I've just been reading a 4 hour old BBC news item on the reintroduction of charges against Boeing. What kind of justice comes up with "deferred prosecution agreement". I was generally aware but hadn't realised it was so blatant.
In January 2021, the US Department of Justice (DoJ) charged Boeing with fraud. But the company was able to avoid going on trial, by agreeing to pay $2.5bn in fines and compensation, and promising to tighten up its compliance procedures.
This settlement - known as a deferred prosecution agreement - provoked intense anger among a number of the relatives of those who died aboard ET302.
They claimed, and continue to claim, that the deal was a "sweetheart agreement" which was concluded without their knowledge, violated their rights, and allowed the company to avoid being held fully accountable.
The Department of Justice defended its decision, insisting that the settlement was appropriate, because it could not prove beyond reasonable doubt there was a direct connection between Boeing's alleged crimes and the two crashes.
Embedded in the post is a long sub thread which has wondrous graphics but it leaves the reader with the usual over-simplified ideas.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-64390546
Reading on, and on, and on, I have to say that it would be churlish to nit pick this news item. In one of the sub-sub sections, it really gives a good overview of the Boeing/FAA self regulation issues. The inner link is a long read.