Slashdot Mirror


VW Engineer Sentenced To 40-Month Prison Term In Diesel Case (reuters.com)

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Reuters: A federal judge in Detroit sentenced former engineer James Liang to 40 months in prison on Friday for his role in Volkswagen AG's multiyear scheme to sell diesel cars that generated more pollution than U.S. clean air rules allowed. U.S. District Court Judge Sean Cox also ordered Liang to pay a $200,000 fine, 10 times the amount sought by federal prosecutors. Cox said he hoped the prison sentence and fine would deter other auto industry engineers and executives from similar schemes to deceive regulators and consumers. Prosecutors last week recommended that Liang, 63, receive a three-year prison sentence, reflecting credit for his months of cooperation with the U.S. investigation of Volkswagen's diesel emissions fraud. Liang could have received a five-year prison term under federal sentencing guidelines. Liang's lawyers had asked for a sentence of home detention and community service.

133 comments

  1. Lol VW engineer by Thundercat007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But the President who instantly retired the moment diesel gate broke. Took his 50 mil pension plan, walks away Scott free. Sounds legit

    1. Re:Lol VW engineer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      scot

    2. Re:Lol VW engineer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      He was smart enough to stay out of the US, unlike this guy. Many of the top execs will be arrested if they come here

    3. Re:Lol VW engineer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is he hiding outside of the EU? Volkswagon's fraud wasn't committed only in the US market.

    4. Re:Lol VW engineer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think it has been established that VW actually broke a law outside the US. They certainly haven't admitted to breaking the anywhere else. In fact, none of the car companies who were caught cheating emissions in Europe (which is by now pretty much all of them) have had any legal consequences other than a few 'voluntary' recalls.

  2. Wait what? by viperidaenz · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The engineer gets prosecuted for decisions signed off by the executives?

    1. Re:Wait what? by BitterOak · · Score: 1

      The engineer gets prosecuted for decisions signed off by the executives?

      Wait what? The hitman gets a murder charge for decisions signed off by his employer?

      --
      If I can be modded down for being a troll, can I be modded up for being an orc, or a balrog?
    2. Re:Wait what? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      The executives should have been prosecuted too, but they may have been more careful to cover their tracks.

      That said, if an engineer does something he knows is illegal, then he should be prosecuted for it -- even if he was ordered to do it by his superiors.

    3. Re:Wait what? by Lucky_Strikez · · Score: 1

      Hitman is a bit of a different trade than Engineer. How you can act like they are remotely the same is a little insane.

    4. Re:Wait what? by HumanWiki · · Score: 1

      The engineer gets prosecuted for decisions signed off by the executives?

      That surprises you? Honestly, I'd be more surprised if the executives were actually charged with anything other than holding up a round of golf.

    5. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not a good analogy.

      You often get no choice in what you do when upper management says 'just do it'. It's that, or asshat exec decides to wreck your career, fire you, etc, etc, all of which you have heard horror stories of on /.

      Yes, The execs involved should also be prosecuted.

    6. Re:Wait what? by JohnFen · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I think his point was that the engineer is the one who wrote the code (metaphorically, he pulled the trigger) and so it's not silly to prosecute him. It doesn't matter if he was doing it on orders. Just like how a hitman should be prosecuted for doing the hit, and it doesn't matter that he was doing it on orders.

      In both cases, the one who gave the orders should be prosecuted as well.

    7. Re:Wait what? by hey! · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The engineer gets prosecuted for decisions signed off by the executives?

      Speaking as an engineer -- hell yes.

      You expect managers to be dishonest, craven bastards. But an engineer is supposed to have integrity.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    8. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hitman is a bit of a different trade than Engineer. How you can act like they are remotely the same is a little insane.

      True, one can easily kill thousands and is licensed, the other has humility but lacks the university degree.

    9. Re:Wait what? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      But an engineer is supposed to have integrity.

      More importantly, his bridges and buildings better had integrity!

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    10. Re:Wait what? by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 1

      You should always say no if it's immoral or unethical. But when it comes to this situation? If the boss said 'just do it', I'd do it and look for another job.

    11. Re:Wait what? by rogoshen1 · · Score: 1

      I think they tried that defense in Nuremburg. It didn't go over so well.

    12. Re:Wait what? by sdinfoserv · · Score: 2

      This isn't murder, and it wasn't 1 company. The emissions fraud was a German country wide practice that included VW, Audi, Mercedes Benz, Daimler - pretty much EVERY German car manufacture that produces diesels.
      https://www.usatoday.com/story...
      To convict a single "engineer" is laughable.

    13. Re:Wait what? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      You always have a choice. You document the request for the illegal thing, refuse to do it, and if you get fired, you sue for a juicy payout.

      Firing someone for refusing an illegal request is illegal in and of itself.

      It's not going to affect your employment prospects with any company worth working for. In fact, in a lot of companies, it will enhance them -- there really are lots of companies who value employees who act ethically.

    14. Re:Wait what? by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 2

      The engineer gets prosecuted for decisions signed off by the executives?

      That's why an engineer who puts extra effort into doing a great job is rewarded with a laser-printed certificate of achievement in a handsome plastic frame, while an exec who gives the order to fudge on emissions testing walks away with millions because the implementing engineer was one who drew the legal lightning bolt.

    15. Re:Wait what? by mrbester · · Score: 1

      The constant "serve as an example" bullshit needs to stop as it doesn't to those who most need the object lesson. Maybe the judge is trying a "pour encourager les autres" approach but forgets that the phrase came about when an admiral was executed. In this instance a midshipman was executed and the admirals couldn't care less.

      --
      "Wait. Something's happening. It's opening up! My God, it's full of apricots!"
    16. Re:Wait what? by ShanghaiBill · · Score: 1

      Hitman is a bit of a different trade than Engineer.

      In either case, if he knew what he was told to do was illegal, then he can't get off by using the "Nuremberg Defense" that he was "just following orders".

    17. Re: Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nothing Germany-specific about it either. Pretty much every car manufacturer has been caught by now.

    18. Re: Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Most managers in a car company are engineers. At VW, almost all of them are.

    19. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Engineers are pathetic beta cucks.
      CEOs are true alpha chads.

      It is the way of the world.

    20. Re: Wait what? by hey! · · Score: 2

      Which is why the company ought to have its hide nailed to the wall. An engineer is allowed to be a bastard, but if he's a liar, he's not a fricken' engineer.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    21. Re:Wait what? by Nethemas+the+Great · · Score: 1

      Signed? No, ordered. Engineers don't do that kind of sh*t, management does. Should the engineers have had a spine? Should there have been whistleblowers? Yes, but rest assured, he's the loyal peon playing shield to his boss.

      --
      Two of my imaginary friends reproduced once ... with negative results.
    22. Re: Wait what? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      An engineer is allowed to be a bastard, but if he's a liar, he's not a fricken' engineer.

      That's brilliant (and accurate). I'm going to start using that.

    23. Re:Wait what? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      The engineers that I know who consistently put in effort that results in exceptionally good work get rewarded through being paid extra well.

      If that's not true where you work, I strongly encourage you to look around for a better job. Great engineers are hard to find and in demand.

    24. Re:Wait what? by sphealey · · Score: 1

      - - - - - You always have a choice. You document the request for the illegal thing, refuse to do it, and if you get fired, you sue for a juicy payout. - - - - -

      "Can no one rid me of this meddlesome USEPA test requirement?"

      Document away - it would take a very determined prosecutor to even get that through a US grand jury as an indictable statement. Also, the trend in the US is for individual whistleblowers to (a) be ignored by the investigative authorities (b) then criminally prosecuted for 'theft of employee property' after a few phone calls are made CEO-to-Attorney General.

    25. Re:Wait what? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      I'm not talking about whistleblowing. I'm talking about suing for wrongful termination. No grand jury (and rarely any normal jury) is involved.

      The level of evidence required isn't even that high. All you'd really need (assuming that you have a reasonably good employment record) is an email or memo exchange showing that you were told to do something obviously illegal and that you refused to do it, and that you were fired or otherwise punished afterwards.

    26. Re:Wait what? by Serge_Tomiko · · Score: 1

      I think there is plenty of dishonesty to go around.

    27. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's not going to affect your employment prospects with any company worth working for. In fact, in a lot of companies, it will enhance them -- there really are lots of companies who value employees who act ethically.

      ( Wow, are you really that stu... ) Read

    28. Re:Wait what? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I was just following orders hasn't been a valid defence since at least the 40s.

    29. Re: Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      True but the American dinosaur auto companies were really hurting. Until this "VW" thing came up, Volkswagen was poised to outsell even General Motors. Thankfully the government put an end to that.

    30. Re:Wait what? by djinn6 · · Score: 1

      The level of evidence required isn't even that high. All you'd really need (assuming that you have a reasonably good employment record) is an email or memo exchange showing that you were told to do something obviously illegal and that you refused to do it, and that you were fired or otherwise punished afterwards.

      Which is why these conversations are always done face to face.

    31. Re:Wait what? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      That's still likely to happen. Someone from management was arrested in May due to the scandal.

    32. Re: Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Speaking as somebody who has worked for a General Motors OEM,yoy've got to be kidding. Automotive is filled with crooks.

    33. Re:Wait what? by djinn6 · · Score: 1

      It's illegal to sell a car that doesn't meet emission standards, but it's perfectly legal to design one. Last I checked, engineers are not involved in sales and marketing.

    34. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The hitman gets a murder charge for decisions signed off by his employer?

      Capos typically have plausible deniability.

    35. Re:Wait what? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      I never work without a paper trail. I've worked at places where the engineering process was so sketchy that work was allowed to proceed without a paper trail, but even then, I have always made sure that I send an email to my supervisor after the verbal request, stating clearly what I understand the job to be, and asking if that's correct.

      That should be standard practice for every engineer -- not as a CYA so much as because verbal requests are easily misunderstood, and it's to everyone's benefit if it's clear what work is to be accomplished and by when.

    36. Re: Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You wouldn't be fired for refusing. You would be fired for completely unrelated matters like your habitual lateness to meetings you claim not to have been told about.

    37. Re:Wait what? by stdarg · · Score: 1

      There's the rub, how do you prove someone knows something is illegal, outside of the most obvious things like rape and murder? I would never have assumed these defeat devices were illegal, I thought this was going to play out in civil court as an issue about false advertising and compensating owners.

    38. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't know the exact specifics in the case, but a the generic statement that "the engineer is the one who wrote the code" is just nonsense. I use to work on controller for aircraft (Cabin Pressure, APU and main jet engine controllers). It is absolutely essential to write the code such that it can be tested. This involves writing into test modes that disable parts of the control algorithm. Without this logic built into the code, the software can't be adequately tested and planes will fall out of the sky much more often than the do today. The "test mode" used to disable emissions sound like a legitimate thing to put into an embedded controller in order to adequately test everything.

      I thing the wrong questions are being asked. The questions I want to see answered include 1) what does the written specifications say? 2) Who approved the specifications? 3) who approved the validation procedure? 4) Who signed off on the actual validation?

    39. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, in many countries if a lower judge would use the words 'serve as an example' then the case will be tossed out by a higher judge as a mistrial. The law is supposed to be blind and use a scale - the Justicia statues are everywhere to remind people of that basic thing.

    40. Re: Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      VW is still outselling GM, as is Toyota.

    41. Re: Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Some executives are still suspects in the criminal investigation s un Germany. The only problem is that it seems most of them really didn't know.

    42. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, you got me there, that's actually a decent reply to my original whinge :)

      There was a clear distinction though - one kills loads of people, the other was just defeating emissions testing (the engineer isn't a biologist so doesn't know about the knock-on effects apart from the basics likely)

    43. Re: Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is still illegal to say a car is legal for sale and let it get sold when it is not.

    44. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The thing is that you are fucked either way.
      Compare it with modern day North Korea. A lot of soldiers do atrocious things there.
      You can always say that they should refuse, but then they will be executed too.

      What Nuremburg told us is that in some situations you will be punished either way.
      The only way they had do get away would have been for Germany to win the war.

      Now, neither example is very good for this particular situation since neither his life nor his lifestyle was on the line.
      What we don't know here (without reading TFA that is) is if Liang knew how his code was going to be used.

    45. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Beta and cuck doesn't really go together.
      The alpha is someone who would physically dominate his surroundings, beat people up and rape women.
      The beta is someone that females would prefer when given the choice.
      In particular alpha females had a preference for beta males, but even beta females would typically pick them over the alpha.

    46. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And not following them have been punished both before and after too.

      If you are given illegal orders you can either refuse to follow them and get punished immediately or you can follow them and only be punished if you lose.

    47. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We do actually sign an oath of ethics when we graduate in engineering here in France.

      Which apparently didn't prevent automotive engineers to write cheating software in Renault, Peugeot or Citroen.

      Oh well.

    48. Re:Wait what? by Comrade+Ogilvy · · Score: 1

      This. It is a good practice to send out an email after meetings to say "This is what I walked away with as our mutual understanding." Not so much because of illegal shenanigans, but because misunderstandings are common, even among honest and competent people. The honest and competent people appreciate your effort to keep you all on the same page, most especially when things are confusing. The dishonest will become tetchy.

    49. Re:Wait what? by Spamalope · · Score: 1

      You get a memo requesting updates on your work, and a verbal follow up ordering the tampering. If you don't complete the tampering, you'll receive written reprimands for your work/meetings with HR followed by termination. The written record will show you failed to complete your job duties. The fact that they were either unreasonable or were never assigned won't be apparent in the written record.

      That's how it's done. How exactly do you plan to sue again? Have you forgotten that management entirely controls the 'facts' of the case?

    50. Re: Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not if you didn't know.

    51. Re: Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But it may have prevented them from admitting.

    52. Re: Wait what? by sdinfoserv · · Score: 1

      All the more incredulous to assert it's a single "engineer"

    53. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This engineer was an executive. Most executives in the car industry are engineers.

    54. Re: Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't think anyone ever claimed that.

    55. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Non-executive engineers in the car industry are very well paid and executives in the car industry are usually engineers.

    56. Re:Wait what? by amorsen · · Score: 1

      James Liang was a manager. The fact that he happened to have an engineering degree makes all the media outlets report him as being an engineer.

      He was not some guy who just acted under orders.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    57. Re:Wait what? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      You get a memo requesting updates on your work, and a verbal follow up ordering the tampering.

      As I said, I would write that verbal change order into an email that I send to the person who made the change order, asking them to acknowledge that my understanding of the work to be done is correct.

      And, to be honest, I shouldn't even have to do that. Any competent software house does not allow work to be done without a paper trail detailing the work to be done. The amount of misunderstanding this avoids can save a ton of money and improve product quality.

      That's how it's done. How exactly do you plan to sue again?

      Because that's not how I'd allow it to be done. If a company has a problem with my "everything must be documented" rule, then I'm out of there, anyway. That's not a company that's worth my time.

    58. Re:Wait what? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      I would never have assumed these defeat devices were illegal

      Why wouldn't you assume that? The code had no other purpose than to lie to federally required certification. If used for that certification, that is obviously fraud, which is obviously illegal.

    59. Re: Wait what? by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      That's right. That's why documentation is important.

    60. Re: Wait what? by david_thornley · · Score: 1

      That's legally dangerous in the US, with its weak worker protection laws. In Germany, I suspect it would be a really really bad idea.

      --
      "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    61. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hey (engineering guy), if you did not have to meet emissions stds, how good could you make these things run?
      Like if we had other, totally external solutions for that? Write some code and get me some test data, thanks......

    62. Re:Wait what? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      How would an engineer know about the law in a far away country? In many countries, including Germany, were Liang worked most of his career, defeat devices are perfectly legal if they serve to protect the engine.

  3. A patsy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To diligently fall on his sword.

    Nothing more to see here folks, it's all been brushed neatly under the carpet.

  4. I'm all for harsh penalties here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...but $200,000 for an engineer combined with the 40 months? If they're going to do that to the engineer following instructions, then they better be much harsher on the executives and managers that told the engineer to do it in the first place.

    1. Re:I'm all for harsh penalties here... by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      A federal judge in Detroit ...

      Something tells me he isn't very happy with fraudulently marketed imported cars...

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    2. Re: I'm all for harsh penalties here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's 40 months and $200 000 more than any employee of the US car makers ever got for a long history of cheating and bending the rules. Never underestimate home advantage and the power of lobbying.

    3. Re:I'm all for harsh penalties here... by munch117 · · Score: 1

      People died. They died from respiratory problems, heart failure or stroke, because that's what air pollution does. We don't know the names of the people that died, they are just a statistic, and we would have a hard time getting a reliable estimate of how many people died. Maybe just a few. Maybe hundreds. But people did die, and this guy made it happen.

      Tell me again that 40 months is harsh.

    4. Re:I'm all for harsh penalties here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You cannot make that assertion without evidence and facts. Something this case appears to be missing, if a lowly engineer is being pinned to the wall. They likely threw him under the bus.

    5. Re:I'm all for harsh penalties here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given the insignificance of the pollutant involved, the low actual emissions (still far below the fleet average in the US) and the fact that there is a tradeoff in diesel emissions between NOx and the far nastier stuff (particulates, volatile organic compounds and carbon monoxide), you can't say that at all. It may very well be that all things considered, fewer people died due to air pollution with the cheat than without.

  5. Throw another pleeb under the money bus by burtosis · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Let's keep those profits rolling, we have engineers to burn! America needs to wise up and start jailing the senior management. It's sad times for America when South Korea is the one with balls while America just rolls over and takes it.

    1. Re:Throw another pleeb under the money bus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, for all the barking USA does about North Korea, the only country NK can really fuck up is South Korea. With that much artillery pointed at Seoul, damn right they have balls.

    2. Re:Throw another pleeb under the money bus by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      A senior manager was recently arrested. These things take time.

  6. everyone should get an indemnification clause by kiviQr · · Score: 2

    I guess everyone needs an indemnification clause in their contract. Else good luck with any software development for military, public transportation, autonomous cars, health, and so on....

    1. Re:everyone should get an indemnification clause by jopsen · · Score: 1

      In this case the engineer knew that he was committing fraud.

      Imagine a construction engineer who at request of management signed off on a bridge wouldn't survive heavy wind :)

      This is why you have a union, even as an engineer, if your employer is instructing you to commit fraud, you might have to sue (a strong union will have the expertise to handle such a scenario).

    2. Re:everyone should get an indemnification clause by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      No indemnification clause will protect you when you knowingly do something wrong.

    3. Re:everyone should get an indemnification clause by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      I guess everyone needs an indemnification clause in their contract.

      In many countries of the world you can't indemnify the acts of an engineer. Professional registration and legislation specific to engineering doesn't allow for that sort of thing.

    4. Re:everyone should get an indemnification clause by stdarg · · Score: 1

      I'm not an automotive engineer but it seems like these defeat devices aren't actually illegal, just misleading. The cars meet the emissions requirements when driven in a very specific way. How is that illegal? Just like if someone drives like a maniac all the time their gas mileage isn't going to be close to the advertised fuel efficiency of the car.

    5. Re: everyone should get an indemnification clause by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There are two specific reasons why VW and ba number of employees are ij trouble in this case:
      - VW also sold cars with defeat devices in the US, where the regulatory agencies are essentially free to decide what they will and will not allow. A gew others may have done the same (GM and Fiat), but those involve pickups, which are allowed more leeway in the US, since they are legally 'light trucks' and, more importantly, they have a large presence in the US with lots of employees and lots of politicians in their pockets.
      - VW was stupid enough to publicly admit everything. This turned out to be a huge mistake and the competition made sure not to make it.

  7. Makes sense. by WolfgangVL · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Part of what you pay an engineer to do is take responsibility for things. That's why you need a cert to call yourself a "Professional Engineer" Same concept as a bridge falling. Some technical person put his approval on it as the end-all, so that technical person takes responsibility. It's part of his/her job. I think the execs should all get smacked a little harder too, but this is fitting.

    --
    You are being ripped off every second of every day, so that advertisers can help rip you off even more tomorrow.
    1. Re:Makes sense. by coolmoe2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That makes no sense what he engineered worked perfectly for many years so his part of the job was fine by an engineering standpoint. What does not make any sense at all is why the executives that ordered the emissions cheating software are not the ones doing the time.

    2. Re:Makes sense. by Streetlight · · Score: 1

      The executives may have just ordered the engineers to build diesel cars that would meet emissions standards. The engineers did that - the cars met the emission standards during tests. Was there a wink-wink by the executives? Maybe.

      --
      In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell
    3. Re:Makes sense. by larryjoe · · Score: 1

      Part of what you pay an engineer to do is take responsibility for things. That's why you need a cert to call yourself a "Professional Engineer" Same concept as a bridge falling. Some technical person put his approval on it as the end-all, so that technical person takes responsibility. It's part of his/her job. I think the execs should all get smacked a little harder too, but this is fitting.

      I totally agree with this as long as the engineer receives financial compensation commensurate with the legal liabilities. However, in contrast to licensed professional engineers, other engineers don't have similar compensation, liability, or certifications.

      All engineers should strive to perform their duties in an ethical manner, but that's not the same as assuming liability.

    4. Re:Makes sense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Fitting to put someone in jail for a non violent offense? What is it with Americans and incarceration? Prison is for violent felons.

      He is guilty and he should be punished. Fine him, cancel his licenses, lose his job, maybe all three. But prison? It's obviously not a deterrent and all that will happen is the guy will probably be prey for more violent people.

      It's wrong. And if you have have a brain you know it's wrong. This is just the prison industry convincing the government that more people should be incarcerated to boost their profits.

      Sickening.

    5. Re:Makes sense. by sphealey · · Score: 1

      If you are an engineer working on emissions control software, part of your job is to have a knowledgeable layman's understanding of the applicable laws and regulations and also to know when you need to call Legal for an analysis of whether or not something you are designing fulfills said laws and regulations.

    6. Re:Makes sense. by ckatko · · Score: 1

      You realize the entire wing for emissions design was sectioned off and only accessible by top executives and people working on it. Right?

      So management, by sectioning off their "illegal section" and keeping other employees from seeing it, is 100% DAMNING PROOF.

    7. Re:Makes sense. by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      so his part of the job was fine by an engineering standpoint.

      Producing something that broke the law was and is not fine from an engineering standpoint regardless of who asked him to do it. Part of being a professional engineer is ethics and having a spine.

    8. Re:Makes sense. by stdarg · · Score: 0

      The thing is, if the cars meet the standards during the test, then they DO meet the standards right? Isn't that the purpose of the test? If the government cared and wanted to test real world conditions they could do so.

    9. Re:Makes sense. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Depends entirely on whether the law makes sense. It may not be wise because of possible consequences, but ethically, there is not necessarily anything wrong with breaking the law as such. Only if the law is just.

      That said, emissions engineering is 99% trying to maintain properties that your customers care about despite physical limitations, while trying to keep to the letter of the law, or, if you also sell your products in the US, how US agencies and courts may interpret the law.

      This was an engine to be used in cars for sale in the US, which means that you have to tread very carefully not to violate any possible interpretation of US emissions regulations. Using a technique that could be argued to be illegal even in more sane jurisdictions is just plain stupid, especially if it involves an exhaust gas that the Americans are obsessed with for political reasons.

  8. Polluting air is worse then a capital crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Amazing how we come from a world of law and order, to a world where polluting the air is more of a serious offense then committing a crime. I have no doubt this is a offense that was obviously pre meditated to do exactly what it did. Skirt the emission laws to satisfy both customer demands and their admission that diesel engines simply cannot meet them without cheating. Not only did these engineers loose a lot, but the customers who bought the cars lost big time too.

    1. Re:Polluting air is worse then a capital crime by MightyMartian · · Score: 1

      Diesel emissions have been tied to a considerable number incidents of cancer. This is a crime, and it is a crime that has victims.

      --
      The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
    2. Re:Polluting air is worse then a capital crime by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 1

      where polluting the air is more of a serious offense then committing a crime

      I don't think that committing a crime is worse than committing a crime.

      --
      Ezekiel 23:20
    3. Re: Polluting air is worse then a capital crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No they haven't.

    4. Re:Polluting air is worse then a capital crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Diesel emissions have been tied to a considerable number of incidents of cancer.

      Correlation is not the same as causation.

      Have emissions from the non-compliant VAG diesel engines been proven to have caused any deaths? Have you run the numbers on the additional emissions from the non-compliant engines?

      The requirements that the VAG engines had to meet for US compliance were pretty tight and the number of cars sold in the US was relatively small. The additional emissions from non-compliance is within the margin of error for estimates of NOx emissions from other sources.

      But, please, don't let stuff like this get in the way of your grandstanding. If the engineer contributed to actual deaths, maybe they should have put him on death row, right?

    5. Re: Polluting air is worse then a capital crime by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This case concerns NOx, which is not known to be carcinogenic.

  9. Entrapment! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    It's entirely possible that this engineer hated what he was doing, complained about it many times, and did everything he could to stop VW from doing this. Then they threatened to fire him and burn his career, and in a desperate situation, he caved in and did what management was asking.

    It sucks when someone with power and/or authority orders you to do something unethical.

    1. Re:Entrapment! by JohnFen · · Score: 1

      It sucks when someone with power and/or authority orders you to do something unethical.

      It sure does! It sucks even more when you cave into those demands. Quitting would be a good thing under those circumstances -- or even better, just refuse to do it and let them fire you. Then you have actual recourse.

      No matter what you do though, you are responsible for the actions you take.

  10. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  11. Curious by easyTree · · Score: 1

    That an engineer would have the ability to set policy for a multinational car company.

    1. Re:Curious by slew · · Score: 5, Interesting

      That an engineer would have the ability to set policy for a multinational car company.

      FWIW, James Liang isn't just some lowly engineer who toiled in obscurity at VW, Liang was a key member of the team that developed the EA189 engine in 2006 at VW in Germany. When the team realized that the engine wouldn't meet US's new 2007 NOx emissions requirements, Liang lead the team that created the software defeat scheme. He was later transferred to the US to as VW’s “Leader of Diesel Compliance” and was apparently one of the engineering representative meeting directly with EPA and CARB officials when confronted with the evidence, they lied about the existence of the defeat device.

      Apparently someone else on the team (an as of yet undisclosed collaborating witness VW employee) latter tipped off the CARB and decided to cooperate with the FBI investigation into the matter. Since Liang was the engineer at the meeting with the regulators, he is taking some of the blame (by all reports, he seems to be pretty remorseful about his role and is cooperating with the investigation).

      Another twist in this whole saga, Oliver Schmidt, 48, who headed the company's regulatory compliance office in the U.S. and has also been arrested in this matter, apparently wrote an email to another VW manager explaining that one employee would not be coming to a meeting with California regulators "so he would not have to consciously lie." I think we can assume that the employee mentioned wasn't Engineer James Liang.

      Well, that engineer should have the ability to not lie about implementing a specific policy on behalf of a multinational car company. Of course it would have probably taken steel balls to actually resist the pressure, it is still within one's ability...

      Sometimes it just sucks to be you, but that is life.

      I've not taken such a grand stand IRL, so I don't know the pressure, but I've take smaller stands, and I'm pretty sure my career has taken hits because of it. I don't have a high profile job, but at least I can sleep at night in my own bed. Sometimes you have to pick your own poison. There's a reason why some other folks get paid the big bucks...

      Just food for thought.

  12. As an Engineer by LeftCoastThinker · · Score: 2

    As an engineer, this is not surprising, but it is also disappointing. Given how dishonest VW has been, it would not surprise me to find out that they convinced this guy he was going to prison anyway (engineers have unseverable criminal liability in most modern countries regarding both fraud and willful negligence) and his family has a pallet of hundred dollar bills sitting in their garage (or in a Swiss bank account) to keep this engineer from testifying against middle and upper management, as well as a few C-level executives. There is no way that this happened in a vacuum without management knowing about it.

    The couple of times I have been asked to do something morally questionable as an engineer and on several occasions when I saw a design error that presented the risk of death or great bodily injury, I made sure to follow up my concerns with a summarizing email to the the manager and his manager, and BCC myself on my personal email. The middle management squeals like a stuck pig over that kind of accountability, but engineers have a very real moral responsibility to protect society beyond most other professions. That has always resolved the issue, but I am always prepared to go directly to the CEO or if that doesn't work, state officials. When engineers don't have that level of commitment to protecting the public, scores of people can be injured or killed. In one instance, a space shuttle exploded.

    Besides that, enriching someone else is the absolute dumbest reason I can think of to go to prison. Criminals in general are pretty stupid, but at least they have figured out that if you are going to rob a bank, you rob it for yourself, not stock holders or managers...

    --
    If you disagree, please post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like
    1. Re:As an Engineer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know that almost all manufactures have been caught doing the same, or worse, at this point. But they were American so no one talked about it.

    2. Re:As an Engineer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Given how dishonest VW has been

      You do realise that of all the car makers that have been caught cheating emissions (i.e., almost all of them by now), VW has been the only one to admit anything, the only one to order an investigation by an external company, the only one to fire those responsible, the only one to replace a large fraction of senior management and took all the beating from the media and politicians around the world while all the others denied everything despite mounting evidence that VW group diesel vehicles actually have the lowest real-world emissions, right?

  13. Please help my memory by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    The first conviction after two years - not bad! Now help my memory - how long took it the US justice system to jail the first banksters after the subprime mortgage scandal?

    Sorry - my bad! I forgot that we apply quite different standards for banks.

    1. Re:Please help my memory by ravenshrike · · Score: 1

      Fiven that Fannie, Freddie, and Contrywide were in it up to their eyeballs, you'd have to start with the government itself.

  14. He is an executive by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I think the title of the slashdot article is misleading. While he was a VW Engineer he is currently a VW Executive. Also, he isn't the only one charged.
    "U.S. prosecutors have charged eight current and former Volkswagen executives in connection with the diesel emissions cheating probe. Liang is one of the lowest-ranking executives charged so far."

    Part of the reason they fined him and sentenced him to jail was his "pivotal" role in the fraud.

    He has had 10 years to come clean and hasn't done it. So I think he deserves what is coming to him, and the other executives as well.

  15. So Diesel is bad? by boudie2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So if it's such a crime against humanity for what VW did with their diesel cars then where is the outrage over all the big semi-trailer trucks? Seems like hypocrisy. After all those big trucks only get 4-8 m.p.g.. Which puts out the most NOX emissions? Ditto for the big 4x4 diesel pickups. Half of them I hear going up the road sound like they don't even have mufflers on them. Never liked diesels.

    1. Re:So Diesel is bad? by munch117 · · Score: 1

      The pollution that you cause by driving your groceries home in any sort of fossil fuel car is way higher that the pollution from transporting the goods to the store. Semis and container ships don't actually pollute very much per kilogram of cargo.

      That's not saying we shouldn't do something about the remaining diesel pollution. Several countries are already planning to phase out fossil fuel cars in just a few decades from now. If your country isn't, take it up with your politicians.

  16. Sounds about right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    But why the fuck would this deter any execs from doing this again?
    They don't care about some engineer lackey. They need to throw the management in prison for 40 months.

  17. setting a fine example by eaglesrule · · Score: 1

    Liang was part of a long-term conspiracy that perpetrated a "stunning fraud on the American consumer," Cox said, as the defendant's family looked on in the courtroom. "This is a very serious and troubling crime against our economic system."

    There is a very special club for those who are allowed to do that, and you're not in it, buddy.

  18. You guys aren't even noticing the biggest fraud... by zilym · · Score: 0

    I drive a 2001 VW diesel car. Still runs good as new after 16+ years. Still perfectly legal, because it was manufactured before the EPA arbitrarily changed the emissions goal posts to shut VW's diesel cars out of the USA car market.

    How can domestic companies compete with VW cars that get better fuel mileage, longer range, and never break? They can't! THAT is why we're seeing this smackdown on VW.

    Go read the book "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand. The USA companies are attempting to succeed, not through superior technology, production and trade, but by trading influence and favors with politicians and their bureaucracies.

    The fact that an ENGINEER, the very type of person that has skills necessary to generate innovation and technological progress, has been wasted on developing a "bureaucracy defeat device" rather than an actual beneficial technological advance and then subsequently sent to JAIL should be a wake up call to engineers everywhere.

    In Atlas Shrugged, competent engineers, executives, and workers alike slowly started fading away to toil in private rather than continuing to work for the public where bureaucracy can smack them around.

    Don't be surprised when bridges and dams start failing in the future. Oh wait, already happening...

  19. Re:You guys aren't even noticing the biggest fraud by ravenshrike · · Score: 3

    No, he was sent to jail because VW lied about it on three separate occasions to US regulators and got caught on discrepancies multiple times over the course of a decade. It was the final time that the exact nature of their corruption was uncovered and what they got the smackdown for.

  20. Re:You guys aren't even noticing the biggest fraud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I drive a 2001 VW diesel car. Still runs good as new after 16+ years. Still perfectly legal, because it was manufactured before the EPA arbitrarily changed the emissions goal posts to shut VW's diesel cars out of the USA car market.

    How can domestic companies compete with VW cars that get better fuel mileage, longer range, and never break? They can't! THAT is why we're seeing this smackdown on VW.

    Go read the book "Atlas Shrugged" by Ayn Rand. The USA companies are attempting to succeed, not through superior technology, production and trade, but by trading influence and favors with politicians and their bureaucracies.

    Diesel cars are a bit of a mess with certain kinds of pollutants. The EPA regulates allowed levels of pollutants. That is their job. They did their job. Now if you are saying they did their job without due study and consideration, well, prove it.

    The job of the EPA is to protect the environment with reasonable laws. They should be considering not just tomorrow but centuries from now. The cost to society of the laws is a factor, as is the cost of not implementing them.

    If a technology that exists is no longer cost effective by the time you mitigate the pollution, then well life goes on. Deal with it. You can convert coal to gas and diesel, but it is apparently a very dirty process so, guess what, we don't do that too often.

    You only get to whine if we give different standards to American manufacturers than to foreign. Besides fraud is fraud. Throw em all in jail and make sure the companies pay the full expected cost to society of the additional pollution through the cars expected lifetime.

  21. Sure, punish the engineer. by JustNiz · · Score: 1

    Stupid court.
    Because not one of the management had any clue what was actually going on, and didn't force him to do it?
    Sure.

    1. Re:Sure, punish the engineer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      James Liang was part of management. The guy was head of US compliance.

  22. Re:You guys aren't even noticing the biggest fraud by s.petry · · Score: 3, Informative

    Great book, but not really relevant to this issue. At least not in the way you presented. US companies are subject to the same regulations as VW, so this isn't really favoritism for financial advantage to US companies. What you could say however, is that it pushes along the fall of Europe to fascist communist rule, since the actual people responsible are not facing charges or jail. Those people remain free and wealthy, while the lackey gets jack booted.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  23. Software freedom helps us breathe cleaner air. by jbn-o · · Score: 1

    More importantly for the public: the golden parachute and engineer's imprisonment does nothing to give affected cars (not just VWs) control of the cars they "own". The car's software should be published, sent to each registered owner in source and binary forms with complete build instructions and licensed under a free software license (I suggest the GPLv3 or later).

    This means Brad Kuhn's warning still holds true: Software Freedom Doesn't Kill People, Your Security Through Obscurity Kills People and vehicle owners who want to keep their vehicle and make it abide by emissions laws without having to trust the parties that put them in danger in the first place can't do so. This is near to symbolic punishment in that it's very real for the individual engineer (nothing symbolic about that) but a way for the government and manufacturers say "Look! We're 'Doing Something'!" with no threat to their power to do this again. That power should be taken away from them and turned into freedom for the affected car owners so we can get cleaner air to breathe and verifiable operation out of what might otherwise be perfectly functional vehicles.

  24. Re: You guys aren't even noticing the biggest frau by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jailing the engineer as though he wasn't obeying management... it's amazing how our elites flaunt the perversion of justice, isn't it? I'm ready to opt out of this shitshow, as is every other straight white male who broke the conditioning. Where do we go?

  25. Re: You guys aren't even noticing the biggest fra by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I knew that an engineer would take the rap. Their identity would be all over the source control changes. Unlike the instructions from his superiors which were probably given verbally at meetings whose minutes were accidentally shredded long ago.

  26. Re: You guys aren't even noticing the biggest frau by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Theoretically maybe, but every time the US car manufacturers cheated they got a slap on the wrist at most. Now the first time a foreign manufacturer gets caught breaking rules designed to disadvantage technology US manufacturers cannot build, happens to be the first time US agencies decide to exaggerate everything publicly as much as possible and to take every penny they can. A complete coincidence, I'm sure.

    Don't worry about Europe. Those who actually broke the law will end up in jail or with a fine. I would be more worried about the US, which has been sliding towards fascism since the turn of the century and has an irreparably broken legal system.

  27. Prison term in diesel case? by megaronic · · Score: 1

    Sounds like a very tight space

    ... gives a new meaning to the word "confinement".

  28. "This" is not an engineer. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As an engineer, I find this not surprising, but also disappointing.

    FTFY

  29. "We gotta make an example out of'im!" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have yet to read a logical, infallible defense for arbitrarily jacking up a punishment "to deter others". It doesn't work, and is an abuse of both law and morality. The fools approving of this treatment are the same fools who would cry foul if the barrel were turned against them. Cowards.

  30. Re: Jews did 9/11 by Ebsolas · · Score: 0

    [Citation Needed]

  31. Re:You guys aren't even noticing the biggest fraud by zilym · · Score: 1

    Last time I checked, US manufacturers didn't make any diesel cars, but they made plenty of diesel pickup trucks. Meanwhile, VW was making diesel cars, but no pickup trucks. The EPA's diesel regulations applied to diesel cars, but did not apply to diesel pickup trucks. No favoritism there! Uh huh...

    Go ahead, let them pull the wool over your eyes. Keep towing that party line, comrade...

  32. Re:You guys aren't even noticing the biggest fraud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No, he was sent to jail because VW lied about it on three separate occasions to US regulators and got caught on discrepancies multiple times over the course of a decade and isn't American.

    FTFY. As far as I'm aware no GM, Ford or (Fiat/Daimler) Chrysler executive ever went to jail for decades of cheating and misleading regulators.

    It was the final time that the exact nature of their corruption was uncovered and what they got the smackdown for.

    Not really true. They got smacked down when they admitted, because the leadership of the various US agencies involved badly needed some high-profile results to offset various failures and because of pressure from lobbyists and politicians to damage foreign competition to the US car manufacturers. VW expected that they would get the same treatment as GM and Ford when they admitted to emissions manipulations behind closed doors. They were wrong...

  33. Re:You guys aren't even noticing the biggest fraud by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Last time I checked, US manufacturers didn't make any diesel cars, but they made plenty of diesel pickup trucks.

    Ford makes plenty of diesel cars and GM also did until they sold their European branch a few weeks ago. Fiat Chrysler probably sells more diesel cars in Europe than petrol cars. They just don't sell them in the US, because diesel only makes sense economically for large pickup trucks in a market where fuel is almost free and the regulations strongly favour petrol engines, which is probably something the US car makers lobbied for, as is the separate and far weaker set of regulations for pickup 'trucks', including a 25% import tarriff. The whole notion that a pickup would somehow not be a car is something that is alien to someone not from North America, but it is awfully convenient for GM, Ford and the US/Canada branch of Fiat Chrysler.