
VW engineer pleads guilty to diesel emissions scandal - oxryly1
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/business/autos/foreign/2016/09/09/vw-charges/90118226/
======
aresant
This guy isn't the "fall guy" or just a poor engineer hung out to try instead
of an exec, he deserves to go to prison based on the material facts of his
plea:

1) He was the central figure in engineering the device.

2) He understood exactly what he was doing and made repeated efforts to
perpetuate the lie to the government and EPA.

3) He led efforts to damage control and roll out an update to consumers under
the guise of improved performance, but really to cover his own ass when the
software got stuck in "testing mode" and deteriorated engine components.

4) He lied to the US government when confronted and led efforts with
conspirators to bury.

I am going to guess that his relatively short 5-year plea also comes at the
price of turning state's evidence on his often mention "co-conspirators".

I'd say it's probably a little preliminary for us to assume that only a single
engineer is going to wind up behind bars for this, just because he's first in
doesn't mean he's last out!

More data here:

[https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/volkswagen-engineer-pleads-
gu...](https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/volkswagen-engineer-pleads-guilty-his-
role-conspiracy-cheat-us-emissions-tests)

~~~
Hydraulix989
Individual engineers don't make product decisions at big companies like
Volkswagen. When I worked as an engineer at a big company, I couldn't even use
a different text editor.

~~~
ramenmeal
"James Robert Liang, leader of diesel competence for VW"

He's not an individual engineer, he was a team lead from the sound of it.
Also, your experience "at a big company" has no relevance here.

~~~
Hydraulix989
"Leader of diesel competence" \-- that sounds like one of those generated
Silicon Valley job titles you get off of:

[http://siliconvalleyjobtitlegenerator.tumblr.com/](http://siliconvalleyjobtitlegenerator.tumblr.com/)

It turns out "VW almost exclusively promotes their engineers to managers."

~~~
SilasX
"NO2 hacker"

~~~
taneq
Well technically...

------
WheelsAtLarge
Really, the engineer is the fall guy. Yes he's at fault but what kind of QA
system does a billion dollar car company have that one person carried on a
sham for decades. No way he was alone! Top management needs to be grilled on
what really happened. At the very least the VP of the division that manged the
emission controls for the company needs to be charged with some felony. I bet
that If he would have said something early on he would have been called a
hero. Now he's a felon. This is a real learning moment for us techies. If you
see something illegal, report it to the proper authorities and run don't walk
out of the company. Companies will find a scapegoat to blame. "Hey you seem
like a good choice as any," be ready for it.

~~~
SilasX
Note that this is also an American employee, and there is certainly still
blame to assign at the head offices in Germany, to both technical employees
and upper management.

Figure I might as well ask it here: how does it happen in Germany? If you go
on reddit, you get inundated every day with tales of how strong their unions
and labor protections are, and how seriously they take professional ethics and
accreditation. Why didn't they feel they had the power to object to a plan
like this?

Edit: I stand corrected; the DoJ release says he was working in Germany and so
should have been covered by those protections:

"According to the plea agreement, from 1983 until May 2008, Liang was an
employee of Volkswagen AG (VW), working in its diesel development department
in Wolfsburg, Germany."

[https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/volkswagen-engineer-pleads-
gu...](https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/volkswagen-engineer-pleads-guilty-his-
role-conspiracy-cheat-us-emissions-tests)

~~~
WheelsAtLarge
I suspect why it all happened is that emissions are invisible for the most
part so it's easy to not see it as a big deal.

It's just regulations getting in the way.

The reality is that people's health are effected by the emissions now and for
some time to come. I bet early deaths can be attributed to the extra pollution
these cars put out and all of it could have been avoided.

------
pweissbrod
Given the minimal information in this article you cant help but wonder if this
is a blatant attempt at designating someone to take the fall for a larger
conspiracy, or if higher-level indictments are on the way. At a company like
VW decisions like this are never made at the engineering level.

~~~
superuser2
>decisions like this are never made at the engineering level.

True, but the law has long held an obligation to "fall on your sword"
disobeying illegal orders, even if it comes at great personal cost. See the
lack of success of the "just following orders" defense at the Nuremberg
trials.

~~~
callesgg
With that logic you can blame a sales man for selling the car to a customer
who planed to drive it in the US.

There is a undefined line between following orders and following the law.

The sales man does not know that it is illegal to sell the car. It is his own
responsibility to not commit crimes. To not commit crimes one must know the
definition of what a crime is. That definition can be found in the law book.
In the Law book one can find that the car in question is illegal to sell.

It would be very hard for him to find that information but it is still his
responsibility.

~~~
mulmen
Do you really think VW salespeople should go to jail for this? Should
salespeople do their own emissions testing? Should they all buy multiple
versions of the same car and crash it to see if it's really safe? How does
that system work? VW has a clear set of emissions rules to follow because
_they_ build the cars, why should the salespeople be on the hook? This isn't
Tesla, VW salespeople don't even work for VW.

~~~
MichaelBurge
"One man's modus ponens is another man's modus tollens"

He's proposing a Reductio Ad Absurdum argument, implying strict adherence to
the "fall on the sword" principle causes prosecution of salespeople.

Because there's an implication, if you accept his argument, then you either
reject strict adherence to the principle(modus tollens) or accept prosecution
of the salespeople(modus ponens).

You interpreted his comment as accepting prosecution of the salespeople, but I
believe he intended you to conclude rejection of strict adherence to the
principle.

~~~
callesgg
Yes, thank you.

&

Thank you for that piece of information. I did not know that it was called
that. Very interesting.

------
TallGuyShort
This feels a bit like the guy on Better Off Ted who always gets paid to admit
fault, claim he has a drug problem, and then go to rehab so the company can
move on blame-free.

~~~
legitster
Dr. Bamba!

That show was so spot on for corporate culture.

~~~
TallGuyShort
"With a mouse, people! Now that's rock bottom..."

------
jobu
_Last year, the Justice Department implemented new guidelines that call for
linking individual accountability as part of corporate investigations._

It's ridiculous that this is only being done now - everyone in the US has been
screaming for it since the financial crisis in 2007-08.

~~~
mtgx
And now they only have to find a fall guy and ensure his family is well off
after he goes to prison.

In this case, three DAs have already found that top execs (and more) were
implicated:

> _" This cover-up was deep, wide and long-lasting. It extended from front-
> line engineers throughout the corner offices ... and right into the CEO
> suites," Schneiderman said, adding that the "toxic corporate culture that
> produced this fraud must be stopped."_

[http://www.reuters.com/article/us-volkwsagen-emissions-
idUSK...](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-volkwsagen-emissions-
idUSKCN0ZZ1X3)

------
ardacinar
Something away from the scandal itself, non-American here and I don't get plea
deals. I mean, normally, a trial can result in acquittal even if the defendant
admits their guilt if there's very strong objective evidence(DNA records etc.)
disproving it. There has existed previous cases where some new evidence
surfaced years after a plea deal and the defendant, previously found guilty,
was released. So, why does a plea deal result in no trial at all? Shouldn't
there be an, even very hastened, trial even if the defendant pleads guilty?
That seems to be result if we only consider the American Justice System and
Logic.

~~~
4yt23623576
If you ask someone involved in the court system, they will tell you that plea
deals are actually vital within the current court system. The judiciary is, in
general, so underfunded in many jurisdictions that it would be simply
impossible to try every case. Plea deals lessen the burden on the courts.

Obviously, this shouldn't be seen as a defense of plea deals, merely an
explanation of one of the incentives that currently exist for them.

Properly funding our court systems would remove this incentive.

~~~
talmand
We would also have to do something about piling on stupid charges in an effort
to force a plea deal as well.

~~~
DugFin
There should probably be a restriction on offering plea bargains, basically
eliminating "plead to a lesser charge". The DA should be allowed to prosecute
no more than the charges they want you to plead to. Piling on charges is
coercion, threatening a good chance of ruining your entire life vs. a
guarantee of only ruining a little of it.

~~~
throwaway729
In that case there's no incentive to take the deal, especially for serious
crimes.

------
readhn
Haha. Politics as usual. They really want us to believe an engineer was the
mastermind of this scandal? An engineer can't make these decisions without
approval from above. Is pathetic. Execs should go to jail or lose their jobs
and pay multi-million dollar fines at the very least. But guess what's gonna
happen? They will be discussing this as a bad dream when they meet up on a
skiing trip in Swiss alps next winter.

~~~
kuschku
The director of the entire diesel department signs a plea deal, and you
complain that no higher ups are indicted?

He wasn’t just an engineer, he was also a manager.

~~~
readhn
Are you telling me that there is just this single person in the entire multi
billion dollar company that could make this kind of decision without top execs
knowledge that screws up the whole business operation and that there are no
checks and balances in place?

If this is the case and top execs really had no clue - they all must go as
they clearly have no idea whats going on and how to run a company.

------
robotcookies
Boy, If I were a high paid executive deliberately cheating on diesel emissions
tests, the first thing I'd do is open a position called "leader of diesel
competence" to take the heat should I get caught. What a ridiculous title and
obviously shows the malicious intent of VWs management.

Yes, the engineer deserves to go to prison because he pulled the trigger. But
his boss deserves just as much if not more prison time.

------
macns
"Defeat device" they called it, not sure if they realized or ever will what it
was they were defeating:

 _" We must be sure to prevent the authority from testing the Gen 1," the
indictment said an employee wrote in German. "If Gen 1 goes onto the roller at
the CARB, then we'll have nothing more to laugh about!!!!!"_[1]

[1]same story from reuters.com: [http://www.reuters.com/article/us-volkswagen-
emissions-idUSK...](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-volkswagen-emissions-
idUSKCN11F234)

------
alistairSH
I'm glad criminal charges are being filed here. But, I do have to wonder why
none for GM (ignition switch cover-up) or Takata (deadly airbags).

------
legitster
I imagine executives are technically innocent, in that they gave engineers
very specific requirements within certain parameters, and asked them to get it
done by any means necessary. And then the executives were more than happy to
be kept in the dark about how it was done. I can't imagine that the executives
would have even been technically competent to understand what had happened.
But they also created a dead end set of objectives for the engineers to carry
out, and no avenue for realism to work its way back up the channel.

~~~
germanier
Pretty much every VW executive in a technical area (including the CEO) is an
engineer by training.

------
jpenninkhof
If you're a cheating banker, you have nothing to fear, but if you're an
engineer you will go to jail.

~~~
sitkack
Launder money for the drug cartels and all you have to do is pay a fine.

------
yitchelle
You know what is rather strange. Germany, the home country of VW, has been
very quiet when compared to the US and other countries. One one hand, I think
that they want to limit the damage. VW is one of the pillars the German
economy. On the other hand, VW did admit to breaking the law and the
appropriate penalty must be given.

~~~
Reason077
Vehicle emissions standards in Europe are much weaker than those in the US.

Even though a "defeat device" is technically against the rules, it seems
unlikely that there will actually be fines or penalties for it. There isn't
any environmental regulator in Europe with the same kind of powers that the
EPA and CARB have.

Legal action in Europe against VW looks more likely to be from the consumer
protection angle. That is, customers were mid-sold vehicles that claimed to be
compliant with emissions limits but in fact are not.

------
draw_down
It's good that we caught the one single person responsible for this scandal.
Yep.

------
amelius
How much did he get paid for this plea?

------
Ace17
How many engineers with a similar position are there in the car industry?

Does clean air depends on none of them misbehaving?

Either this guy is the "fall guy", or the whole system is very fragile.

~~~
tocf
The competition _must_ have known that VW was cheating, yet not one
"competitor" called them out on it.

The whole thing is a systemic failure. Regulations don't work. Regulators are
generally lousy at their jobs (if they aren't working for the regulatees, they
will be - I'm talking about the top regulators, mind you). The "free market"
failed, because if everyone is cheating no one is cheating.

It's time we start working on a replacement, because what we've got now is
busted.

------
trhway
It is hard to imagine that a large number of reasonable tech and business
people would do it that blatantly for so long. After all it isn't Mafia nor
government nor banks. I wonder whether it was done as some temporary "fix"
back then, just to meet schedule/KPIs/etc., which just naturally became a
"feature".

~~~
DugFin
The way I see it, they probably did it somewhat incrementally. To some degree,
they've ALWAYS programmed the ECUs "to the test", because isn't that basically
what the authorities want? A system that meets standards X, Y, and Z, as
verified by a test of X, Y, and Z? What got them into trouble was the fact
that ECUs became more and more sophisticated, allowing them to gradually
isolate X, Y, and Z into ever-shrinking "islands" of compliance. It was
tolerated for so long that both engineering and management probably became
accustomed to cheating the test to some degree, so when the standards became
even more stringent, they basically saw nothing wrong with creating a special
"clean" ECU profile narrowly tailored to the specific parameters of the test
procedure. Granted, they knew they were cheating, but I think when you're
inside the corporate bubble and everyone's operating on the premise that
cheating has always been tolerated on the test, it becomes harder to be the
guy that says "this is too much".

~~~
trhway
Reminds about that GPU performance tests story of Nvidia if I remember
correctly.

------
tonyjstark
I did a small software project as a contractor for VW and it was just a mobile
app, not integrated in the car. The hassle we had to go though was immense, it
actually went up for decisions 2 levels below CEO. So I don't believe he is
the only one or even the main responsible guy. I hope this is not the end with
trials for VW executives.

------
post_break
Interesting to see the 2014 software update to try and hide the defeat
software.

------
known
"Behind every great fortune there is a crime." \--Honore de Balzac

------
B1FF_PSUVM
If I were a German engineer, I'd be more than a tad miffed at the executives
who are flushing down the drain the reputation earned by over a century of
unparalleled excellence.

Oh well. Sic transit.

"German engineering!"

"Ah, ah, ah. The VW kind?"

Sad.

------
intrasight
I seriously doubt this guy will serve jail time. I'm not saying that I think
that he shouldn't, or that he should. It's just rare for white-collar
criminals to serve time here.

------
criddell
If Mr. Liang is a P.Eng., I hope he loses his license. There should be a bunch
of Engineers losing their licenses.

~~~
scrumper
There should be some executives losing their jobs and freedom, if this guy is
pleading guilty to several felonies. He wasn't acting on his own initiative.

~~~
jasonkostempski
Just to play devil's advocate, maybe the requirements really are way over the
line. In that case I wouldn't hold any grudges. Just because something is
classified a felony doesn't mean it's morally wrong.

Edit: To clarify, I'm not suggesting this guy taking the dive for the execs is
ok, just that someone lying about emission test results may not be as horrible
as they're trying to make it sound.

~~~
SwellJoe
The emissions standards are already a dangerous compromise; we should have
been making hard decisions about emissions 20, even 30, years ago...they've
gotten stricter because they were disastrously lenient in the past, and we see
the results of it.

The reasons someone lying about emissions tests are really as bad is it
sounds:

\- If one manufacturer lies, other manufacturers are forced to either lie, or
lose customers in the market to the liar. Thus, dangerous cars become more
common, car makers that try to do the right thing make lower profits and sell
fewer cars.

\- In this case, "clean diesel" lies likely led other manufacturers to waste
resources on trying to make clean diesel of their own. Again, competitive
advantage goes to the liar who doesn't actually have to make clean diesel;
they just say they did, and sell boatloads of it.

\- Emissions standards are already too lenient. Our planet's steadily rising
temperature shows us this. No one here at HN (I would hope) would be arguing
that climate change isn't happening or that humans aren't causing a
significant portion of it, so the only sensible thing is to look at what
causes it, and regulate it (somehow; I am not an expert on the subject of how
emissions are regulated or should be regulated, but I know it's not really
working, thus far...as autos are a significant portion of emissions).

So, if the requirements are "way over the line", how does one explain other
auto makers complying with them? Are they all lying? There's been increased
scrutiny, so it's likely to come out, if they have been. Wouldn't that be an
interesting situation?

~~~
aianus
Diesel soot doesn't cause climate change, that's CO2 which is not regulated.

I think it's ridiculous (at least in Canada) that I have to pay $30 every
other year to have my car emissions tested while city buses and trucks spew
black clouds unopposed. Just feels like a useless cash grab.

~~~
SwellJoe
CO2 is regulated, and so is NOx.

Buses and trucks are also regulated and have to adhere to emissions standards,
and get tested regularly; at least, in the US, they are regulated more heavily
than autos (or, at least have more paperwork and legal obligations involved in
driving them, and have a higher tax burden).

People riding a bus are, in aggregate, producing much less waste than if they
were all driving automobiles...so, it's OK that a bus produces quite a bit
more waste than a single automobile. And, I might even argue we aren't going
far enough to incentivize people to take mass transit rather than driving
themselves.

The cargo industry _is_ responsible for a tremendous amount of emissions;
freight ships account for millions of cars worth of emissions, in fact. That's
definitely an area for improvement on a worldwide level. I'm in no way saying
there aren't other sources of emissions, or that regulating auto emissions
effectively will solve the problem. Merely that ignoring emissions from cars
will exacerbate what is already the single biggest problem humanity faces
going forward.

~~~
SilasX
>CO2 is regulated, and so is NOx.

Right, but (per parent comment), you misrepresented the basis for the tradeoff
behind the regulation -- you justified it by the need to prevent global
warming, but the regulation pertained to NO2, not CO2, and satisfying the
former typically makes the car _less_ CO2-efficient.

So, you were justifying a GW-worsening regulation by the need to lessen GW.

(Your point about differing limits for buses vs cars is correct though, and
the parent is wrong on that issue. But it would frankly be better if they were
just charged per emission and each mode decides for itself whether the extra
emissions are worth it.)

~~~
SwellJoe
Sure, there's the argument that we're squeezing the balloon rather than
reducing waste; the waste products can be tweaked to produce more or less of
one or the other. My point is that as long as diesel continues to be propped
up as a "clean" technology, based on fabricated data, we won't see migration
to actually cleaner technology. Of course it's cheaper to make vehicles that
are either poisonous or cause climate change (both, actually, no matter how
you squeeze the balloon).

Diesel, it turns out, isn't all that "clean". I hate that it's so...I drive a
modern turbo diesel vehicle, and have been very disappointed to learn about
the tradeoffs and negatives of that technology (though I drive a big Ford
diesel, which doesn't make some of the compromises that VW was making in its
small engines, and does comply with EPA regulations without trickery, to the
best of my knowledge).

Burning fossil fuels contributes to climate change and produce dangerous
emissions that are toxic for living things. As long as we continue to allow
auto makers and the fossil fuel industry to externalize those costs,
alternatives won't be competitive and won't be able to replace those fossil
fuel burning vehicles.

~~~
SilasX
What part of that do you believe I was disagreeing with?

~~~
SwellJoe
This part:

> you were justifying a GW-worsening regulation by the need to lessen GW.

