Boeing knew about safety-alert problems, didn't tell airlines: Report

Channel: Fox Business
Published: 05/06/2019

Description
Fox News senior judicial analyst Judge Andrew Napolitano on the potential legal fallout from the two crashes of Boeing 737 Max 8 jets. FOX Business Network (FBN) is a financial news channel delivering real-time information across all platforms that impact both Main Street and Wall Street. Headq...



Transcript
But we want to kick this half an hour off with boeing. The company is set to drag the dow this morning due to its exposure in china. Plus there was a major admission over the weekend. Boeing reportedly knew about the problems with the 737 max safety alert system for a year before telling the faa and the airline's i spoke with boeing ceo dennis muhlenberg back in november after the lion air crash i ...
indonesia before the ethiopian air crash had occurred. Here'S what he said about safety at boeing, the 737 max is safe and the safety is a core value for us at boeing. It always has been, and we ensure that our airplanes are safein fact. This airplane went through thousands of hours of tests and evaluation certification working with the pilots. Vidiots right now is fox news, senior judicial analyst judge, andrew napolitano. We know what he said in november - judge square, that for us. Well, we now know that their problems are potentially grave, both with respect to civil liability and criminal libel. We'Ll start with civil, the warsaw convention caps, the maximum amount of financial damages that an airline or its carrier has to pay to a injured innocent passenger lawyers. For the passengers could argue that the caps should be removed because of deception on the part of the boeing, but their real problem and i'm sorry to use thisphrase is criminally negligent homicide.

There is a potential for prosecutors to make that claim. Now. Here'S the here's, the claim, the failure to comply with a legal obligation to inform the kerry the airline of a defect in the software when that failure, arguably resulted in death is a definition of criminally negligent homicide. So boeing's problems are quite serious. Those are under us law, wouldn't the actions if there were criminal, be in the jurisdictions where the quote unquote. Crime took place. Well, the crime, if it with it was a crime, would have taken place when and where boeing was either manufactured or when the where boeing's executives were when they made the decision. Whoever made thedecision i'm not saying up to muhlenberg personally, there's no evidence of that where they were, they were when the decision was made, but the united states has claimed something called extraterritoriality, meaning if there's harm caused in the united states to a an entity or a Corporation or human being, even if the act of the cause the harm occurred elsewhere federal prosecutors can prosecute here. So i don't think that that i'm not suggesting that there should be a prosecution, but i'm telling you that there's a potential for one, and it would not surprise me if we hear soon that federal prosecutors have commenced an investigation. So boeing knew about the safety alert problem for a yearbefore telling other airlines and the federal aviation administration and the problem at issue, and this is in the journals story, with incredible reporting from the capacitor and a drift angle and allison sider. Yes, the problem kept a safety feature that was found on earlier models from functioning on the max, though quote it isn't clear if the feature would have prevented either crash. That would be.

That would be the defense now. Prosecutors would look at that defense before charging, because just like there's one of the comments made and in the muller report, you don't want to bring a case unless you think you can prove it beyond a reasonable doubt. So if there is a substantialand material defense there, that would be a defense on the criminal side. It might not be a defense on the civil side, where the bar is a lot lower beyond a preponderance of the evidence. Civil case is not beyond what what did they know? When did they know it? What did they have an obligation to tell who decided not to tell those are all questions that lawyers for the the estates of the passengers or even boeing's insurance carrier? Boeing'S carrier decides to say we're not going to cover you because you're deceived, even us, somebody is going to make those enquiries.


Watch Next

Loading...