This time, the plaintiffs were armed with some explosive evidence. The plaintiffs–truck drivers who survived the attack, and relatives of those who didn’t–presented Judge Miller with e-mails showing that KBR officials expected casualties the night before the attack, according to the Houston Chronicle. George Seagle, director of security for KBR’s government and infrastructure division, for example, wrote that the company “will get people injured or killed tomorrow.”
Tommy Fibich of Fibich, Hampton & Leebron, one of the attorneys for the plaintiffs, argued to Judge Miller that KBR, and its former parent Halliburton, recklessly disregarded the safety of the victims. “They were sacrificed for the profits of KBR,” said Fibich.
KBR, which is represented by McKenna Long & Aldridge, presented an argument similar to the one that initially proved successful before Judge Miller. “While KRB of course knew about the threats, the company ultimately relied on the judgments and representations of the military,” said McKenna partner Ray Biagini.
Trial will start in May if the case is allowed to proceed, the Chronicle reported.