A law firm representing the families of passengers killed in Boeing 737 MAX accidents has sent a letter to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) calling for criminal prosecution of former Boeing executives and $24 billion in fines. The letter cites a statement from Texas judge Reed O’Connor, a district court judge involved in the case, that referred to Boeing’s handling of the situation as “the deadliest corporate crime in U.S. history.”
The 32-page letter was sent by Professor Paul Cassell of the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City.
The announcement from Cassell’s office today (June 19) maintains that the January 2021 deferred prosecution agreement (DPA) between the DOJ and Boeing mandated that the manufacturer improve safety and compliance in aircraft production. “But in April of this year [2024],” Cassell’s office wrote, “the Department concluded that Boeing had breached its safety and compliance obligations under the DPA. The Department has asked the families how the Department should proceed with the case against Boeing.”
The letter suggests suspending part of the fine on the condition that those funds be dedicated to “corporate compliance and new safety measures.” In addition, the letter recommends that the DOJ asks Judge O’Connor to appoint a corporate monitor to review the safety measures and “to direct improvement as appropriate.” The letter did not specify how much of the $24 billion fine should be distributed to Cassell’s clients.
Further, the letter asks the DOJ to prosecute Dennis Muilenburg, who was Boeing’s CEO at the time of the accidents—as well as other “responsible corporate executives”—for their personal contributions to hiding 737 MAX safety problems from the FAA.
Cassell wrote, “It would almost be morally reprehensible if the criminal justice system was incapable of capturing the enormous human costs of Boeing’s crime.”
NO amount of punitive fines will bring their loved ones back to life. Virtue signaling by dedicating proceeds of a massive judgement to “improving safety” is likely not going to improve safety. The choice to call Boeing’s quality issues a “crime” and calling for incarceration of executives will likewise have neither effect. Boeing fell on their “sword.” The FAA fell on their “sword.” The companies ordering these airplanes fell on their “sword.” The pilots flying these airplanes fell on their “sword.” And the mechanics who serviced the problems of the flight crews fell on their “swords.” Having to half destroy a company for that isn’t gonna make one bit of difference. The ONLY people who are gonna feel better are the ambulance chasing attorneys who can now give up finding Camp Lejeune water drinkers.
So, who takes responsibility for these disasters? These things happen due to gross negligence by the people who make the decisions in the company. Everybody working for an aircraft manufacturer knows the deadly consequences of mistakes and neglect in the process. Corporations cannot go to prison, so, in the end, nobody suffers a penalty. Does this fact promote good management in these companies and reduce the chance of fatal mistakes? The “ambulance chasing attorneys” do not cause the aircraft failures and the resulting deaths and injuries. Those lawyers do not have to “chase” any ambulances to get clients who want the company to pay something for loss of their relatives and loved ones. Indeed, the victims of criminal negligence by the airplane manufacturers seek out representation which can never fully compensate for their losses.
I agree Larry.
It not “virtual signaling”, it’s accountability. The executive team responsible should be prosecuted.
Their only accountability is getting fired with a golden parachute. Bet the victims of Boeing’s reckless “profits at all costs” corner cutting would liked to have at least 1 silk parachute nicely packed.
I do believe you meant virtue signaling ” as opposed to ” virtual signaling ” ❓
And yes, I agree — it is actually a demand for accountability that should be the standard.
Prosecution should be brought against the former CEO and his staff who created this mess in the first place. However, the FAA screwed up as did Boeing. This sounds like an attorney who thinks there should be punitive action against just Boeing but the FAA should also be part of any lawsuit if it gets to that point.
By including other principles such as the FAA, or airline purchasers or operators or mechanics or crews in the prima facia case only waters down the initial strike focus which should be primarily and initially against Boeing and its subcontractors.
Any litigation in this initial legal remedy request should be squarely placed upon Boeing Aircraft and its principals including all past and present actors ,agents and subcontractors involved in the design, manufacturing processes and quality control of the 737 Max’s involved in these crashes.
There in lies the primary facile of the incidents.
Airline purchasers, lessors, operators, crews, pilots, mechanics, FAA oversight Inspectors have no domain rights in what should be the prima face litigation.
In addition, any notion of dedicating collecting ordered fines or part thereof, is a waste of judgement monies.
Boeing will not increase or move to make more ” effective ” any quality control programs or safety initiatives that will accomplish a damn thing.
Prosecution by the Federal DOJ with prior green lighting by the U.S. Congress should ensue.against all past and present Boeing personnel at all levels that had a direct part in the chain of events that led to these flawed system designs and subsequent cover ups.
You folks that think Boeing ought to be heavily fined are likely the very same ones moaning about the price of new GA airplanes. Sigh!
Larry S, sorry but punitive damages are the primary means of making corporations act responsibly. That is exactly how the system works.
That may be how the “system” does work. But that’s not to say it’s how the system should work. Corporations and businesses do not pay taxes and they do not pay the punitive damages. The customer pays both along with any other expenses the business has. All of it “trickles down” to the end user. That being you and I on the bottom. It doesn take a business degree to know that, but it sure takes a fool to not understand it. So if you’re one who feels so satisfied watching CNN flaunt the billion dollar punishment, don’t whine about inflation being what it is today.
The Chinese would problay be interested in the company
Talk with just about any airline pilot who knows the two airlines in question and they are quick to blame ham-fisted flying for the accidents, not Boeing. Ultimately the costs for litigation will be born by the flying public, so be careful what you wish for. What I see here are ambulance-chasing lawyers and families hoping to cash in on the death of loved ones. Money will not bring them back.
But…. A lawsuit is the answer to all problems.
I remember very clearly back in the 70’s a particular aviation ambulance chaser who made his fortune suing Beechcraft over the Bonanza. The most interesting was one where the pilot and his son found themselves behind a slower plane on final to an uncontrolled airport. Finding himself gaining in the slower aircraft,the pilot begin making skidding S turns which continued until he was able to slosh the fuel from his nearly empty fuel tank away from the outlet,and cause the engine to die. Rather than attempt a restart,or declare an emergency,he was on final, remember, he elected to hold back on the yoke until the plane stalled,spun and crashed. Beechcraft was found at fault for not designing a ” foolproof” fuel system. It’s tough to make a piece of equipment idiot proof when idiots seem to be getting more clever than ever.
The MCAS system in 737 MAX was signed off by the FAA with a single point of failure AOA sensor, this was an egregious failure of design by also a massive failure of government oversight. That said both MAX accidents were avoidable if the flight crews would have properly responded.
When they lost pitch control due to the MCAS failure it could have been quickly corrected with stab trim disconnect, the crews also did not reduce power even as the nose of their aircraft was pointed down and accelerating.
Accidents were a design and oversight failure but also a failure by the flight crews to properly respond to a recoverable failure.
Then the FAA inspectors who approved this should be held responsible too.
Yeah, I know. Will never happen. The government is never at fault.
FAA Inspectors did not approve the design of the MCAS system.
The Boeing Engineering Organizational Delegated Organization (FAA-ODA) approved the MCAS system which is why it was so easly overlooked by the FAA. The FAA delegated its Engineering functions/approvals to Boeing under an approved system FAA-ODA and Boeing was trusted to follow that approved delegation self-certifying design and changes to those designs.
The FAA did exactly the same thing with the Airbus A330 and many others. And one of them (A330) ended up at the bottom of the Atlantic under very similar circumstances. Where was all the scrutiny then? I would suggest all of you experts watch a few of the “Mentor Pilot” videos on YouTube so you have a idea just how faulty the so called “fly by wire” and high tech automation really is. You will find dozens of episodes describing software induced mishaps. In the end, it was the FAA and EASA that allowed all of this to happen. And it was all for the benefit of airlines bottom line.
This!!!
Those passengers are dead because the pilots failed to do their job.
When the subject of these two tragic fatal crashes comes up, I always ask, do you think those two MCAS failures were the only cases of MCAS engagement? Of course not. But we never hear about all the others where pilots simply did their job. Training is a key contributor to these accidents.
The sequence of events and pilot actions are not publicly well known. It seems the press has decided that four pilots working for third world airlines were just not as news worthy as going after Boeing/FAA And of course they are correct but it misses the point.
FDR data supports many assertions that the pilots just didn’t know what to do. The fact that power was never reduced in both events supports that. Not to mention the age old pilot adage that if what you just did had unexpected results, UNDO IT!
Did Boeing and the FAA deserve investing. Absolutely. Did Mullenberger kill those passengers? No. Inept pilots did.
Right on. This isn’t about the poor victims at all. I’m not usually a conspiracy type but there is something going on here that just doesn’t pass the old smell test. There is something much deeper with this continual Boeing bashing. If I were the CEO, I would pull the plug on the entire commercial aircraft division and let the Chinese take it. That seems to be the American way these days. Too bad so many great jobs will go along with it. We’ll see how Airbus fairs with their new rival. So, just keep it up folks. You’re having fun posting your criticism but you’re messing with a lot of lives doing so.
Boeing also changed the operating parameters and authority of the MCAS system AFTER the design was approved by the FAA without informing the FAA of the changes.
Boeing test pilots found that they had to respond to MCAS failures within 4 seconds or the aircraft could be unrecoverable. And this was when they knew what was going to happen.
Deciding that pilots did not need to know about a system that could crash the plane in order save some money is inexcusable.
If your standard is perfection, everything is below standard.
Great for the liability industry, not so much for a functional society.
Apparently, most readers of this post (and many others) have no idea how a corporation functions. The decision making does not start at the top, it starts at the bottom. There is no way the upper management arbitrarily made any decision regarding these issues without input from below. Their job, by law, is to oversee the interests of the shareholders. And that includes every one of you who has IRAs, 401k’s or any other stocks and bonds. The CEOs job is not to ensure the software in a guidance system is flawless or is it theirs to walk the floors making sure every bolt, nut and rivet is properly installed. To all of those looking to point blame, add to the list the software engineers, the mechanic who didn’t install the bolts and the inspector who trusted them to do it right.
To all of those who feel Boeing went too far with a new version of the 737, it’s just an aluminum tube! Just like any other aircraft. It’s what’s inside of the tube that makes it different. And for the most part, it’s the exact same technology they would put into a new type. Just putting new windscreens and winglets along with a new model number does not make it better.
Many take the easy point of view that “Boeing” did this. Just who is this Boeing? It’s a hundred thousand employees, all who are paid very well and most of them trusted employees who are proud of their work. None of them got up in the morning wanting to crash an aircraft. They “Boeing” did not “change the operating parameters” in the interest of making more money. Only a fool or an attorney would come to that conclusion. Did Airbus intentionally write faulty software for the hundreds of incidents it caused?
We seem to overlook the pilots of these aircraft. They can fall back on the age-old excuse of not being trained properly or some little detail wasn’t in the manual. Is it really possible that every little detail of these now high-tech machines can be put into a manual that can even fit into an aircraft? Would the pilots read and have the ability to comprehend it if they did? I know a few that wouldn’t come close and more than likely Boeing engineers felt the same way. The fact is not all are or were good pilots. And, I will add that it is not unusual these days but yet every one of them holds their hands out on payday for those big bucks they are so happy to accept. Should it not be their responsibility to know their aircraft? So, when they accept the big bucks should they not strive to be as professional as possible?
As others have mentioned, this is not an exclusive Boeing issue. I will never be convinced Airbus or any other manufacturer are completely free of these issues and the evidence proves that in many ways. Airbus aircraft are no safer than any other brand. Theirs have gone down in virtually identical conditions and they were left off the hook with a simple “update to the software”. Yet they seem to be completely immune to the scrutiny that belongs to this entire industry. This industry is simply out of control and all the harsh talk from the FAA and Washington politicians will not change one thing. The truth is, neither have a clue. And for sure some ambulance chasing attorney’s lining their pocket and taking advantage of the grief of so-called survivors will not change a thing either.
“Prosecution by the Federal DOJ with prior green lighting by the U.S. Congress should ensue.against all past and present Boeing personnel at all levels that had a direct part in the chain of events that led to these flawed system designs and subsequent cover ups.” – Frank Tino
And they should be prosecuted, both as Boeing employees and as individual criminals under RICO, with no bail allowed. Included should be anyone involved in the development and approval of “streamlined” training programs for foreign airlines who may be putting pilots with limited flight time and experience into their jets. A former flight student of mine, when transitioning into the 737-800 (pre-Max) had repeated pitch trim runaways, usually coupled with some other emergency, in the sim. She says she got very good at flying the beast on manual trim only, usually with asymmetrical thrust as well. FDR data indicates this was not the case with the Lion and Ethiopian crews, but we can’t go there without raising the “bigotry” bugaboo. Boeing needs to “fall on its sword” and be allowed to bleed out in peace, all honor forfeited.