I highly doubt they'd be criminal indictments. Boeing is USA's baby, can't have them losing against European Airbus, or God forbid, Chinese Comac.
Reminds me of when FAA didn't ground the Boeing, despite the fatal crashes because of that association. Instead, it was Chinese aviation authority that did, which forced every other airline to follow suit.
Most likely a fine, round up a few line workers to take the heat, a manager or two, then call it a day.
This is a reference to an existing criminal indictment, for which Boeing entered into a deferred prosecution agreement in which they paid $2.5 billion in penalties and compensation and accepted various behavioral commitments, which DoJ is now saying they have breached, allowing prosecution to be recommenced.
So, no, your prediction is wrong, it is a criminal indictment.
For a corporation who doesn’t exist in reality one of the most tangible punishments possible is monetary penalties plus behavioral commitments with teeth. It’s not like they’re going to put the Boeing HQ in a prison complex or something.
Deferred prosecution saves a lot of money and time, on both sides, as well as deflects some amount of discovery. It also leaves a sword of Damocles over them that if they don’t reform everything they hoped to avoid by paying all that money comes back upon them and worse.
This feels like a pretty effective way to punish and attempt to reform a corporation. The fact Boeing is so managed by the accountants that even their lawyers can’t convince them to stop cutting corners and trying to get away with substandard work to juice EPS is baffling though. The fact literally everyone on earth knows this is the problem yet they are still appointing a new airplanes unit CEO that is an accountant doubly so. (No joke, undergrad in accounting, MBA, both marginal schools)
They have to actually commit a crime. And there are some things that a corporation can do that this happens - and SOX has criminal liability attached. But criminality requires stuff like intent and involvement. Often times the board is way too remote from the decision to be criminally liable by any sense of justice. It might feel good to say that but when discussing sending human beings to prison the bar should be high (even though it’s too low for many people not on a board).
But material consequences for companies are monetary and since a company’s life is money, that’s actually usually pretty compelling.
> If I had killed someone, would I be allowed to buy my freedom
In some cases this has been allowed, assuming it was not intentional. For example a neurosurgeon who accidentally hits someone in a crosswalk. The family can ask for no jail time so the surgeon can continue practicing because that's the only way the civil settlement will get paid. This depends on the victim or family's wishes, whether or not the prosecutor will approve, and what the judge thinks.
From a societal view and the victim's view it might be a better outcome to get monetary compensation.
FWIW since Boeing is too big to fail I'd love to see the US Government get rid of the current upper management and board. Put engineers back in charge and move HQ back to Seattle.
Boeing's "new" CEO is another accountant. How much do you think he really cares or even understands the engineering and process issues? And how long do you think that "care" will last once the heat dies down?
You're confusing state law and federal law here. If I murder someone and the DoJ is involved in the prosecution for homicide it means I did something like kill a federal marshal.
I'm not getting off with anything less than jail time.
Well one of those specific places is "happened on an airplane" which seems to be the relevant one for this analogy.
For example, say you shove someone on a plane and they fall and hit their head - federal manslaughter that would likely be a candidate for deferred prosecution.
> If I had killed someone, would I be allowed to buy my freedom?
One difference between an individual and a company is the former can't be guilty of a crime because of knowledge held by the hand and imputed to the person by law, but not possessed by the brain.
Which was pretty much the basis for the deferred prosecution agreement here, and why besides the monetary penalty Boeing was obligated to take steps to prevent similar frauds.
You're conflating criminal indictment of the corporate "person" with personal criminal indictment. The former is far more likely than the latter. No Boeing execs are going to prison because America is selectively extremely corrupt while pretending not to be.
If they need a head on a pike to get the rest of the world to trust them enough again to keep competing with Airbus then maybe they will find that rule of law still makes sense.
We have a mutual extradition treaty, and since the us frequently desires the extradition of high profile cases it’s not impossible that his could happen.
The biggest problem would be the absence of an European criminal law pertaining to companies.
Reminds me of when FAA didn't ground the Boeing, despite the fatal crashes because of that association. Instead, it was Chinese aviation authority that did, which forced every other airline to follow suit.
Most likely a fine, round up a few line workers to take the heat, a manager or two, then call it a day.