4 ms·

Allegations of criminality by Boeing in deceased whistleblower complaint

94 points by jules-jules 3y ago

prossercj 3y ago
Here's a link to the actual document: https://abcnews4.com/resources/pdf/504242d5-eb40-47bc-b8ea-b78dda9a77ab-BarnettFirstAmendedComplaint5421_Redacted.pdf https://abcnews4.com/resources/pdf/504242d5-eb40-47bc-b8ea-b...
ALittleLight 3y ago
Why would police refuse to release security camera footage showing the witness in the parking lot? This looks extremely suspicious and is getting national attention. What's the reason not to promptly release dispositive evidence? If you show a video where he walks to his own car and shoots himself - that's pretty compelling.
- LargoLasskhyfv 3y ago
  National Narrative Security.
  - pueblito 3y ago
    Yep that critical cognitive infrastructure
- fnordpiglet 3y ago
  It’s pretty standard practice as I understood it to not release evidence in an investigation unless there’s a good reason to. The way I read it while the cause of death was declared there was still an investigation ongoing.
  - ALittleLight 3y ago
    That's why I mentioned that this has national attention and looks extremely suspicious. Citizens are and should be concerned if a major company is murdering witnesses in the middle of their testimony - and doubly concerned if the government is doing a shoddy job investigating or holding the company accountable. His family knows he's dead. If it's a clear cut suicide on video - then what's the conceivable reason to wait?
- ImAnAmateur 3y ago
  It may be because it's an ongoing investigation. There's a big difference between "not now" and "never". If it's what you say it is, then it might be very definitive and graphic. Out of respect for the family they might choose not to.
  - tw04 3y ago
    “Out of respect for the family” would not past muster in a court of law. They’ll eventually be sued and lose on FOIA grounds if they don’t voluntarily release it. https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t30c004.php https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t30c004.php
    - bestouff 3y ago
      Unless it gets "accidentally" deleted.
      - moi2388 3y ago
        It will. Or the camera angles are such that it conveniently didn’t capture anything. I guarantee it
- typeofhuman 3y ago
  For the same reason the cameras in the jail holding Epstein malfunctioned during the time of his death.
- purpleidea 3y ago
  Don't worry, the footage will "get mysteriously erased by accident". Some poor IT schmuck will take the blame, etc, etc...
- MilStdJunkie 3y ago
  Just for funsies, let's assume foul play. There's a happy way to look at it, and an unhappy way. The unhappy way is that whoever Epsteined him has enough juice/skill/perseverance to wipe the tapes between the moment of recording and a courtroom. The happy way is that the cops aren't releasing it because it looks an awful lot like a goddamn murder scene, with all sorts of weird details, 1) apparently the guy wasn't depressed, 2) packing bags - and leaving them behind - seems a bit peculiar on your way to shoot yourself, 3) that third-party nugget about "if something happens to me . .", and 4) a gazillion dollars and who knows what else worth of motive. But things being what they are, the most likely scenario is that the poor guy was just too tired to keep cranking for nothing, wife's gone, only to head home to his ma like he's thirteen years old. Nothing to show for fifty something years of honest work and advocacy, so he punches his dance card. That doesn't fit, in my brain, because of how focused he's been on this, but people are fuckin' complicated, and shit sucks. There but for God go etc etc etc.
  - justinclift 3y ago
    > so he punches his dance card. Makes no logical sense before he'd even completely finished giving the deposition. It was his golden ticket to stick it to the people who'd screwed him over. Can't really see anyone passing up that opportunity. Then probably hanging around to watch it play out (for good or bad, etc). ;)
    - M95D 3y ago
      Or maybe he received a phone call: "We know about <that> mistake you made <years> ago. / We will publish what you said on <that> ocasion about <gays / women rights / racism / other sensitive subject>."
      - AstralStorm 3y ago
        That wouldn't destroy the man though. People say shit all the time. It would have to be something much more damaging to his character like child abuse or something, and well cooked too. Even then, the timing is wrong. He'd wait and deliver his lawyer shot first, or cancel the case.
two_handfuls 3y ago
I loved this complaint from Boeing against the whistleblower employee: “John still needs to learn the art of F2F (‘face to face’) engagement to address and follow up on issues instead of using e-mail to express process violations.”
- HarryHirsch 3y ago
  A former abusive supervisor insisted on MS Teams instead of email because she thought Teams was immune to discovery. That is common conduct.
  - fnordpiglet 3y ago
    It’s also absolutely wrong. All communications are discoverable even communications using private devices and services if it’s at all related to what’s being investigated. I know a lot of people use personal devices for corporate work that might involve litigation or investigation thinking it shields them. In fact it implicates them further and taints all their private communications as potentially relevant and discoverable, as well as those they communicate with. It’s a dumb as a stump thing to do.
    - jefftk 3y ago
      > All communications are discoverable Face to face, phone call, and video call are all not recorded, and so not discoverable.
      - fnordpiglet 3y ago
        At many places phone and videos are absolutely recorded, it depends on the industry. But generally when one says “communications” in the context of discoverability the implication is “humanly possibly to discover communications.”
        d-z-m 3y ago
        > At many places phone and videos are absolutely recorded do you have an example where this is the case? We're talking about internal company communications, right? Not customer facing quality assurance type recording.
nyokodo 3y ago
If I’m reading this right, depending on the severity of the offense, what he alleges has a maximum sentence of up to life in prison, or a fine up to $1M, per offense. [1] 1. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/38#:~:text=Go!-,18%20U.S.%20Code%20%C2%A7%2038%20%2D%20Fraud%20involving%20aircraft%20or%20space,in%20interstate%20or%20foreign%20commerce&text=attempts%20or%20conspires%20to%20commit,provided%20in%20subsection%20(b) https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/38#:~:text=Go!-,1....
- seanicus 3y ago
  [laughs in regulatory capture]
  - nyokodo 3y ago
    > laughs in regulatory capture Well, if the guy was murdered, and if the murder was related to the case it doesn't sound like they were merely laughing.
    - MilStdJunkie 3y ago
      You save the laughing for after the murdering, generally. It's traditional.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

94 points by jules-jules 3y ago

Here's a link to the actual document: https://abcnews4.com/resources/pdf/504242d5-eb40-47bc-b8ea-b78dda9a77ab-BarnettFirstAmendedComplaint5421_Redacted.pdf https://abcnews4.com/resources/pdf/504242d5-eb40-47bc-b8ea-b...

ALittleLight 3y ago

Why would police refuse to release security camera footage showing the witness in the parking lot? This looks extremely suspicious and is getting national attention. What's the reason not to promptly release dispositive evidence? If you show a video where he walks to his own car and shoots himself - that's pretty compelling.

LargoLasskhyfv 3y ago
National Narrative Security.
- pueblito 3y ago
  Yep that critical cognitive infrastructure
fnordpiglet 3y ago
It’s pretty standard practice as I understood it to not release evidence in an investigation unless there’s a good reason to. The way I read it while the cause of death was declared there was still an investigation ongoing.
- ALittleLight 3y ago
  That's why I mentioned that this has national attention and looks extremely suspicious. Citizens are and should be concerned if a major company is murdering witnesses in the middle of their testimony - and doubly concerned if the government is doing a shoddy job investigating or holding the company accountable. His family knows he's dead. If it's a clear cut suicide on video - then what's the conceivable reason to wait?
ImAnAmateur 3y ago
It may be because it's an ongoing investigation. There's a big difference between "not now" and "never". If it's what you say it is, then it might be very definitive and graphic. Out of respect for the family they might choose not to.
- tw04 3y ago
  “Out of respect for the family” would not past muster in a court of law. They’ll eventually be sued and lose on FOIA grounds if they don’t voluntarily release it. https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t30c004.php https://www.scstatehouse.gov/code/t30c004.php
  - bestouff 3y ago
    Unless it gets "accidentally" deleted.
    - moi2388 3y ago
      It will. Or the camera angles are such that it conveniently didn’t capture anything. I guarantee it
typeofhuman 3y ago
For the same reason the cameras in the jail holding Epstein malfunctioned during the time of his death.
purpleidea 3y ago
Don't worry, the footage will "get mysteriously erased by accident". Some poor IT schmuck will take the blame, etc, etc...
MilStdJunkie 3y ago
Just for funsies, let's assume foul play. There's a happy way to look at it, and an unhappy way. The unhappy way is that whoever Epsteined him has enough juice/skill/perseverance to wipe the tapes between the moment of recording and a courtroom. The happy way is that the cops aren't releasing it because it looks an awful lot like a goddamn murder scene, with all sorts of weird details, 1) apparently the guy wasn't depressed, 2) packing bags - and leaving them behind - seems a bit peculiar on your way to shoot yourself, 3) that third-party nugget about "if something happens to me . .", and 4) a gazillion dollars and who knows what else worth of motive. But things being what they are, the most likely scenario is that the poor guy was just too tired to keep cranking for nothing, wife's gone, only to head home to his ma like he's thirteen years old. Nothing to show for fifty something years of honest work and advocacy, so he punches his dance card. That doesn't fit, in my brain, because of how focused he's been on this, but people are fuckin' complicated, and shit sucks. There but for God go etc etc etc.
- justinclift 3y ago
  > so he punches his dance card. Makes no logical sense before he'd even completely finished giving the deposition. It was his golden ticket to stick it to the people who'd screwed him over. Can't really see anyone passing up that opportunity. Then probably hanging around to watch it play out (for good or bad, etc). ;)
  - M95D 3y ago
    Or maybe he received a phone call: "We know about <that> mistake you made <years> ago. / We will publish what you said on <that> ocasion about <gays / women rights / racism / other sensitive subject>."
    - AstralStorm 3y ago
      That wouldn't destroy the man though. People say shit all the time. It would have to be something much more damaging to his character like child abuse or something, and well cooked too. Even then, the timing is wrong. He'd wait and deliver his lawyer shot first, or cancel the case.

two_handfuls 3y ago

I loved this complaint from Boeing against the whistleblower employee: “John still needs to learn the art of F2F (‘face to face’) engagement to address and follow up on issues instead of using e-mail to express process violations.”

HarryHirsch 3y ago
A former abusive supervisor insisted on MS Teams instead of email because she thought Teams was immune to discovery. That is common conduct.
- fnordpiglet 3y ago
  It’s also absolutely wrong. All communications are discoverable even communications using private devices and services if it’s at all related to what’s being investigated. I know a lot of people use personal devices for corporate work that might involve litigation or investigation thinking it shields them. In fact it implicates them further and taints all their private communications as potentially relevant and discoverable, as well as those they communicate with. It’s a dumb as a stump thing to do.
  - jefftk 3y ago
    > All communications are discoverable Face to face, phone call, and video call are all not recorded, and so not discoverable.
    - fnordpiglet 3y ago
      At many places phone and videos are absolutely recorded, it depends on the industry. But generally when one says “communications” in the context of discoverability the implication is “humanly possibly to discover communications.”
      - d-z-m 3y ago
        > At many places phone and videos are absolutely recorded do you have an example where this is the case? We're talking about internal company communications, right? Not customer facing quality assurance type recording.

nyokodo 3y ago

If I’m reading this right, depending on the severity of the offense, what he alleges has a maximum sentence of up to life in prison, or a fine up to $1M, per offense. [1] 1. https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/38#:~:text=Go!-,18%20U.S.%20Code%20%C2%A7%2038%20%2D%20Fraud%20involving%20aircraft%20or%20space,in%20interstate%20or%20foreign%20commerce&text=attempts%20or%20conspires%20to%20commit,provided%20in%20subsection%20(b) https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/38#:~:text=Go!-,1....

seanicus 3y ago
[laughs in regulatory capture]
- nyokodo 3y ago
  > laughs in regulatory capture Well, if the guy was murdered, and if the murder was related to the case it doesn't sound like they were merely laughing.
  - MilStdJunkie 3y ago
    You save the laughing for after the murdering, generally. It's traditional.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]