Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes • Hacker News Board

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#421

Post by amelius » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 5:05 PM UTC

iSnow wrote: post #37

supernova87a wrote: post #25

Our governmental methods of punishment for corporations strike me as lacking. This seems similar to Wells Fargo, where ok, the company was fined, sued, made to pay restitution (somewhat) to victims. But underlying it all, the culture and incentives at the company that produced the situation didn't get fundamentally changed. Which often perpetuates across specific leaders, boards, and is a part of what a company is --…

You have to get the leadership by the balls. The CEO isn't going to change a company's culture alone, but she has leverage and connections. If they know they face prison if the company plays foul in a major way, they will put pressure on their deputies to change culture. Also, fines that go up to say 10% of global revenue. That ensures that even activist shareholders take note and do not pressure the CEO to cut corne…

Yes, pressure them to do internal investigations (if they like to stay out of prison).

That will also keep the costs at the company and not with society and after the fact.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#422

Post by philwelch » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 5:06 PM UTC

5636588 wrote: post #372

credit_guy wrote: post #354

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Hard to disagree But hard to agree too. How exactly can you prevent someone from pleading guilty?

Judge needs to approve a plea deal. See Hunter's Biden case.

[flagged]

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#423

Post by diob » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 5:08 PM UTC

ActionHank wrote: post #334

deeth_starr_v wrote: post #298

From the article: Paul Cassell, a lawyer for victims’ family members, said he plans to ask the federal judge on the case to reject the deal and “simply set the matter for a public trial, so that all the facts surrounding the case will be aired in a fair and open forum before a jury.” Hard to disagree

If it does go to trial it would be great for people behind this to be directly tried for their criminal actions as well. The reality is that a company is on trial for the actions of individuals and if there is no follow through on that it will not change anything. I doubt it goes to trial as I am 99% sure that the judge will rubber stamp the whole thing because the US is a corporate driven hellscape where peasants ar…

Don't worry, it's now legal for the judge and everyone else involved to get a nice present from Boeing, as long as it happens afterwards!

:(

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#424

Post by philwelch » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 5:09 PM UTC

gunapologist99 wrote: post #357

deeth_starr_v wrote: post #298

From the article: Paul Cassell, a lawyer for victims’ family members, said he plans to ask the federal judge on the case to reject the deal and “simply set the matter for a public trial, so that all the facts surrounding the case will be aired in a fair and open forum before a jury.” Hard to disagree

This is for a criminal case. The victims don't play a prosecutorial role here and are not actually parties to this case. The appropriate venue for the victims is a civil jury trial (lawsuit), where recovery of losses is possible because the victims then become party to the case (plaintiff). The reason this lawyer is requesting this is so that the government will be forced to lay its cards on the table during trial, w…

Is a trial really the only mechanism by which the government could share that evidence with civil plaintiffs?

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#425

Post by manquer » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 5:11 PM UTC

mminer237 wrote: post #215

manquer wrote: post #50

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think he needs to. they will appeal based on the insanely broad immunity ruling and get the conviction overturned on procedural loophole created by the ruling - no evidence from his presidency even for unofficial acts and justice department will not retry a sitting president. He is likely to get the convictions even in the caroll defamation case for the same reason. Only the fraudulent valuation case is likel…

His conviction was based on criminal acts entirely when he was not president.

No this is a common misconception.

He was convicted for falsifying business records nothing else. All the records that were fraudulently submitted were starting Jan 2017.

The hush money payment wasn't illegal, hiding it was.

It rose to a felony instead of misdemeanor because it was done in service another crime which is campaign finance violation, the other crime need not be proven and he was not charged with that.

All they got him for paying cohen illegally.

Also there was some evidence introduced from his time as president , he would argue that evidence is now inadmissible and in a favourable court they will declare mistrial and ask the lower court to do it again.

If he wins again the prosecution will have to pause and he gets the delay he wants.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#426

Post by akira2501 » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 5:13 PM UTC

robertlagrant wrote: post #132

akira2501 wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The U.S. is not going to shut down Boeing. It's a monopoly. Just break it up. > How many jobs would be lost if that happened "We don't negotiate with [economic] terrorists." > especially in this economy? $77b annual revenue. Positive quarterly growth rate the last 8 out of 12 quarters. Two global wars we refuse to negotiate peace in and Boeing is a major weapons supplier. Then again, if you kill and scare enough pe…

> "We don't negotiate with [economic] terrorists." This is just so silly. Shutting down a company results in people losing their jobs. No terrorists involved.

> Shutting down a company results in people losing their jobs.

And ending murder and child victims results in people (investigators, litigators, counselors) losing their jobs. Should we stop trying to solve these problems too?

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#427

Post by mlekoszek » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 5:14 PM UTC

diob wrote: post #423

ActionHank wrote: post #334

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If it does go to trial it would be great for people behind this to be directly tried for their criminal actions as well. The reality is that a company is on trial for the actions of individuals and if there is no follow through on that it will not change anything. I doubt it goes to trial as I am 99% sure that the judge will rubber stamp the whole thing because the US is a corporate driven hellscape where peasants ar…

Don't worry, it's now legal for the judge and everyone else involved to get a nice present from Boeing, as long as it happens afterwards! :(

Wait... explain.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#428

Post by tsunamifury » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 5:14 PM UTC

bumby wrote: post #418

tsunamifury wrote: post #409

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think people seem to have a very romantic notion that there is some meeting where all the engineers get together and decide whether or not they are going to kill their users or not.

Not to "kill their users" but they realistically have meeting to vote on whether the system is "go/nogo". This is the basic structure of many aerospace designs. If you ever watch a rocket launch, they are literally checking in with every system owner for that decision. Prior to even getting to the launch date, there are meetings where they are checking with the designers for similar decisions. There are good document…

Yea and with challenger only one engineer raised the alarm while a large group of well meaning engineers overrode him.

This is reality. Decisions aren’t kill/not kill.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#429

Post by mrguyorama » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 5:15 PM UTC

darby_nine wrote: post #327

BartjeD wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For spilling a hot coffee cup you get $ 2.7 million worth of punitive damages. But for killing more than 200 people and trying to hide the evidence, we'll charge you 200 million and call it a day. That's less per person than the price of a hot-coffee spill.

> For spilling a hot coffee cup you get $ 2.7 million worth of punitive damages Dude it literally melted her labia together. She deserved that 2.7 million and only got a small portion of it.

Nevermind that she only asked McDonalds to cover like five figures worth of medical bills, which they rejected. The JURY selected that figure, explicitly as a fuck you to the corporation that had a documented history of giving people coffee hotter than industry recommendations for safety, people getting really hurt from that coffee, and McDonalds sweeping those instances under the rug without making any changes to their coffee temperature.

Now, instead it is a definitive PR win, with an entire generation of entitled asshole business owners swearing up and down that we need "Tort reform" because "a lady spilled coffee on herself and got $2.7 million", which was explicitly caused by a megacorp going out of their way to be dangerous.

Re: Boeing to plead guilty to criminal fraud charge stemming from 737 MAX crashes

#430

Post by underlipton » Mon, Jul 08, 2024, 5:17 PM UTC

philwelch wrote: post #416

dfxm12 wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you explain your line of thinking for saying this? Because to me, the standard for such a big company, getting so many public dollars, that is responsible for the safety of a ton of Americans (and more) should obviously be more strict (for at least those reasons) compared to an individual who can't afford a good lawyer who had just a little too much weed on them.

The largest share of convicted inmates in the US were convicted of violent crimes such as murder, rape, robbery, or assault. Simple marijuana possession makes up a tiny share. And less than half of the violent crimes committed in the US lead to a conviction.

Couple of things:

1) Citation needed. Particularly if you're talking about federal inmates, state, or both.

2) It's disingenuous (re: primacy bias) to lead off with murder and rape, which account for a far smaller portion of "violent" crime than robbery (which I assume includes burglary, in which the victim and perpetrator don't make contact) and assault (which, again, does not require the victim and perpetrator to physically make contact (that's battery)).

All of this is aside fact that an individual who allegedly commits a heinous act against another person or small group of people is in a completely different class from a large corporation whose products put millions at risk (and the executives and managers who sign off on those company's decisions). There is quite the destructive myopia behind the increasingly punitive (rather than rehabilitative) nature of incarceration for the former, when the latter get off so easy.