Then there are the "lower" and "logically" less able and more biased courts, prosecutors, and attorneys in the levels below the Supreme Court. You would hope somewhere in this system there was somebody that followed the rules and did their jobs, even if the Supreme Court is unable to. A prosecutor's office. A company's legal department. A private legal firm. An attorney.
It seems finding people of integrity in the legal system is as slapdash as it was to find such people in my department when I was an inspector at Boeing. I was almost alone in being the one with enough integrity to do my job while being pressured not to do it by people without integrity.
Take the Boeing Legal department, for instance, which I tried to report fraud to on two occasions and who are assisting in my persecution now. They have many attorneys in house who presumably had to pass the bar and have to stay members of the bar to continue their profession.
There seems to be a lack of accountability in the profession. Or did Boeing's attorneys give the errant legal opinion and let the militarily sensitive technology on the airplanes deliver just because Boeing needed to deliver the airplanes to meet revenue and profit targets? That might explain both the highly questionable opinion by Boeing's attorneys and why Boeing deferred complying with State Department requests for Boeing to apply for export licenses before delivering such airplanes on multiple occasions. It also explains why such attorneys were not fired or debarred for incompetence. They were just doing their jobs. But that would have made them even better candidates for disbarment, you would think.
But since when did attorneys stop advising companies how to avoid legal problems by ensuring they complied with laws, and stop advising companies how to minimize the damage from any accidental breaking of the law, and start advising their companies how to break the law with impunity?
I saw that in the same Boeing legal department. They refused to end the fraud in quality assurance I reported to their Chief Counsel on two occasions, and instead seemed to pull out all the stops in ensuring that fraud was not ended, as a naive person like me (at the time) might have expected. Hell, the Chief Counsel of Boeing showed up at the doorstep of my work not to help end the fraud, but instead to decide how to dispose of me, who they viewed as the real problem. You would think any attorney involved in the covering up of this fraud and the resulting retaliation against me would be a prime candidate for disbarment. But I have no knowledge of any of them being disbarred. To this day they labor to cover up the same fraud I reported to them over five years ago.
Their spokespeople have repeatedly lied to the press about it also, both in responding to the inevitable defects that such a quality system lets deliver to the fleet (in which they said something like, "we have multiple layers of inspection that would never allow such defects to leave our production system," which most people inside and outside Boeing know is untrue) and in responding to my persecution at their request (saying something like, "we have processes in place to address such concerns," while not stating the fact that those processes didn't work to end the fraud I reported or the related problems in the quality system I also reported). Indeed, my prosecution is just one part of their plan to cover up the noted fraud.
But if private legal departments operate thusly, what about our prosecutors? Wouldn't those attorneys who work on our dime spot such fraud and the related efforts to cover it up by placing false reports to the police to get people trying to end it arrested and the information they were gathering for the relevant authorities confiscated?
Nope. They apparently do what the Boeing Legal department wants them to do, not what is in the interests of the public or public safety. They decide to participate in the cover up by attacking the messenger of the fraud. Of course, maybe it is not incompetence or corruption that caused our public attorneys to act against their professional ethics. Maybe Boeing's chief outside law firm contributing to the campaign of the prosecutor who faces his first election for King County Prosecutor in a few months played a part. I don't know if Boeing is helping his election directly yet, but they have certainly proven themselves arrogant enough to do so. Shouldn't these types of activities cause these prosecutors to get disbarred as well? It would seem so. I don't see the bar association condoning this type of behavior.
So, if private and public attorneys are becoming corrupted and are working together to silence people like me that seek to end corporate fraud and don't seem to face any consequences for that corruption, what is the hope for us not to devolve further into some kind of fascist nightmare of a state where corporations run all branches of the government, and not us? Individual attorneys that want to take on such monoliths at their own cost? Who would end up getting disbarred in that case? The corrupt attorneys or the ones seeking to end that corruption?
We are at a dangerous point in America, especially when a progressive State like Washington experiences this kind of corruption bordering on fascism. Will it get better, or worse? Will someone in the legal systems of governments and corporations stand up and actually do their jobs like they are supposed to? Will anyone at the bar association stand up and do their jobs to get rid of the people that are affronts to their profession?
Who knows? I am just one insignificant "victim" of unethical public and private attorneys working together that should probably be disbarred for incompetence and/or corruption. There will be others, unless someone, like I did in my job as an inspector at Boeing, stands up and actually does their job with the required ethics.
Today's Daily Report Quote:
This quote is also from my addendum (supplement) to my first report, This corruption at Boeing bodes ill for the 787 program, I believe. Customers should hope their 787s are not damaged at Boeing and have to be repaired and "inspected" by these Boeing personnel:
This just in:
I found a stash of official shop stamped off and QA stamped off Form (number) Composite Repair Records that supported work done per NCRs (Non-Conformance Records). I checked the NCRs listed on them in NCM, and some of them, but not all, as should have been the case, had been scanned into the NCRs they supported. I looked at the forms, and something curious stuck out. They were all repairs on 737NG T/Rs (thrust reversers), and all of them showed that the composite repair technician used the wrong material to lay up the repairs! I checked the NCRs again to see if this "substitute material" had been written up on the NCRs on a revision and approved by our PSD engineering and project stress engineering, which is required for repairs done with materials used that are not the same as the drawing required materials per our composite repair document, (number) section 8.1.4.a.(2). Nada. No such approval from engineering or stress on any of them. Do you think that a T/R sleeve installed on a 737NG airplane that is probably flying around with people on it right now, with a composite lay-up repair that was done with the wrong material without required engineering approval of that material for the repair, and without the additional required stress approval for use of that material, could be a safety problem? I think so. While the T/R sleeve might withstand the rigors of flight (or may not, in time), it may blow apart during T/R deployment when stresses on it might be greater. But I’m not an engineer. Just a lowly line inspector. I think that these listed repairs are only the tip of the iceberg, obviously, in relation to all of the repairs that probably have been done similarly without full engineering and stress approvals, by at least these two listed composite repair technicians, to unknown parts of unknown criticality to the integrity of the airplane: