Monsanto settled a batch of civil cases regarding Roundup for $10bn. No one settle’s for that sum unless they’re guilty.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/business/roundup-settleme...
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/24/business/roundup-settleme...
That’s just one damning factor, but there are more. For example, in multiple cases juries agreed that Monsanto has manipulated writing and data from studies of their products. Essentially Ghost writing studies to suit their needs.
Cost of settling is X
Potential cost of losing is Y
Risk of losing is Z
If X < Z*Y, then you settle; often a trial continues until Z and Y are sufficiently known, then X is offered to the opposing party.
In this case, Y could have bankrupted the company (hundreds of billions in real damages). So, even if risk (Z) was 10-20%, $10B is a deal.
"Companies Finalize $26 Billion Deal With States and Cities to End Opioid Lawsuits" [1]
"Judge approves $1 billion settlement for victims of deadly Florida condo collapse" [2]
"39 State Attorneys General Announce $1.85 Billion Settlement with Student Loan Servicer Navient" [3]
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/25/health/opioids-settlement...
[2] https://www.pbs.org/newshour/nation/judge-approves-1-billion...
Settlement goes both ways, so I don't think your argument is sound.
For executions there are additional things as well beyond the regular criminal trial.
Which isn't to say that a civil trial verdict isn't accurate to some extent - it just isn't absolute proof. There's some evidence in scientific literature about roundup's carcinogenicity at high doses (like what a farmer or landscaper would commonly encounter) and other various health issues at high dose. The big question is what happens at low doses and if it's impactful. The science is still out on that (and the alternative of lower agricultural output per unit of land area isn't really palatable from both a starvation risk perspective and a climate perspective).
Also, there's this:
> Part of the $1.25 billion will be used to establish an independent expert panel to resolve two critical questions about glyphosate: Does it cause cancer, and if so, what is the minimum dosage or exposure level that is dangerous?
> If the panel concludes that glyphosate is a carcinogen, Bayer will not be able to argue otherwise in future cases — and if the experts reach the opposite conclusion, the class action’s lawyers will be similarly bound.
That case?
Bayer settled the class action for 3 orders of magnitude less than some jury awards. They don't have to believe it causes cancer, just that a low percentage of juries can be convinced that making Bayer pay up is a good idea. Straightforward math. They still have 10s of thousands of other court cases to deal with, too.