From an internal memo about more stringent credit policies for internet pharmacies:
"Many of these companies operate outside of federal and state regulations over the sale of controlled drugs, which require diagnosis and prescription by a licensed physician. Drugs purchased from these sites may be diluted or counterfeit."
To believe that FedEx lacked knowledge of illegal activity, one must believe that they assumed some of these pharmacies were genuine and that while it was feasible to create special policies to ensure FedEx was paid, policies to verify the organizations legitimacy (which would also increase the chance of them being paid), were impractical. However, that will be difficult because one executive told another that: "...these types of accounts will always result in a loss at some point. They have a very short lifespan and will eventually be shut down by the DEA." (emphasis added)
They certainly can't argue, as many others in this thread have, that the companies weren't identifiable: They were doing it to enforce this policy. The credit department maintained a list of pharmacies that, at one time, had 600 entries on it.
Based solely on your quotations, I would use the following analogy:
Suppose you like to buy and sell bags full of chocolate eggs. You know from past experience that roughly 10% of the foil-wrapped eggs are spoiled, but the only way of knowing which 10% of the foil-wrapped eggs is to cut them all open, which would be uneconomical and destroy the entire value of the product.
So maybe FedEx knew that P(illegal|pharmacy) was greater than P(illegal), but that P(illegal|pharmacy) was still too low compared to P(pharmacy) to justify shutting down all pharmacies.
Always is an odd characterization of something that occurs 10% of the time.
Edit to respond to comment: The context is a an executive talking about whether accounts that FedEx classifies as internet pharmacies should be counted towards sales goals used for bonuses. That means they could classify new accounts as belonging to this group or not. It's worth noting that their definition is likely not synonymous with the plain meaning of internet pharmacy. Rather it means that subset that they expect the DEA will put out of business. I'm sure Caremark isn't excluded from normal sales metrics and subjected to extraordinary credit requirements.
To believe that FedEx lacked knowledge of illegal activity, one must believe that they assumed some of these pharmacies were genuine and that while it was feasible to create special policies to ensure FedEx was paid, policies to verify the organizations legitimacy (which would also increase the chance of them being paid), were impractical. However, that will be difficult because one executive told another that: "...these types of accounts will always result in a loss at some point. They have a very short lifespan and will eventually be shut down by the DEA." (emphasis added)
They certainly can't argue, as many others in this thread have, that the companies weren't identifiable: They were doing it to enforce this policy. The credit department maintained a list of pharmacies that, at one time, had 600 entries on it.