Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Legal Loophole Offers Volkswagen Criminal Immunity

Posted by samzenpus on from the just-walk-away dept.

An anonymous reader writes: According to the Wall Street Journal (paywalled) a loophole in the 1970 Clean Air Act could make it impossible for U.S. prosecutors to subject Volkswagen to criminal charges over its use of standards-dodging 'defeat devices' in its emissions-testing software. Prosecutors are now reported to be considering alternative methods, including (considerably lesser) charges that Volkswagen lied to regulation authorities.

6 of 323 comments (clear)

  1. What exactly is the law/rule? by XanC · · Score: 3, Interesting

    If the rulebook says "When we plug in our testing machine, your car needs to be emitting X, Y and Z", then they were totally within the rules.

  2. Re:Just makes them look even more guilty by 0123456 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Indeed. It's just awful that people who didn't break the law can't be punished for not doing so.

  3. Re:TFA, TFS by gstoddart · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It's not really a loophole. Instead it was a conscious decision about how to enforce the Clean Air Act by the lawmakers who made it.

    Come now, do you think those lawmakers made such a helpful clause without a couple of campaign contributions to grease the wheels? Sorry, but when laws are written like that, you can safely assume it's because someone wanted it that way.

    For the exact reason the DMCA has no fangs when corporations misuse it; because they bloody well wanted it that way.

    In fact, it would appear Former Rep. John Dingell (D., Mich.), a longtime congressman and auto industry ally gave them exactly what they wanted.

    And, once again, corporations buy the laws that suit them best.

    --
    Lost at C:>. Found at C.
  4. Re:Just makes them look even more guilty by SvnLyrBrto · · Score: 3, Interesting
    How about RICO?

    I'm not sure about the precise legal definition of racketeering, but the Wikipedia definition of a racket is:

    A racket is a service that is fraudulently offered to solve a problem, such as for a problem that does not actually exist, that will not be put into effect, or that would not otherwise exist if the racket did not exist. Conducting a racket is racketeering.[1] Particularly, the potential problem may be caused by the same party that offers to solve it, although that fact may be concealed, with the specific intent to engender continual patronage for this party.

    That sounds a lot like what Volkswagen did to me. And RICO is often used to go after organizations that weasel out of responsibility for their misdeeds through loopholes. And, of course, there's the second part: Corrupt Organizations. And that fits Volkswagen to the tee... corrupt as hell and rotten to the core.

    --
    Imagine all the people...
  5. Could send them to jail by Etherwalk · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Who's worming their way out?
    Sounds like the prosecutors are trying to make a case that won't get thrown out.
    You can't just make up law as you go along because it's morally wrong.

    You could send them to jail if you wanted to. Fraud, false statements to government, criminal conspiracy, etc...

    Just maybe not under the clean air act.

  6. Re:TFA, TFS by Comen · · Score: 2, Interesting

    NO it is not small, but it is not jail either, I think people should be furious when millionaires do not go to jail for something anyone else would easily be fucked for, but sure it will cost them lots of money.