This is incredibly naive. We are talking about a company that was literally too lazy to check if all the bolts were in place and secured in an airplane, risking a fatal incident with hundreds of people killed. And that is after two planes already force crashed killing everyone on board, because of a faulty IT system that was not properly checked.

Why do you think an airplane company is so confident that they can ignore public safety in lieu of profits? It's because they know the US Government is just going to give them a slap on the wrist. They effectively murdered those passengers, where's the charges?

Boeing has proven plenty, that they have a full disregard for human lifes, if they think they can get away with it. So assassinating whistleblowers and using their influential friends to cover it up as opposed to uncertain and lengthy court battles requiring millions to be spent on it, is absolutely in character.

Corporations already have millions of dollars set aside for legal suits, it's the price of doing business. They don't care if court cases go on for long periods, they know they can remain solvent longer than their former employees.

Also, killing a person doesn't mean the court cases just stop, they've already given their testimony. Furthermore, hiring someone to kill someone isn't getting rid of evidence, it's just creating a new witness to your criminality. You think anyone working as a hired murderer is going to shy away from blackmail, or not use you as a bargaining chip if they ever get into legal trouble?

it will cause a shit ton of litigation towards Boeing. It was by far the obviously cheaper choice to just do proper QA.

dO yOu HaVe a SoUrCe 4 ThAt?

Corporations do liability and cost-benifit analysis all the time, and it's often a lot cheaper to deal with class action law suits than it is to do proper QA or Recalls, just look at the ford pinto.

I think you overestimate the the effectiveness of courts to bring up punitive damages on multi billion dollar corporations.

Lol, no attempt to comprehend the argument?

It's silly that people are so adamant that sourced materials make up the entirety of any debate. Especially considering that the vast majority of people are terrible at actually comprehending what those sources are trying to say, and if they were created by authors with inherent biases.

We live in a world with a glut of "scientific papers" created by corporations, think tanks, and desperate grad students.

But since you insist....

Here

Not explicitly about hitmen, but it is about corporate murder and how the judicial system evolved to protect them. People still get killed by their employees all the time, now it's just mostly unsafe working conditions. What is the point of utilizing a hitman when you have lawyers on retainer who can easily mitigate the problem legally?