For Ford, for Petersen—and for victory in a Pinto trial
Around the horseshoe-shaped table in the board room on the twelfth floor of the Ford Motor Co. headquarters in Dearborn, Mich., last week, 18 normally staid directors gave out three loud hurrahs. The first was for Henry Ford II, who retired after nearly 35 years as the company’s boss and was succeeded as chairman by Philip Caldwell, 60. The second was for Donald Petersen, 53, who replaced Caldwell as president. The third was for the automaker’s acquittal that same day in Winamac, Ind., on unprecedented criminal charges of reckless homicide in the deaths of three teen-age girls in a fiery Pinto crash in 1978. They were the 57th, 58th and 59th people to die in accidents involving the subcompact, which Ford began making in 1971.
At stake in the trial was far more than the maximum penalty of $30,000 in fines. Ford’s losses in civil suits resulting from Pinto accidents already total millions of dollars. Executives feared that a guilty verdict in Winamac could expose the firm to untold millions of dollars in punitive damages—a penalty above and beyond a plaintiffs actual losses—in the nearly 40 Pinto cases still pending. Little wonder, then, that Ford was reportedly willing to budget $1 million for its defense, which was headed by James Neal, 50, the gravel-voiced Tennessean who was chief prosecutor in the Watergate trials.
The Winamac case involved a yellow 1973 Pinto that was carrying Judy Ann Ulrich, 18, her sister Lynn Marie, 16, and cousin Donna Ulrich, 18, to volleyball practice in Goshen, Ind., on Aug. 10,1978. As they were headed north on five-lane U.S. Route 33, their car was struck from behind by a 1972 Chevrolet van. The Pinto collapsed like a concertina; its fuel tank ruptured, and the car burst into flames. Lynn Marie and Donna died in the wreck; Judy Ann, who had been driving, was pulled out alive but died within hours at a hospital. Unknown to the girls, Ford had two months earlier decided to recall Pintos manufactured from 1971 to 1976 to repair their fuel tanks.
At the trial, Prosecutor Michael Cosentino set out to prove that Ford knew the gas tanks of the early Pintos were likely to rupture in rear-end crashes, but after a cost-benefit analysis, had decided against installing a $6.65 part that would have helped protect the tanks. Cosentino maintained that Ford then did not try hard enough to warn Pinto owners about the danger. He produced eyewitnesses who testified that the girls’ Pinto had been moving at 15 to 35 m.p.h. when struck, meaning that the impact speed was equal to no more than 35 m.p.h. At that speed, Cosentino maintained, a fuel tank should not rupture.
The state’s case was hobbled early in the trial when Judge Harold Staffeldt ruled that the prosecution could submit only evidence involving Pintos manufactured in 1973; as a result, Cosentino could not present much of his evidence. Neal showed jurors exhibits and portions of nine miles of test-crash films demonstrating that the Pinto was at least as safe as rival subcompacts. Then he sprang a surprise: he produced two witnesses who testified that Judy Ann had told them just before she died that her car was stopped when it was struck by the van. Thus, argued Neal, the closing speed was about 50 m.p.h., which no subcompact could withstand.
By the time the jury of seven men and five women began their deliberations, only four of them seemed convinced by the state’s case. As time wore on, three more moved over into the Ford column, and finally, after 25 hours, the last holdout, James A. Yurgilas, made it unanimous. A relieved Neal said he hoped the verdict would “discourage prosecutions like this in the future.” But some legal experts doubt that it will. They believe that the publicity may encourage prosecutors elsewhere to bring similar cases. Said Cosentino: “I would hope that the fact that Ford Motor Co. had to come to Winamac, Ind., and defend itself on a criminal charge would put all large corporations on notice. Corporations have to be responsible citizens; they cannot pollute our waters, pollute our atmosphere or put out a defective product that can be fatal.”
At Ford headquarters in Dearborn, Henry Ford II greeted the verdict as “great, good news.” The trial was, in fact, one of several legal actions that apparently had induced him to delay his retirement beyond last Oct. 1, when he would have preferred to leave. Earlier this year, for instance, the Justice Department informed the automaker that it had dropped an investigation into alleged bribery in 1975 of officials in Indonesia.
Even though Ford did not formally step down until last week, he had begun turning over his responsibilities to Caldwell last summer. In October, Ford relinquished his title of chief executive officer to his successor and moved his belongings out of his twelfth-floor suite. In effect, Caldwell for five months has run the giant automaker (1979 revenues: $43.5 billion). Ford, however, remains the head of the board of directors’ powerful finance committee, and an old colleague has cautioned: “Don’t count him out.” Still, for the first time since 1906, a non-Ford is in the driver’s seat.
More Must-Reads from TIME
- L.A. Fires Show Reality of 1.5°C of Warming
- How Canada Fell Out of Love With Trudeau
- Trump Is Treating the Globe Like a Monopoly Board
- Bad Bunny On Heartbreak and New Album
- 10 Boundaries Therapists Want You to Set in the New Year
- The Motivational Trick That Makes You Exercise Harder
- Nicole Kidman Is a Pure Pleasure to Watch in Babygirl
- Column: Jimmy Carter’s Global Legacy Was Moral Clarity
Contact us at letters@time.com