The lawyer for the families who lost loved ones in two Boeing crashes of 737 MAX jets argued on October 11, 2024, that the plea deal between the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Boeing should not be accepted by the federal district court judge in Texas who is overseeing the criminal matter against the aircraft manufacturing giant.

Paul Cassell, attorney for the families in this case and professor of the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah, argued before U.S. Federal District Court Judge Reed O’Connor that the plea deal “rests on an airbrushed set of facts that conceals the truth about this case.” He went on to tell the court that the DOJ and Boeing set the terms of the plea deal as “non-negotiable” and were finalized without consulting the families who have been found to be victims under the federal Crime Victims’ Rights Act.

Cassell went on to say that the plea deal does not mention the 346 deaths in the two crashes five years ago and argued for the case to go to trial because the plea deal is “not an appropriate determination of remedial measures” to ensure that these planes that continue to fly are safe. “What fine is commensurate with a crime that kills 346 people?” he asked. Alternatively, Cassell argued that Judge O’Connor should reject this deal and have the parties return with an alternative plea deal that is fairer to the families and the flying public.

“The heart of the matter is that the parties are swallowing the gun,” Cassell said Friday morning. He also told the Court that Boeing failed to provide all relevant facts that go directly to the deadliest corporate crime in U.S. history. He pointed to the October 9, 2024, article in The New York Times, “Months Before Ethiopian Crash, Boeing Turned Aside Carrier’s Questions,” by Mark Walker and James Glanz, that revealed that Boeing failed to answer the chief Ethiopian pilot’s questions about the new MAX jet following the first crash in the Java Sea in October 2018. These emails also were not provided to Congress despite congressional officials asking for all pertinent information at several hearings in Washington, D.C. The article stated that answers to these questions could have avoided the second crash five months later.

The plea deal includes a fine that the families say is wholly inadequate to make a statement to Boeing and a monitor appointed by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and approved by Boeing without family input. Cassell asked the court to reject the plea agreement with Boeing on nine grounds, including that it is too lenient given the criminal sentencing guidelines and that “it surreptitiously exonerates Boeing’s then-senior leadership.” The families are arguing for an independent monitor to be appointed by the court.

At least 14 family members from various countries were present at today’s hours-long arguments presented to Judge O’Connor. Susan Riffel of California, who lost her two sons, Melvin and Bennett, in the second crash, said following the hearing, “The 170,000 members of the ‘Boeing Family’ didn’t kill our sons; the Boeing executives did. … How is it counterproductive to have an independent monitor? Boeing’s business as usual isn’t working. The DOJ told us what they were planning to propose to Boeing and that it was a non-negotiable offer, and then they negotiated with Boeing. … We want those responsible to be held responsible. Not 170,000 workers, as suggested by the Boeing lawyer today. Boeing is not too big for justice.”

Her husband, Ike, who also attended the hearing, said:

“Our families come back to truth, justice, and accountability. … No one wants Boeing to fail, but we need to get the criminals out of the system. … It seems that DOJ just is interested in getting this case behind them.”

Chris Moore of Canada, who lost his daughter in the crash and who attended today’s hearing, said, “Boeing has always had the privilege of second changes and ‘do overs’ whether it is by way of the FAA’s lack of oversight and ability to assess airworthiness and risk properly or the Justice Department’s lack of integrity. My daughter Danielle and 345 other passengers never got a ‘do over’ after the brand new 737 MAX plane crashed due to Boeing’s criminal acts. The House’s final report found significantly more incriminating facts than the DOJ’s agreement stated. The deal is like Boeing’s MCAS certification plan: half-baked and noncompliant. The plea bargain rehashes the deferred prosecution agreement but leaves out the most important facts that tie the crime to the death of 346 people, for which Boeing should be held to account. The only way for this to occur is to conduct a criminal trial and let all the facts come to light.

“DOJ supported Boeing’s position of minimizing the loss and protection of information. The argument lacked factual support. Given the severity of this case, it should have mandated greater penalties and monitoring. … The DOJ is protecting Boeing’s image, assets, and mitigating its market losses. … The FAA failed to oversee Boeing engineering and production, and they need an independent set of eyes to oversee these areas at Boeing. The plea deal ignores this and the full picture of facts. The House has a more accurate picture of what happened, but the plea deal distorts this,” Moore said.

Nadia Milleron, who lost her daughter Samya in the crash and who also attended today’s hearing with her husband, Michael Stumo, said, “The Department of Justice said that the plea agreement is ‘reasonable and in the public interest,’ but it actually protects Boeing. The Department of Justice is supposed to represent the people of the United States, and by not holding Boeing accountable in any meaningful way, it allows for no consequences and, therefore, repeated bad behavior on Boeing’s part but also on the part of other executives who might threaten human life. Mark Philip, who argued for Boeing said that the FAA is the safety expert, and it is counterproductive to have a safety monitor that that would be conflicting. But actually the FAA needs the pressure of the criminal court to hold Boeing accountable and add additional pressure for safety. In the five years since the crash and this year also especially with the Alaska Air blowout, we can see that FAA oversight is inadequate. The public, through criminal accountability, has to assert greater pressure for safety.”

For further information, contact Clifford Law Offices Communications Partner Pamela Sakowicz Menaker at 847-721-0909 (cell) or pammenaker@cliffordlaw.com.

Various family members who lost loved ones in the Boeing crash speak to the media following Friday’s hearing outside the federal courthouse in Fort Worth, Texas.

The post Federal Judge Hears Arguments Against Boeing’s DOJ Plea Deal in Texas appeared first on Clifford Law Offices.

U.S. Federal District Court Judge Reed O’Connor in Fort Worth, Texas, has set a hearing for Friday, October 11, at 9:00 a.m. in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas – Fort Worth Division to hear objections to a proposed plea deal from victims’ relatives in the criminal case against Boeing for the two 737 MAX8 crashes that killed 346 people.

The families’ objections to the plea deal gained additional support in the October 9 New York Times story, “Months Before Ethiopian Crash, Boeing Turned Aside Carrier’s Questions,” by Mark Walker and James Glanz, exclusively reporting that in late 2018, prior to the second crash in Ethiopia, high-level executives at Boeing refused to answer email questions from Ethiopian Airlines’ chief pilot about how to respond to activation of a new flight control system called MCAS – the very problem that would just months later lead to the second crash of ET Flight 302.

Reporters said these emails were not made available to U.S. congressional investigators. Relying on information that the families had originally filed under seal with Judge O’Connor, The New York Times stated, “[A]viation experts said the lack of additional information most likely contributed to the inability of the pilots to pull themselves out of a fatal nosedive once the flight control software system malfunctioned. … The emails stand in sharp contrast to Boeing’s initial efforts to suggest that the Ethiopian crash was partly the result of pilot error.”

The New York Times story goes on to report the families’ reaction to this news, quoting Naoise Connolly Ryan of Ireland, who, with her two young children, lost her husband, Mick Ryan, in the Ethiopian crash: “Ms. Ryan criticized Boeing for holding back safety information from airlines, calling it criminal and suggesting it could have prevented the Ethiopian crash. … Ms. Ryan said she did not know why the Justice Department had not dug deeper into the matter.”

Following the two crashes and a U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) criminal investigation, in January 2021, Boeing entered a Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) with the DOJ to resolve a criminal charge of conspiring to defraud the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) about the safety of the Boeing 737 MAX. Then, in May 2024, the DOJ found that Boeing violated its promise in the DPA to improve the company’s safety protocols. The DOJ cited, among other problems, a January 2024 in-flight panel blowout on an Alaska Airlines 737 MAX jet built by Boeing.

In July, Boeing agreed to plead guilty to conspiring to defraud the FAA. The DOJ and Boeing presented a proposed plea agreement to Judge O’Connor for his review. The victims’ families, who have been found to be victims under the federal Crime Victims’ Rights Act, have objected to the proposed “sweetheart” plea deal, arguing in their objections that the DPA fails to include any provisions acknowledging the 346 deaths and generally fails to hold Boeing accountable for past consequences of its crime and to protect the flying public in the future.

Paul Cassell, attorney for the families in this federal case and professor of the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah, said, “Today’s story confirms what the families have been saying for years: Senior executives at Boeing concealed safety issues with the 737 MAX, at congressional hearings and even from pilots who were trying to learn how to respond to those issues. Boeing hid those problems as part of its criminal conspiracy to defraud the FAA. And, sadly, the emails publicly released now for the first time confirm that one tragic consequence of Boeing’s lies was the crash of ET Flight 302, killing 157 passengers and crew.” He told The New York Times reporters that “Boeing put continuing its conspiracy of concealment ahead of passenger safety, killing all those on board.”

At Friday’s hearing, lawyers will ask Judge O’Connor for accountability from Boeing. This is only possible by not accepting the DOJ plea deal and putting Boeing executives on trial to find the full truth for the families and the flying public. Several family members of crash victims, including some traveling from other countries, are expected to appear at Friday’s 9 a.m. (CST) hearing in federal District Court in Fort Worth, Texas.

For further information, contact Clifford Law Offices Communications Partner Pamela Sakowicz Menaker at 847-721-0909 (cell) or pammenaker@cliffordlaw.com.

The post Federal Judge Sets Hearing Over Objections to Boeing 737 MAX DOJ Deal appeared first on Clifford Law Offices.

Paul Cassell, attorney for the families in this federal case and professor of the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah, heads the team representing the victims of families killed in two Boeing crashes, with counsel from Clifford Law Offices of Chicago, Burns Charest of Dallas; Kreindler & Kreindler of New York; and Podhurst Orseck of Miami.

The team received a favorable result in their appeal against a U.S. judge’s decision not to reopen Boeing’s deferred prosecution agreement. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit affirmed the families’ status as crime victims and said their statutory rights must be upheld “at every stage of the court’s criminal proceedings.”

Various firms in several categories will also be honored for their work on November 14 at the Four Seasons Hotel in Washington, D.C. To view the entire list, click here.

GIR is an internationally trusted source of worldwide news, analysis, and data on the law and practice of cross-border investigations.

The post Plaintiffs’ Legal Team in Boeing Criminal Case Receives Global Investigations Review Award appeared first on Clifford Law Offices.

“Running product liability, aviation and mass tort claims in the UK & US” Conference is sponsored by Outer Chambers in England. Durkin spoke on “Holding Boeing to Account – the 737 MAX Litigation.” Durkin, representing victims in nearly every major aviation crash in the last 40 years, is one of the key lawyers in the civil litigation pending in federal district court in Chicago against Boeing in the crash of a 737 MAX8 jet in Ethiopia five years ago.

The half-day program was held at the Arundel House in London followed by a fireside chat and a networking reception. To watch the full recording of Durkin’s presentation or download his slide deck, click here.

If you have any questions, contact Clifford Law Offices Communications Partner Pamela Sakowicz Menaker at 847-721-0909 (cell).

Kevin P. Durkin, partner at Clifford Law Offices, presenting at the Outer Temple’s 2024 conference in London.

The post Kevin Durkin Spoke on Holding Boeing to Account at Outer Temple Product Liability Conference appeared first on Clifford Law Offices.

The reply brief argues that the DOJ did not reasonably confer with the families about specific terms of the plea agreement. It goes on to ask Judge Reed O’Connor, who is overseeing the criminal matter in federal district court in Fort Worth, Texas, to reject the plea deal because it blocks his ability to craft his own sentence for Boeing.

“The proposed plea deal is not only deceptive but morally reprehensible because it fails to hold Boeing accountable for killing 346 people,” said Paul Cassell, attorney for the families in this case and professor of the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah. “A judge can reject a plea deal that is not in the public interest, and this misleading and unfair deal is clearly against the public interest. The families ask Judge O’Connor to use his recognized authority to reject this inappropriate plea and airbrushed factual account of what happened.”

After a door plug on an Alaska Airlines jet flew off mid-air in January, the DOJ found in May that Boeing had breached its obligations under a previously entered Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA). In July, the DOJ announced a proposed plea deal that recommends Judge O’Connor impose a fine of only $243.6 million. The deal does not include any prosecution of Boeing executives.

The families argue in their brief that the fine is an inadequate response to what Judge O’Connor previously called “the deadliest corporate crime in U.S. history.” And the families argue the remedial measures and monitoring that the agreement would provide are inadequate to protect the safety of the flying public. The families also argue that the proposed facts surrounding the plea deal misleadingly exclude the involvement of Boeing’s top executives in the crime.

The Foundation for Aviation Safety held a Zoom press conference Thursday, August 22, 2o24, where it revealed heretofore unreleased documents that detail mechanical and electrical issues with the 737 MAX jet that continues to be manufactured and continues to fly thousands of passengers daily.

The families’ reply brief is available at www.CliffordLaw.com and is attached here.

For further information, contact Clifford Law Offices Communications Partner Pamela Sakowicz Menaker at 847-721-0909 (cell).

Media Files:

• Plaintiffs Redacted Reply Brief

The post Boeing Crash Victims Families Ask Texas Court to Reject DOJ Boeing Plea Agreement appeared first on Clifford Law Offices.

Highly experienced with that aircraft in particular, aviation attorneys at Clifford Law Offices said every possibility has to be considered when a plane suddenly falls from the sky in mid-flight. Clifford Law Offices was Lead Counsel in the crash of the same type of aircraft, an ATR turboprop, in the 1994 crash in Roselawn, Indiana, killing all 68 on board in a short flight from Indianapolis, Indiana, to Chicago. There, it was found that the plane that suffered a loss of aileron control due to ice accretion that the plane’s boot mechanism was unable to kick off, leading it to crash from 16,000 feet.

Early reports from Brazil indicate that this plane was about 17,000 feet in the air when it also appeared to lose control before spiraling down in a residential neighborhood with rainy conditions at the surface. The winter weather in Brazil at this time of year means that the temperature was about zero degrees at that height, similar to the weather during the Roselawn, Indiana crash. That crash led the U.S. National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) to issue dozens of safety recommendations that resulted in numerous ATR airplane design and operational changes.

“At this stage, nothing can be ruled out,” said Robert A. Clifford, founder and senior partner of Clifford Law Offices and Lead Counsel of the Boeing 737 MAX8 aircraft that crashed in Ethiopia, killing all 157 on board. “As we found out in the Roselawn crash, the formation of ice on a plane during flight is highly dangerous because it can change the performance and stability and control characteristics, which can then quickly lead to catastrophic loss of control. Data from the airplane’s ‘black boxes’ should soon help investigators determine the causal issues and begin giving the victim families some idea of what happened and why.”

The Brazilian airline VoePass provided a manifest that indicated 58 passengers and four crew members were aboard Flight 2283 when the ATR 72 turboprop crashed Friday afternoon (August 9, 2024). Flight tracking website Flightradar24 reportedly said data sent from the plane indicated it was diving at 8,000 to 24,000 feet per minute in the last 60 seconds of the flight before it crashed about 1:30 p.m. local time.

ATR’s are manufactured by a joint venture of Airbus in France and Italy’s Leonardo S.p.A.

Clifford Law Offices also represented the family of Brazilian entrepreneur Matias Machline and his wife Marina who were killed in a helicopter crash in New York in 1994. Weather was a factor in that crash.

For further information or to speak to one of the aviation attorneys at Clifford Law Offices, contact Clifford Law Offices Communications Partner Pamela Sakowicz Menaker at 847-721-0909 (cell).

The post Aviation Law Firm Representing Victims in Previous Similar ATR Crash Comment on Possible Cause of Tragic Plane Crash in Brazil appeared first on Clifford Law Offices.

“Running product liability, aviation and mass tort claims in the UK & US” Conference is sponsored by Outer Chambers in England. Durkin spoke on “Holding Boeing to Account – the 737 MAX Litigation.” Durkin, representing victims in nearly every major aviation crash in the last 40 years, is one of the key lawyers in the civil litigation pending in federal district court in Chicago against Boeing in the crash of a 737 MAX8 jet in Ethiopia five years ago.

The half-day program was held at the Arundel House in London. It was followed by a fireside chat and a networking reception. To view the agenda, click here.

If you have any questions, contact Clifford Law Offices Communications Partner Pamela Sakowicz Menaker at 847-721-0909 (cell).

The post Kevin Durkin Spoke in UK on Aviation Litigation Liability appeared first on Clifford Law Offices.

The event, sponsored by the McGill University Institute of Air and Space Law, was held on September 13-14, 2024, in Montreal. Brammeier spoke on a panel addressing “Liability of Air Carriers.”

Brammeier handles complex and catastrophic transportation matters with the firm, currently serving as Liaison Counsel in the pending litigation in federal district court in Chicago involving a Boeing 737 MAX8 aircraft that crashed in Ethiopia five years ago, killing 157.

For further information, contact Clifford Law Offices Communications Partner Pamela Sakowicz Menaker at 847-721-0909 (cell).

The post Tracy Brammeier Spoke at Institute of Air and Space Law appeared first on Clifford Law Offices.

Families who lost loved ones in two Boeing 737 MAX crashes quickly filed in that same court an objection to the deal. The families’ notice indicated that “the plea deal with Boeing unfairly makes concessions to Boeing that other criminal defendants would never receive and fails to hold Boeing accountable for the deaths of 346 persons. … As a result, the generous plea agreement rests on deceptive and offensive premises,” according to the objection filed in federal district court in Texas after the DOJ filed Boeing’s plea with the court.

The issue of whether to accept the plea agreement and Boeing’s guilty plea now rests with Judge O’Connor who is overseeing the criminal matter. Families from around the world are intending to travel to an anticipated court hearing to argue against the deal.

“This sweetheart deal fails to recognize that because of Boeing’s conspiracy, 346 people died. Through crafty lawyering between Boeing and DOJ, the deadly consequences of Boeing’s crime are being hidden,” said Paul Cassell, attorney for the families in this case and professor of the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah. “A judge can reject a plea deal that is not in the public interest, and this deceptive and unfair deal is clearly not in the public interest. We plan to ask Judge O’Connor to use his recognized authority to reject this inappropriate plea 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.”

“The families are highly disappointed that the DOJ fails to account for the two crashes,” said Robert A. Clifford, founder and senior partner at Clifford Law Offices and Lead Counsel for the families in the civil litigation pending in federal district court in Chicago. “Much more evidence has been presented over the last five years that demonstrates that the culture of Boeing putting profits over safety hasn’t changed. This plea agreement only furthers that skewed corporate objective. The families will continue to fight for justice and safety for the flying public in the names of their deceased loved ones who gave the ultimate sacrifice.”

The DOJ initially informed the families that it would not seek prosecution against Boeing and explained the terms of the plea agreement on a last-minute two-hour video conference last Sunday (June 30, 2024).

Reaction to the Justice Department offering what families and their lawyers term a “sweetheart deal” was swift with some referring to the DOJ’s Deferred Prosecution Agreement (DPA) entered into nearly four years ago. In May, the DOJ decided to discard the DPA after it found Boeing hadn’t complied with its terms following a door plug flying off of an Alaska Airlines jet in mid-flight in January.

Catherine Berthet of France who lost her 28-year-old daughter, Camille, said in response to the DOJ action, “In offering this plea deal to Boeing on a platter, the DOJ is demonstrating its weakness and contempt for victims’ families and the public interest. No one will be fooled. After years of legal battles by the families of the 346 victims killed in the crashes of flights JT610 and ET302, the DOJ is offering the same iniquitous sweetheart deal deemed illegal that it offered in January 2021. In the meantime, the families had asserted their right to be recognized as direct victims of Boeing’s crimes, and won, with Judge O’Connor describing these crashes and Boeing’s conduct as the deadliest corporate crime in American history. Once again, and despite its denials, on the pretext that it met with the families at ‘meet and confer’ events that were merely “meet and announce,’ the DOJ is ignoring the families by not mentioning any of the victims Boeing killed in the Plea Deal agreement. Worse still, the DOJ, using its legal options, is filing the plea deal and putting the decision on whether or not to accept it in Judge O’Connor’s hands, hoping that the Judge won’t dare to rule against it. But we know better and trust Judge O’Connor’s sense of justice and public safety interest. It’s as if the U.S. government has learned nothing from the last five years, either in terms of justice or air safety. As if the DOJ didn’t understand that the only way to stop Boeing from continuing its deadly culture is to take them to court, as would be the case for any dangerous individual or criminal company that has killed 346 people. Of course, with the help of our lawyers, we immediately filed a motion before Judge O’Connor, and I hope to have the opportunity to go to Fort Worth as soon as possible so that I can be heard and make the case, like the other families, for Boeing to be taken to court. This is the only way to obtain Truth, Accountability, and Justice for my daughter Camille, and for the 345 other victims. Finally, this agreement is a folly in terms of air safety. It demonstrates the DOJ’s contempt and deafness in the face of whistleblower hearings before the highest courts, expert reports, and the alarming increase in serious incidents and accidents involving Boeing aircraft, especially the 737Max, in recent years, including the near-miss crash last January. The reality is that the next crash is likely, and the government will have done nothing to prevent it. As far as I’m concerned, American justice, which should be an example to the whole world, is in fact shamefully complacent towards those who put short-term profitability and image before passenger safety.”

“The DoJ has decided that repeating the same mistakes made when they negotiated their illegal DPA three years ago will now yield a different result. The penalties and conditions imposed on Boeing as a result of this plea deal are not substantively different than those that failed to change Boeing’s safety culture and that resulted in the Alaska Air door blowout,” said Javier de Luis who lost his sister Graziella in the second crash five years ago. He is an aerospace engineer. “This agreement ignores Judge O’Connor’s finding that Boeing’s fraud was directly responsible for the deaths of 346 people. It ignores the Fifth Circuit’s observation that an agreement such as this fundamentally needs to serve the manifest public interest of improving aviation safety. When the next crash happens, every DoJ official that signed off on this deal will be as responsible as the Boeing executives that refuse to put safety ahead of profits.”

Zipporah Kuria of England who lost her father, Joseph, said, “Miscarriage of justice is a gross understatement in describing this. It is an atrocious abomination. I hope that, God forbid, if this happens again the DOJ is reminded that it had the opportunity to do something meaningful and instead chose not to. We will not stop our fight for justice, whatever that looks like moving forward. For a company that keeps singing that they have changed their tune to take the easy way out again, isn’t reflective of that. It’s a stark reality that this sets a precedent for morally bankrupt companies like Boeing can prosper at the cost of human life without real reprimand and that justice is for those who can afford to wriggle out of accountability. Shame on the DOJ.”

Chris and Clariss Moore of Canada lost their daughter Danielle, 24, in the crash. He said, “The Department of Justice should have initially conducted a full investigation and a criminal trial against Boeing staff who spearheaded the fraudulent certification of the Boeing Max plane. The deadliest corporate crime in United States history but the most lenient sanction for corporate manslaughter of this magnitude requires a detailed explanation of what happened; the facts must be made public, and the individuals must be held to account. Just as Boeing didn’t take corrective actions after the first crash, the Department of Justice, too, has not taken corrective action after yet another accident caused by Boeing (Alaska Air). The plea deal is a carbon copy of the DPA and without true accountability, more accidents will happen. These soft actions taken by the Department of Justice once again show favoritism to those who are wealthy and powerful in the United States.”

Ike Riffel of California who lost his two sons, Melvin and Bennett, in the crash said, “Again the Department of Justice leaves the families of 346 people killed by Boeing’s reckless and negligent behavior in the dark. Without full transparency and accountability, nothing will change. I would hope that we could learn from these terrible tragedies. But instead, the DOJ hands Boeing another sweetheart deal. With this deal, there will be no investigation, there will be no expert witness testimony, there will be no perpetrators of these crimes to answer the charges in court. Without a full public investigation and public trial, the families and flying public will never know the truth. We would hope that the death of our loved ones would have brought about real change in the way Boeing does business and begin to put safety over profit again — the formula that made them the great company they used to be. The first corporate probation did nothing to change Boeing’s behavior, what makes the DOJ think that another one will make any difference? It makes you ask the question, is justice really blind?”

Paul Njoroge of Canada who lost his entire family, Carol, his wife, and his son and daughters, 6-year-old Ryan, 4-year-old Kelli, and 9-month-old Rubi, and his wife’s mom, said, “It was obviously a no-brainer that Boeing was going to accept the plea agreement. It is a deal that allows Boeing to go unscathed. The truth is that the Department of Justice re-wrote the Deferred Prosecution Agreement of January 2021. Obnoxiously, this plea agreement does not factor in that 346 lives were lost because of the negligence of Boeing’s senior management. When this deal goes before Judge O’Connor of the Northern District of Texas, I will request him to disallow it.”

Judge O’Connor ruled earlier that the 346 family members who lost loved ones in two new Boeing 737 MAX8 crashes within five months were crime victims in this case under the federal Crime Victims’ Rights Act.

The terms of the deal appear to mean that no individual executives at Boeing will be charged with a crime, even though families and their attorneys have sent evidence of Boeing’s then-high-level executives being culpable in the conspiracy. Boeing will pay a fine of $487 million with a $234 million credit given for monies previously paid, an amount that is much smaller than the potential $24.7 billion fine that Boeing could have faced.

The DOJ plea agreement also includes an independent corporate monitor for three years at Boeing facilities to be selected by the government. The families asked to be involved in the selection process with Judge O’Connor to have the final say in the selection of the monitor.

For further information, contact Clifford Law Offices Communications Partner Pamela Sakowicz Menaker at 847-721-0909 (cell).

Court Files:

• Department of Justice Notice of Agreement
• Department of Justice Letter to Crash Victims’ Families RE: Plea Agreement
• Boeing Crash Victims’ Families Notice of Objection

The post Boeing Victims’ Families Ask Court to Reject Plea Agreement appeared first on Clifford Law Offices.

Paul Cassell, attorney for the families in the criminal action pending in federal district court in Texas and professor of the S.J. Quinney College of Law at the University of Utah, said, “The Justice Department is preparing to offer to Boeing another sweetheart plea deal. The deal will not acknowledge, in any way, that Boeing’s crime killed 346 people. It also appears to rest on the idea that Boeing did not harm any victim. The families will strenuously object to this plea deal. Judge Reed O’Connor will have to decide whether this no-accountability-deal is in the public interest. Indeed, he will have to decide whether to approve a federal Rule 11(c)(1)(C) that ties his hands at sentencing and prevents him from imposing any additional punishment or remedial measures. The memory of 346 innocents killed by Boeing demands more justice than this.”

Robert A. Clifford, founder and senior partner at Clifford Law Offices and Lead Counsel in the civil litigation pending in federal district court in Chicago who participated in the call, said, “I can tell you that the families are very unhappy and angered with DOJ’s decisions and proposal. There is no accountability, no admission that Boeing’s admitted crime caused the 346 deaths, and the families will most certainly object before Judge Reed O’Connor and ask that he reject the plea if Boeing accepts.”

Cassell told Leon that the families will be traveling from around the world to go to the next hearing before Judge O’Connor in Texas “to fight this.”

Glenn Leon, Chief of the Fraud Section of the Criminal Division at the U.S. DOJ, told the group on the call that the DOJ hasn’t shared the new plea agreement with Boeing but would do so later Sunday. He admitted there is “a strong interest” by the families to go to trial, but he repeatedly said that the DOJ couldn’t prove charges by a reasonable doubt. Families argued over and over for a trial and to allow a jury to make that decision.

Javier de Luis, who lost his sister in the second crash of a Boeing 737 MAX8 jet and who was a member of the Federal Aviation Administration Expert Review Panel on Boeing’s Safety Culture, said following Sunday’s meeting, “The issue is not whether there should be trial vs a plea deal. The issue is that the penalties being proposed by the DoJ are totally inadequate both from the perspective of accountability for the crimes committed and from the perspective of acting in the public interest by ensuring a change in Boeing’s behavior. The penalties proposed here are essentially the same as those proposed under the previous DPA which, as Alaska Air demonstrated, did nothing to increase the safety of the flying public.”

Other issues included the choosing of a corporate monitor and the amount of the fine DOJ intends to ask the court to impose on Boeing.

For further information, contact Clifford Law Offices Communications Partner Pamela Sakowicz Menaker at 847-721-0909 (Cell).

The post Victims of Boeing Crash Angered by Department of Justice “Sweetheart Deal” Explained to Them in Conferral Meeting appeared first on Clifford Law Offices.