by MDG
A U.S. District Judge, BP, and the Department of Justice recently
illustrated a fascinating aspect of our criminal justice system: if
you want to plead guilty to eleven felony counts, two misdemeanors,
and an obstruction charge and avoid facing any time in prison, the
answer is to simply be a corporate entity.
Three years ago this April, the Deepwater Horizon exploded in the Gulf
of Mexico, causing an incredible amount of economic and environmental
damage that gripped headlines and placed BP in the national psyche as
public enemy number one. Often overlooked, however, is the fact that
eleven men working on the Horizon died as a result of the rig
malfunction. Although BP pleaded guilty to eleven felony counts in
addition to two misdemeanors and an obstruction charge, the company
recently escaped any true criminal liability when a U.S. District
Judge approved a settlement in which BP would pay $4 billion in
penalties rather than stand trial for its criminal negligence.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-21244916.
There may be some very compelling and logical reasons as to why it
made more sense for BP to pay a penalty rather than face the usual
criminal liability. Perhaps, as a corporate entity, it was unclear who
would face the charges brought against the entire corporation. Maybe,
in paying a $4 billion penalty, BP could provide more aid to the
victims’ families and others harmed by the oil spill. Ultimately, it
makes no difference whether these or any other offered explanations
truly represent sound legal policy. What matters a great deal more,
however, is that judicial approval of BP’s settlement allowed any
individual associated with the company to avoid prison time, depriving
the victims and their families of a chance at justice, while also
granting the corporation rights no individual could ever dream of.
Could any of us imagine the pain in a judge explaining that the
criminal negligence leading to our family member’s death could be paid
off by a fine rather than jail time? Would such an outcome even be
possible for anyone not involved in a multi-billion dollar
corporation? Although BP issued an apology to the victims and their
families, it’s clear that simply paying a penalty in lieu of facing
prison time has not been enough. Chris Jones, brother of one of the
eleven victims, commented on the approved settlement by proclaiming BP
“the real winner,” stating the company “got what they wanted.”
http://www.houstonchronicle.com/business/energy/article/BP-s-plea-eases-its-burdens-weighs-heavy-on-some-4233833.php.
The sentiment that BP was the “winner” rather than the victims speaks
volumes, making it clear that for at least some of the victim’s
families, a forced apology and a paycheck wasn’t enough to erase the
criminal behavior that led to the death of their loved ones.
I agree with MDG sentiment. In the criminal system compensation for the harm done is not the goal.The purpose of the criminal law is to express the communities disapproval, to provide a sense of justice which money alone can not provide. Admittance of guilt should not be underestimated but when it is a fictional entity admitting guilt its hard not to think the sentiment is just as fictional. In this case the community demanded justice beyond the simple payment for harm done. It demanded justice that expresses the condemnation of the community in the form of a criminal conviction. Unfortunately, the legal community has become soft, and we consider settlement to always be the superior option. When prosecutors consider settlement a win, one can only wonder if the avoidance of trail by prosecutors was truly them acting in the best interest of the community, or if it is cowardice at the thought of going to trial. The only other alternative is that prosecutors, as public servants, are neglecting their duty to the public, and are instead act only in their own interest.