Updated 3-4-09, 3:56 PM PST! Please note that this blog covers several important issues that all occurred in close proximity, so this blog will probably end up being my longest by far to date. Putting so many issues in one blog is not ideal, but all of these issues except item 1 are of extreme importance and I therefore do not want to bury them behind a later blog entry that infers that one issue is more important than the rest.

Please scroll down to item 4 if you want to see my remarks on the latest tragic 737NG crash that Boeing is at least partially (if not fully) responsible for, which killed three of its own employees.

1. The Small Good News:

The false, unfounded, and overblown charges against me were finally dismissed.

2. The Hugely Bad News:

Boeing and their King County Prosecutors, Dan Satterberg, Kathy Van Olst, and Scott Peterson continue to try to cover up any evidence of Boeing management crimes of the highest order--even to the point of overtly interfering with the gathering of critical evidence in that case. No company (and definitely not a prosecutor supposedly sworn to uphold the law) should have that kind of power to interfere with true justice.

In his support of Boeing outside the law, Dan Satterberg has proven once and for all that he protects the white collar crime of his campaign contributors, rather than does his statutory duty to oppose and charge all white collar criminal violations--Boeing's or anybody else's.

Corrupt Boeing management has just proven, well, that they are indeed corrupt Boeing management.

See the my comments at the link at the bottom of this blog entry for important additional information on this latest obstruction of justice by Boeing, Boeing "Legal," The Seattle Police Department (SPD) and Dan Satterberg, the Boeing (and Boeing outside counsel) owned King County Prosecutor.

3. Another startling issue is the fact that Boeing committed the same crime that they and their King County Prosecutors accused me of doing and prosecuted me for by Boeing's illegal possession of my personal computer drives well past the date the King County Superior Court order required their return.

You be the judge. Compare the court order language and dates to what the Boeing letter states. Also note that the court order required their return to the SPD, but, instead, Boeing illegally erased the evidence of their illegal access and copying of my personal files. I had wanted the drives returned to the SPD as required by the court order so that they could be checked for evidence that Boeing had illegally accessed my personal files. Note that I reported Boeing's illegal possession of these drives to the SPD and the FBI on February 4th, 2009, and asked them to retrieve them immediately so that Boeing would not be able to erase evidence of their illegal access of my files.

I was, and still am, concerned for anyone Boeing found that I had communicated with in the personal email that I had stored on my computer before the time it was seized (in all likelihood illegally, despite what an overly Boeing deferrent King County Superior Court judge approved at the request of a certain corrupt Boeing Corporate Investigations Manager, a certainly corrupt Boeing inside counsel, and Scott Peterson, the King County Prosecutor doing everything (legal or mostly not) per the direction of Boeing's bought and paid for King County Prosecutor, Dan Satterberg).

The reason? I have certain knowledge that Boeing's illegal pogrom against innocent whistleblowers and everyone close to them continues to this day. I will post more on that later:













Note that Boeing's attorney (the same one that embraced King County Prosecutor Scott Peterson during my trial after his closing remarks when she thought he had my conviction in the bag--before the jury's deliberations' outcome intruded upon her fantasy in that regard) does not state in the letter that the wiping of the copies of my computer drives illegally in their possession was not illegal in itself--but what would you expect from a "Boeing Legal" attorney? You might have expected some attempted explanation on her part in the letter on behalf of her employer, but, just as with any criminal under investigation, attorneys often believe the less said the better.

Yes, it is overly obvious that Boeing broke the law and the court order in this matter, then tried to cover up the extent of their crime by wiping the drives on Boeing premises rather than returning them to the SPD where they could be checked for any illegal access to my personal files that occurred in addition to the illegal holding of the copies of my drives past the court ordered 12/31/08 required date of their return to the SPD.

Note that this crime involved Boeing criminal attorneys in the Boeing Legal Department, and it was done By Boeing intentionally with its addled Legal Department's concurrence. It was not a simple oversight on their part by far. A vastly smaller company with no legal department that knows the law inside and out as Boeing's Legal Department does may plausibly make such a specious argument--Boeing can't. Note that the Boeing Legal Department knowing the law extremely well is a point I concede. From my intimate experience with them, they purposely know the law so well so they can circumvent around it, as they did in this matter and in the other case of obstruction of justice noted in item 2 above, among other instances. To Boeing Legal, there are in essence two sets of books--the laws of the land, and the completely different set of principals that they really operate by which contain such principals of theirs such as whistleblower retaliation, harassment against the "independent of Boeing" press, etc., etc. Yes, I am not the Boeing Legal Departments biggest fan by far because I have never witnessed them doing the right thing despite my intimate knowledge of their actions--they only seem to do the opposite.

In fact, Boeing never had any intention of ever returning the copies of my computer drives to the SPD as the court order and the law itself required. How do I know this? Boeing's actions of course. Instead of letting the SPD image the drives onto SPD owned drives that would have to be returned to the SPD as a matter of course because they would be SPD property in addition to the court order requirement for their return to the SPD, Boeing's outside counsel "pulled rank" on the SPD and told them to image the drives onto two hard drives that Boeing would provide them. Why did they have the drives imaged on Boeing owned drives rather than SPD owned drives? You got it--Boeing intended to keep the drives and my personal files on them forever, never intending to comply with the court ordered mandate to not access my personal files while they were in their possession or the requirement to return them to the SPD no later than 12/31/08. Only my report to the SPD and FBI changed their plans to keep those copies of my computer drives forever and forced them into cover up mode that led them to illegally erase them rather than return them as legally required. Where are the illegal copies they made of those copies? That's what now needs to be the main point of the investigation by authorities in this matter in additon to the obviously required criminal charges for their intentional lawbreaking as noted.

But here is an interesting conundrum--the court order still requires their return to the SPD--illegally erased as they did, or not. But there is another obvious problem I don't have the answer to at this point--did the SPD make note of the I.D. of the two Boeing drives before they imaged my drives onto them and provided them to Boeing? Why is this important? If they didn't do so before they were sent out to Boeing, there will be no way to verify that Boeing ever even illegally erased the same drives they illegally held--right, we would only have Boeing's word that they did so with no way to verify they did so.

Boeing wanted copies of my computer drives so that they could illegally access my personal files that were on them and in order to continue their illegal pogrom against anyone that dares to oppose Boeing lawbreaking or dares to associate with whistleblowers who oppose Boeing lawbreaking--in this case me.

New! The Boeing Illegal Department (as they would be more aptly named, I strongly believe) is not the only organization involved in this pogrom against whistleblowers like me, the sources of true Boeing stories (especially stories about Boeing lawbreaking, some of which I have been the source of) in the press, and the very idea of a free and unmolested press itself.

I found this out when I had to do two interviews with Boeing as part of the continuance for dismissal that I signed under duress due to the unethical if not illegal pressure on U.S. Attorney Carl Blackstone by Perkins Coie partner Marc Boman (Boman used his friendship with Blackstone to get Blackstone to go against all ethics and standards of his profession and threaten me with a federal prosecution he later admitted he had no basis for if I did not enter into the "Deal with the Devil" that I ultimately had to agree to).

One of the interviews (on 10/28/08) was required per the agreement and lasted about eight hours. The other interview (on 2/11/09) my attorney and I did under protest as it was outside the terms of the continuance for dismissal I was forced to sign, which expired in its entirety on 1/30/09. That interview only lasted about three hours.

But what is interesting about these interviews, absent the fact that I should never have had to do them at all absent Marc Boman’s unethical if not illegal conduct for his client, Boeing, is where the interviews occurred, who was present at the interviews, and the questions that were put to me at the interviews.

These interviews are one of the main reasons that I know as much as I do about Boeing’s and their outside counsel’s illegal (I strongly believe) and continuing pogrom against whistleblowers, the sources of true information in the press about Boeing lawbreaking, and Boeing’s and their outside counsel’s retaliation against those whistleblowers (which include the noted press sources), and Boeing and their outside counsel’s unethical if not illegal pogrom against the very idea of a free and independent press that this country was founded on as engendered in the Constitution of the United States.

These two interviews occurred at the offices of Boeing’s outside counsel, Gordon, Tilden, Thomas, & Cordell, LLP, in downtown Seattle, on the 40th floor of the 1001 Fourth Avenue Plaza building, a 50 story skyscraper that was Seattle’s tallest building from approximately 1969 to 1985 (only of interest if you are trying to guestimate what Boeing is paying this outside counsel per billable hour (I would guess about $10 a minute), and to imagine the fantastic view I saw of Seattle from that firm’s main conference room in which the interviews were done—which was stunning and truly worth at least a $10 a minute admission fee, I think. Luckily they let me and my attorney sit on the side of the huge conference table with the view).

Present at the interviews were my attorney, Ramona Brandes, me, Anthony “Tony” Maus of “Boeing is the most arrogant company on the face of the planet” quote and whistleblower retaliation against me fame, Jeffrey Tilden, founding partner of Gordon, Tilden, Thomas, & Cordell, LLP, and a freelance court reporter transcribing the interviews.

I couldn’t describe the contents of the first interview because the agreement I was coerced into signing prohibited that—that is, until the agreement expired on 1/30/09—now I can document publicly both interviews.

Mr. Tilden was a gentleman, at least while he wasn’t “slipping the knife” in during an inappropriate question or during prevarications in the interview(s) and related letters to my attorney that I wasn’t being forthcoming enough during the interviews. I’m sure those prevarications were just for legal manuevering on Mr. Tilden’s part for his “$10 a minute” client, Boeing, and had no relationship to my very honest and very forthcoming testimony during the interviews. Despite the long span of time between most of the events they questioned me about and the time of the interviews, I think I did remarkably well—much, much better, in fact, than I understand President Reagan himself did when he gave sworn testimony in the Iran Contra Affair investigation. In fact, when I remembered additional details relating to one of the questions I was asked during a break, I reported that info to them when the interview continued, even though I didn’t want to give that info to them, as it concerned what I knew of Dominic Gates other sources, which I wanted to protect from the same retaliation and termination that the SOX IT whistleblowers and I suffered by Boeing’s illegal (I strongly believe) actions against them. I gave that info to them as I was legally required to do as part of the agreement—they would have me sent to prison falsely if I had refused to do so. Thankfully, Dominic never told me his other source’s names, so I hope that the other whistleblowers they are still trying to route out and illegally persecute will be safe from such retaliation because they won’t ignore and keep silent about Boeing’s illegal conduct.

And that was what was so troubling about the interviews—Tilden and Maus were only seeking info from me that they could obviously use to identify and persecute such whistleblowers and persecute The Seattle Times itself with. Additionally, they sought personal info from me so that they could continue the persecution of me and ruining of my life for doing the right thing ad infinitum.

In that last instance, they had the gall to ask me for my current address and for my current work location.

Why would they need such information? I can only think of two reasons—they wanted my current address in order to have investigators illegally surveil me in hopes of furthering my persecution, and they wanted my current employer info so that they could continue to ensure that I was blackballed from the industry and/or so that they could call that employer and ask them to terminate me or tell me I was being laid off if that company was open to such improper and illegal Boeing pressure.

In fact, its very likely that they have done exactly that with both of the jobs that I was doing exceedingly well in, but ended under suspicious circumstances suddenly. However, I don’t have any hard proof of Boeing and their outside counsel doing that--yet.

Boeing and their outside counsel failed to call my current employer to ask them to fire me or tell me I was being laid off permanently as they likely did in my last two jobs, only because they couldn’t do so due to the fact that I am currently unemployed—thanks to their original actions against me and subsequent actions with my later employers.

My first job after Boeing terminated me for trying to end their lawbreaking imperiling lives and our national security was at a machine shop in Bothell, Washington. They are one of the main non-union suppliers to Boeing locally, but they did work for several other companies as well, including Boeing’s main competitors. I accepted the job offer extended to me during my interview with the QA manager there, and they were immediately impressed with my work ethic and expertise. For those of you that are prejudiced against overweight people like me, I lifted crates of heavy machined parts (weighing up to 70 LBS and more each) around for ten hour shifts during my inspection work on those parts. Lazy, I’m anything but. Actually, due in small part to the few times I had to ask for a few hours off of work so that I could go into Seattle for hearings to do with the progress of the false and unfounded charges against me, my QA Manager gave me a raise much, much earlier than we had negotiated in the interview, and actually raised my pay to significantly more than we had agreed to in the interview after my probation time there. Funny, but he actually believed that my taking a few hours off of work here and there (which I only did when absolutely necessary, as I didn’t want to jeopardize my job by taking any time off of work at all) was because I was interviewing with other companies because I wasn’t satisfied with the pay or the long commute from Kent to Bothell! Even though that raise was an unintended consequence of his fears that he would lose me to another company, it did show me how well he appreciated my hard work and expertise on the companies’ behalf.
When the trial came up, I asked my management there if I could work on second shift for a few weeks. I intentionally made cryptic the reason why, and thankfully they didn’t press me further for details. They granted me the temporary shift change, no doubt because they thought they had to do so in order to keep me on there.

I was going to the trial during the day, and going directly therefrom to work in Bothell.

During the first few days of the trial and my stint on second shift there, the HR manager of the company came up to me at work and took me upstairs to pick out a company jacket, as I was well past the six month mark with the company, I was then considered a permanent employee there. They didn’t have my size, so he special ordered one.

Then came the fateful day when someone saw the news of the trial on the false charges, they recognized me as being the falsely accused in the trial, and they brought the article in to work about it and passed it around.

I never got a chance to hear what my coworkers there thought about me facing such false charges, as when I reported to work that afternoon after the trial had ended that day, 3/26/08, the HR Manager and my QA Manager were there at my workstation to “greet” me. They immediately led me to the same conference room where I originally interviewed for the job. There, the HR manager told me about the article passed about that day, and told me that they were terminating me for “a conflict of interest with a main customer (Boeing).” What the “conflict of interest” was that they thought I had with Boeing they never explained, and I never have figured out. The HR manager told me he had visited my website and blog and he seemed to be unable to describe exactly how he felt about the truth I had posted there, other than a negative connotation. I guess they terminated me for telling the truth, just as Boeing did (and later prosecuted me for). I told the HR manager that, “I had always thought he was a great HR manager, up until this meeting,” and both him and my QA manager shook my hand and wished me luck as they showed me the door.

Later, I checked the company rule manual they had provided me when I was hired—no where in it was listed “a conflict of interest with a customer” as a prohibited thing. A conflict of interest with the company itself was prohibited, but not with a customer. Wrongful termination, indeed. Never mind the fact that I had no conceivable “conflict of interest” with Boeing—ever, unless you call me whistleblowing on their crimes and their illegal retaliation for such “a conflict of interest.”

But what the larger point was in writing all of this was too examine Boeing’s possible involvement with my wrongful termination from that company. I don’t remember if we covered the subject in the meeting, but any reasonable person would assume that my employer had contacted Boeing after they saw the article and realized I was the most dreaded of things to any corrupt company like Boeing—a whistleblower. What was discussed between them, if anything? I don’t yet know. But Boeing’s and Tilden’s inapproriate questions in my interview with them lead me to believe that Boeing would support their wrongful termination of me, if not direct itself that it occur if my employer of the time wanted further Boeing work.

I will be adding to the prior new section as I get time to do so. It is by no means complete, but I trust that it documents in further detail just why I believe that Boeing is still illegally going after me to ensure I am never employed again and my life is further destroyed because I dared to do the right thing against Boeing's frauds, as well as illegally going after other whistleblowers, press sources of Boeing lawbreaking to the press, and the press itself if they won't serve only as mouthpieces for the lies and cover-ups of corrupt Boeing management.

Want proof that they intentionally obstructed justice again in the case of the illegal erasure of the drives rather than returning them as required? Notice the date on which they started to illegally erase the disks rather than returning them to the SPD as the court order required--2/9/08. Why is that date significant? Because, on 2/4/09 I became aware of their illegal possession of these copies of my computer drives and I reported that fact to both the SPD and the FBI, who I asked to immediately go to Boeing and confiscate the illegally held drives and any evidence during that seizure of any illegal copying of my personal files on those disks.

Then what happened? Yep, exactly what is documented above in the Boeing letter--more obstruction of justice by Boeing and Boeing Legal. Apparently, Boeing denied the FBI access to Boeing property on which they illegally held the copies of my computer drives and any copies they illegally made of those copies of my drives. At least they denied them access long enough to erase the evidence of their illegal copying at Boeing.

Why is Boeing and Boeing Legal so law adverse and obstruction of justice friendly? That is a good question, and the answer to that I have blogged on frequently. In a nutshell, it is this--Boeing is so arrogant and powerful that it knows that it does not have to comply with any law or any court order. It has key personnel in most agencies corrupted to the point that they will never lift a finger to oppose Boeing no matter how egregious Boeing's lawbreaking is. And it was this that I was up against when I went up against corrupt Boeing QA management starting in early 2002. Is it no wonder what then happened to me as a result?

The two "Senators from Boeing" mostly just watched me "burned at the stake" illegally by Boeing and Boeing's outside counsel and their bought and paid for (by their campaign contributions, as well as perhaps other favors) King County Prosecutor, Dan Satterberg. I wrote to both senators years before Boeing had me falsely arrested. Washington's Junior Senator never did anything to my knowledge to help me oppose the serious fraud in Boeing and FAA management that I reported to her. To her credit, Washington's Senior Senator did respond with a letter back to me about the referral action she was going to take in response (which I never learned the outcome of despite letters asking for status), and she also helped me another time with the OIG "investigation" behind the scenes. Unfortunately, I knew exactly why she was so coy about appearing to support my efforts at stopping FAA and Boeing management fraud by putting her actions behind the scenes into writing to me. But I am thankful for what little she did do despite her obvious fear of looking like she opposed Boeing lawbreaking publicly.

Note that Del Valerio was the Boeing computer forensics guy that participated in the illegal whistleblower retaliation pogrom against me, and was the guy who prevaricated in sworn testimony in an interview with my attorney in order to shape his testimony away from the truth in order to do his management's bidding and ensure the unfounded charges against me resulted in a prison stay that would protect corrupt Boeing management from the truth of my whistleblowing of their crimes. He actually had the gall to infer that I was a hacker even though he knew I never was one (I only accessed files on the Boeing network that any Boeing employee with computer access could have accessed). His "uhs" while he was shaping his testimony in his head during the interview were numerous indeed, especially when he was lying that what I did in accessing publicly accessible files (to all Boeing employees) was included in the definition of "hacking." That he was involved in the cover up of Boeing's illegal possession, access, and copying of my personal files is not surprising in the least. Boeing has seemed to maintain the same small corrupt cadre of personnel throughout their retaliation efforts against me.

What is notable as well is that the letter states that a person from Boeing's OIG was there to witness the illegal wiping of the copies of my computer drives.

The Boeing OIG is just as corrupt as its subset organization, Boeing Ethics.

In fact, having the OIG rep witness this and attest to anything from that witnessing is just like someone in WWII Germany reporting to the Gestapo that they think Jews are being burned in the concentration camps, the Gestapo rep going inside the camp and actually witnessing the Jews' bodies being thrown in the ovens and burnt, then that Gestapo rep going to the person who asked them to investigate and telling them that they had seen no evidence of Jews or anything else being burned in the ovens, even as the smoke from the ovens billows up in the background.

That's exactly how much I trust the OIG to do anything at all ethical, or attest to anything truthfully, and my opinion of them in this regard is an informed one. After all, they are one of the Boeing organizations that persecutes whistleblowers as they did me.

Will the people involved in this crime and cover up be held accountable? Will the law be applied to them with the same vigor it was overly applied to me?

Not likely so in King County Superior Court, as Dan Satterberg would have to file charges against himself, Scott Peterson, and Boeing for that to happen.

There are other and much more fair courts than that one, however.

Here is a comment I just did in response to an anonymous commentator to this blog entry that contains much more detail about this Boeing theft (and almost assuredly illegal copying) of my personal data, as well as much more important info about the entirely separate Boeing crime of Boeing, SPD, and KCPO obstruction of justice in an active investigation of Boeing management crimes of the highest order:


Thanks for the post. You are exactly right, anonymous.

Sorry, but I am working on posting the rest of that story today, but I got interrupted after posting the bogus Boeing letter. I have yet to post the court order that gave out the very, very specific conditions for their release (which they intentionally violated) and the required date of their return to the SPD (which they also intentionally violated). I will try to post it momentarily, then I have to explain the documents on the blog.

You are remarkably astute! Yes, (as far as I know) my original computer drives are still sitting unmolested in the SPD Computer Forensics Lab.

Of course, corrupt Boeing management are trying to prevent themselves from facing charges which are likely to be (in my opinion, pending the investigation's conclusion, of course) much more extreme than I was falsely faced with by corrupt Boeing management and their King County Prosecutor as a result of the investigation I am cooperating with (by specifically allowing them to take all of my stuff in SPD custody for that investigation). This is obstruction of justice on their part, pure and simple.

True, the vast majority of crooks do not want to go to prison for their crimes. But do we let them obstruct justice like Boeing is doing in this case so they can destroy the evidence against them and therefore short circuit the possibility of such very rightful charges against them? The answer is no, unless Boeing is the one obstructing justice, according to corrupt personnel at the Seattle Police Department and the Boeing financed King County Prosecutor's Office.

This is a huge story that will one day come out in all its ugly detail nationally. Although Boeing, the SPD, and the corrupt KCPO know which authorities I am cooperating with in efforts to at long last bring culpable criminals in Boeing management to justice for their very high crimes, I cannot divulge that here, out of respect and deference to these authorities who have so bravely stepped up to do their duty in a climate that, although changing rapidly, is still unfriendly to honest authorities trying their best to protect us from criminal acter's frauds of the highest order, no matter how big, corrupt, or powerful the corporation they are investigating is.

This obstruction of justice by Boeing with corrupt SPD and KCPO help will not ultimately stand. Of course, corrupt Boeing management trying to literally save their own arses from culpability for their crimes are likely trying their best to have my drives erased that are in SPD custody. Those drives of mine have the data that I so meticulously collected of Boeing crimes of the highest order so I could give that data to the relevant investigative authorities (that is, before Boeing filed a false police report in 2006 and had them wrongly confiscated from me).

Corrupt Boeing management, Boeing's SPD, and Boeing's KCPO I believe wrongly think that I told these investigators of the high crimes they are investigating and suggested that they get the data I long ago had collected for them from the SPD for that investigation.

They may have been so led astray to think that I had the investigation started because I did call the SPD and FBI to investigate the illegal holding and copying of my personal computer by Boeing in violation of the law and the court order requiring that my personal data on those drives not be accessed or copied in any way and that those copies of my drives be returned to SPD custody on 12/31/08 at the latest. That was an entirely separate matter of much lesser importance than the investigation of Boeing that Boeing, the SPD, and the KCPO are obstructing.

Nothing could be further from the truth, and that is why I am so proud of these brave investigators for having acted on their own in this investigation of the most serious crime imaginable. It was they who requested my permission to get my drives from the SPD Computer Forensics Laboratory. I more than gladly gave it to these brave authorities. Of course, I will do whatever I can to assist these investigators during the investigation that they started on their own by just doing their critical jobs.

They launched the investigation when they came across one of my websites that documented serious crimes under their purview. I have long hoped that authorities would come across one of my web pages and launch the investigation required of the Boeing management crimes documented thereon. To my knowledge, this is the first investigation to be started that way--by brave investigators making proactive efforts to protect us from crimes of the most serious sort.

Needless to say, I am dumbfounded that a corporation even as large. powerful, arrogant, and law adverse as Boeing would dare to obstruct an investigation of the magnitude of this one. Hopefully, Boeing will not succeed in this obstruction of long past due justice, and will not therefore succeed in stuffing the "bloody skeletons" back into the closet and keeping it locked from authorities who already know exactly the nature of the high crimes and location of the "closet" in which the evidence of Boeing's crimes are stored--my computer in SPD custody.

Add to the crimes they have committed the crime of obstruction of justice. Hopefully all involved personnel will do much more time ultimately because of this affront to every law this country was founded on.

End of comment.

Is this just another cover up by Boeing and the King County Prosecutor's Office of Boeing's crimes?--Of course--that is certainly the case.

If they had nothing to hide and had did nothing wrong, they would have complied with the court order and returned the drives rather than instead erasing the evidence of their violations of the court order and the law in the matter.

This involves the computers (quite likely illegally, no matter what the judge approved) that were seized from me on 5/17/06 when Boeing had me arrested at work and simultaneously seized them from my home in what was the start of their most serious episode of whistleblower retaliation against me (after the harrassment and retaliation I suffered on the job at Boeing for years for reporting their fraud in QA management to the FAA, and for simply doing my job of inspecting airplanes).

Update! Please read the following email I just sent to the FBI to upate them on the developments noted above:

From: Gerald Eastman
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2009 1:18 PM
To: (FBI email address)

Subject: Urgent info for Eastman Case investigators--As Feared, Boeing Illegal Erasure of the Copies of My Computer Drive Occurs. Unfounded Charges Against Me are Finally Dismissed

Dear Eastman Case Investigators,

I wanted to inform you of important developments that you need to know about for your ongoing investigation of the illegal possession and illegal copying of my personal data concerning the copies of my computer drives that are/were in the possession of Boeing.

As feared and I tried to forestall by warning your team previously, Boeing illegally wiped those drives of any evidence of their illegal copying of my personal files in violation of the law and the court order I previously sent to you. Accordingly, please expand the investigation to include this obstruction of justice by Boeing during an active investigation. The only possible reason for their illegal (wiping) of those drives instead of compliance with the court ordered return of them intact to the SPD is an obvious effort on their part to cover up the illegal accessing and copying of my computer files before you could get them back and check for such illegal access as I requested you to do before their illegal erasure.

Please see my additional thoughts on this obstruction of justice by Boeing on my blog by looking at item 3 of my latest blog at:

http://eastmans.web.aplus.net/pblog/index.php

Also please note that the unfounded and false charges against me were dismissed last Wednesday. You may have caught that on KOMO TV 4 news. Now I am just like every other law abiding U.S. citizen without such false charges hanging over my head by that dismissal. With this news, I trust that you will treat me (as I hope you have done prior) just as you would any other citizen reporting serious crimes and related obstruction of justice, and that you will keep me informed of the investigation's progress. I hope that you also similarly pursue violations of the law, the court order, and the related obstruction of justice extremely vigorously and thoroughly, just as you would any report to your office from any other unaccused law abiding citizen that your office interfaces with in the investigation of serious criminal matters (like this one) that they report to you.

Thanks for your hard work to hold the criminals accountable in this important case. It is a testament to your professionalism that you are holding Boeing to the law in this investigation, just as you would do in the case of any unconnected person being investigated for criminal conduct.

Note that, due my informed belief that parts of the SPD are helping Boeing obstruct justice in an unrelated matter, I am ceasing efforts to get the SPD to uphold the law themselves in this matter, and I will be exclusively updating your team as related developments arise from this point forward.

Gerald Eastman


4. Strange--yet another 737 crashed today.

Update, 3/4/09!--It appears that my corrupt QA management at Boeing's PSD may be off the hook for the specific deaths and grievous injuries in the Turkish Airlines 737-800 crash. Both Boeing Legal and the Boeing Chief Counsel's Office are not off the hook for responsibility yet, however--they covered up Boeing QA management fraud across the enterprise--not just at PSD, and that larger fraud may still be a causal factor in the crash.

New news from the investigation points to a faulty altimeter as a main factor in the crash.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/national/ ... crash.html

What is still unclear is if the "defect in the altimeter" was in the altimeter itself or in the wiring between the altimeter and other critical systems, like the autopilot. The altimeter is in all likelihood a Boeing purchased item, whereas the noted wiring itself was almost certainly done at Boeing.

I know that the wiring on Boeing planes is one of the chief areas in which defects are intentionally delivered to Boeing customers on aircraft because of the rollerstamping fraud common across the enterprise due to corrupt QA management and Boeing Legal and the Chief Counsel's Office's cover-up of said fraud rather than ending of it when I reported it to them in detail.

I worked in 777 Systems Installation (SI) in Everett as an inspector and I could not believe the numbers of defects in the wiring that I found during my inspections. Due to my not taking part sufficiently (to Boeing QA management) in the Boeing "reindeer games" of rollerstamping fraud, I documented those defects for rework rather than ignoring them and buying off the paperwork as the rollerstamping inspectors did. I remember a particularly bad job I had clocked in on inspecting on the 777 flight deck.

Of interest, perhaps, is that when I was loaned into that area, my recently promoted former boss when I was a PED (Passenger Entry Door) Door Rigger (who shall remain nameless as he later tragically died) and Liz Otis, V.P. of Quality at BCA, walked into the 777 section I was inspecting and struck up a conversation with me. They asked me how I found the quality of the work I inspected. I was polite about it, but I didn't mince words as well about the abysmal quality of the wiring I had been inspecting and documenting the defects of there. As I recall, I complained there were so many defects on each wiring job I clocked into that I had to spend much time per job documenting all of those defects as a result of my necessarily thorough inspections, which was making me less efficient than I would have liked to have been if not thusly slowed down dealing with the abysmal workmanship on those wiring jobs.

Note that the requirements for wiring outside the fuselage in "high vibration areas" are intentionally more strict per engineering than inside the fuselage, which the engineers assume to be mostly an area without significant vibration. Anyone who flies, however, will attest that that is not the case, of course. But if you were riding an engine ala Slim Pickens riding the nuke in "Doctor Strangelove," you may be able to feel the difference in vibration levels.

But what I was getting to was the much slacker standards for installation of wiring inside the fuselage, and the fact that even those minimal standards were not being met, in large part to the rollerstamping fraud of other inspectors under the direction of Boeing QA management that Boeing Legal and the Boeing Chief Counsel of the time covered up and ensured the continuance of rather than ended as I had urged the to do for the safety of the passengers and crews of Boeing commercial aircraft and their military derivatives.

So, the mystery is partly revealed, but that reveals new questions. Was it a wiring fault, an "inside the box" vendor altimeter fault, and/or a maintenance error? We should find out in due time, hopefully. The replacement of the caution light, the previous errors in the altimeter, and the exact sequence of such events and other causal factors will be interesting as more is learned.

Because the fraud at PSD on the 737NG EBU production line (among all others there) is so well documented here (and includes new data), is so well documented in my almost 400 page report to the FAA and Boeing's Chief Counsel on that issue and many others, and is so well documented in at least one "Boeing Ethics" "investigation," that I plan on posting here, I will leave this here for posterity, even though it appears an EBU problem may not be the cause. The rollerstamping fraud demonstrated by all of this is still a suspect in the crash, however, as I previously noted below would be the case if the 737NG EBU fraud was eliminated as a cause of the crash. Unfortunately for everyone, the results of the fraud of Boeing QA management cannot easily (or even with some difficulty, for that matter) be undone. The criminals in the matter will remain the criminals in the matter until they are brought to justice and they pay for their crimes:

Could it be because of the rollerstamping fraud noted on this blog and my website? It is interesting beyond the obvious tragedy involved that it seems to be a loss of power in one or both engines. I saw the fraud first hand on the 737NG EBU (Turbo-Fan (Jet) Engine Build-Up) production line at the Propulsion Systems Division at Boeing when I was an inspector there. That was where I was arrested and terminated. The 737NG EBUs (two of which powered the crashed Turkish Airlines 737NG airplane) were some of the most rollerstamped major components of any aircraft produced by Boeing. I exposed that corruption in my report to the FAA, and openly opposed it at work there when I was assigned to that line in crude efforts to fire me for not rollerstamping as fast as other inspectors on that line--the fastest paced one at PSD.

I filed an ethics complaint against my corrupt QA supervisor--Tom Nakamichi--because he told me not to look at the engines too closely in my inspections when they were received from General Electric. I'll have to post the details of that ethics investigation here. It may show you just how bad things were as far as QA management fraud on the 737NG EBU program (as well as any other production line at Boeing's PSD for that matter). Tom told me to stand at least four feet or so from the engines I was receiving and told me not to look at most of the engine even at that distance. Unbelievable? No. Not for those that witnessed it. Of course, as noted on a prior blog, the antithetically named Boeing Ethics Department "did not substantiate" my ethics complaint, even though there were multiple witnesses to Nakamichi's highly unethical conduct.

The problem with being told not to comply with the FAA approved quality manual requirements to inspect these critical airplane propulsion units upon receival?

In addition to the fact that it is illegal to ignore the FAA requirements to inspect those engines, I knew from my many inspections of those General Electric engines (which form the "core" of the 737NG EBUs) that those engines were very defect ridden upon receival. Later I would learn that General Electric had self-inspection in place at their factory--which, of course is no excuse for them delivering to Boeing with those engines the hundreds if not thousands of defects that I found on those engines during my many receival inspections of them as they came into the building at the start of the PSD production line that built them up to be ready to interface with rest of the airplane.

Let's just say that the resident rep from General Electric that had to ensure the many, many defects I found on those G.E. engines were corrected before the NCRs (Non-Conformance Records) I wrote were bought off (only in the case that I bought them off myself), wasn't my greatest fan. He, like my corrupt management, preferred that I never saw and documented the defects from the G.E. factory for repair in the first place. Of course, per procedure, all the defects I wrote up during my receival inspections had to be validated as rejectable defects before the NCR was sent on to Engineering for disposition. And out of the hundreds and likely thousands of defects I found on these G.E. 737NG engines, I believe I could count the times a defect I wrote up was cancelled as not a defect on a few fingers on one hand--an outstanding accuracy record. Of course, that does not mean that my corrupt Boeing QA management did not try to persecute me for those extremely few instances--they did so remarkably consistently, due to their widespread corruption and care only for Cost and Schedule concerns rather than the Quality and Safety problems that they were instead supposed to chiefly address rather than ignore.

Actually, most of those few cancelled NCR items were not my errors at all--they were just valid defects per the specs and engineering drawings that my management did not want to have reworked so that they would instead ultimately deliver to Boeing's airline and military platform customers rather than show up in their CORRS (Cost of Rework and Repair System) cost charts.

Of course, other inspectors on that 737NG EBU line did not buck their managements corrupt directions to violate FAA required inspection procedures as well as I did by far. Some of them were indeed the most prolific rollerstampers at PSD, or all of Boeing, for that matter.

That is not solely their responsibilty, however. Most were just trying to prevent retaliation against them by Boeing management that I had suffered for insisting on actually doing my critical job of inspecting the receival and buildup of those EBUs. Corrupt Boeing QA management (as well as anyone that protected them, like the Boeing Ethics Department, The Boeing Legal Department, and Boeing's Chief Counsel) were ultimately responsible for that fraud, as they purposefully engendered it and/or protected its continuance.

Updated! Of course, I mean in no way to infer that this rollerstamping fraud engendered by Boeing management at Boeing only resulted in G.E.'s/CFMI's defects ultimately being intentionally ignored and therefor delivering to Boeing's customers--myriad defects created at Boeing on the 737NG line during PSD's buildup of the core supplied engines into the "ready to hang from the airplane" propulsion units (EBUs) also were intentionally ignored and delivered to airline and military customers by this endemic Boeing QA management engendered QA rollerstamping fraud. In addition, likely millions of other defects have intentionally delivered because of this rollerstamping fraud on all Boeing built components of Boeing's commercial airplane programs and their military derivatives. This is fraud that is endemic throughout BCA as a result of Boeing executive management's, Boeing Legal's, and the Boeing Chief Counsel Office's steadfast pursuit and defense of that fraud, despite my continuing efforts to end it before yet another life is lost or someone is grievously injured because of it. How do I know that it is so widespread at BCA? I witnessed that myself, of course, at the Everett plant, at PSD, and at Flight Test at "Boeing Field" in Seattle (troublingly, the same organization that will be doing 787 flight testing if it ever flies). All places were remarkably similarly corrupt, and their QA management consciously engaged in that fraud to the point that no ethical inspector did not have to fear for their job because of their ethics and determination to do their critical jobs despite their corrupt management's insistence that they do otherwise. Also note that my corrupt QA supervisor (later promoted) at PSD, whose base corruption started my quest on 1/11/2002 to end this fraud costing and risking many lives, came to PSD from the Renton plant, from where he learned his corrupt QA management ways. Also note that Boeing's fraud in this regard intentionally allows the same fraud and defects to deliver from Boeing suppliers to Boeing's plants, as a recent DOT OIG report documented (except for documenting the fact that it was intentional Boeing management fraud behind the DOT OIG documented Boeing "global" oversight of performing its oversight responsibilities over the integrity of the quality systems of its suppliers. You only as far to look in that regard as what I documented above about Boeing QA management's intentional oversight of the defects on G.E./CFMI turbofan engine "cores" so that those defects could deliver to Boeing's military and airline customers so that reworking and repairing them would not interfere with Boeing QA management's Cost, Schedule, and CORRS cost reduction goals. I don't believe they intended that that fraud they engaged in would result in crashes of Boeing aircraft, but that specific fraud that I witnessed accross the Boeing enterprise appears to be a prime candidate for the cause of this particular crash, and the deaths and grievous injuries therefrom. As I've stated before, I don't think their fraud and crimes in this regard rise to the level of murder charges, however, 1st degree manslaughter charges I believe would be quite appropriate considering the level of fraud and lack of care for the passengers and crew's lives that I witnessed in these corrupt Boeing managers that I unforunately witnessed the corrupt antics of. There is an almost 400 page report I wrote and gave to the FAA and Boeing's Chief Counsel documenting this very same Boeing QA management fraud. That they covered it up and continued it rather than investigating and ending it as I had hoped makes them witting accomplices in those serious crimes that have cost lives and have grievously injured so many.

One thing I will never understand (despite the fact I know the reason behind it) is why Boeing protected Tom Nakamichi, my QA supervisor, and his boss (just as guilty, for she directed him to threaten me into rollerstamping line) from any sanctions for their corruption and law breaking as documented in my ethics report and report to the FAA, which I forwarded on to Doug Bain, Boeing's Chief Counsel at the time. Boeing, considering their ability to obstruct justice, could have easily thrown Nakamichi and his boss "under the bus" to law enforcement to further make it look to me that they had actually done something besides cover up after I submitted my report to the Chief Counsel for appropriate corrective actions following Boeing's FAA management's refusal to actually investigate the report and let the chips fall where they as a result of that purely hypothetical unbiased investigation. They didn't do so (give over Nakamichi and boss to law enforcement), much to the credit of their corruption noted so well here and on my website.

In fact, both Nakamichi and his boss were promoted, instead, shortly thereafter. To keep them in corrupt Boeing management line by rewarding them thusly? Quite possibly.

One good thing in my dismissal is knowing the certainty that Tom Nakamichi, his boss, and anyone else involved in Boeing management, Boeing outside law firms, or the management of public agencies like the FAA that are/were involved in the corruption detailed on my website and blog now have a vastly greater chance than I do of wearing orange jumpsuits and getting free lodging and meals. In that regard, the correct direction for justice has been restored to those truly deserving of it, even if Boeing still hasn't gotten that fact and is still trying to use its undue influence with gullible and corrupt government employees to overtly interfere with any rightful efforts by ethical authorities to ensure culpability and corrective actions for Boeing management's crimes.

Tom Nakamichi, by the way, was the corrupt Boeing manager that overtly told me per his boss's direction to engage in rollerstamping fraud and just buy the paperwork off rather than do my job of inspecting the airplane components first as documented near the bottom of the main page of my website. It was his attempt to coerce me into doing the highly illegal in that 1/11/02 meeting that prompted me to take action to stop that endemic fraud in Boeing QA management and the resulting dangerous and defect delivering Boeing Quality Management System by going to the FAA. And the rest is history. However, from this point on, the criminals will not dictate the direction of justice in the opposite direction it should take, as they did in the past. Now, justice will be applied to the real criminals, whether Boeing and the King County prosecutor's Office approve of that or not.

Of course, the crash may not be related to this fraud at Boeing that intentionally let defective engines deliver to Boeing's commercial and 737NG military airplane platform customers. But even if it isn't, this fraud is documented here anyway. This crash could also well be because of other defects in the airplane that Boeing managment also intentionally let deliver to such airlines due to the noted rollerstamping fraud.

Update, Friday 2-27-08:

I posted this comment on the articles on the Seattle Post Intelligencer and The Seattle Times websites. Links are provided:

http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. ... ction=DESC

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/soundoff/ ... eID=401555

Tragedy, indeed.

All the more tragic in that the crash may have something to do with the fraud in Boeing QA management that I witnessed and tried to stop on the 737NG Engine Build Up (EBU) production line that I reported to the FAA and Boeing's Chief Counsel at the time, Doug Bain.

Boeing and the FAA, through their well documented corrupt relationship, chose to cover up and let the fraud continue rather than end it, which resulted in defective G.E./CFMI engines (and other components) being delivered on Boeing 737NG commercial aircraft and their military derivatives. If this traces back to the fraud I tried to stop before more lives were lost, I could say "I told you so," but all I have now is a feeling of grief over the loss of life in common with the families of the dead and well wishes for those fighting to recover from their injuries.

That McNerney made such a statement is reprehensible, as his office's obstruction of reforms at Boeing may be quite possibly the very reason the crash happened in the first place.

You can check out more details on my thoughts about this crash and the quite possibly related fraud I witnessed at Boeing related to the Boeing management sanctioned rollerstamping of defective 737NG EBUs at my blog at:

http://eastmans.web.aplus.net/pblog/index.php

If this crash is related to that fraud, I can say that I did everything possible to prevent these deaths and injuries. That doesn't give me any personal peace, however, like maybe it should--it only begets anger at those in Boeing, the Boeing Legal Department, and FAA management that purposely ensured this fraud negating the quality, safety, and reliability of these EBUs (and other "Boeing" airplane components) that quite likely cost these very lives. I have no tolerance for people that put profit over the value of people's lives. Hopefully soon they will be brought to justice, and the fraud in Boeing QA management will be at long last ended, for the safety of everyone involved.

As far as I know, the dead Boeing employees were not involved in any way with the fraud I witnessed in Boeing QA. Even if they were, they didn't deserve death for such actions. These are the crimes of others at Boeing--they deserve only lengthily prison terms, not death, for their crimes are simply first degree manslaughter, as far as I know.

Maybe the politicians and authorities will finally act to stop that fraud now that people are quite likely dead and grievously injured because of it.

Regarding the dismissal of the charges against me, and the related frauds to those fraudulent charges:

No victory --Boeing management criminality, cover up, and interference into investigations into Boeing's numerous frauds continues.

Justice will prevail--but when?

Why doesn't Boeing management walk the annual ethics training talk they present to employees every year? The truth (as stated in those trainings) will come out eventually as Marriane Jennings stated in a Boeing funded ethics training video, no matter how hard or how illegally they try to cover it up.

Why do non-management Boeing employees have to comply with the Boeing Code of Conduct, when Boeing management refuses to do so? After all, it was typical (to this day) Boeing management fraud that resulted in the formation of that Code of Conduct in the first place.

In that regard, Boeing is well down the path of Enron, which Ms. Jennings outlined the downfall of in the noted training video. Boeing employees will only save their own jobs by ensuring their corrupt management is brought to justice and removed before their criminality destroys the company. Strangely perhaps--that is exactly what I have been pursuing since the noted 1/11/02 meeting with Nakamichi.

5. Boeing stated through a newscast on Seattle's KOMO TV 4 that my "allegations" are "outrageous," thereby stating that the truth itself is outrageous to Boeing--and that meaning of their statement is exactly true, unlike most Boeing P.R. department spin--nothing outrages corrupt Boeing management like the truth of their corruption ultimately becoming public. That is why they illegally retaliated against the SOX IT whistleblowers, and exactly why they retaliated so viciously against me and my family for doing the right thing, when they couldn't handle the danger of the real truth coming out concerning their numerous and complex frauds.

When will Boeing get a management that will no longer rely on lawbreaking in order to pad the bottom line and cover up for past lawbreaking?

I don't know, but let's just hope it is soon, for the welfare of all Boeing workers, the lives of passengers and crew on Boeing commercial and military aircraft, and for our national security.

Marriane Jennings was right. Boeing will go into "Enron history" itself unless it bucks its corrupt management like a deathly ill host removing the deadly parasite that is killing it.

By the way--anyone got a link to the KOMO TV 4 afternoon newcast of my story? I can't find it to post it and view it.

Wow. Just when you thought things couldn't get much weirder, along comes the Breaking News that Former Washington Governor Gary Locke is the new pick for Commerce Secretary.

I thought that Gary Locke was a good governor. However, he is not without his own baggage. Chief among that baggage is a certain closeness with the interests of (currently corrupt) Boeing management. That would be a good thing if Boeing had an ethical, law abiding, and competent management. However, that is currently not the case. So, if Mr. Locke gets the post and acts in any way to support that mismanagement as he has done in the past, that would be a very bad thing indeed. Note that there is a very large difference between supporting the currently corrupt management at Boeing and supporting the employees of Boeing. I would support anything Mr. Locke does to support the interests of Boeing workers as long as that action in no way supports the current cadre of corrupt Boeing management.

So, the Gary Locke choice is indeed problematic, as he is potentially at least the second "corrupt Boeing management mole" in the Obama administration, after Four Star General and former Marine Core Commandant and NATO Commander James L. Jones, who used to be on the Boeing Board of Directors (Being on the Boeing Board of Directors does not mean you support corrupt Boeing management, of course, but it certainly is not an indicator that you don't, by far).

There are problems with other supposedly "people friendly" and corporate corruption adverse Democratic politicians from Washington State (my state) than Gary Locke. Our two Washington State Senators, even though "people serving" Democrats, are known in certain circles as "the Senators from Boeing." In my experience, it is a moniker they both have earned. The fact that Boeing management is corrupt doesn't seem to color their support of that management in any way. In fact, they both would rather turn their heads and let innocent whistleblowers be fired and/or imprisoned on false charges by Boeing, Boeing's outside counsel, and the King County Prosecutor's Office rather than lift a finger to do their basic jobs and oppose Boeing management lawbreaking and illegal Boeing whistleblower retaliation.

That isn't to state that they are not better than a Republican would be in opposing such white collar crime in Boeing management, however there doesn't seem to be as much of a difference as there should be between them and the hypothetical "government of, by, and for corporations" Republican type of Senator on this issue.

Another problem with the Gary Locke choice is that Gary Locke's family lives in China--family which he is still close to and visits in China occasionally. How will this affect the Obama administration's holding of China to account for their numerous crimes in this country and repression in their own country? It is common knowledge that China has hundreds if not thousands of spies in the U.S. that steal U.S. technology rather than attempt to develop it from scratch themselves in order to help their military and commercial interests. Boeing's illegal transfer of technology that it doesn't own, from programs on its military side to the "white world" commercial side of the company, where it is accessible to such spys and even outsourced to China by Boeing doesn't help matters at all.

Commerce Department export licensing is obviously a cruel joke on our national security. Many things are kicked to that hopelessly industry biased agency that should be licensed instead through the much tougher State Department ITAR controls. Will Gary Locke remove this historical bias from the Commerce Department or make it worse due to his family ties and Boeing mismanagement bias?

Let's just hope that Gary Locke has the ethics with which to deny corrupt Boeing management overtures and lawbreaking and keep the U.S. safe from it's most potent potential enemy, the country his family immigrated from--China. Hope may be all we have in this matter that these two men are not "Boeing corrupt management moles," and instead will choose to protect our country's interests in its very survival rather than the very narrow interests of corrupt Boeing management.

This just in: Things are worse than I thought at first:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/homepage/story/62676.html

'Fred Kiga, who was Locke’s chief of staff from 2001 to 2004, said Locke was a big hit in Asian countries.

“The trips I went on, he was a rock star,” said Kiga, who now is Boeing’s vice president for global corporate citizenship and its main liaison for state and local governments. “First, he was good looking and intelligent. And he was the first Chinese-American governor on the mainland U.S.”'

Looks like both Kiga and Locke cashed in, with Kiga perhaps cashing in in the more questionable way by joining Boeing management detailed so well here. Locke joined a law firm with a good reputation after his stint as governor, however, he appears to have been promoting trade with China at that firm. What he specifically was doing there will be critical to cover in his confirmation hearings. For instance, was he trying to get past export law requirements for clients? If that was so, the committee should just vote no.

An appearance of bias is almost as damning as smoking gun proof of such bias. Here we obviously have at least the appearance of bias that would interfere with his critical duties as Commerce Secretary--especially in the case of China.

I voted for Gary Locke twice and he and his family are indeed nice people. That is not what we need in a Commerce Secretary, however. We need instead someone that is without any possible bias that may interfere with the discharge of their national security critical duties in the post and is without any possible bias toward the perhaps already highly ethically compromised Boeing V.P. and perhaps others that Locke used to work with in government before they chose to cash in at Boeing.

Is Kiga ethically compromised after whatever period of time he has been suckling up to corrupt Boeing management as part of his V.P. job? I can't say without more detailed research I don't have time for.

But, in a clumsy analogy I am perhaps famous for among people who know my writing, would you take your dog back home after it spent the night in the kennel in "The Thing" Sci-Fi movie remake that had an alien possessed dog in that kennel? No? I understand.

Of course, I'm not inferring that Boeing management are possessed by aliens--they are just mostly eminently corrupt.

I'm not inferring that Gary Locke cannot perform the job as Commerce Secretary well. However, considering his past with Boeing, promoting trade with China, coolness toward Taiwan's predicament, and his close Chinese heritage, he will need our help to ensure that he does do that job well--especially in all matters related to China or Boeing.

President Obama could have easily made a less problematic choice, I believe. Now tax problems and Republicanism aren't looking so bad after all.

End of blog.

Of a more personal side note to do with the unlikely and extremely peripheral "relationship" between me and Gary Locke to do with the 787 site selection debacle Boeing put Washington State through in 2003:

I don't know if Gary Locke is up to speed on the whole 787 site selection debacle. I fear his ego may have shielded him from the truth on that matter. He may actually believe that he was the reason the 787 was sited in Everett, Washington rather than the anti-union Boeing Board of Directors' preferred location of anti-union Charlotte, North Carolina. If he believes he is the reason, he is of course wrong, per Boeing's belief. According to Boeing, I am the sole reason the 787 was sited in Washington, even if they had the former Boeing executive in charge of the mismanagement-addled 787 program prevaricate in an interview with my attorney before trial that he had feared the opposite was the case. This was when The Seattle Times broke the news that Boeing Commercial Airplanes President Alan Mulally (and team) preferred Everett (even though the BOD had the final say and had anti-union bias for another site). This is the article they pinned on me for being the source of the "closely held" site selection recommendation by Mulally and his mismanagement team. It is perhaps of interest that I never have met Mulally, unless you count attendance in a crowd watching him at the 777 Rollout in Everett and a speech he gave to employees at the Propulsion Systems Division of Boeing as "meeting him." Every reporter on the planet at the time would likely do almost anything to get that info, but only one reporter, Dominic Gates of The Seattle Times, managed to uncover that critical story and share it with all Boeing employees.

I never did ask for anything (or was offered anything) from The Seattle Times for the stories which I was one of the sources for (some of which are noted on my website, (www.thelastinspector.com). I received not so much as a free subscription. My sole reason for contacting The Seattle Times was to bring the still installed corrupt Boeing management and corrupt FAA management to justice for their crimes against public, air crew, and military personnel safety and our national security as noted elsewhere on this blog and as noted on my main website.

Read my comments to the FAA on the proposed policy change that would allow the 787 to be less safe in lightning strikes than is currently required if special conditions/exemptions Boeing has asked for are granted by clicking on the link below:

My Comments to The FAA Concerning the Proposed Policy Memo Change

I think you will find I have been as "brutally honest" as usual in these comments to the FAA.

Update--I received a response today (2/17/08) from Victor Wicklund, Manager, Propulsion & Mechanical Systems, ANM-112, FAA Transport Standards Staff, confirming receipt of my comments (Mr. Wicklund, who is handling comments on the proposed policy change, was out of the office from the day before I submitted my comments until today, so he couldn't confirm until now).

Now we await their response.

Breaking news article of special interest to anyone reading this Blog:

You may have thought that Dominic Gates and The Seattle Times (TST) would have been cowed at this point from writing and publishing rightfully hard hitting news about Boeing/FAA management corruption risking people's safety for more Boeing bottom line dollars and quid pro quo FAA management Boeing jobs, considering all of the unethical if not "extra-legal" (outside the law) pressure Boeing has put on TST as noted on this blog.

I am glad that Dominic has not been detered by Boeing's heavy handed attempts to intimidate his newspaper from doing their critical jobs. His front page Seattle Times article on TST's most read day (today, Sunday, February 8th) proves otherwise.

The press is not perfect by far. Investigative journalism as Dominic has demonstrated in this article is a dying art, and one that powerful Boeing and their outside counsel have been doing their best to put to death wrongfully forever in order to cover up any public knowledge of Boeing management corruption of the worst possible kind--Boeing management corruption that intentionally places millions of lives of the public at much greater risk in order to add just a few more dollars to Boeing's bottom line and in their own pockets. It is the same corruption I risked my job and entire life to bring to an end. Boeing terminated me and ruined my life and tried to imprison me for doing so, but I still persist in trying to end this unholy marriage of Boeing/FAA management personal greed. That very Boeing/FAA management corruption still arrogantly exists right up to the present moment, however, as demonstrated by Dominic's powerful article.

Dominic is an Irish-American who looks nothing like "Braveheart" (Mel Gibson, in the film) does. However, he does share one uncanny quality with "Braveheart"--bravery, and should be applauded everywhere for it.

I myself also look nothing like "Braveheart" does as well, but Boeing and their outside counsel have been trying to do to me in effect exactly what the king did to Braveheart in the last scene of that movie. Injustice, indeed. Only the very corrupt deserve such a fate, and I don't wish to point out any specific candidates in Boeing management that I might think deserve that fate because I don't think like those corrupt acters obviously do, as judged by their actions. Better to turn the other cheek than cast the first stone, methinks.

But enough of such a clumsy introduction. Follow the link below to Dominic's wonderful article exposing FAA/Boeing management corruption in detail never before seen except on my blog and website, and read my comments on the article on the comments section for the article on The Seattle Times website:


http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/b ... ing08.html

Can you believe that Boeing, their outside counsel, and Dan Satterberg (the King County Prosecutor) tried to put me in prison for leaking the original 787 lightning story-- http://community.seattletimes.nwsource. ... g=boeing05--to Dominic in (futile, up to this point) efforts to save lives before the 787 entered service?

At least, thanks to Dominic's follow up on the original story I was accused of working with him on, some 787 passengers and crew will know before they board it just what a "bucket O' lightning hot composite wing tank bolts" they are literally getting into, if they were to make that mistake.

LOL. Read the comments on the article on the TST website. One commenter has a fantastic comment that will solve this 787 safety problem that corrupt FAA and Boeing management have tried thusfar to cover up rather than fix--make Boeing and FAA higher management fly on 787 test flights through severe thunderstorms with the inerting system off as they are now proposing that unknowing 787 passengers and cabin crew do when and if the airplane enters service!

That commenter has nailed the perfect solution to all of this in the face of the current arrogant FAA/Boeing management corruption that seeks to make the 787 less safe for Boeing profitability and 787 production debacle make schedule purposes. If they were forced to fly on them in that condition, they would reverse course immediately in order to save the only bacon that ever seems to matter to them--their own

An appearance of bias is almost as damning as “smoking gun” proof of such bias, especially for those in public office and on the King County Superior Court bench.

As noted in prior blogs, much more than the appearance of bias is at work in Dan Satterberg’s King County Prosecutor’s Office, in that he has sold all rights to the management of certain cases like mine that have great value to thusly sell to the highest dollar campaign contributors with the most dirty hands (in my case, Boeing and Boeing’s outside law firm, Perkins Coie, were the purchasers of said rights).

But, even to the jaded (like me) to news of new avenues of corruption in our government and industry, it never ceases to amaze me every time I see such brazen corruption first hand, as I did in just the latest miscarriage of justice in my case that happened one week ago, on Tuesday, the 27th of January.

The fact the participants were mostly the same, even though I was before a different King County Superior Court judge that day, mostly explains the miscarriage of justice in itself. I did have hopes that being before a different King County Superior Court judge would result in the first ruling in my case that appeared unbiased, or that was in my favor, for that matter. My hopes were dashed, however, when the King County Superior Court judge I was before quickly proved that she was the same as the others that have came before in my case. You can always hope for justice in King County Superior Court. You have virtually no chance of receiving it there, but at least you can always hope that a new judge in your case is not biased toward the prosecutor and other moneyed interests like Boeing that are before the court opposing you. But, in her defense, she was just maintaining the bias of all King County Superior Court Judges that have handled this case.

Of course, as you will see, this hearing last week broke no new news about bias in the King County Prosecutor’s Office and King County Superior Court. Only the circumstances of the injustice that resulted changed. All of the injustice before in my case was abetted rather than contradicted by the judge’s ruling that day.

The hearing last week was set many months ago, in July, 2008, when I signed a "Continuance for Dismissal" at the time under undue and perhaps illegal pressure from Marc A. Boman’s buddy, US Attorney Carl Blackstone. Boman had called in a personal favor from his friend Blackstone, and Blackstone acceded to that unethical if not illegal request. Boman is Boeing’s outside counsel they selected from Perkins Coie per Boeing’s long standing retainer with Perkins Coie to proactively protect the white collar criminals at Boeing by covering up any evidence of their wrongdoing so that they never have to face any consequences whatsoever for their crimes, while Boeing and Perkins Coie persecute whistleblowers that made the “mistake” of trying to blow the whistle on their management’s criminal activities. Blackstone would later backpedal when I blogged about his unethical if not illegal act to perform federal prosecutions purely per his powerful buddies’ request, rather than any facts related to the merits of the case itself. Blackstone admitted he made a mistake in doing so, but seemed to really be trying to “fall on his sword” in doing so so as to protect his buddy Boman from any implication when Boman had already been rightly implicated in pressuring Blackstone to threaten to file charges against me that had no merit in and of themselves.

You have to wonder what kind of leverage Boman has on Blackstone to get Blackstone to lie both coming and going (in the original threat to prosecute me, which he never planned to carry through on, as it was a threat solely made at the request of a powerful friend independent of the facts of the case, and in lying that Boman wasn’t involved) concerning my case. You would think that it would have to be some other “leverage” than a mere friendship that thusly blinded Blackstone to all ethics and laws that applied to his own conduct in the affair. It seems that it instead would have to be much more in the arena of what Boman knows about his buddy Blackstone—knowledge that Boman perhaps gained through that “friendship” or by other means at Boman’s disposal. Of course, only Boman and Blackstone may know of exactly what kind of sordid information Boman holds over Blackstone, unless Boman told his partners at Perkins Coie the nature of how he planned to pressure Blackstone to do something that Blackstone himself said had very little chance of happening had Boman not pressured him to make the noted threat against me that resulted in me giving up my rights during the now expired agreement, in effect making me “lie down with the devil” (Boeing and their “mirrored in lack of ethics” counsel and paid prosecutor) during the length of the expired agreement.

The “Continuance for Dismissal” stated January 27th of this year was the date on which I would return to court for the court to decide if I had complied with the agreement or I had not. The prosecutor was supposed to ask the judge to dismiss the charges against me if I had kept to the agreement over the last six months and cooperated with them and Boeing per the terms of the agreement. If that happened, as I expected it would the morning of the hearing as I had done everything asked of me and more, the charges against me would be dropped as of January 30th, 2009 at the latest, the expiration date of the agreement.

That wouldn’t happen, however, as it turns out, as Boeing’s well paid King County Prosecutor decided I had to keep to every letter of the agreement they also had signed, but they did not have to comply with any of the agreement themselves.

My attorney and I had made sure that I had done everything and more that I was required to do per the agreement so that I would have the charges dismissed against me by January 30th..

However, Boeing decided to tell Satterberg that they wanted a 60 day extension of my fate. And even though there was no conceivable valid reason to ask for such a continuance, much less be granted it by the judge, Dan Satterberg had his prosecutor accede to Boeing’s obviously improper request anyway, just as Satterberg has consistently done with every improper if not outright illegal request of Boeing and Boeing’s outside counsel in my case.

But, there was an “impartial” judge there that would ensure that no such obvious travesty of justice in my case occurred, right? Nah. She did appear to be vertical in her chair and kept her eyes open during our arguments against this request for further injustice in my case, however she ruled as if we had made no arguments whatsoever, giving Satterberg and Boeing and Boeing’s outside counsel their requested extra 60 days to try to commit further injustices against me.

You’ve got to be wondering what Boeing’s argument was in the hearing for requesting the 60 days continuance, some 57 days past the expiration of the agreement (the prosecutor only was at the hearing to assist Boeing with their arguments before the judge).

Even though I know what it was, obviously, as I witnessed it firsthand, I still find it hard to believe myself, and even harder to believe that even the typically corrupt King County Superior Court judge at the hearing bought it. If typical, she bought it after being bought like Satterberg has been as I noted in prior blogs. Indeed, no money has to change hands in order for a public official to be bought. Like the FAA/Boeing corruption I was trying to expose that has cost lives, only the promise (overtly stated or otherwise) of a better job if they rule the right way is required to do so. Indeed, no overt action on the part of Boeing and their prosecutor is required in this area, as the judge may simply rule for Boeing hoping that they later financially reward her in some way for doing so, whether through campaign favors or otherwise. Perhaps if it was made clear that Boeing and Boeing’s outside counsel reserve such cash for bribing officials only as corrupted as Dan Satterberg is, I might receive one day a ruling that is not biased by the lollipops—I mean dollar signs—dancing in their heads every time Boeing is before them opposing me.

To give a bit of background, the arguments revolved around “up to two meetings, of up to eight hours each” that were allowed for in the agreement if Boeing chose to have them at all before the expiration date of the agreement. Boeing only scheduled one of the optional (for them) interviews, which I submitted to on 10/28/08. Boeing never made any attempts to schedule the other interview before the agreement expired on 1/30/09. Their arguments also revolved around a requirement in the agreement that I perform my best efforts to get the files back that I gave to the Seattle Times. I only had to make a good faith effort to get them back—their actual return was not a requirement in the agreement in any way.

My attorney and I had requested the files back from The Seattle Times (TST) on several occasions. That alone satisfied any possible view of that requirement in the agreement. TST originally refused to give them back, despite heavy pressure on TST to do so via Boeing and Boeing’s outside counsel’s usual scorched earth tactics that was levied against TST in addition to our requests. However, at some point not too far before the hearing, TST decided to change their minds, apparently deciding a legal fight against Boeing’s heavy handed pressure was not worth it, despite the fact that they were likely protected from having to give back the files through Washington State’s Shield Law that protects the press from powerful moneyed interests that seek to stifle the idea of a free press in this country, like Boeing extremely arrogantly does by persecuting press sources and the press themselves if articles are written that don’t match their PR department’s habitual lies about the true nature of Boeing. TST returned the files to my attorney the morning of the hearing, and my attorney and a courier from her office brought the returned files to the court and gave them to Boeing’s lap dog prosecutor, who was sitting next to Boeing’s attorney as usual that afternoon.

Unbelievably (except for those of you that know of entities as corrupt as Boeing and the King County Prosecutor’s Office are), Boeing argued through their puppet prosecutor that the 60 day continuance was needed because “they had only just received the files from The Seattle Times, they hadn’t had the opportunity to open the package that contained the files to verify their contents (not true, they just chose not to do so in the time the had to do so before the hearing), and they needed time to review the files before they could schedule the second interview allowed for in the agreement.”

So, all of you legally savvy people should be rolling on the floor either laughing or crying at this point (ROTFLMAO or ROTFCMAO), knowing just how inane and totally devoid of logical much less legal argument that argument was. Even people that know little about the law can understand just how much a travesty of justice this was.

The lies in Boeing’s arguments are many, even though it was a very short one. I don’t pretend to capture them all here:

1. The second interview was never mandatory per the agreement, unless Boeing scheduled it before the agreement expired. Even though Boeing argued to the judge that they wanted to delay scheduling the second interview until an indefinite time after they had decided they were done reviewing the files returned to them, they made no efforts before, during, or after the hearing to do so before the requirement to have a second interview expired with the agreement on 1/30/09.

2. There was no requirement for us to actually get the files back from TST as we did. To use the fact we did something extra outside the requirements of the agreement and have that used against us is injustice, indeed.

3. Boeing already knew exactly what was on 17 of the 18 disks that were in the package returned to them, as during our cooperation with them several months prior we had been able to show them where folders with the exact copies of the files burnt on each disk were on my computer. Therefore, Boeing had several months already with which to review all of those files that they had had already. Only the files on disk 7 I did not know, as we had told them at the same time we led them to the locations of the other disk’s files on my computer. I had forgotten to save a folder with the contents of that disk before I gave it to TST. There were some printed pages I had given to TST in the package, but, per my recollection, I had not given TST very many such pages, as I had started using CDs for convenience purposes shortly after my quest to bring Boeing to justice by going to TST had begun. Eighteen CDs may seem like a lot of info, however, as I wrote, I chose CDs because I had them and they were thusly convenient—not because the contents of each disk required the capacity of a CD. Indeed, to my recollection, most CDs had fewer than a half dozen files on them on average, some of which were just Word files I wrote that explained the other files on the particular CD. So, to claim they needed 60 days with which to review a few files on one disk and a few printed pages is ludicrous. They could have done so in the time between the hearing and when they first got them, but chose not to. The reason for this lie of theirs? They likely wanted the sixty days for reasons other than the reasons they lied to the judge they needed it. Of course, lying to a judge is dangerous, except of course if you are Satterberg or Boeing, in which case such lying will be rewarded instead of punished as noted.

4. No one could possibly state truthfully that I had not complied with the agreement in any way, yet they inferred so anyway in their request in asking for more time to do an interview that they have not scheduled even up until today.

Obviously, the agreement expired on 1/30/09. I complied with any reasonable and unbiased interpretation of it. Boeing and the King County Prosecutor’s office chose not to comply with it. So now that the agreement has expired, things return to what they were before the agreement. I signed away my rights to a jury trial by signing the agreement. Now that the agreement is expired, my rights to a jury trial are restored, which can be looked at as a good thing, especially when they have demonstrated they never intended to comply with the agreement on their end. So, we’ll see if they want to try me again before the statute of limitations expires in the case, whenever that is.

Before the hearing, Vanessa Lee, Boeing Legal’s attorney who made all arguments at the hearing through her puppet prosecutor Scott Peterson (to Peterson’s defense, he was only acting as a puppet of Boeing because Dan Satterberg had directed him to do so) said to my attorney, “there is such a thing as professional courtesy” and “It really hurts to be accused of wanting to extend this” Lee was complaining that my attorney was “not showing her professional courtesy” by inferring Lee wanted to extend my case, which Lee had already indicated that she wanted to do and was going to request at the hearing. That would be a funny “joke” on Lee’s part, if it wasn’t such a serious lie. Let’s hope Vanessa Lee will soon be stripped of her license to practice law because of such malpractice and calling the kettle white, when it is so obviously black... On a much less serious note, Vanessa Lee is known by those close to her as "Lemons," which is a nickname of which the precise origin escapes me. But, to be fair, people that see me call me "Family Guy," although that is not my nickname (frankly, I don't myself see the resemblance, LOL).

As you can see, what actually happened was a complete travesty of justice, but fit well with all of the shenanigans that Boeing and the King County Prosecutor have pulled thusfar in the case.

Simply another unfortunate day in Dan Satterberg’s King County Kangaroo Superior Court.

So, I was in effect screwed yet again by this cabal of crooks. Being charged with a crime in King County is almost becoming a sign that you are actually following the law much too closely.