• aksdb@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    85
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    Being whistleblower and being involved in such legal proceedings sucks and I can imagine that one might give up (like Barnett in March) or that it takes a huge toll on your body (like Dean now). But then again … two such incidents around the same company … reminds me a bit too much of russian windows.

  • Shadow@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    ·
    5 months ago

    Paywall:

    Joshua Dean, a former quality auditor at Boeing supplier Spirit AeroSystems and one of the first whistleblowers to allege Spirit leadership had ignored manufacturing defects on the 737 MAX, died Tuesday morning after a struggle with a sudden, fast-spreading infection.

    Known as Josh, Dean lived in Wichita, Kan., where Spirit is based. He was 45, had been in good health and was noted for having a healthy lifestyle.

    He died after two weeks in critical condition, his aunt Carol Parsons said.

    Spirit spokesperson Joe Buccino said: “Our thoughts are with Josh Dean’s family. This sudden loss is stunning news here and for his loved ones.”

    Dean had given a deposition in a Spirit shareholder lawsuit and also filed a complaint with the Federal Aviation Administration alleging “serious and gross misconduct by senior quality management of the 737 production line” at Spirit.

    Spirit fired Dean in April 2023, and he had filed a complaint with the Department of Labor alleging his termination was in retaliation for raising concerns related to aviation safety.

    Parsons said Dean became ill and went to the hospital because he was having trouble breathing just over two weeks ago. He was intubated and developed pneumonia and then a serious bacterial infection, MRSA.

    His condition deteriorated rapidly, and he was airlifted from Wichita to a hospital in Oklahoma City, Parsons said. There he was put on an ECMO machine, which circulates and oxygenates a patient’s blood outside the body, taking over heart and lung function when a patient’s organs don’t work on their own.

    His mother posted a message Friday on Facebook relating all those details and saying that Dean was “fighting for his life.”

    • warmaster@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      33
      ·
      edit-2
      5 months ago

      Edit: Why should I trust an anonymous source?

      Explanation to my doubt:

      In computer science, wouldn’t that be like proprietary software only being auditable by cherry picked 3rd parties? In this case I should also need to trust the auditor.

      In contrast, in FOSS software, all code is open to the public and can be audited publicly.

      Edit2: I value privacy, that’s why I use Linux and Librewolf. I just don’t understand how that translate to this case.

      As I now understand how my original post was conveying a different message from what I intended to ask, I copy it below:

      Would you trust an anonymous source ?

      Downvotes to an honest question. I should take a break from internet.

      • AlexanderESmith@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        37
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        I don’t care who it is, they give the information, then authorities verify it. If it comes up verified, there you go.

          • AlexanderESmith@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            12
            ·
            5 months ago

            Then it still doesn’t matter. If an identified source gives information that isn’t verifiable, it’s still not actionable.

          • orcrist@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            5 months ago

            We already have enough evidence to verify a lot of the horrible things that has happened at these two companies. So what you wrote might be true in some situations, but it has nothing to do with the issue at hand.

          • unreasonabro@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            5 months ago

            cmon honky what are we talking about, what is the current subject

            that’s right, they killed the guy who could verify the stuff

            like fn work with us here, geez ;)

      • aStonedSanta@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        5 months ago

        I’d say we could trust the police to verify but yeah… I’d trust an anon source verified by AP more than the local police in most areas by a fucking mile.

      • Viking_Hippie@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Would you trust an anonymous source ?

        In cases like this where anonymity is likely necessary to divulge crucial information and survive? Absolutely. You sound like you have no idea how journalism in general and confidential sources in particular works.

        Downvotes to an honest question

        Honest question, my ass! It was obviously a rhetorical question meant to imply that anonymous sources are inherently not trustworthy.

        • warmaster@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          5 months ago

          Honest question, my ass! It was obviously a rhetorical question meant to imply that anonymous sources are inherently not trustworthy

          This made me realize the message I was transmitting. I edited my post in hope I can better express my question. Sorry for writing like a moron.

      • PsychedSy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        ·
        5 months ago

        This isn’t an allegation floating in the ether. Specific allegations can be investigated, usually pretty objectively.

      • orcrist@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        5 months ago

        Why would you trust any source, anonymous or otherwise, if you had the option to confirm what they said? … Like here, where we did, where we do.

      • unreasonabro@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        5 months ago

        Obviously it depends on the quality of the information, doesn’t it

        like if it’s some rando just bullshitting, that’s gonna be obvious

        if he’s dropping insider secrets or sounding authoritative, that requires investigation

        but we’re a bit past all that right

        Like you are aware of the wider context of what often happens to whistleblowers, time and again, … like you’re not just in here shooting your mouth off right, you know something about it when you deign to ask such a glib question? Or have you done none of your homework and just wanted to bless us with the annoying noise you made?

  • Hegar@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    48
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    5 months ago

    Boeing is an important part of our military industrial base and thus an important part of the broader structure of US power.

    That’s why they’re allowed to kill whistleblowers without repercussion.

  • snekerpimp@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    36
    ·
    5 months ago

    I, for one, will make sure I never step foot in a Boeing commercial airplane, and I will tell the tale about how Boeing kills whistle blowers to my kid’s kid’s kids

    • Dyskolos@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      5 months ago

      Apart of that definition being outdated: Which major CEO isn’t? It’s more like a basic requirement for the job :-(

  • TheAnonymouseJoker@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    5 months ago

    White House heads need to be dropped head on from building height to mysteriously stop the deaths of whistleblowers and activists. It will be a coincidence, I guarantee. Nothing related.