It’s not a shakedown. I don’t think you could find a court in any of the counties/parishes adjacent to the Gulf of Mexico where this spill is happening that would not find BP guilty of criminal negligence.
They had over 700 write-ups over a short period of time while most of their competitors combined didn’t even top 35. It was well known that they were an outlier in the industry. They knew that Deepwater would be a problem in February and decided to not tell anyone because it would have blown a hole in their whole “responsible green company” BS.
If I were on a jury I’d vote guilty for criminal negligence. Of course, I’m from the area actually getting affected by the spill and so my bias makes me nowhere near as qualified to speak on it as someone out in Montana who won’t be affected at all. Right?
However, BP has not yet actually been found guilty of ANYTHING. A shakedown is using the threat of criminal, civil or violent action to extract money from an entity WITHOUT first following the procedures for determining if the entity is guilty and, if guilty, what the amount of damages are.
If a cop threatens to give me a ticket for speeding, and he starts loudly "investigating" the crime -- oh, and he calls in to his partner and says "I've got someone in front of me that I'm going to kick his ass"--- and after all that, the cop turns and nicely asks me for $20.00, hello, that's a shakedown.
Exactly. If they are guilty as you charge, the courts are the place to deal with it. Not an all-powerful executive branch. This IS a shakedown, and it is highly unconstitutional. If you disagree, Freerepublic may not be the best place to visit right now.