> "Judge Conley informed me that it has been brought to his attention that while he presided over the case he owned stock in Apple," writes Joel Turner, the court's chief deputy clerk.
That definitely makes it sound like it was a component of something else.
Much more likely to me is that he had a financial advisor handling his money. The article specifically talks about the number of shares purchased, and for most vehicles like this that makes no sense. Also, what I have read about for these conflicts of interest is that broad based index funds and such don't require disclosure. Something like an ETF that was specifically heavy in Apple might, but something that is just tech stocks probably would not.
Having exposure to Apple because it’s a component of a broad market ETF that one owns, on the other hand, would.