3 ms·

> About illegal reuse of potential defective parts and potentially dangerous metal shavings I'm no expert, but I'd expect a history of (criminal) negligence wo

• Someone1234 3y ago
  The lawsuit has already started on the door incident, and his testimony even if he was alive isn't relevant. The door was a process problem + screw-up, 2016 parts was potentially criminally illegal (and on purpose). Plus in civil court, where the standards are lower, they could bring in his interviews to the FAA/BBC anyway (they won't, because relevance). I feel like a bunch of people online have irrationally decided these two things are directly connected, and are now massaging the facts to meet that narrative. Aside from Boeing, there isn't a lot of reason to connect these two things. But people want to ignore the facts to make this sound like a sexy movie script. Two things happened. They happened around the same time. Even if he was alive today, it is unlikely the two would intersect outside of [bad] Boeing PR.