Lease this WebApp and get rid of the ads.
Not necessarily an easy thing to convict on...
Mon Jan 9, 2017 7:18am

The prosecution may get lucky and find some e-mails or signed documents, but one of the biggest challenges I see with this kind of case is proving what someone knew. Proving WHEN a defendant learned a given piece of information.

IMO if they have a letter signed by the exec specifically ordering the modifications to the vehicle to make it perform differently during testing, that makes it pretty clear. But I have noted that often executives are slick enough to not sign such documents. That the documents will likely demonstrate direct knowledge on the part of folks LOWER in the company (designers, design managers, etc)... but proving that the SPECIFIC defendant knew something is harder.

In this case, the guy was telling the gov't that the flaws were accidental and not intentional... The question that the court will have to figure out is whether or not he was actively LYING? Or whether or not he was simply telling what he had been told by HIS bosses? One act is criminal, the other isn't.

Click here to receive daily updates

Religion and Ethics BBS