BP – “Beyond Prosecution”

[Devil_Fish]

BP – “Beyond Prosecution”

Commentary by Scott West


Scott West
At least that is the way it seems to be. I watched as two very good criminal investigations were shut down by Bush’s (2) Department of Justice (DOJ) and had to also watch incredulously as my agency, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), fell into lockstep with DOJ. The two cases were the Texas City Refinery explosion criminal investigation and the March 2006 transit pipeline rupture on the North Slope of Alaska criminal investigation. In the first, a number of workers were killed or injured, and in the second, the largest oil spill(in Alaska) since the Exxon Valdez occurred.

I think we can safely assume that BP (corporations do not make decisions; the people that run them do) did not want to blow up one of its refineries, kill and injure its employees, or to dump valuable crude onto the tundra and into a frozen lake. So what made these “accidents” become the focus of criminal investigations? It was a corporate culture that rewarded cost savings at every level, and that dealt harshly with anyone who brought bad news to management. Generally, the cost savings occurred at the expense of worker safety and environmental protection, and workers learned to limit voicing their concerns about these matters because being outspoken usually resulted in losing one’s livelihood. So, we have the situation in these two cases where corners were cut and workers’ voiced concerns were ignored. The company had the internal information to know that explosions could occur and pipes could rupture, yet did not take the prudent steps of reasonable persons to address those problems. That is negligence, and it is criminal.

As a criminal investigator, I want to make sure that we get to the highest people in the organization that made the negligent decisions, or were aware they were being made. We also want to hold these higher-level folks accountable so corporations will take notice and do the right thing, both within the organization under investigation and others in the business. Deterrence is critical especially for a very small boutique criminal investigative force such as the one deployed by the EPA. These investigators cannot address all of the environmental criminals, so deterrence is desired to reduce the number of criminals and criminal acts. Paltry corporate fines and corporate criminal pleas do not hold individuals accountable and do nothing to promote deterrence, even within the offending corporation. BP was an environmental criminal recidivist when these two criminal acts occurred.

More: http://www.seashepherd.org/news-and-media/news-100510-1.html

[Kalun D]

1. K and R

Kick and Recommend

BP is a repeat offender.

I can't for the life of me understand why they are being allowed to run the clean up. The dispersants are making the problem worse, they are only being used to hide the oil. They are denying the cleanup crews permission to use respirators because it's bad for their "image"

BP's assets need to be seized and they need to be criminally charged, prosecuted, and convicted. The fines should be a percentage of their profits, not some piddly amount only in the millions. All the top level executives need to go to prison for life. They give people life for stealing bread under 3 strikes, how come people who cause $Billions in environmental damage walk free? Did any Exxon execs do jail time for the Valdez? Hell no.

B. astard
P. eople (homage to Lily Tomlin)

B. eyond
P. ollution, it's an environmental disaster.

B. astard
P. olluters

B. itch
P. issheads

[sce56]

3. B.iggest P.olluter K&R

B.lack
P.oop

B.lackened
P.orts

B.ig
P.unks

[leveymg]

2. Deterrence is the most valuable part of enforcement. They aren't applying the law.

[Scuba]

4. +1

[rudy23]

5. Buys Presidents. nt

[inna]

6. lol. good one.

With all seriousness though, Big Oil (along with Big Finance and MIC and such) have the government in its pocket, they basically own it. It's Capital, not The People, whose interests are represented and served.