Report on JusticeReport on JusticeMy interpretation of justice is the proper administration of laws through evaluating the nature of legal matters, disputes, and findings resulting in the condition that every man receives his due compensation. In our country you may notice that this type of justice is known as Retributive Justice. Retributive justice is defined as the application of penalties and punishment for moral wrongs. This is easily seen in the U.S. through the judicial system objectively assessing the moral wrongs committed by a person and then accurately calculating the payment of punitive damages. Also our civil court system in the United States uses Compensatory justice which is compensating someone when they are harmed by another. This can be executed by using the concept of rightful morality based on such things as ethics, rationality, law, natural law, religion, fairness, or equity, along with the punishment for the breach of these ethics by pursuing financial and civil damages against another something harmful has occurred.
U.S. blames BP for Gulf spillAccording to reports contained in the article three main major companies were equally to blame for the Deepwater Horizon accident that killed 11 workers and spewed more than 4 million barrels of oil from the Macondo well into the sea. These major companies are Transocean, Halliburton, and BP and each of the first two companies place blame on BP for supposedly being responsible for all the operational decisions and the contributing causes of the spill and therefore should be the only company held accountable. However even though BP agrees with the basic conclusion of the investigation reports they say that the accident was brought about by a multiple of causes, involving several different parties
\r
\r
I do not recommend calling this company up to the company’s corporate office for further answers, but after reading these two paragraphs you will likely be able to understand why some of them appear to be telling the truth. As we explained with the first part, we did think there was a problem with the BP response and that it could have been caused by environmental factors – for sure. However, since the whole story started to emerge in this way in the aftermath of one of the worst oil spills, we do not necessarily think that this explanation is always correct.\r
As mentioned, only the third company, Halliburton, has been held accountable for the Deepwater Horizon accident, as its actions had in fact caused it to take all three factors into account.
\r
\r
The company made significant effort to develop a public policy stating they did not intend to provide additional information during the investigation period, except for one small example: it may well have not been possible to make a public effort to resolve the issue of the timing of the spill.
\r
\r
The conclusion based on these three evidence-based findings is:
\r
\r
The BP response may well have been a direct result of the Deepwater Horizon spill and not a possible environmental event. The BP response was entirely consistent with all the evidence of the accident and in particular with an assessment by the International Energy Agency which confirmed that the spill appeared to be a result of BP’s oil and gas operations. Therefore, we conclude that the only reasonable explanation for BP’s response is a deliberate and negligent decision that was taken in advance by the oil companies.
\r
\r
\r
The only other possible explanation is that the spill was a natural event in which a third party in the system involved was responsible for the spill and this third party was likely culpable for most of the resulting damage.
\r
\r
\r
The independent report from the Joint BP Institute for the Assessment of the Effects of Natural Occurrences, which includes the Deepwater Horizon accident, suggests that BP may have been responsible for the spills that led to the disaster. The Joint BP Institute concluded that the spill resulted from a single contributor to an event occurring three days prior to the initial incident.\r
\r
\r