1603

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

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

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

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 126 points 9 months ago

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

[-] kromem@lemmy.world 126 points 9 months ago

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

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

I tear up just thinking about it.

[-] Fuckfuckmyfuckingass@lemmy.world 42 points 9 months ago

Bravo. Hope you make Hollywood kid, you got the vision we need.

[-] Threeme2189@sh.itjust.works 16 points 9 months ago

The current vision in Hollywood is sequels, reboots and milking any IP for all its worth.

[-] kromem@lemmy.world 13 points 9 months ago

Don't underestimate the franchise potential of The Whistleblower Bodyguard 4: Furious at Fast Food.

[-] felbane@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

"They didn't salt the god damned fries AGAIN!?"

organizes heist

[-] M0oP0o@mander.xyz 13 points 9 months ago

I see this as an absolute win. Also kinda liking the idea of big companies spending money in a spy vs spy sort of thing.

[-] aidan@lemmy.world 63 points 9 months ago

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

[-] genie@lemmy.world 29 points 9 months ago

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

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 7 points 9 months ago

There should be presumption of guilt in this case.

[-] aidan@lemmy.world 5 points 9 months ago

What?? No that's ridiculous. People do kill themselves sometimes.

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 4 points 9 months ago

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

[-] aidan@lemmy.world 2 points 9 months ago

What? And break into his home so he can't?

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 months ago

That'll cost them less money and years of not seeing daylight, so why not.

[-] aidan@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

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

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 months ago

I meant not that the witness would be obligated to accept that, but that a company would be interested to offer to pay for various measures to preserve their health, sanity and all that.

[-] aidan@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

But the claim was that he committed suicide, say you're concerned about the company killing you so you accept their security. Couldn't the security then just have a good reason to be in your house to "find the body" when you "slip in the shower"

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 months ago

You don't get it, his death before giving witness is unconditionally considered a murder by the company.

[-] aidan@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

So then someone else can kill him like others have said. But depending on what is being whistleblowed, someone in the company taking the fall for murder might not be as bad as what could be discovered. Especially if government agencies are included in this.

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 2 points 9 months ago

So then someone else can kill him like others have said.

Which is why company is interested in preventing that.

[-] aidan@lemmy.world 0 points 9 months ago

So its not really about justice for the murder?

[-] rottingleaf@lemmy.zip 1 points 9 months ago

Yes, it's about preventing it.

[-] aidan@lemmy.world 1 points 9 months ago

I feel like people more often die during a trial then get murdered during it.

[-] Railcar8095@lemm.ee 6 points 9 months ago

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

Just one example of that being a terrible idea

[-] GroteStreet@aussie.zone 10 points 9 months ago

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

[-] kerrypacker@lemmy.world 25 points 9 months ago

It's absolutely not. They don't want whistleblowers.

[-] agitatedpotato@lemmy.world 14 points 9 months ago

Do not underestimate the level of solidarity rich people will display against anyone who challenges them.

this post was submitted on 11 Mar 2024
1603 points (99.2% liked)

News

23627 readers
2490 users here now

Welcome to the News community!

Rules:

1. Be civil


Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.


2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.


Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.


3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.


Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.


4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.


Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.


5. Only recent news is allowed.


Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.


6. All posts must be news articles.


No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.


7. No duplicate posts.


If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.


8. Misinformation is prohibited.


Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.


9. No link shorteners.


The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.


10. Don't copy entire article in your post body


For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS