Were the Boeing Blowout Plane Passengers ‘Victims of a Crime?’

Boeing’s very public problems have continued apace since the nearly disastrous mid-air blowout one of its planes experienced on January 5 of this year. We already knew that multiple investigations were ongoing, both internally and by the government. But now the FBI has gotten involved, apparently in a very official capacity. Passengers who were on that flight received a letter from the Bureau this week saying that a criminal investigation into the incident has been opened. The letter also notified them that they may be “victims of a crime.” The passengers were further invited to set up a profile on the FBI’s Victim Notification System so they would be able to receive updates. This came as hopeful news to the group of passengers who have already begun a lawsuit against Boeing. (NY Post)

The FBI has contacted passengers on the Alaska Airlines flight on which a door panel blew off at 16,000 feet to tell them that they might be a “possible victim of a crime.”

The agency’s Seattle bureau sent a letter Tuesday confirming to passengers that it has opened a criminal investigation into the Jan. 5 blowout on the Boeing 737 MAX flight, according to the Seattle Times.

It said they may be a “possible victim of a crime,” and directed the 171 passengers to set up a profile through the department’s Victim Notification System to receive updates on the case.

I’m still not sure why the FBI is getting involved unless there’s been something far darker going on in the background that we’ve yet to hear about. From all we’ve learned thus far, nobody at Boeing or Alaska Airlines did anything intentional that might have harmed or even simply endangered people. They are at most guilty of neglect in the construction and maintenance programs they are running. That seems like something that would be more appropriately investigated by the FAA or the Department of Transportation, even if it rises to the level of criminality requiring fines to be imposed. The FBI has yet to specify what specific “crime” is being alleged.

Of course, I’ve had similar questions about the civil lawsuit that’s being brought. You typically have to be able to demonstrate some sort of damages when seeking compensation. The passengers were obviously alarmed during the blowout event, which is understandable and they have every right to complain. But there were no reports of injuries or even property loss as a result, aside from possibly the kid who nearly had his shirt sucked off of him by the vacuum. Perhaps they are claiming some sort of emotional damage, but that’s harder to prove when you’re looking for a sizable settlement. As I’ve written previously, I still suspect this may simply be a case of a couple of opportunistic lawyers who see a target with deep pockets who may be willing to pay up quickly in the interest of making some bad headlines go away.

In related news, you probably remember Boeing whistleblower John Barnett who was found dead of a single gunshot wound in his car earlier this month. There were already questions being raised about the initial finding his death was a suicide, but the deeper reporters look into the story, the fishier it appears. Now it’s being reported that Barnett had testified that his former managers at Boeing had been spying on him.

Boeing whistleblower John Barnett claimed the company’s management had been spying on him in the bombshell court case he was working on when he was mysteriously found dead.

The quality control engineer’s attorneys, Robert Turkewitz and Brian Knowles, released the complaint Wednesday out of transparency after Barnett was found dead in his pickup truck at a Charleston, South Carolina, hotel on March 9.

Barnett testified that he had suffered multiple instances of retaliation from senior management at Boeing after he began reporting deficiencies in quality and safety through internal channels. The incidents included what he described as a “gaslighting campaign” against him. The harassment led him to retire ten years earlier than he had previously planned in 2017, according to his attorney. 

How do these stories relate to Barnett’s mysterious death, assuming there is any relationship at all? I can completely believe that the company might engage in some retaliation against a squeaky wheel in their quality control department. But there is a significant chasm between an internal gaslighting campaign and a gunshot to the head. Also, Barnett retired in 2017, more than five years ago. He wasn’t gathering any new dirt on Boeing and he was going to say whatever he was going to say in court anyway. What benefit would anyone at Boeing derive from his death after all these years? Something about Barnett’s death doesn’t add up in my opinion, but it may be a bit of a stretch to lay a murder charge at Boeing’s door.