Boeing 737 MAX victims' relatives ask judge to reject deal ending criminal case
Relatives of some of the 346 people killed in two Boeing MAX crashes in 2018 and 2019 asked a federal judge on Wednesday to reject a deal between the Justice Department and the plane maker that allows the company to avoid prosecution in a criminal fraud case.
The agreement enables Boeing to avoid being branded a convicted felon and to escape oversight from an independent monitor for three years that was part of a plea deal struck in 2024.
The families cited Judge Reed O'Connor's statement in 2023 that "Boeing's crime may properly be considered the deadliest corporate crime in U.S. history."
They argue dismissal of the case is not in the public interest and the obligations imposed on Boeing are not enforceable. They said the Justice Department has opted not to wait for a ruling but "has already contractually obligated itself not to further prosecute Boeing, regardless of how the court rules."
If the government declined to move forward with the prosecution even if the court rejected the deal, O'Connor should appoint a special prosecutor, the families told the judge.
Under the deal, Boeing agreed to pay an additional $444.5 million into a crash victims fund to be divided evenly per crash victim, on top of a $243.6-million fine.
Boeing in July agreed to plead guilty to a criminal fraud conspiracy charge after the two fatal 737 MAX crashes in Indonesia and Ethiopia.
Boeing will pay $1.1 billion in total, including the fine, compensation to families and over $455 million to strengthen the company's compliance, safety, and quality programs.
The Justice Department said in late May the deal "secures meaningful accountability, delivers substantial and immediate public benefits, and brings finality to a difficult and complex case whose outcome would otherwise be uncertain."
The department did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
The vast majority of the families have settled civil suits with Boeing and collectively have been "paid several billion dollars," the Justice Department said.
Boeing, which did not immediately comment on Wednesday, will no longer face oversight by an independent monitor under the agreement, but will hire a compliance consultant.
Boeing had previously been set to go on trial June 23 on a charge it misled U.S. regulators about a crucial flight control system on the 737 MAX, its best-selling jet.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
With disbarment decision, John Eastman's downfall continues
Friday, June 13, was a truly unlucky day for John Eastman, a key architect of President Trump 's plot to disrupt the results of the 2020 presidential election. A California appellate court, charged with reviewing recommendations to discipline lawyers in that state, affirmed the findings of a trial judge and recommended that Eastman 'be disbarred from the practice of law in California and that Eastman's name be stricken from the roll of attorneys.' The judges found that his work on the 2020 election case was shoddy and deceptive. 'Disbarment,' they said, 'is necessary to protect the public, the courts, and the legal profession.' For any lawyer, this is a professional death sentence. But the court's decision is not only a devastating blow to Eastman but also to the Trumpist myth that the 2020 presidential election was stolen. That lie drove MAGA's 2024 election efforts and still animates Trump's speeches, including the one he recently gave to troops at Fort Bragg, N.C. It is also embraced by the heads of the Justice Department and the FBI, as well as by Speaker of the House Mike Johnson. And, as the court noted, Eastman himself continues, to this day, to claim that there were 'nefarious forces behind former President Biden's 2020 electoral win.' But like the House Jan. 6 Committee and 60 other courts, the judges serving on the Review Department of the California State Bar Court would have none of it. They made clear that 'in a democracy nothing can be more fundamental than the orderly transfer of power that occurs after a fair and unimpeded electoral process,' and that Trump and Eastman violated the law by conspiring and lying to disrupt the 2020 election. So why is Friday's Eastman ruling significant? The case is unique and momentous because this is the only proceeding where Eastman, along with supporting denialist enthusiasts, testified under oath, cross-examined their critics and presented their full denialism defense. Eastman — assisted by his denialist apostles, who took 19 days to testify, present 7 witnesses and introduce over 180 document exhibits — had more than his day in court. He also presented his stolen election narrative to the public-at-large, with thousands watching by Zoom. After considering this evidence, the Review Department court held that Eastman's 'false narrative' of 'nefarious forces behind' President Biden's 2020 win 'resulted in the undermining of our country's electoral process, reduced faith in election professionals, and lessened respect for the courts of this land.' And even if neither of the meticulous decisions of these two California courts changes the minds of the MAGA faithful nor shames Republican leadership into rejecting the Big Lie, the decisions and the evidence that support them will withstand the tests of time and help foil historical revisionism. They set the record straight and ensure that Trump and his accomplices will have difficulty escaping history's judgment. As former Chief Justice Charles Evans Hughes observed, court judgments like the one handed down last week are addressed not just to our present moment but 'to the intelligence of a future day.' The Eastman case demonstrates again that misinformation and lies collapse in a courtroom where facts and evidence rule. Among the courts' key findings are: Eastman admitted that he knew of no significant ballot fraud that would justify challenging the election results. Eastman failed to 'support the Constitution or laws of the United States' as all lawyers must do. Eastman was grossly negligent in failing to investigate the bizarre results of statistical studies on which he relied to disrupt the presidential election — for example, that there was a one quadrillion to the fourth power chance of Biden winning four states after Clinton lost them in 2016. Eastman knew that his Jan. 6, 2020, Ellipse speech was built on lies and willful blindness. 'We know there was…traditional fraud that occurred,' he said. 'We know that dead people voted.' At the time, he understood neither claim was true. And the Review Department rejected Eastman's 'merely 'rhetorical hyperbole'' defense. The courts also did not find his explanation a credible defense for his fraudulent actions and mischaracterizations. Both courts rejected Eastman's claims that such statements and rhetorical hyperbole are constitutionally protected. While recognizing that all lawyers have a First Amendment right to make public statements, the Review Department court said that 'this right does not extend to making knowing or reckless false statements of fact or law.' Nor does the First Amendment protect speech 'that is employed as a tool in the commission of a crime.' Eastman falsely told the Jan. 6 "Stop the Steal" crowd and the nation that state election law irregularities and fraudulent voting had changed the result of the presidential election. Part of the proof? As the trial judge noted, on Nov. 29, 2020, Eastman wrote to fellow MAGA lawyer Cleta Mitchell that he knew of no actual evidence of outcome-determinative fraud in any states: 'It would be nice to have actually hard documented evidence of the fraud.' Eastman's biggest lie was that Vice President Pence had the authority to interfere in the electoral vote. Both Eastman and Trump knew Pence had no such authority, but, on the president's behalf, Eastman continued to press Pence and his lawyer to disrupt the Electoral College count. Even Eastman's own testifying constitutional expert and family friend, conservative Professor John Yoo, flipped on Eastman. Yoo breathtakingly admitted that the Trump-Eastman alternative elector notion was 'a made-up dispute rather than a real one' and that Pence's rejection of the pair's arguments was 'unassailable.' The Review Department also emphasized that Eastman's testimony during the bar disciplinary proceedings demonstrated that his beliefs were not sincere, honest or credible. From start to finish, the court found, he 'used his skills to push a false narrative in the courtroom, the White House, and the media.' Despite such plentiful and well-documented findings, which California law insists must meet the heavy burden of "clear and convincing evidence" before an attorney can be disbarred, Trump's top election lawyer has remained defiant, disingenuous and not credible. Eastman characterized the bar proceeding as 'political persecution.' He insisted that those who brought charges against him 'should themselves be disbarred,' and that the Office of Chief Trial Counsel of the State Bar and the trial judge were 'partisan' actors who had made campaign contributions to Democrats. This rhetoric, of course, sounds eerily familiar. Eastman will likely appeal to the California Supreme Court and, if he loses there, eventually to the U.S. Supreme Court on First Amendment grounds. It is also possible that when the next Supreme Court vacancy occurs, Trump may nominate Eastman. After all, if we can have a convicted felon in the White House, why not a disbarred, but loyal, lawyer on the nation's highest court? Whatever unfolds for Eastman, and despite the profound damage that Trump's election denialism has done to American democracy, the Eastman case compellingly illustrates Alexander Hamilton's confidence that this nation is well served by an independent judiciary. As if anticipating the election denialism of Trump and Eastman, Hamilton argued that courts would 'guard the Constitution and the rights of individuals from the effects of…the acts of designing men or the influence of particular [circumstances which] sometimes disseminate among the people themselves…' Nearly 250 years later, Hamilton sounds positively clairvoyant.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
The US Needs Boeing To Be Strong and Healthy, Says Air Lease CEO
Boeing had been getting its act together until the crash of an Air India flight last week raised fresh questions about the planemaker, says Air Lease CEO John Plueger. Plueger says clarity should come soon from the investigation into the crash. He says the US needs a strong, healthy Boeing to develop its new planes. Sign in to access your portfolio
San Francisco Chronicle
3 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
NTSB urges quick fix on Boeing plane engines to prevent smoke from filling cabin after a bird strike
Safety experts recommended Wednesday that the engines on Boeing's troubled 737 Max airplanes be modified quickly to prevent smoke from filling the cockpit or cabin after a safety feature is activated following a bird strike. The problem detailed by the National Transportation Safety Board emerged after two bird strikes involving Southwest Airlines planes in 2023 — one in Havana, Cuba, and another in New Orleans. The Federal Aviation Administration and Boeing already warned airlines and pilots about the problem and the engine maker has been working on a fix. The NTSB said that the engines CFM International makes for the Boeing plane can inadvertently release oil into the hot engine when the safety feature, called a load reduction device, is activated after a bird strike or similar engine issue. The resulting smoke feeds directly into either the cockpit or passenger cabin depending on which engine was struck. Similar engine models with the same safety feature are also used on Airbus A320neo planes and C919 planes made by the Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China. The NTSB urged European and Chinese aviation safety regulators to evaluate those engine models to determine if they could also be susceptible to the smoke problem. Safety device solved one problem but created another The new safety device that CFM added to its engines solved one problem by limiting damage when an engine starts to come apart, but created a new problem by releasing the oil that burns and generates smoke. 'This is a case of an unintended consequence of a new and innovative safety idea where if the fan gets unbalanced that this is a way to alleviate the load and thereby doing less damage to the engine, the engine pylon, all of that,' said aviation safety expert John Cox, who is CEO of the Safety Operating Systems consulting firm. CFM said in a statement that it is 'aligned with the NTSB's recommendations and the work is already underway, in close partnership with our airframers, to enhance the capability of this important system.' The company, which is a joint venture between GE Aerospace and Safran Aircraft Engines, confirmed it is working on a software update for the 737 Max's engines and said it is evaluating similar engine models. Boeing said it is working with CFM on the update and the planemaker supports NTSB's recommendations. Boeing also updated some of the checklists pilots rely on to help them take appropriate actions. The NTSB investigated a December 2023 incident in which a Southwest Airlines plane struck a bird while taking off from New Orleans and had to land quickly after thick smoke filled the cockpit — even making it hard for the pilot to see the instrument panel or his copilot. In an incident nine months earlier involving another Southwest 737 Max, smoke filled the cabin after a bird strike after takeoff in Havana. Air from the left engine on a 737 Max flows directly into the cockpit while air from the right engine flows into the passenger cabin. FAA says it will require airlines to implement a permanent fix when it's available While these incidents were both bird strikes, the NTSB said this could happen in certain other circumstances. The FAA said in a statement that it agrees with the NTSB recommendations and when 'the engine manufacturer develops a permanent mitigation, we will require operators to implement it within an appropriate timeframe.' Pilots can act to limit smoke in the plane by manually cutting off airflow from the engines, but smoke can quickly start to fill the cabin within a few seconds. The engine manufacturer is working on a software update that should do that automatically, but that's not expected to be ready until sometime in the first quarter of next year. The NTSB said in its report that several pilots who fly Boeing 737s told investigators they weren't aware of these incidents despite the efforts Boeing and the FAA have made. The NTSB said 'it is critical to ensure that pilots who fly airplanes equipped with CFM LEAP-1B engines are fully aware of the potential for smoke in the cockpit.' Airbus didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. A Southwest spokesperson said the airline has been in close contact with the FAA, Boeing and the engine maker since the incidents and notified its pilots after they happened. The spokesperson said the airline continues to address the issue through its training and safety management systems. Persistent troubles for the 737 Max The Boeing 737 Max planes have been the focus since they were involved in both incidents, and there has been a history of other problems with that plane. The Max version of Boeing's bestselling 737 airplane has been the source of persistent troubles for Boeing after two of the jets crashed. The crashes, one in Indonesia in 2018 and another in Ethiopia in 2019, killed 346 people. The problem in those crashes stemmed from a sensor providing faulty readings that pushed the nose down, leaving pilots unable to regain control. After the second crash, Max jets were grounded worldwide until the company redesigned the system. Last month, the Justice Department reached a deal to allow Boeing to avoid criminal prosecution for allegedly misleading U.S. regulators about the Max before the two crashes. Worries about the plane flared up again after a door plug blew off a Max operated by Alaska Airlines, leading regulators to cap Boeing's production at 38 jets per month. The NTSB plans to meet next Tuesday to discuss what investigators found about that incident.
