US judge rules against family challenge in 737 MAX criminal settlement

A federal judge rejected a challenge by relatives of Boeing 737 MAX crash victims to the aviation giant's US criminal settlement, according to a ruling reviewed Friday by AFP.

In a win for Boeing and the Justice Department, US District Judge Reed O'Connor ruled against ordering changes to the controversial January 2021 deferred prosecution agreement (DPA), ruling that the "court lacks statutory authority to supervise, or substantively review" the settlement between Boeing and DOJ.

The decision is a setback for families who garnered a hard-fought public arraignment of Boeing last month in O'Connor's Fort Worth, Texas courthouse at which they argued that the 2021 accord should be radically revised and overseen by a court-appointed monitor.

The DPA required Boeing to pay $2.5 billion in fines and restitution in exchange for immunity from criminal prosecution for charges it defrauded the government during the certification of the MAX.

Read also

Senators grill Southwest Airlines after holiday meltdown

The DPA came about six weeks after the Federal Aviation Administration cleared the MAX to resume service after two crashes killing 346 people grounded the plane worldwide for 20 months.

The families have argued that Boeing's role in what they have called the "deadliest corporate crime" in US history" merit criminal conviction of the company and top brass.

But O'Connor also rejected the families' arguments that the Justice Department behaved in "bad faith" with respect to the families.

In a previous ruling, O'Connor had sided with the families in concluding that they qualified as "crime victims" under federal law and should have been consulted by the Justice Department ahead of the DPA.

But in the latest decision, O'Connor said the Justice Department's failures were based on their "errant" assessment of the victim's rights statute.

Read also

Shareholder sues Shell bosses over climate risks

Further, incorrect statements by US officials to family representatives before January 2021 denying ongoing DOJ actions were the result of "miscommunication" rather than a "willful attempt to deceive the victim's representatives," O'Connor said.

"A showing of bad faith requires substantially more than legal error," said O'Connor, who also cited government outreach, including a meeting between the families and US Attorney General Merrick Garland, as evidence.

"Though these measures do not alter the fact that the families were originally denied their legal status and associated rights as crime victims' representatives, they evince the Government's good faith -- not the opposite," O'Connor said.

A representative for the families said they were "disappointed" with the decision and plan to appeal.

"The Boeing and DOJ crafted an illegal and secret plea deal without any chance for the families to confer about it, which is required by the Crime Victims Rights Act," said attorney Paul Cassell.

Read also

Australia to remove Chinese-made cameras from defence sites

"We are optimistic our appeal will vindicate the families' rights in this case and ensure that never again are deals like this one reached secretly and without victim involvement."

Source: AFP