WEBVTT - Will PG&E Be Prosecuted for Role in CA Fires

0:00:03.480 --> 0:00:07.560
<v Speaker 1>Welcome to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. I'm June Grosso. Every

0:00:07.640 --> 0:00:10.440
<v Speaker 1>day we bring you insight and analysis into the most

0:00:10.480 --> 0:00:13.399
<v Speaker 1>important legal news of the day. You can find more

0:00:13.480 --> 0:00:18.040
<v Speaker 1>episodes of the Bloomberg Law Podcast on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud

0:00:18.320 --> 0:00:23.079
<v Speaker 1>and on Bloomberg dot com slash podcasts. Good California's largest

0:00:23.120 --> 0:00:27.040
<v Speaker 1>public utility face murder or manslaughter charges for the recent

0:00:27.120 --> 0:00:30.440
<v Speaker 1>wildfires that killed eighty six people in the Paradise area,

0:00:30.880 --> 0:00:33.519
<v Speaker 1>more deaths than any other fire in the state's history.

0:00:33.920 --> 0:00:37.160
<v Speaker 1>P G and E has already been labeled a convicted felon,

0:00:37.240 --> 0:00:40.199
<v Speaker 1>and a federal judge is overseeing its probation for criminal

0:00:40.240 --> 0:00:44.840
<v Speaker 1>convictions following a twenty ten pipeline explosion that killed eight people.

0:00:45.360 --> 0:00:48.400
<v Speaker 1>Joining me is Peter Henning, professor at Wayne State University

0:00:48.479 --> 0:00:51.800
<v Speaker 1>Law School. Peter, what evidence would the state have to

0:00:51.840 --> 0:00:55.360
<v Speaker 1>come up with in its investigation to charge p G

0:00:55.520 --> 0:00:58.960
<v Speaker 1>n E criminally? Well, the starting point in this, the

0:00:59.000 --> 0:01:02.920
<v Speaker 1>Attorney General pointed out, is that they have to figure

0:01:02.960 --> 0:01:06.640
<v Speaker 1>out whether p g n E was reckless, because if

0:01:06.680 --> 0:01:10.480
<v Speaker 1>you want to bring a homicide charge, either second degree

0:01:10.560 --> 0:01:15.080
<v Speaker 1>murder or involuntary manslaughter, you would have to find that

0:01:15.160 --> 0:01:20.440
<v Speaker 1>the utility was reckless in its operations, and if they

0:01:20.520 --> 0:01:23.319
<v Speaker 1>can't find that kind of evidence, then what they're left

0:01:23.360 --> 0:01:27.759
<v Speaker 1>with are maybe some misdemeanors failure to clear vegetation, failure

0:01:27.800 --> 0:01:32.120
<v Speaker 1>to properly maintain their wires, But it would be a

0:01:32.440 --> 0:01:36.440
<v Speaker 1>much more toned down case if they can't find evidence

0:01:36.480 --> 0:01:39.360
<v Speaker 1>that p G and E acted recklessly. There have been

0:01:39.520 --> 0:01:45.400
<v Speaker 1>various charges and investigations of p GNY in recent years,

0:01:45.440 --> 0:01:49.000
<v Speaker 1>sometimes difficult to sort them all out. Does its history

0:01:49.160 --> 0:01:53.680
<v Speaker 1>play into whether any charges will be brought? I certainly

0:01:53.720 --> 0:01:56.960
<v Speaker 1>think it does, and especially because the company's on probation

0:01:57.240 --> 0:02:02.960
<v Speaker 1>at the moment from that explosion, and so if it

0:02:03.080 --> 0:02:06.480
<v Speaker 1>were to violate any of the terms of its probation,

0:02:06.560 --> 0:02:09.799
<v Speaker 1>and the key term is that it cannot commit any

0:02:09.840 --> 0:02:14.200
<v Speaker 1>other crimes that that could result in charges for violating

0:02:14.520 --> 0:02:17.960
<v Speaker 1>the terms of its probation. And I think, um, you know,

0:02:18.280 --> 0:02:23.120
<v Speaker 1>no utility is very popular among the populace and so,

0:02:23.720 --> 0:02:27.639
<v Speaker 1>but PGNs history here and the fact that it's been

0:02:27.680 --> 0:02:32.640
<v Speaker 1>accused of not being cooperative with the Public Utility Commission

0:02:33.200 --> 0:02:38.720
<v Speaker 1>and fighting that case back from I really think prosecutors

0:02:38.720 --> 0:02:41.240
<v Speaker 1>are going to look hard at p G and E

0:02:41.560 --> 0:02:45.120
<v Speaker 1>and if they can find evidence of even just something

0:02:45.160 --> 0:02:50.560
<v Speaker 1>beyond ordinary negligence. I think they'll look at pursuing charges

0:02:50.639 --> 0:02:53.640
<v Speaker 1>because of the history of the company. We know what

0:02:53.760 --> 0:02:56.600
<v Speaker 1>happens to a person who's on probation and who has

0:02:56.680 --> 0:03:01.200
<v Speaker 1>been charged grimly. But explain what happens to a company. Well,

0:03:01.440 --> 0:03:03.000
<v Speaker 1>I mean there are a couple of things that could

0:03:03.080 --> 0:03:06.359
<v Speaker 1>happen that Typically, when a company is found to have

0:03:06.440 --> 0:03:09.960
<v Speaker 1>violated the law, you imposed fines or you meaning the government,

0:03:10.200 --> 0:03:15.040
<v Speaker 1>where the court imposes a fine. Um, it is possible,

0:03:15.320 --> 0:03:19.040
<v Speaker 1>although I don't think this would happen, but a company

0:03:19.120 --> 0:03:22.119
<v Speaker 1>can be in effect put to death by having its

0:03:22.200 --> 0:03:25.320
<v Speaker 1>charter revoked by the state. Now that I don't think

0:03:25.360 --> 0:03:27.800
<v Speaker 1>you were going to see that with a public utility,

0:03:27.880 --> 0:03:32.600
<v Speaker 1>because who's going to take over its operations? But the

0:03:32.680 --> 0:03:39.400
<v Speaker 1>company is already operating with a monitor from its teen conviction. Um,

0:03:39.480 --> 0:03:42.800
<v Speaker 1>that monitorship could be ratcheted up and you could have

0:03:42.920 --> 0:03:46.600
<v Speaker 1>much closer state supervision, which of course P. G and

0:03:46.640 --> 0:03:50.040
<v Speaker 1>E would have to pay for. And so the costs

0:03:50.040 --> 0:03:53.640
<v Speaker 1>here are going to be much greater beyond justifined, because

0:03:53.760 --> 0:03:57.080
<v Speaker 1>you also have all the private lawsuits where people whose

0:03:57.120 --> 0:04:00.320
<v Speaker 1>houses were destroyed are going to go after pg need

0:04:00.320 --> 0:04:03.320
<v Speaker 1>to try to recover, as are the insurance companies. P

0:04:03.520 --> 0:04:07.520
<v Speaker 1>gens executives and people of the company have never been

0:04:07.560 --> 0:04:12.320
<v Speaker 1>held accountable in any of these investigations or lawsuits. Is

0:04:12.400 --> 0:04:16.640
<v Speaker 1>that likely in the future. That's an interesting question. Getting

0:04:16.680 --> 0:04:19.360
<v Speaker 1>to the c suite or that you know, the very

0:04:19.480 --> 0:04:23.920
<v Speaker 1>senior executives is very difficult because they tend not to

0:04:23.960 --> 0:04:28.200
<v Speaker 1>have their fingerprints, if you will, on the basic types

0:04:28.240 --> 0:04:32.640
<v Speaker 1>of decisions that result in corporate liability. It's much more

0:04:32.760 --> 0:04:37.919
<v Speaker 1>likely to be lower or mid level managers. Um you know,

0:04:38.000 --> 0:04:42.039
<v Speaker 1>could you break through to the senior executive ranks. I'm

0:04:42.120 --> 0:04:45.919
<v Speaker 1>just not sure. I'm sure the prosecutors at bout the

0:04:45.920 --> 0:04:48.719
<v Speaker 1>state and the federal level want to see if there's

0:04:48.800 --> 0:04:52.200
<v Speaker 1>someone who they can hold personally liable. But a lot

0:04:52.240 --> 0:04:54.800
<v Speaker 1>of times in a corporation, especially on the size of

0:04:54.880 --> 0:04:59.320
<v Speaker 1>pgn E, that so much authority is diffuse that it's

0:04:59.320 --> 0:05:01.560
<v Speaker 1>hard to be able point the finger at one or

0:05:01.560 --> 0:05:04.840
<v Speaker 1>two people or they end up really becoming just scapegoats,

0:05:05.200 --> 0:05:09.840
<v Speaker 1>and there's a measure of unfairness juries if they see

0:05:09.839 --> 0:05:14.120
<v Speaker 1>a company and individuals being charged, often will cut slack

0:05:14.160 --> 0:05:18.120
<v Speaker 1>to the individuals and hold the company responsible. So I'm

0:05:18.120 --> 0:05:21.320
<v Speaker 1>just not sure we're going to see any individuals charged

0:05:21.360 --> 0:05:24.280
<v Speaker 1>in this case, although it certainly it's possible. So Peter

0:05:24.400 --> 0:05:27.520
<v Speaker 1>in a report to Judge William als Up on Monday,

0:05:27.560 --> 0:05:32.160
<v Speaker 1>and he's the judge who is overseeing pgens probation p G,

0:05:32.279 --> 0:05:34.720
<v Speaker 1>and he seemed to be trying to shift the blame

0:05:35.360 --> 0:05:40.559
<v Speaker 1>for the recent wildfires tell us more about its claims there. Well,

0:05:40.600 --> 0:05:43.760
<v Speaker 1>that's interesting, and what a surprise that they would try

0:05:43.800 --> 0:05:49.320
<v Speaker 1>to uh negate their any possible blame. They're pointing out

0:05:49.400 --> 0:05:53.240
<v Speaker 1>that where these fires started, um, and of course we

0:05:53.279 --> 0:05:57.640
<v Speaker 1>don't know exactly where the fire started or what was

0:05:57.720 --> 0:06:01.000
<v Speaker 1>its cause, but they're pointing out that it could have

0:06:01.080 --> 0:06:08.240
<v Speaker 1>been individuals who had unauthorized materials for the power lines

0:06:09.040 --> 0:06:12.479
<v Speaker 1>or had somehow altered how the power was brought to

0:06:12.520 --> 0:06:15.320
<v Speaker 1>their homes. And I think p G and E at

0:06:15.400 --> 0:06:17.760
<v Speaker 1>least it looks like they're going to try to point

0:06:17.800 --> 0:06:21.280
<v Speaker 1>the finger at others and say, sorry, not us. Um,

0:06:21.560 --> 0:06:25.000
<v Speaker 1>you know, we did everything we could do. We can't

0:06:25.000 --> 0:06:28.600
<v Speaker 1>control what individuals do on their own property. And of

0:06:28.640 --> 0:06:31.719
<v Speaker 1>course you know that in that part of California it's

0:06:31.720 --> 0:06:35.320
<v Speaker 1>a tinder box, and so any type of error with

0:06:35.400 --> 0:06:39.000
<v Speaker 1>electricity can spark a fire and as we saw, can

0:06:39.040 --> 0:06:43.960
<v Speaker 1>have a disastrous implications. So I think what p GNI

0:06:44.120 --> 0:06:47.640
<v Speaker 1>is doing is it's trying to limit its potential liability

0:06:47.720 --> 0:06:51.919
<v Speaker 1>here by saying we weren't reckless. Maybe we were negligent,

0:06:52.040 --> 0:06:54.919
<v Speaker 1>maybe we should have paid more attention, but that would

0:06:55.000 --> 0:07:00.840
<v Speaker 1>likely preclude a homicide charge. Javier Sarah, the a G

0:07:01.120 --> 0:07:04.760
<v Speaker 1>for California. His office submitted a legal brief that the

0:07:04.839 --> 0:07:09.080
<v Speaker 1>judge requested, why didn't the a G offer an opinion

0:07:09.400 --> 0:07:13.720
<v Speaker 1>on pg ns criminal negligence or recklessness? Why did it

0:07:13.840 --> 0:07:16.720
<v Speaker 1>stay away from that? Well, I think at the moment,

0:07:16.760 --> 0:07:19.400
<v Speaker 1>and what that brief does is it lays out here's

0:07:19.440 --> 0:07:22.240
<v Speaker 1>what we would have to prove, but at the moment

0:07:22.280 --> 0:07:26.200
<v Speaker 1>they don't know for sure. And so as they pointed

0:07:26.200 --> 0:07:28.960
<v Speaker 1>out that there are two key issues in this case.

0:07:29.400 --> 0:07:31.120
<v Speaker 1>If p G and he is going to be held

0:07:31.160 --> 0:07:34.640
<v Speaker 1>liable for the deaths, and the first of those is intent,

0:07:34.840 --> 0:07:38.480
<v Speaker 1>can they show recklessness? And the second is causation? Um,

0:07:39.040 --> 0:07:42.520
<v Speaker 1>did what p G and E did or failed to do?

0:07:43.120 --> 0:07:46.240
<v Speaker 1>Did that cause the fires? Or was it just a

0:07:46.400 --> 0:07:51.119
<v Speaker 1>contributing source of the fires? And that in in any

0:07:51.160 --> 0:07:55.440
<v Speaker 1>homicide charge, causation is a key element. That's Peter Henny,

0:07:55.440 --> 0:08:00.280
<v Speaker 1>Professor at Wayne State University Law School. Thanks for listening

0:08:00.280 --> 0:08:03.520
<v Speaker 1>to the Bloomberg Law Podcast. You can subscribe and listen

0:08:03.560 --> 0:08:07.160
<v Speaker 1>to the show on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, and on bloomberg

0:08:07.200 --> 0:08:11.960
<v Speaker 1>dot com slash podcast. I'm June Brosso. This is Bloomberg