Latest News

Boeing 737 MAX crash victim families ask judge to name corporate monitor

Family members of victims eliminated in two Boeing 737 MAX crashes on Monday asked a U.S. judge to call a corporate monitor to take a look at the planemaker's safety and corporate compliance treatments.

In a court filing, the member of the family asked U.S. District Judge Reed O'Connor to impose the independent display stating Boeing provides a continuous risk to public safety.

Amongst the reasons the families pointed out were: the U.S. Justice Department's recent decision that Boeing breached a 2021 deferred prosecution agreement; the Jan. 5 mid-air emergency of a brand-new Alaska Airlines MAX 9; and an almost day-to-day barrage of news reports about Boeing airplane malfunctioning and internal whistleblowers revealing Boeing's regulatory infractions.

O'Connor in February 2023 had actually declined to call a screen stating there was no accurate record to justify that Boeing presents a continuous danger to public security.

Boeing and the Justice Department did not instantly remark.

Last month, the Justice Department stated Boeing had failed to style, execute, and impose a compliance and principles program to avoid and discover violations of the U.S. fraud laws throughout its operations, violating the agreement that shielded the planemaker from prosecution over fatal 737 MAX crashes in 2018 and 2019 that killed 346 people.

Boeing filed a reaction rejecting it broke the agreement.

The Justice Department need to decide by July 7 whether to prosecute Boeing and it could seek to require a monitor as part of any settlement with the planemaker. A legal representative for the department said Friday in an email that no decision had actually been made on whether to prosecute Boeing.

O'Connor ruled in October 2022

that the 346 individuals eliminated in 2 Boeing 737 MAX crashes in 2018 and 2019 were lawfully criminal offense victims and stated the Justice Department had actually not adhered to its victim alert obligations under the law.

The Justice Department in 2023 opposed naming a display stating it would be duplicative to DOJ oversight and

disadvantageous to the processes that are operative now.

(source: Reuters)