By John Q. Hosedrinker 
A federal judge in Texas has granted the government’s request to dismiss the criminal conspiracy charge against Boeing related to the 737 Max crashes, which resulted in 346 fatalities. As part of the agreement, Boeing will pay an additional $1.1 billion in fines and compensation. This resolution comes despite the judge’s statement that the deal “fails to secure the necessary accountability to ensure the safety of the flying public.” The Justice Department maintains the resolution is the most just outcome, though some of the victims’ families plan to appeal the decision.
Read the original article here
The news that the criminal case against Boeing, stemming from the tragic 737 Max crashes, has been dismissed by a US judge is, to put it mildly, disheartening. The circumstances surrounding this decision and the fallout from these crashes are deeply unsettling, and it’s understandable why so many people are reacting with anger and frustration. The idea that a corporation, even one as massive and influential as Boeing, can seemingly sidestep accountability for such a significant loss of life is hard to swallow.
The core of the issue lies in the fact that the Department of Justice (DOJ) requested the case’s dismissal. This isn’t a neutral verdict; it’s a decision by the government, a move that allows Boeing to avoid a full-blown criminal trial. This, in itself, raises serious questions about justice and the fairness of the legal system. It’s especially galling when considering the sheer scale of the tragedy: hundreds of lives lost due to a faulty aircraft.
The details of the dismissal are particularly troubling. The judge, Reed O’Connor, approved a deal where Boeing will pay or invest an additional $1.1 billion. This money is earmarked for fines, compensation for the victims’ families, and improvements to Boeing’s safety and quality procedures. On the surface, it might sound like a significant sum, but when weighed against the loss of life and the alleged deception that led to the crashes, it feels woefully inadequate. It’s a deal that, in many people’s eyes, lets Boeing off the hook with a slap on the wrist.
One of the most concerning aspects of the agreement is that Boeing is allowed to choose its own compliance consultant rather than having an independent monitor overseeing its safety and quality improvements. This seems to suggest that the company is trusted to police itself, which is a problematic proposition given the documented issues and alleged cover-ups that led to the crashes in the first place. Prosecutors themselves stated Boeing deceived government regulators about a flight-control system that was later implicated in the fatal flights, so trusting them to fix their mistakes seems illogical. How can we be sure that the issues that caused these crashes have been effectively addressed if the company itself is largely in control of the remediation process?
The sheer scope of the alleged misconduct is astounding, and the fact that no individual at Boeing has been held criminally accountable feels like a travesty of justice. The documentary “Downfall: The Case Against Boeing” is being recommended to provide further clarity on how this happened. While it’s good to have a documentary explain the details behind the issue, in this case, it is also important to note that the executives who were responsible for the decisions that led to the crashes stepped down and walked away with considerable bonuses. The message this sends is chilling: that corporate executives can prioritize profit over safety, knowingly put dangerous products on the market, and escape significant consequences.
This whole situation also highlights a broader issue: the influence of money and power in our legal and political systems. It’s a deeply uncomfortable reality that raises questions about whether justice is truly blind, or if it can be manipulated by those with the resources to do so. The fact that this case was heard by a judge known for his conservative leanings and his history with the Federalist Society also raises valid questions about potential biases and political agendas. Some observers have raised concerns about the practice of “judge shopping,” where cases are strategically filed in jurisdictions known to be more favorable to certain outcomes.
The dismissal of the criminal case against Boeing is a stark reminder of the challenges we face in holding powerful corporations accountable. The message is clear: if you have enough money, you can potentially get away with things that would result in severe punishment for individuals. It’s a corrosive dynamic that undermines public trust and perpetuates a sense of injustice. The fact that the victims’ families are left with the pain of their loss and the knowledge that those responsible have largely escaped consequences is simply unacceptable. The entire situation should be concerning to anyone who believes in fairness, accountability, and the value of human life.