Court time
"Prove my client knew it was fake, remember innocent until proven guilty + beyond reasonable doubt" - defense lawyer
Acquitted
Court costs for US government - 5 million
"Let's add new regulations to make sure they have to test parts" - some person
"We need to stop big government" - Republicans
"There's too many regulations how can I stay in business, guess I'll raise prices for the government" - supplier
"Why does this part cost so much, corruption, conspiracy, blah" - hackernews comment
It’s a civil case against the contractors not the government, it carries a much lower burden of proof, just needs to prove preponderance of the evidence (more than 50% chance of the claim being true).
Plus you have discovery and depositions to help build your case.
Oh and if they don’t comply with discovery, well then the judge will just find them liable and then the case will just be about how much money they owe (see the Alex Jones cases going on right now).
>>Acquitted
It does not work like that.
The client has already signed off, under penalty of perjury, that the parts ARE NOT FAKE, and that the company and the parts (respectively) comply with any number of Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) requirements applicable to the contract.
If the part is bad, it is going to be up to the "client" to prove that his statements were not false.
I cant help but feel a hypocracy is a great word for small government
And blacklisted from doing business with the government.
> Under the preponderance standard, the burden of proof is met when the party with the burden convinces the fact finder that there is a greater than 50% chance that the claim is true. This is the burden of proof in a civil trial.
If the supplier were criminally liable (as they also can be, for trafficking in counterfeit goods or services[2]) then because the bar is higher the prosecution would (should) only move forward if they believe they have the requisite evidence to meet that standard.
As it is, the widow is taking the suppliers to court in civil court[3]:
> Now, two years later, the 32-year-old has filed a federal civil lawsuit against defense giant Lockheed Martin, Collins Aerospace and several sections of Teledyne Technologies, alleging that components of her husband's ejection seat may have been counterfeit, leading to his death on June 30, 2020.
The aforementioned law was passed in Dec 2011 by the House of Representatives, which the Republicans held a majority in, and the Senate, which the Democrats held by a slim majority[4][5].
I'm not sure what your comment is about other than trying to appear knowledgeable through cynicism. Ironic that you would complain about others' HN comments.
[0] https://aronsonllc.com/government-looks-to-contractors-to-st...
[1] https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/preponderance_of_the_evidenc...
[2] https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/2320
[3] https://www.military.com/daily-news/2022/09/14/widow-of-f-16...
[4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Defense_Authorization...
[5] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/112th_United_States_Congress