Go Back  Airline Pilot Central Forums > Pilot Lounge > Aviation Law
Boeing facing criminal charges? >

Boeing facing criminal charges?


Notices
Aviation Law Legal issues, FARs, and questions

Boeing facing criminal charges?

Old 03-22-2024, 05:32 AM
  #1  
Perennial Reserve
Thread Starter
 
Excargodog's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2018
Posts: 11,843
Default Boeing facing criminal charges?

Passengers on board the Alaska Airlines Boeing 737 Max 9 that suffered a terrifying midair blowout in January have received a letter from the FBI saying they may be victims “of a crime.”

Attorney Mark Lindquist, who represents multiple passengers that were on Alaska Airlines flight 1282, shared with CNN the letter that the FBI office in Seattle sent to passengers on Tuesday.

Boeing’s potential criminal liability

But Justice opened a probe into the incident and Boeing in February, CNN has previously reported. That investigation carries the potential to upend a controversial deferred prosecution agreement that Boeing reached with the Justice Department in the final month of the Trump administration.

Tha settlement, which was criticized by families of crash victims and members of Congress, was over charges that Boeing defrauded the Federal Aviation Administration during the original certification process for the 737 Max jets. Boeing agreed to pay $2.5 billion as part of that settlement, but most of that was money Boeing had already agreed to pay to the airlines that had purchased the Max jets grounded for 20 monthsfollowing the Ethiopian Air crash and an earlier crash in Indonesia.

The deferred prosecution agreement could have ended the threat of Boeing facing criminal liability for those earlier fraud charges. But the Alaska Air incident came just days before a three-year probation-like period was due to end, so the criminal probe could expose Boeing to charges not just for the Alaska Air incident but also the earlier allegations of criminal wrongdoing.



https://finance.yahoo.com/news/fbi-t...101306191.html

https://youtu.be/G0SwI1LwTtY?si=YAOERHIUuicvD_JJ
Excargodog is offline  
Old 03-22-2024, 01:29 PM
  #2  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,651
Default

Russians nailed a 777 over Ukraine and paid not one ruble in compensation. No killers brought to justice. A Chinese lab bat flued the global economy into a tailspin, millions dead. Same liability exposure, criminal charges none. Did BA renege on its agreement to self certify exercising best practice due diligence, beyond a shadow of ‘criminal’ doubt? Who stands accused exactly? If, big if, this goes to trial, the prosecution better resemble a Gatling gun crew.
METO Guido is offline  
Old 03-23-2024, 06:50 AM
  #3  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,712
Default

Yes it's probably posturing but who knows with subpoenas and warrants they might find some more incriminating emails.

Finding a corporation "criminally" liable is basically just another angle of attack for regulators. But who knows, if they come up with a smoking gun they might actually find a real live human criminal who can be convicted. That would be good IMO... I don't think companies can really commit "crimes". I think people commit crimes, and shouldn't be allowed to hide behind a corporate veil.
rickair7777 is offline  
Old 03-23-2024, 07:26 AM
  #4  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,651
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777
Yes it's probably posturing but who knows with subpoenas and warrants they might find some more incriminating emails.

Finding a corporation "criminally" liable is basically just another angle of attack for regulators. But who knows, if they come up with a smoking gun they might actually find a real live human criminal who can be convicted. That would be good IMO... I don't think companies can really commit "crimes". I think people commit crimes, and shouldn't be allowed to hide behind a corporate veil.
Agree. Wrong doers can’t operate behind corporate protection. But mailing door plug pax FBI notification of a criminal wrongdoing investigation, extending back to the stab trim fiasco, isn’t the way to enforce code.

It’s a precedent matter potentially impacting any number of operators, manufacturers & subs using letters of authorization to conduct checks on behalf of federal inspectors. Our entire routine surveillance system runs on it. So if the goal is to sell the world’s most unaffordable airframe, they’re clearly on the right path. Fly the friendly skies, offer that window seat to a lawyer.
METO Guido is offline  
Old 03-25-2024, 05:55 AM
  #5  
Disinterested Third Party
 
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,191
Default

The regulation and the FAA's administrative punishment to enforce the regulation, is not the extend of the available penalty, which may flow well beyond, into criminal law.

Advising subjects that they are party to an investigation isn't posturing, and the FBI doesn't make a habit of revealing an investigation, or jeopardizing it by revealing it, simply for theater.

A mistake is not necessarily a criminal act, but neglect may be. The character of the problem may rise to the level of pursuing an executive, or may be restricted to a few actors. The FBI may be pursuing an investigation from other means, not limited to the Alaska incident. The Alaska passengers maybe central or tangential to that investigation. The FBI is not necessarily revealing the bigger picture, nor are they required to do so. The FBI may also be applying indirect pressure, for the purposes of an investigation; receipt of the letter does not necessarily mean that's the scope of the investigation.
JohnBurke is offline  
Old 03-25-2024, 01:45 PM
  #6  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Feb 2015
Posts: 1,035
Default

Originally Posted by rickair7777
Yes it's probably posturing but who knows with subpoenas and warrants they might find some more incriminating emails.

Finding a corporation "criminally" liable is basically just another angle of attack for regulators. But who knows, if they come up with a smoking gun they might actually find a real live human criminal who can be convicted. That would be good IMO... I don't think companies can really commit "crimes". I think people commit crimes, and shouldn't be allowed to hide behind a corporate veil.
“more incriminating emails?” Are you referring g to the handful of emails sent by a drunk moron to a coworker? The handful of emails that are all that was found after years of investigating? Then that individual was promptly acquitted after a very short trial.

so, what incriminating emails?
PNWFlyer is offline  
Old 03-25-2024, 05:22 PM
  #7  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: May 2010
Posts: 346
Default

Originally Posted by JohnBurke

...Advising subjects that they are party to an investigation isn't posturing, and the FBI doesn't make a habit of revealing an investigation, or jeopardizing it by revealing it, simply for theater....

Ever heard of James Comey?
EasternATC is offline  
Old 03-25-2024, 06:26 PM
  #8  
Disinterested Third Party
 
Joined APC: Jun 2012
Posts: 6,191
Default

Originally Posted by EasternATC
Ever heard of James Comey?
Your conspiracy-minded point?
JohnBurke is offline  
Old 03-26-2024, 06:07 AM
  #9  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Apr 2011
Posts: 1,651
Default

Your conspiracy-minded point?
Thank you Director Hoover. When FBI keyboard clucks notify W2 wage earners they're investigating Congress for the most monstrously conceived rico scheme in American history, maybe things have changed. Until then, same as it ever was.
METO Guido is offline  
Old 03-26-2024, 07:18 AM
  #10  
Prime Minister/Moderator
 
rickair7777's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Engines Turn Or People Swim
Posts: 39,712
Default

Originally Posted by JohnBurke
Advising subjects that they are party to an investigation isn't posturing, and the FBI doesn't make a habit of revealing an investigation, or jeopardizing it by revealing it, simply for theater.
I used to think that.
rickair7777 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
docav8tor
Major
7
11-20-2020 09:41 PM
docav8tor
Safety
4
02-29-2020 06:02 PM
jcountry
Major
56
02-22-2017 09:52 AM
FastDEW
Major
201
09-03-2011 06:42 AM
SWAjet
Major
0
03-07-2005 09:48 AM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are Off
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices