5 ms·

Seriously, how is the penalty only $46 million? Should be multiple billions of dollars. And the employees who faked the tests should be in prison.

wil421 7y ago
I’m not suggesting prison but some kind of charge, even if it’s a misdemeanor, is needed. Whoever faked the test result needs a record that would hopefully follow them. Would you rather hire someone who was busted with a small amount of drugs or someone who faked test results for NASA?
- dingo_bat 7y ago
  I don't care about the fine, but all involved should never be able to practice their profession again. They can start afresh in a new field.
- iidop 7y ago
  Destruction of $700m property due to negligence certainly seems jailworthy to me. At the very least, this company should be paying a fine which actually recovers the damages.
  - TheBeardKing 7y ago
    Negligence? That's outright fraud.
  - mikeash 7y ago
    Last time I was up for jury duty, I was asked to consider a sentence of up to 20 years in prison for the crime of receiving a stolen Xbox.
    - iidop 7y ago
      That's insane.
    - TallGuyShort 7y ago
      That's the kind of crowd you end up running with if you do things like trying marijuana in college. edit: Real question, though. I'm often called to report for jury duty but have yet to actually sit on a jury. My understanding is the jury is explicitly charged to reach a "guilty of accusation" or "not guilty" decision. And sentencing is a whole separate phase of the trial in which the jury is not involved. I'm sure this varies with types of charges and with locale, but... am I missing something about how you were asked as a juror to consider that sentence?
      - mikeash 7y ago
        In Virginia, which I believe is the only state like this, a jury which renders a guilty verdict then reconvenes to determine the sentence. Everywhere else sentencing is done by the judge.
      - cr0sh 7y ago
        > am I missing something about how you were asked as a juror to consider that sentence? It was probably asked during the "voir dire" phase; that's where if you actually perform jury duty and have to go down to the court, your group might be called in to sit for "voir dire", where the lawyers for each side (prosecution and defendant) ask each potential jury member certain questions regarding the case. The questions are meant to allow the lawyers to pick from the group a pool of jurors - those that make it through voir dire perform the actual jury duty of being the jury. Those who don't, go home. And if you ever want to never serve on a jury, or never be called again for jury duty, mention that you support FIJA or the concept of a "fully informed jury". It's like a poison pill for ever serving on a jury again, but usually, if you are anything like a software engineer or similar (which they do ask your profession in voir dire), they will generally skip you (they really, really don't want anyone with that kind of mindset of extreme logic, reasoning, rationality, process flow, etc). But if you mention FIJA - there's a chance they'll not only let you go, plus strike you from the "call list" - but that any other potential juror in the room will get the same treatment. FIJA is not against the law. It's your right as a citizen to understand and be "fully informed", but the courts (or our justice system) have made it so that most people aren't (for instance, most people don't know or understand anything about "jury nullification", and the system plays to this ignorance). They will say such things prior to the jury leaving to decide the case that the jury can only consider the "guilty or not guilty" according to the law, etc - which is a complete lie. A juror or jury can decide "not guilty" even if it is clear that the law was broken, if they feel the law is unjust. But they don't want you to know that you can do that as a juror or jury. So they don't "fully inform" you of that option. If you really want to get them into a tizzy, print out 500 business cards with the FIJA info on them, and put them on cars in the parking lots around the courthouse...note that you might need a permit for this, or they might have made it "illegal" to do this to cars around a courthouse (it might be considered jury tampering or something - amazing that by informing people of their rights as a juror and citizen, that would be considered "tampering"...), so understand that, too.
    - MockObject 7y ago
      Was that under a three strikes law?
      - mikeash 7y ago
        No, that’s just the maximum punishment prescribed for felony receiving stolen property.
    - user5994461 7y ago
      Was it in the USA? I'm surprised there would be a jury on a theft case. Where I am from, I heard jury are limited to criminal courts where the minimal case is something like manslaughter.
      - mikeash 7y ago
        Yes, in the US. The Constitution guarantees the right to a jury trial for any “serious” offense, which apparently means anything where the potential sentence is greater than six months. Individual states can grant the right to a jury trial for lesser offenses as well if they wish.
  - Cthulhu_ 7y ago
    That can only be done if first, it can be proven that it was poor materials that caused the failure, and two, it's only useful if the company can actually afford a fine like that. You also have to consider what your motivation behind punishment is; is it re-education? Is it compensation of damages? Or is it to just completely bankrupt the company because Never Again? I mean in that last case, NASA and the US as a whole may find itself at a disadvantage in the aluminum industry.
    - iidop 7y ago
      Prison serves the purpose of deterrence, while the fine serves the purpose of compensation. Some amount of forgiveness is actually better for everyone, but that doesn't excuse the responsibility for restitution.
    - mikeash 7y ago
      Funny how these are never a consideration when it’s an individual’s life on the line. Edit: on second thought, these often are considered for individuals, as long as they’re sufficiently sympathetic/rich. See for example Brock Turner. I should say, funny how these are often not considered for individuals, depending on who they are.
    - gpm 7y ago
      How does being able to afford the fine have anything to do with it!? The company caused 700M damage to the US tax payers (assuming the proof part), they should be on the hook to repay that, if they can't they should go bankrupt like anyone else who owes more money than they have.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  Depends on the details of the situations. The dude who tried to sneak coke past border security has poor judgement. The dude who rubber stamped the Friday at 4:55 test after every test that week passed is just human.
vectorEQ 7y ago
it's really hard to push onto employees as it's hard to determine if they were acting on their own or being pressured into doing such things. (as even acting on one's own can be motivated by unhealthy stress or such things which can be outside of their control / responsibility.) that being said, for the incurred loss, 46 million is tiny.
- thanksgiving 7y ago
  Personally, I think it should be the board + CEO who goes to prison when it is a corporation that does something like this. Don't trust someone enough? Don't hire! Disclosure: My ulterior motive is that I think corporations are way too big and also I found the Sun Tzu story of killing a general very interesting. > Sun Tzu said: "If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then the general is to blame." So he started drilling them again, and this time gave the order "Left turn," whereupon the girls once more burst into fits of laughter. Sun Tzu: "If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, the general is to blame. But if his orders ARE clear, and the soldiers nevertheless disobey, then it is the fault of their officers." > So saying, he ordered the leaders of the two companies to be beheaded. Now the king of Wu was watching the scene from the top of a raised pavilion; and when he saw that his favorite concubines were about to be executed, he was greatly alarmed and hurriedly sent down the following message: "We are now quite satisfied as to our general's ability to handle troops. If We are bereft of these two concubines, our meat and drink will lose their savor. It is our wish that they shall not be beheaded." Sun Tzu replied: "Having once received His Majesty's commission to be the general of his forces, there are certain commands of His Majesty which, acting in that capacity, I am unable to accept." Accordingly, he had the two leaders beheaded, and straightway installed the pair next in order as leaders in their place. When this had been done, the drum was sounded for the drill once more; and the girls went through all the evolutions, turning to the right or to the left, marching ahead or wheeling back, kneeling or standing, with perfect accuracy and precision, not venturing to utter a sound.
  - andrewflnr 7y ago
    > Don't trust someone enough? Don't hire! This is 100% impossible to carry out at the scale of a corporation. You don't have enough data about a person staging in front of you to bet a prison sentence on their never ever doing anything wrong, maybe unless you've been friends with them for years. The board+CEO have even less visibility and control over hiring decisions made by middle managers. You would make every leadership position a game of Russian roulette.
icegreentea2 7y ago
The DOJ press release linked elsewhere in the thread says at least one employee was jailed: "Second, from in or about 2002 through September 2015, Dennis Balius, the SPI testing lab supervisor, led a scheme to alter tests within SPI’s computerized systems and provide false certifications with the altered results to customers. Balius also instructed employees to violate other testing standards, such as increasing the speed of the testing machines or cutting samples in a manner that did not meet the required specifications. Balius pleaded guilty in July 2017 and was sentenced to three years in prison and ordered to pay over $170,000 in restitution." The penalty is only $46 million because they've yet to be able to determine (like in court) that the claimed loses (like the failed launches) were actually a consequence of SPI's fraud. The damages are likely on the scale of the orders actually made.

wil421 7y ago

I’m not suggesting prison but some kind of charge, even if it’s a misdemeanor, is needed. Whoever faked the test result needs a record that would hopefully follow them. Would you rather hire someone who was busted with a small amount of drugs or someone who faked test results for NASA?

dingo_bat 7y ago
I don't care about the fine, but all involved should never be able to practice their profession again. They can start afresh in a new field.
iidop 7y ago
Destruction of $700m property due to negligence certainly seems jailworthy to me. At the very least, this company should be paying a fine which actually recovers the damages.
- TheBeardKing 7y ago
  Negligence? That's outright fraud.
- mikeash 7y ago
  Last time I was up for jury duty, I was asked to consider a sentence of up to 20 years in prison for the crime of receiving a stolen Xbox.
  - iidop 7y ago
    That's insane.
  - TallGuyShort 7y ago
    That's the kind of crowd you end up running with if you do things like trying marijuana in college. edit: Real question, though. I'm often called to report for jury duty but have yet to actually sit on a jury. My understanding is the jury is explicitly charged to reach a "guilty of accusation" or "not guilty" decision. And sentencing is a whole separate phase of the trial in which the jury is not involved. I'm sure this varies with types of charges and with locale, but... am I missing something about how you were asked as a juror to consider that sentence?
    - mikeash 7y ago
      In Virginia, which I believe is the only state like this, a jury which renders a guilty verdict then reconvenes to determine the sentence. Everywhere else sentencing is done by the judge.
    - cr0sh 7y ago
      > am I missing something about how you were asked as a juror to consider that sentence? It was probably asked during the "voir dire" phase; that's where if you actually perform jury duty and have to go down to the court, your group might be called in to sit for "voir dire", where the lawyers for each side (prosecution and defendant) ask each potential jury member certain questions regarding the case. The questions are meant to allow the lawyers to pick from the group a pool of jurors - those that make it through voir dire perform the actual jury duty of being the jury. Those who don't, go home. And if you ever want to never serve on a jury, or never be called again for jury duty, mention that you support FIJA or the concept of a "fully informed jury". It's like a poison pill for ever serving on a jury again, but usually, if you are anything like a software engineer or similar (which they do ask your profession in voir dire), they will generally skip you (they really, really don't want anyone with that kind of mindset of extreme logic, reasoning, rationality, process flow, etc). But if you mention FIJA - there's a chance they'll not only let you go, plus strike you from the "call list" - but that any other potential juror in the room will get the same treatment. FIJA is not against the law. It's your right as a citizen to understand and be "fully informed", but the courts (or our justice system) have made it so that most people aren't (for instance, most people don't know or understand anything about "jury nullification", and the system plays to this ignorance). They will say such things prior to the jury leaving to decide the case that the jury can only consider the "guilty or not guilty" according to the law, etc - which is a complete lie. A juror or jury can decide "not guilty" even if it is clear that the law was broken, if they feel the law is unjust. But they don't want you to know that you can do that as a juror or jury. So they don't "fully inform" you of that option. If you really want to get them into a tizzy, print out 500 business cards with the FIJA info on them, and put them on cars in the parking lots around the courthouse...note that you might need a permit for this, or they might have made it "illegal" to do this to cars around a courthouse (it might be considered jury tampering or something - amazing that by informing people of their rights as a juror and citizen, that would be considered "tampering"...), so understand that, too.
  - MockObject 7y ago
    Was that under a three strikes law?
    - mikeash 7y ago
      No, that’s just the maximum punishment prescribed for felony receiving stolen property.
  - user5994461 7y ago
    Was it in the USA? I'm surprised there would be a jury on a theft case. Where I am from, I heard jury are limited to criminal courts where the minimal case is something like manslaughter.
    - mikeash 7y ago
      Yes, in the US. The Constitution guarantees the right to a jury trial for any “serious” offense, which apparently means anything where the potential sentence is greater than six months. Individual states can grant the right to a jury trial for lesser offenses as well if they wish.
- Cthulhu_ 7y ago
  That can only be done if first, it can be proven that it was poor materials that caused the failure, and two, it's only useful if the company can actually afford a fine like that. You also have to consider what your motivation behind punishment is; is it re-education? Is it compensation of damages? Or is it to just completely bankrupt the company because Never Again? I mean in that last case, NASA and the US as a whole may find itself at a disadvantage in the aluminum industry.
  - iidop 7y ago
    Prison serves the purpose of deterrence, while the fine serves the purpose of compensation. Some amount of forgiveness is actually better for everyone, but that doesn't excuse the responsibility for restitution.
  - mikeash 7y ago
    Funny how these are never a consideration when it’s an individual’s life on the line. Edit: on second thought, these often are considered for individuals, as long as they’re sufficiently sympathetic/rich. See for example Brock Turner. I should say, funny how these are often not considered for individuals, depending on who they are.
  - gpm 7y ago
    How does being able to afford the fine have anything to do with it!? The company caused 700M damage to the US tax payers (assuming the proof part), they should be on the hook to repay that, if they can't they should go bankrupt like anyone else who owes more money than they have.
dsfyu404ed 7y ago
Depends on the details of the situations. The dude who tried to sneak coke past border security has poor judgement. The dude who rubber stamped the Friday at 4:55 test after every test that week passed is just human.

vectorEQ 7y ago

it's really hard to push onto employees as it's hard to determine if they were acting on their own or being pressured into doing such things. (as even acting on one's own can be motivated by unhealthy stress or such things which can be outside of their control / responsibility.) that being said, for the incurred loss, 46 million is tiny.

thanksgiving 7y ago
Personally, I think it should be the board + CEO who goes to prison when it is a corporation that does something like this. Don't trust someone enough? Don't hire! Disclosure: My ulterior motive is that I think corporations are way too big and also I found the Sun Tzu story of killing a general very interesting. > Sun Tzu said: "If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, then the general is to blame." So he started drilling them again, and this time gave the order "Left turn," whereupon the girls once more burst into fits of laughter. Sun Tzu: "If words of command are not clear and distinct, if orders are not thoroughly understood, the general is to blame. But if his orders ARE clear, and the soldiers nevertheless disobey, then it is the fault of their officers." > So saying, he ordered the leaders of the two companies to be beheaded. Now the king of Wu was watching the scene from the top of a raised pavilion; and when he saw that his favorite concubines were about to be executed, he was greatly alarmed and hurriedly sent down the following message: "We are now quite satisfied as to our general's ability to handle troops. If We are bereft of these two concubines, our meat and drink will lose their savor. It is our wish that they shall not be beheaded." Sun Tzu replied: "Having once received His Majesty's commission to be the general of his forces, there are certain commands of His Majesty which, acting in that capacity, I am unable to accept." Accordingly, he had the two leaders beheaded, and straightway installed the pair next in order as leaders in their place. When this had been done, the drum was sounded for the drill once more; and the girls went through all the evolutions, turning to the right or to the left, marching ahead or wheeling back, kneeling or standing, with perfect accuracy and precision, not venturing to utter a sound.
- andrewflnr 7y ago
  > Don't trust someone enough? Don't hire! This is 100% impossible to carry out at the scale of a corporation. You don't have enough data about a person staging in front of you to bet a prison sentence on their never ever doing anything wrong, maybe unless you've been friends with them for years. The board+CEO have even less visibility and control over hiring decisions made by middle managers. You would make every leadership position a game of Russian roulette.

icegreentea2 7y ago

The DOJ press release linked elsewhere in the thread says at least one employee was jailed: "Second, from in or about 2002 through September 2015, Dennis Balius, the SPI testing lab supervisor, led a scheme to alter tests within SPI’s computerized systems and provide false certifications with the altered results to customers. Balius also instructed employees to violate other testing standards, such as increasing the speed of the testing machines or cutting samples in a manner that did not meet the required specifications. Balius pleaded guilty in July 2017 and was sentenced to three years in prison and ordered to pay over $170,000 in restitution." The penalty is only $46 million because they've yet to be able to determine (like in court) that the claimed loses (like the failed launches) were actually a consequence of SPI's fraud. The damages are likely on the scale of the orders actually made.