John Barnett had worked for Boeing for 32 years, until his retirement in 2017.

In the days before his death, he had been giving evidence in a whistleblower lawsuit against the company.

Boeing said it was saddened to hear of Mr Barnett’s passing. The Charleston County coroner confirmed his death to the BBC on Monday.

It said the 62-year-old had died from a “self-inflicted” wound on 9 March and police were investigating.

  • gradyp@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    280
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I am not a conspiracy theorist. Reality is trying it’s damnedest to make me one.

    • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      130
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      Eh. There will always be real conspiracies and then…lizard people conspiracies.

      This shit right here? yeah…they killed him. 100%. No doubt in my fucking mind.

      • agent_flounder@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        136
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        I mean, he was old…people die—

        It said the 62-year-old had died from a “self-inflicted” wound on 9 March and police were investigating.

        oh shit they totally fucking killed him

        • agent_flounder@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          6 months ago

          Not sure what to make of this chart except that a few items are misplaced imo and I agree conspiracy shit is an alt right pipeline in most cases. Maybe it wasn’t always but whatever.

          Anyhow.

          I haven’t followed up on the news. But there sure wasn’t much available yesterday. So as far as actual reliable evidence we the public have little.

          The guy being dead with an apparent self inflicted wound (as BBC and others said) or gunshot (as Corp Crime Reporter said) during whistleblower court proceedings against a giant company is consistent with suicide from:

          • Stress of the case or from blackmail
          • Stress from something totally unrelated.
          • Some other cause (depression, terminal illness…)

          It is also consistent with:

          • murder made to look like suicide to silence his further testimony and dissuade others

          Any of these is certainly plausible at least. As is Epstein being murdered. Actually, that one is more plausible, given the few suspicious coincidences and the sheer number of people who wanted his secrets to stay that way. Whereas extra-terrestrial UFOs aren’t all that plausible based on our current body of scientific knowledge.

          • xapr@lemmy.sdf.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            I agree with pretty much everything you’ve written. The only point I would like to make is that the section where the UFOs sits is the “We Have Questions” section, which is between the “Things That Actually Happened” and “Unequivocally False But Mostly Harmless” sections. I interpret this section as containing things that cannot (as of 2021) be conclusively shown to be true or false. Also note that they’re not even saying ET UFOs, but just UFOs. I think the flying saucer is just for visual flair. If I recall correctly, the person who designed this is/was an actual graphic designer.

            • gila@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              6 months ago

              Lol, they mustn’t be a great one, because their design seems to have led at least one of y’all to interpret the labels as denoting for the category below, rather than upper/lower bounds between two categories. i.e. things in the blue category above the “speculation line” label are speculative but not yet “leaving reality”

        • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          Epstein didn’t kill himself though. The circumstances where above the level of questioning, there were cameras turned off and he was supposedly on suicide watch.

    • Serinus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      103
      ·
      6 months ago

      It’s possible it was stress from the litigation. In fact, if you don’t specify whose stress, I’d almost guarantee it.

    • SolidGrue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      59
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      There are circumstances where conspiracy the likeliest explanation.

      This is one of those.

    • grue@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      30
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      If it actually happened, it’s just a “conspiracy,” not a “conspiracy theory.”

    • Kalysta@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      6 months ago

      The Gulf of Tonkin incident being created by the US was a conspiracy theory until it wasn’t.

      Not every “conspiracy theory” is wrong. Sometimes people in charge are actually trying to cover something up. It’s not insane to be skeptical of an official line until it’s backed up with proof.

      Lizard people, however, don’t exist.

      • gradyp@awful.systems
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        My comment was meant to be tongue in cheek but you pretty much nailed the message I’m after. Don’t jump to the conspiracy conclusion but you have to have something wrong with your brain if this doesn’t at least tickle your skeptic gland.

      • TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        39
        ·
        6 months ago

        A conspiracy is when a group plans to do something unlawful. So if it’s proven true it’s still a conspiracy. It just stops being a theory.

        • Burn_The_Right@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          A “theory” is a collection of information we currently understand to be true.

          The term “conspiracy theory” is a misnomer that should be correctly expressed as “conspiracy hypothesis”. But that’s just a theory.

        • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          I think the confusion arises from the secrecy part. A conspiracy is understood to be a secret unlawful activity, especially of subversive nature. When it’s not secret anymore is it still conspiracy? or is it just organised crime? I know it feels just pedantic, but this is why the media abuses words to steer collective opinion. Nowadays you can just say something is a conspiracy and people will believe it’s fake without recourse.

          • TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            I was just being kind of funny. Language is weird and I’m pretty sure that the word conspiracy is headed through the change to mean “Crazy people think this thing is true”

            • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              6 months ago

              Then we need to find another word to express when people gets together to do shady shit, which happens more often than not.

              • TexasDrunk@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                6 months ago

                No arguments here. I’d like to be able to differentiate between people going shady shit and flat earth believers.

      • GladiusB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        This isn’t proof. That’s the crazy part. I hear ya. I’m with ya. I don’t see anything that is concrete physical evidence to tie it all together. As of now.

        • Kinglink@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          32
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          6 months ago

          I agree, I just was making a joke. It’s a conspiracy until you realize it’s a fact. MK-ULTRA, Government spying on you (which time? ) , Big tobacco hiding that cigerettes cause cancer, Stacks of ET games are buried in New Mexico, even dark stories like the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiments were all conspiracy theories at one time. Sadly they all turned out to be true.

          • cm0002@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            35
            ·
            6 months ago

            There’s also the conspiracy theory of conspiracy theories that the government actually likes and even spreads conspiracy theories so that the real ones get lost in the noise and written off by the general public as “just another loony conspiracy theory”

            • Krauerking@lemy.lol
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              12
              ·
              6 months ago

              I like that one because I absolutely don’t like it, but it’s hard not to like and think that it’s worth being a likable conspiracy theory.
              And that’s the problem with conspiracy theories, you like to like them and then you can’t be sure.

              It’s just like that sometimes.

          • prole@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            6 months ago

            Very few conspiracies are as dark and terrifying as (checks notes) Atari games buried in the desert.

      • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        That’s the most annoying misunderstanding. A conspiracy is still a conspiracy when you prove it happened/it’s happening. Conspirators remain conspirators, which means they were working together to do something illegal in secret. Ok, so now it’s not secret anymore, but they still conspired.

  • IzzyScissor@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    246
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    6 months ago

    He was staying at a hotel out-of-state while giving evidence against Boeing.
    He was found dead in his car in the hotel parking lot from a ‘self-inflicted wound’.

    There’s really no other way to look at it logically than he was murdered by Boeing. Nothing else adds up.

    • deo@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      147
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      He wasn’t even done giving the deposition that he literally volunteered to give…

        • Aleric@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          94
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          6 months ago

          I don’t know what you were trying to achieve beyond publicly announcing you’re a petty, boring person.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          57
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          Did he not literally volunteer?

          I mean, I get it, I’m sick of “literally” meaning “figuratively”, and I’d die on that hill with you, but this is the dumbest possible time to make that stand. In this case “literally” just means “literally”.

        • maryjayjay@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          40
          arrow-down
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          Literally has been used as an intensifier for over 200 years. The Oxford English Dictionary includes a definition of literally meaning “figuratively”. Jane Austen, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Henry David Thoreau, James Fenimore Cooper, James Joyce, Charles Dickens, and Mark Twain all used it that way in their writing.

          So until you write something as well respected and enduring as Sanditon, The Great Gatsby, Tom Sawyer, or Ulysses and collect your mother fucking Nobel prize in literature, please choke on a literal dick you confidently incorrect fuckwit.

          • leftzero@lemmynsfw.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            32
            ·
            6 months ago

            In this case literally literally did mean literally, though, not figuratively. Which makes the fuckwit even more incorrect.

          • Pretzilla@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Wondering if they historically used it more as in a ‘literarily’ sense and with license

            Evolving language and all that

            (I’m not trying to argue anything, just musing)

          • Riskable@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            I don’t care what justification you throw out. Misuse of literally drives me figuratively insane!

        • force@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          21
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          6 months ago

          i’m literally sorry that you literally don’t know standard english my guy, i literally don’t know what to literally say to you 😭

    • Jimmyeatsausage@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      91
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      6 months ago

      I mean, I think the logical thing to do is wait until the evidence comes out and we know for sure. It’s entirely possible he was under a lot of stress from all this and did kill himself. Now, I don’t deny that it’s a HUGE. FUCKING. CONICIDENCE. but those do happen from time to time. Its also a hell of a story, good-guy whistleblower murdered by greedy multinational aerospace company and defense contractor…during an election year…if you wrote the script nobody would buy it.

      Let’s be suspicious, but not jump to conclusions.

      • Olhonestjim@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Jesus, do you think maybe they’re trying to run out the clock too? Who wants to bet that a certain CEO is angling for a political position within a certain potential administration? Perhaps head of the FAA?

    • Xanis@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      73
      ·
      6 months ago

      Look, I’m not gonna say Boeing did it. Though if they did, I’d bet money they drove.

    • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      38
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      An investor could’ve threatened his family? (So not directly Boeing)

      If he got a bunch of hate online, or had crippling anxiety about the testimony he still had to give? I mean you could even speculate he thought he would be killed someday, so he took it into his own hands.

      (Please note the above is all BS!)

      I would argue the jury is still out and that we may never know.

      • meco03211@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        39
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        Direct involvement might be a question still. But general involvement is absolute. If Boeing wasn’t so shitty he almost assuredly would still be alive.

        • brbposting@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          18
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          I suppose even if nobody ever said a word to him you could make that argument. No poor business practices = no testimony = no car in a hotel parking lot.

      • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        An investor could’ve threatened his family? (So not directly Boeing)

        Or somebody involved in corporate corruption and embezzling in Boeing. That would be worse for Boeing as a whole than him remaining alive, but possibly better for that somebody who may not be identified.

    • aidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      6 months ago

      It makes no sense for them to kill him, that draws wayyyy too much attention. More likely if they were involved, they blackmailed him and that caused him to kill himself, or another party that also wanted to keep him quiet killed him and they didn’t care if it looked like Boeing did it.

    • rsuri@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      6 months ago

      Does suicide ever add up? It being a hit doesn’t add up either. A hotel parking lot is a rather public place to try to force someone to kill themselves.

  • 🍔🍔🍔@toast.ooo
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    167
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    6 months ago

    i can’t find it online, but im reasonably certain i heard an interview with this guy on Canadian public radio several years ago that really shook me. he talked basically about how he wouldn’t fly on a Boeing plane, knowing what he knows and having seen what he’d seen, stuff like quality rejected parts getting taken back into inventory to meet quotas. the takeaway for me was that the quality control system that had previously worked so well was an invention of equal or possibly higher importance to any kind of aerodynamic innovation present on those planes. i work in an analogous role (in a different industry) and i really do take it more seriously after having heard the interview. nobody likes the work of quality assurance and you’ll never see someone doing a non-conformance report on TV but it’s a necessary condition for planes to stay in the sky. RIP to a real one and if he got murdered then i hope the industry burns

    • linearchaos@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      48
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      John Oliver’s Boeing broadcast last week included a video of a guy walking around a Boeing production floor asking all the people if any of them would be willing to fly in a Boeing. Of everyone he asked a single guy said yes and then followed it up with “but I kind of have a death wish.”

      • Emerald@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        19
        ·
        6 months ago

        There were more yes’s, but they were cut out of the video. However, Oliver mentions after the video what amount of them said yes and what amount said no. Most of them did say “no” though.

        • lennybird@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          If Boeing was running a tight ship with safety in mind, they should all have been yes. If one said no, that could be a disgruntled employee for some reason or another, but jesus…

          Anyways, Airbus for me it is.

  • M0oP0o@mander.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    130
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    6 months ago

    They should really make some sort of incentive to keep these people alive. Like if a whistle blower dies before the verdict of the trial/hearing make it an automatic assumption and multiply the punishment by 3 times (Treble!). Then you would have companies doing everything to not have whistle blowers die, not what we have today.

    • kromem@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      125
      ·
      6 months ago

      Your competitors take out contract hits against your whistleblower and you need to have bodyguards to protect them.

      And then your head of security and the whistleblower fall in love until at the end of the movie the competitor assassin gets into the court waiting room and the head of security throws themselves into the ninja star’s way and dies in the whistleblower’s arms as the ultimate sacrifice is made for love and corporate profits.

      I tear up just thinking about it.

    • aidan@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      66
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      6 months ago

      They do have an disincentive, its called decades in jail if its discovered you kill him.

      • genie@lemmy.world
        cake
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        29
        ·
        6 months ago

        Exactly this. In a fucked up way a rule like that would actually incentivise whistleblowers to become martyrs.

          • rottingleaf@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            6 months ago

            Then they’d be interested to hire him all kinds of councilors and security guards so that he doesn’t kill himself.

                • aidan@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  Because don’t you think that in itself is a form of witness intimidation? Won’t people be hesitant to volunteer to testify during a lengthy trial if it means a security guard literally watching them sleep and shower for months.

      • Railcar8095@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        Step 1: Short company stocks Step 2: kill witness against the company Step 3: profit.

        Just one example of that being a terrible idea

    • GroteStreet 🦘@aussie.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      6 months ago

      Or, short of that… If you’re whistleblowing on Boeing, you should go to Airbus and Lockheed and tell them, “it’s in your best interest that I stay breathing”.

    • Paddzr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      6 months ago

      What else does boeing do?.. It wouldn’t be military tech also? Like Apaches for example.

  • Kitten_Mittens@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    116
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    “Local officials confirmed Mr. Barnett’s suicide. When asked how Mr. Barnett managed to fire the sniper shot through his bedroom window, the officer first on the scene only replied, “Trust me bro.”, while stuffing a large stack of 100 dollars bills back down the front of his pants.”

    • BeardedSingleMalt@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      53
      ·
      6 months ago

      [2 week later] Former lead detective found dead in in what investigators have ruled a suicide. He apparently hung himself after a fit of rage where his house appeared to have kicked in his own front door, tore the hard drive out of his security camera hub, punched himself in the face a number of times, then tied the rope to a bannister and strung himself up.

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      (Interwebz pedant voice) actually there are several scenarios possible where one could conceivably kill themselves with a sniper rifle 100 yards away . . . People who don’t know about this are just so credulous, but weapons science has known for a long time that JFK actually killed himself . . .

  • Chaotic Entropy@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    104
    ·
    edit-2
    6 months ago

    I’m not going to say that Boeing had this guy directly killed, but I can certainly see them and their legal team explicitly trying to make his life as hellish as possible until he felt that he only had one way out. Legal threats if you stop proceeding with your case, legals threats if you don’t, they want a terrible warning for any other whistleblowers.

      • ShepherdPie@midwest.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        27
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yes the FBI wanted to make an example out of him for the crime of downloading research papers from a service he had legitimate access to. Even JSTOR thought the prosecution was absurd and didn’t want anything to do with it.

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      71
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      The fact that several airlines let you filter out plane models indicates people are indeed doing that. Airbus: no fuss; no muss.

    • RBG@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      12
      ·
      6 months ago

      At what part of the trip. When boarding? You think the airline will accommodate? You already paid.

        • RBG@discuss.tchncs.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          That assumes there will always be a good alternative to choose from.

          From where I live to go back home to my parents there is exactly one provider that flies directly. All other connections have stop-overs. Not even talking about price difference.

      • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        23
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        6 months ago

        I am actually at the point where I will avoid Boeing 737-MAX at booking, ask again at check-in to confirm the plane type, and if I saw one at the gate, I would refuse to board and accept the money as a loss. Unfortunately not everyone can afford re-booking like that. So f*ck Boeing and I just hope that Airbus won’t ever be that corrupt (chances are they are or will be at some point).

          • Emerald@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            I mean… It takes a bit to learn how to fly a plane. They wouldn’t really want to dispose of that skill and learn to fly Airbus instead.

            • Olhonestjim@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              6 months ago

              I’m no pilot, but I can’t imagine these particular variants have been around so long for retraining to be a serious issue. Not when mass death is on the line and older, reliable Boeing planes still exist.

              • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                6 months ago

                I am not sure what you are trying to say exactly, however the re-certification that should be required for the 737-MAX was exactly the reason for introducing the MCAS software to prevent the crew certified for older 737 models from pushing the nose into the ground on take-off. That, together with glossing over the major design change so that no pilot would flag “hey, this is a new plane, we should get a proper new certification for this” contributed to the two crashes, murdering 350something people over profit.

                Boeing wanted to sell a new plane model with significantly altered aerodynamic behavior as a “variant” of an existing one so airlines could save cost on not having to re-certify pilots.

                • Olhonestjim@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I’m saying if the newer, problematic planes aren’t going to be forced to ground by regulators, pilots should refuse to fly them. Surely there are plenty of planes still flying built by Boeing before they sold souls. Surely those won’t require massive retraining. Fly them instead.

          • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            6 months ago

            Because most older Boeing models are actually robust aircraft & when the maintenance is in the hand of a capable airline, there’s nothing wrong with them from the perspective of safety. But as Boeing continues to fuck this up, and murder whistleblowers - I doubt there will be Boeing airplanes left to safely board in the future.

      • KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        21
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        6 months ago

        The airline will accommodate just fine: “Oh, you don’t want to fly? Too bad, the exit is that way.”

  • LopensLeftArm@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    103
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    Guess the executives didn’t want to wait for him to take one of their planes and die naturally by getting sucked out at 35,000 feet when a door falls off.

  • blahsay@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    100
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    I’ll never fly in a Boeing again after hearing this. Unless the ceo gets arrested 🤔

    Kayak lets you search via plane model fyi

    • smb@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      6 months ago

      thanks for the info about kayak, very appreciated!!

      me same, i would never again willingly book a flight with a boeing airplane.

      in my mind that B. company got the status of a criminal organization >20 years ago when they afaik refused to fix a problem with sensors and the computer overriding pilot control which crashed the plane just after takeoff while pilot could not do anything against it. back then however the discussions were about computers overriding pilot control, not about a company intentionally risking lives.

      Now they seem to me to still refuse to fix the problems and instead rename planes so that one cannot avoid their deathtraps unless not at all flying with their aircrafts. so i choose to only book flights with aviation companies that do not have B. planes at all. I decided to in future rather use a car or boat instead, if only B. planes are available.

      i would not be surprised if the current “technical event” would be the actual same cause that “forced the nose down” over 20years ago, to me it sounds exactly like the same until now, it might just luckily have happened by chance high enough in the air so that the “nose forced down by computer” problem could somehow be solved with enough time where they had only seconds in that crash two decades ago.

      • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        25
        ·
        6 months ago

        20 years ago when they afaik refused to fix a problem with sensors and the computer overriding pilot control which crashed the plane just after takeoff while pilot could not do anything against it

        Erm. Are you talking about something OTHER than the changed 737-MAX design and the MCAS system? Because those two related crashes happened in late 2018 and early 2019 - 5-6 years ago. Got a link to the >20 years ago incident you are talking about?

        • sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          6 months ago

          The only crash I know of thats similar to what they’re talking about happened in an airbus plane, and during landing not takeoff. The pilots tried to pull up on their side sticks to avoid crashing, but the plane ignored the input because it would have overcorrected and caused the plane to stall. As a result they crashed onto the runway.

          That isn’t to say Boeing doesn’t have a history with such things. Look into United Airlines 811 in 1989. Improper design caused a massive chunk of the fuselage to be ripped out in flight, throwing 9 people into the ocean and causing a rapid decompression. Initial investigations said the cause was human error, but the family of one of the victims researched it themselves and found out that wasn’t the case.

          • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            Can’t find an airbus crash on landing with that description - do you have a year, place, or flight number?

            And of course, Boeing and Airbus also have had bad design decisions - just think of the A400-M…

              • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                6 months ago

                Thanks. Reading up on that however, reads like not so much a negligent design, but a lesson learned from a new scenario that hadn’t caused an issue before.

                PS: I cringed hard at the use of “male” in the description of the pilot & copilot on the wikipedia page - seems some incel wrote that…

                • sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  I would’ve assumed it should have been designed to dampen the input to a point where it isn’t dangerous, instead of ignoring it entirely. There could be a reason they didn’t do that which I’m not seeing, but that seems like a good idea at first glance.

        • BlitzoTheOisSilent@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          6 months ago

          Not the person you responded to, but they may be talking about the Boeing 787 Dreamliner, which I believe the FAA grounded (I could be misremembering the John Oliver points about it) after several incidents within the first few months of release.

        • smb@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          what i meant was decades ago, not the “recent” crashes of 2018…

          i tried to find it but didn’t yet. there are way more plane crashes than i thought i would have to go through…

          looking at “new technology” introduced (as it was quite new) i stumbled over this article and remembered that the “three computers voting” (while the pilot may only take place in that voting - as a minority …) was part of the discussions back then (which is not written in that article however, but i found one piece, yay!):

          https://archive.seattletimes.com/archive/?date=19950605&slug=2124705

          i feel like i could remember something wrong like it maybe was not a takeoff but possibly a go-around where the crash happened… not sure i won’t yet give up searching, but i have to stop for now…

          edit: i am not saying it was a 777, i just found a piece of my 20year old puzzle…

    • misspacfic@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      6 months ago

      good call on kayak.

      just tried it out by excluding MAX models of aircraft and it worked. unfortunately, that severely limits options, but hey, it’s possible.

  • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    99
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    6 months ago

    So, the guy was expected to appear in court for thw second round of questioning and when he didn’t show up was found dead in his truck in the underground car park of the hotel. Doesn’t sound like someone that wanted to end it. Maybe I’m wrong but I wouldn’t book a room to go to court and then on a whim decide to end it.

    They should investigate the coroner asap.

    • sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      6 months ago

      Most people that kill themselves do so on a whim. Its probably not the case, but its not impossible. I’m guessing either the coroner is corrupt, or they have actual evidence it was a suicide. If it was a murder, then I doubt Boeing would do it without assurance it couldn’t be traced back to them. So regardless of what actually happened, the only official story there will ever be is that it was a suicide. That is, unless Boeing is as reckless about murder as they are about building planes.

      • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        6 months ago

        Most people who commit suicide actually plan to do it. There is plenty of warning beforehand.

      • Cosmic Cleric@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        13
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        Most people that kill themselves do so on a whim.

        [Citation required]

        I would argue that most likely than not there is a trail of depression and/or mental illness that leads up to the actual act being done.

        • sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          Absolutely, I don’t mean there is no warning whatsoever. There is almost always a history of depression, but that history is not always visible to loved ones, let alone the public. I just mean they are likely not specifically planning to commit suicide until soon before they do it, which at least in my experience is true

          • Cosmicomical@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            Yeah it could emerge apparently at random for unsuspecting familiars, but this guy was about to do something that was important for him, on which he worked for years according to the article. Sounds sus to me.

  • Adulated_Aspersion@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    86
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    This is “falling out of a window or down an elevator shaft in Russia”-level blatant.

    This appears very loud and clear to any other potential whistle-blowers.

    • uis@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      6 months ago

      You forgot blown-up plane. For Boeing it is super easy.

      • Welt@lazysoci.al
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        14
        ·
        6 months ago

        Yes, a prominent manufacturer is likely to publicly destroy their product to target one person, rather than simply have their lawyers and accountants make life as difficult as possible for this person.

        • deaf_fish@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          6 months ago

          They seem to be just fine publicly destroying their products for better stock prices.

  • Venia Silente@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    6 months ago

    It said the 62-year-old had died from a “self-inflicted” wound on 9 March and police were investigating.

    Ah yes the classic suicide by shot to the back.

    Nothing to see here, citizen. Move along, and consoom Boeing.

    • MyNamesNotRobert@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      41
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      6 months ago

      What are us plebs going to do, boycott Boeing and buy our personal jets someplace else? I think I’m going to protest by never buying a 747. Get wrecked Boeing.

    • sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      6 months ago

      It was a gunshot wound to the head. Its plausible the wound was self inflicted, although its pretty clear Boeing probably did it. They are evil, not stupid.

      • EatATaco@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’m certainly suspicious, but if you’re basing that “probably” on the information provided in this article…well your critical thinking skill leave a lot to be desired.

        • sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          6 months ago

          I think a “probably” is pretty reasonable considering the circumstances. Its a lot less certainty than I’m seeing in the rest of these comments.

          • EatATaco@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            6 months ago

            I think a “probably” is pretty reasonable considering the circumstances.

            No, it’s not. It’s based on nothing but suspicion. Unless I’m missing something, there is nothing that indicates that this was even a murder, let alone anything linking that murder to Boeing. It’s just blind speculation. It’s the same shit I deal with constantly with Trump supporters, where their suspicions about the 2016 are more important than actually having the facts to back it up.

              • evergreen@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                6 months ago

                What if the dude was so stressed out by all of this he just said fuck it, I’m done, and blew his brains out?

                I’m not saying I think this is true any more than I think Boeing had him killed. Just providing it as a plausible motive for suicide to show that we really need more information to be revealed from a proper investigation before we attach ourselves to assumptions.

              • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                But we have actual evidence for suicide (coroner report) and none for murder. But sure your ignorance of what’s going on in his life trumps actual facts.

            • sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              6 months ago

              I know its speculation, that’s why I’m using the word probably. There is a rock solid motive, but no hard evidence. Which is why I’m not going to outright claim they did it. Maybe your definition of probably is different than mine, but to me, it means there is a very real possibility that I’m wrong.

              • EatATaco@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                6 months ago

                I know its speculation, that’s why I’m using the word probably.

                Blind speculation. You have nothing to support the claim. You’re just suspicious about it. There is no “probably” here, it just a possibility.

                Maybe your definition of probably is different than mine, but to me, it means there is a very real possibility that I’m wrong.

                Probably means more likely than not. You have precisely zero to back up your claim. The evidence suggests that Trump probably (i.e. more likely than not) raped Jean Carroll, which is why a jury found him liable for it. If you brought the evidence you have right now that Boeing killed this guy for a civil claim, you would be laughed out of court.

                • sanpedropeddler@sh.itjust.works
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  6 months ago

                  There is no “probably” here, it just a possibility.

                  Its a possibility that seems very likely, that’s what I mean by probably.

                  If you brought the evidence you have right now that Boeing killed this guy for a civil claim, you would be laughed out of court.

                  That’s very interesting, however, I am not in court.

      • Venia Silente@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        6 months ago

        One thing I learned from NCIS: “investigate suicides as if they were murders”.

        Dunno if it was one of the Rules, tho.

  • jpreston2005@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    70
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    6 months ago

    Weird, but I read this article and before it said specifically that he died from a gunshot wound. Looks like it’s been updated (or redacted) to leave that bit out. Originally it said he died from a self inflicted gunshot wound to the head.

    So Boeing executives murdered a whistleblower. huh.

    Being in Quality Control myself, I’ve always felt pressure from higher ups around some of our bigger findings. Cool to know if I ever find something too big they’ll just straight up murder me.

    • alekwithak@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      I’ve thought about this way too much and if you seriously think you’re in danger, there’s a few things you can do. Obviously lots of security cameras with local and off-site backups. Then hidden cameras, whatever spy cameras you can find, with an SD card in each. Then you need to create a deadman switch. Something you must interact with at least daily or it automatically uploads all your videos and documents etc everywhere it can, and / or sends them to your lawyer or journalists if you think you can trust them. I err on the side of public release as well because as long as it’s in the public eye it will be subject to scrutiny. That’s also why I’d start establishing a social media presence. “HI I’m X, I blew the whistle on Y. There’s a hearing scheduled for Z and I would like to once again publicly state that I don’t have any current medical or mental health issues and I have no plans to ever take my own life. Anyway here’s how to make waffles” or whatever.

      • Riven@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        ·
        6 months ago

        I’ve thought about this a lot too and I don’t even have a job where I need to worry about it. The best way is really to just stay in the public eye and be as transparent as legally possible. I considered just fucking live streaming most of my life on twitch if I needed too. Car cam, house cam, go pro on my person, etc.

        • alekwithak@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          edit-2
          6 months ago

          A 24-hour live stream is brilliant.

          I’d still do a hidden cam or two in your car and other places you’re likely to switch networks and lose your stream for a moment.

    • John_McMurray@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      6 months ago

      Something strange like that happened after that Sri Lankan family was murdered in Ontario. Was referred to as a mass shooting until no, wait, was a knife.

    • in4aPenny@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      6 months ago

      And they get away with it because we let them. We have proven time and time again that we’ll do nothing, so they’ll keep doing it.

      • agitatedpotato@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        6 months ago

        The difference between terrorism and revolution is critical mass of supporters. If it was as easy as taking to the streets with guns I imagine more of the left would do it. We only have to look as far back as 2019 to Willem van Spronsen to see you’d likely just die in vain. Until then, train, agitate, and organize.

        • in4aPenny@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          If it was as easy as taking to the streets with guns I imagine more of the left would do it.

          I mean, isn’t that how lefty commies defeated the Nazi’s? Never said it was easy, but they got there in the end, and there’s still more work to be done it would seem. We got numbers on our side, $32.6trillion worth of them wouldn’t even fill up a single 737 airplane.

      • EmperorHenry@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        6 months ago

        No, WE don’t let them for forbid them from doing anything.

        Those corporate jackoffs are the ones that control everything. All our elections are just for show.

        • in4aPenny@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          6 months ago

          These corporate jackoffs also have names and addresses, just sayin’. They’re only as untouchable as we let them be, and they’re terrified of the fact that we’re waking up to that (hence the bunkers n shit). They’re like “Nuh uh” and we’re like “Oh ok then” and give them our lunch money, their power is equal to that of a bully making rules on the playground, we just need to grow the fuck up.