Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every
Speaker 1: day we bring you insight and analysis into the most
Speaker 1: important legal news of the day. You can find more
Speaker 1: episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud
Speaker 1: and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. Good California's largest
Speaker 1: public utility face murder or manslaughter charges for the recent
Speaker 1: wildfires that killed eighty six people in the Paradise area,
Speaker 1: more deaths than any other fire in the state's history.
Speaker 1: P G and E has already been labeled a convicted felon,
Speaker 1: and a federal judge is overseeing its probation for criminal
Speaker 1: convictions following a twenty ten pipeline explosion that killed eight people.
Speaker 1: Joining me is Peter Henning, professor at Wayne State University
Speaker 1: Law School. Peter, what evidence would the state have to
Speaker 1: come up with in its investigation to charge p G
Speaker 1: n E criminally? Well, the starting point in this, the
Speaker 1: Attorney General pointed out, is that they have to figure
Speaker 1: out whether p g n E was reckless, because if
Speaker 1: you want to bring a homicide charge, either second degree
Speaker 1: murder or involuntary manslaughter, you would have to find that
Speaker 1: the utility was reckless in its operations, and if they
Speaker 1: can't find that kind of evidence, then what they're left
Speaker 1: with are maybe some misdemeanors failure to clear vegetation, failure
Speaker 1: to properly maintain their wires, But it would be a
Speaker 1: much more toned down case if they can't find evidence
Speaker 1: that p G and E acted recklessly. There have been
Speaker 1: various charges and investigations of p GNY in recent years,
Speaker 1: sometimes difficult to sort them all out. Does its history
Speaker 1: play into whether any charges will be brought? I certainly
Speaker 1: think it does, and especially because the company's on probation
Speaker 1: at the moment from that explosion, and so if it
Speaker 1: were to violate any of the terms of its probation,
Speaker 1: and the key term is that it cannot commit any
Speaker 1: other crimes that that could result in charges for violating
Speaker 1: the terms of its probation. And I think, um, you know,
Speaker 1: no utility is very popular among the populace and so,
Speaker 1: but PGNs history here and the fact that it's been
Speaker 1: accused of not being cooperative with the Public Utility Commission
Speaker 1: and fighting that case back from I really think prosecutors
Speaker 1: are going to look hard at p G and E
Speaker 1: and if they can find evidence of even just something
Speaker 1: beyond ordinary negligence. I think they'll look at pursuing charges
Speaker 1: because of the history of the company. We know what
Speaker 1: happens to a person who's on probation and who has
Speaker 1: been charged grimly. But explain what happens to a company. Well,
Speaker 1: I mean there are a couple of things that could
Speaker 1: happen that Typically, when a company is found to have
Speaker 1: violated the law, you imposed fines or you meaning the government,
Speaker 1: where the court imposes a fine. Um, it is possible,
Speaker 1: although I don't think this would happen, but a company
Speaker 1: can be in effect put to death by having its
Speaker 1: charter revoked by the state. Now that I don't think
Speaker 1: you were going to see that with a public utility,
Speaker 1: because who's going to take over its operations? But the
Speaker 1: company is already operating with a monitor from its teen conviction. Um,
Speaker 1: that monitorship could be ratcheted up and you could have
Speaker 1: much closer state supervision, which of course P. G and
Speaker 1: E would have to pay for. And so the costs
Speaker 1: here are going to be much greater beyond justifined, because
Speaker 1: you also have all the private lawsuits where people whose
Speaker 1: houses were destroyed are going to go after pg need
Speaker 1: to try to recover, as are the insurance companies. P
Speaker 1: gens executives and people of the company have never been
Speaker 1: held accountable in any of these investigations or lawsuits. Is
Speaker 1: that likely in the future. That's an interesting question. Getting
Speaker 1: to the c suite or that you know, the very
Speaker 1: senior executives is very difficult because they tend not to
Speaker 1: have their fingerprints, if you will, on the basic types
Speaker 1: of decisions that result in corporate liability. It's much more
Speaker 1: likely to be lower or mid level managers. Um you know,
Speaker 1: could you break through to the senior executive ranks. I'm
Speaker 1: just not sure. I'm sure the prosecutors at bout the
Speaker 1: state and the federal level want to see if there's
Speaker 1: someone who they can hold personally liable. But a lot
Speaker 1: of times in a corporation, especially on the size of
Speaker 1: pgn E, that so much authority is diffuse that it's
Speaker 1: hard to be able point the finger at one or
Speaker 1: two people or they end up really becoming just scapegoats,
Speaker 1: and there's a measure of unfairness juries if they see
Speaker 1: a company and individuals being charged, often will cut slack
Speaker 1: to the individuals and hold the company responsible. So I'm
Speaker 1: just not sure we're going to see any individuals charged
Speaker 1: in this case, although it certainly it's possible. So Peter
Speaker 1: in a report to Judge William als Up on Monday,
Speaker 1: and he's the judge who is overseeing pgens probation p G,
Speaker 1: and he seemed to be trying to shift the blame
Speaker 1: for the recent wildfires tell us more about its claims there. Well,
Speaker 1: that's interesting, and what a surprise that they would try
Speaker 1: to uh negate their any possible blame. They're pointing out
Speaker 1: that where these fires started, um, and of course we
Speaker 1: don't know exactly where the fire started or what was
Speaker 1: its cause, but they're pointing out that it could have
Speaker 1: been individuals who had unauthorized materials for the power lines
Speaker 1: or had somehow altered how the power was brought to
Speaker 1: their homes. And I think p G and E at
Speaker 1: least it looks like they're going to try to point
Speaker 1: the finger at others and say, sorry, not us. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, we did everything we could do. We can't
Speaker 1: control what individuals do on their own property. And of
Speaker 1: course you know that in that part of California it's
Speaker 1: a tinder box, and so any type of error with
Speaker 1: electricity can spark a fire and as we saw, can
Speaker 1: have a disastrous implications. So I think what p GNI
Speaker 1: is doing is it's trying to limit its potential liability
Speaker 1: here by saying we weren't reckless. Maybe we were negligent,
Speaker 1: maybe we should have paid more attention, but that would
Speaker 1: likely preclude a homicide charge. Javier Sarah, the a G
Speaker 1: for California. His office submitted a legal brief that the
Speaker 1: judge requested, why didn't the a G offer an opinion
Speaker 1: on pg ns criminal negligence or recklessness? Why did it
Speaker 1: stay away from that? Well, I think at the moment,
Speaker 1: and what that brief does is it lays out here's
Speaker 1: what we would have to prove, but at the moment
Speaker 1: they don't know for sure. And so as they pointed
Speaker 1: out that there are two key issues in this case.
Speaker 1: If p G and he is going to be held
Speaker 1: liable for the deaths, and the first of those is intent,
Speaker 1: can they show recklessness? And the second is causation? Um,
Speaker 1: did what p G and E did or failed to do?
Speaker 1: Did that cause the fires? Or was it just a
Speaker 1: contributing source of the fires? And that in in any
Speaker 1: homicide charge, causation is a key element. That's Peter Henny,
Speaker 1: Professor at Wayne State University Law School. Thanks for listening
Speaker 1: to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can subscribe and listen
Speaker 1: to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and on bloomberg
Speaker 1: dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brosso. This is Bloomberg