\n
![](\"https:\/\/fortune.com\/img-assets\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/07\/AP24180487059395.jpg?w=2048\")
<\/p>\n [ad_1]
\n<\/p>\n
Federal prosecutors and victims\u2019 families are waiting for\u00a0Boeing<\/a>\u00a0to decide whether to accept a plea deal<\/a> that would\u00a0settle a criminal fraud charge<\/a>\u00a0accusing the aerospace giant of misleading regulators who approved the 737 Max jetliner before two of the planes crashed.<\/p>\n Relatives of some of the 346 people who died in the October 2018 and March 2019 crashes are furious about the plea offer, which Justice Department\u00a0prosecutors spelled out<\/a>\u00a0in an online meeting with the families and their lawyers on Sunday.<\/p>\n The families want to put Boeing<\/a> on trial.<\/p>\n \u201cThis package offers another opportunity for Boeing to hide their misdeeds from the public,\u201d Ike Riffel, a Californian whose\u00a0two sons died<\/a>\u00a0in the second 737 Max crash, said Monday. \u201cThe families are very disappointed, but we vow to fight on.\u201d<\/p>\n Paul Cassell, a former federal judge who is representing some of\u00a0the victims\u2019 families<\/a>, called it \u201ca sweetheart deal\u201d for Boeing.<\/p>\n Some of the lawyers involved in the case, however, say a plea deal is better than nothing.<\/p>\n \u201cWhile I personally would have preferred a more vigorous prosecution, a guilty plea to a felony is a serious step up\u201d from a 2021 agreement between Boeing and the Justice Department, said Mark Lindquist, a lawyer who is suing Boeing on behalf of passengers who survived a\u00a0scary 737 Max inciden<\/a>\u00a0t at the beginning of this year.<\/p>\n The Justice Department first charged Boeing with fraud in January 2021 but\u00a0agreed not to prosecute<\/a>\u00a0if the company paid a fine and followed other terms for three years. Then, seven weeks ago, the department said\u00a0Boeing had violated<\/a>\u00a0the deferred prosecution agreement by failing to make changes to detect and prevent future violations of anti-fraud laws. Prosecutors have not publicly disclosed the alleged violations.<\/p>\n Here are some questions being asked about the case.<\/p>\n The Justice Department wants Boeing to plead guilty to a single count of fraud for deceiving the Federal Aviation Administration about new flight-control software for\u00a0the 737 Max<\/a>\u00a0and how much\u00a0training pilots<\/a>\u00a0of older 737 models would need to safely fly the plane. In the 2021 settlement, Boeing blamed the deception on two low-level employees, one of whom was\u00a0later acquitted<\/a>\u00a0after a trial in federal court.<\/p>\n The company isn\u2019t saying. Lawyers for the victims\u2019 families say the company would be crazy to reject it.<\/p>\n If Boeing takes the deal, it would plead guilty in what likely would be a very short court session. If it turns down the offer, the Justice Department is vowing to take the case to trial, which could expose more details of Boeing\u2019s actions while it was asking the FAA to certify the Max.<\/p>\n Boeing \u201cwouldn\u2019t want that bad press and publicity that would come from a trial that would likely involve family members of victims testifying,\u201d said Joseph Facciponti, executive director of New York University\u2019s law school program on corporate compliance and enforcement. A judge might also impose a harder sentence if Boeing contested the case and lost, he added.<\/p>\n Yes. The plea and the sentence outlined by the Justice Department, including a $244 million fine and appointment of a monitor to oversee the agreement, would be filed in U.S. District Court in Fort Worth, Texas. If\u00a0Judge Reed O\u2019Connor<\/a>\u00a0accepts the agreement, he could not change the terms approved by Boeing and prosecutors.<\/p>\n If the judge rejects a plea deal, Boeing and the Justice Department could negotiate a new agreement or go to trial.<\/p>\n Lawyers for the families say that if Boeing accepts the plea deal, they will ask O\u2019Connor to reject it.<\/p>\n It would strengthen the hand of victims\u2019 families who have not settled their pending lawsuits against the company. It is less clear whether survivors and heirs who already accepted settlements could file new claims.<\/p>\n It would only resolve the fraud charge filed after the two deadly crashes, which took place off the coast\u00a0of Indonesia<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0in Ethiopia<\/a>.<\/p>\n The Justice Department opened another investigation after a panel covering an unused emergency exit\u00a0blew off<\/a>\u00a0a 737 Max during an Alaska Airlines flight in January;\u00a0the FBI told passengers<\/a>\u00a0on that flight they might be victims of a crime. The National Transportation Safety Board and Federal Aviation Administration are conducting separate investigations into the blowout and Boeing\u2019s manufacturing quality.<\/p>\n Boeing announced Monday that it will pay $4.7 billion in stock to\u00a0acquire Spirit AeroSystems<\/a>, which makes fuselages for the 737 Max. Boeing once owned Spirit, and it believes that bringing the supplier back in-house will help it improve quality and\u00a0ease safety concerns<\/a>\u00a0about its planes.<\/p>\n Manufacturing mistakes by suppliers can turn up in finished products. The Alaska Airlines blowout occurred after bolts were not reinstalled following a repair job at Boeing \u2014 workers had to fix rivets that were damaged when the fuselage arrived from Spirit \u2014 according to a\u00a0preliminary report<\/a>\u00a0by the NTSB.<\/p>\n A criminal conviction can jeopardize a company\u2019s standing as a federal contractor, and Boeing is an important one. The company builds planes for the Defense Department and\u00a0built a space capsule<\/a>\u00a0for NASA.<\/p>\n Facciponti, the NYU expert on corporate law, said the plea could be written so that a Boeing subsidiary pleads guilty, allowing the rest of the company to avoid disbarment. However, in many cases agencies have discretion to avoid disbarring companies.<\/p>\n \u201cI don\u2019t think the government wants to lose the ability to contract with Boeing, so there is always the option for government agencies to allow a company that has been convicted of a crime like this to continue doing business with them,\u201d Facciponti said.<\/p>\n The Boeing case also raises questions about deferred prosecution agreements.<\/p>\n Peter Reilly, a law professor at Texas A&M University who has written about them, said DPAs were intended to handle low-level offenses and first-time offenders but are now used in major cases like the 2015 deal with\u00a0General Motors<\/a>, which was charged with\u00a0concealing a deadly problem<\/a>\u00a0with ignition switches in small cars. Reilly said Congress should bar DPAs when victims of a corporate crime die.<\/p>\n \u201cPeople are realizing, wow, this is what happens when Boeing admits to committing a very serious crime and 346 people die?\u201d he said.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n\nWhat is Boeing accused of?<\/h2>\n
Is Boeing likely to accept the plea offer?<\/h2>\n
Can the judge block a plea deal?<\/h2>\n
Would a guilty plea lead to more civil lawsuits against Boeing?<\/h2>\n
Does the plea offer affect other investigations into Boeing?<\/h2>\n
Will Boeing\u2019s purchase of a key supplier improve safety?<\/h2>\n
What are other potential implications of a Boeing plea?<\/h2>\n
Subscribe to the CEO Daily newsletter to get global CEO perspectives on the biggest stories in business. Sign up for free<\/a>.<\/div>\n