Monday, May 24, 2010

A SIMPLE CASE WHICH SHOWS HOW MONEY BUYS JUSTICE - BP vs. EMILIO SANCHEZ

Many will remember how the father of Robert Sanchez, Emilio Sanchez, was arrested and transported north over a leaking drilling platform. The indictment and arrest happened after he had already been sued over the matter. I have no interest in this piece getting into the merits of the lawsuit or claims by the state. My only issue is why is a small time salvage operated like Emilio Sanchez indicted and arrested in a publicity stunt over a dilapidated drilling platform (this was the claim by the state) which was leaking oil, but BP which at this point may have caused irreparable damage to the Gulf and the thousands of families which rely on the Gulf for a livelihood been given a free ride?

I need to note the platform was not owned by Emilio Sanchez - it was owned by his corporation - Sanship Inc. This is important because you indict corporations over issues like this, and not the CEO. Many will remember this is exactly what happened with Judge Alejandro and the companies he managed out at the port.

BP appeared at Congressional hearings and immediately did a who’s on first bit with a blame game. They refuse to say with certainty if they will pay all of the claims. They always impose some type qualifier. On Sunday it was reported that BP had agreed to pay beyond the 75 million limit imposted by law. Only time will tell on this one.

Why is our inept President doing nothing while BP continues to fail in its efforts to control the situation. This is also more than a mere spill destroying the Gulf. It goes to national security. It is going to be very hard for this or any near future administration to push for more offshore drilling, which is a national security issue.

This blast has also exposed the fact a properly placed explosive device can interrupt our oil supply while destroying our environment. The national news media being run by idiots never tied to the Gulf story the fact Boca Chica blowout at the natural gas rig also had a failed blowout device..

For me this is a black and white case of how money buys justice. BP is making a mockery of the Obama Administration and President Obama sits on his hands doing nothing. After the 1st week the US government should have taken control of the situation. It did not because BP is privileged. But if you are a small time salvage operator who is the CEO of the company you watch how fast the government sues you and indicts you.

At the time of the Emilio Sanchez matter I recommended that he sue the state over the arrest. It was a clear attempt to use a criminal proceeding to effectuate a result in a civil matter. This was unethical - but again justice is not the same for the small guy as it is for the mulit-billion dollar corporation which has the ability to donate millions upon millions of dollars to Washington politicos and spend millions upon millions on lobbyists.

Some will say Emilio Sanchez got what he deserved. I never followed this case to the end because I knew there was too much politics involved in how it was handled. The question here though is, why are the small time operators subject to a different rule of law than the big time multi-billion dollar corporations?

Here are some links with background information for anyone interested in the background.

http://houston.bizjournals.com/houston/stories/2008/01/21/story8.html (Sanchez)


http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1836924/posts (Alejandro)

1 comment:

Fred Drew said...

In regard to the rig owned by Emilio Sanchez's company. It supposedly was not pumping and being maintained by a licensed company. I wonder why that company was not arrested and "perp-walked" as was Mr. Sanchez.
He may have skated on thin ice on other matters but why the hassle in this one.
It seems that the government creates the perception of crime solved rather than solve crimes. How can you tell who the bad guys are and how bad are they?
Certain businesses draw more interest than others - if the profits are large then the participants must be crooks. That may be but you must remember the larger risk and the more competitive the players. It draws the interests of some tough players - good and bad.
Even the questionable need the opportunity to a fair legal examination without being pre-sold by the press..