NEWS STORY
Swissair 111 whistleblower won't face charges - cops
Supposed leak about doomed flight posted on Internet not from confidential report

By RICHARD DOOLEY
The Daily News

ADVERTISEMENT


The RCMP will not lay charges after an investigation into the supposed leak of confidential information from the probe into the crash of Swissair Flight 111.

The Daily News learned in September that a source calling himself beanspiller_ca had posted information on the Internet he said was from the Transportation Safety Board�s draft final report, released after a 41/2-year investigation into the cause of the MD-11 crash near Peggy�s Cove on Sept. 2, 1998.

Leaking information from a confidential draft review prior to its public release is against the law, and could result in hefty fines or a jail term.

RCMP spokesman Sgt. Wayne Noonan said officers spoke with Beanspiller, and concluded no laws were broken.

�Nothing new has been learned that causes us concern as far as what the actual cause of the crash was,� he said.

Noonan said it appears Beanspiller didn�t have access to information from the report.

All 229 people on board the New York to Geneva plane were killed after a fire disabled the jet, sending it hurtling into the sea as it prepared for an emergency landing at Halifax International Airport.

Beanspiller said investigators determined improper wiring of the plane�s controversial high-tech entertainment system caused the initial fire that led to the crash. Some family members of victims of the crash have long suspected the video-on demand entertainment system for first-class passengers as the leading suspect in the fire.

Mark Fetherolf and his wife Barbara lost their 16-year-old daughter Tara in the crash. Beanspiller�s postings first appeared in a chat group they began for other family members.

He said his faith in Beanspiller�s information was not shaken by the RCMP.

�Not really. The information that came from him came from just one of the (TSB) study groups involved in this thing, and it�s quite possible they won�t all agree,� he said.

Fetherolf said he�ll be disappointed if investigators don�t pinpoint the cause of the fire. Crash investigators have not revealed the root cause of the on-board fire, but have hinted the entertainment system will figure prominently in the final report.

The TSB�s final report is expected to be publicly released within the next couple of months. A confidential draft report was circulated to all the parties involved in the investigation for comments.

TSB spokesman Jim Harris said the RCMP was asked to investigate to ensure the integrity of the investigation, and because of concerns about potential misinformation being released to the public.

rdooley@hfxnews.ca

http://www.canada.com/halifax/dailynews/story.asp?id={AB49D903-A325-467C-B0D9-1191E28CE3AC}

I just wanted to say that beanspiller never said that his information came from the draft report.

Just wanted to add that the TSB could end all 'speculation' about the cause of sr111 by doing one simple thing. Making the draft report results public. Investigations should be open. If the TSB is concerned about integrety than the investigation should be an open one and the draft report not just shown to those responsible.

RCMP STATEMENTS DO NOT DISCREDIT BEANSPILLER

The tone of the RCMP's comments appear to minimize the significance of Beanspiller's revelations, but careful analysis suggests Beanspiller is entirely credible.

Sgt. Noonan's states:

1. No laws were broken. It appears Beanspiller didn�t have access to information from the report.

True enough. The Canadian Transportation Accident Investigation and Safety Board Act contains the following provision:

No person shall communicate or use the draft report, or permit its communication or use, for any purpose, other than the taking of remedial measures... ( complete statute )

Beanspiller did not have access to the draft report (his initial posts were made prior to its release) and therefore did not violate the statute. However that doesn't imply that the information he did provide is any less credible!

2. �Nothing new has been learned that causes us concern as far as what the actual cause of the crash was.�

Again, true enough. Nothing materially new has been disclosed. We have known from the beginning of the investigation that the IFEN wiring was among the key items being investigated. Beanspiller simply confirmed this. Of course he goes on to state that it (the IFEN wiring) was the source of ignition. We believe that there is evidence to this effect, albeit necessarily indirect.

In fact, the RCMP told Beanspiller that what he was doing wasn't illegal, but that he should nonetheless cease and desist. And this is not at all surprising, given the TSB's well-known fixation on controlling the flow of information. Obviously, if Beanspiller's disclosures were factually all wrong, it would have been obvious without any investigation that no laws were broken. The logical conclusion is that Beanspiller's remarks raised (the TSB's) concern that there was a real leak in the investigation and that there might be more to come. The investigation was preemptive.

Vic Gerden told me several things that I believe are significant with respect to the issues raised here:

1. If a single root cause was identified quickly, the opportunity would be lost to thoroughly understand the chain of events leading to the disaster and to affect remedial actions.

2. The IFEN will figure prominantly in the final report.

3. An air disaster is typically the result of a convergence of factors, the absense of any one of which would avert the crash.

The TSB's report will surely not name a single cause. We already know that metallized mylar insulation and flight crew procedures will be named as contributors.

Assuming that the IFEN will "figure prominantly", the question is, how much weight will be placed on its contribution to the crash?

What is disturbing is that, if the TSB did discover strong evidence that the IFEN was in fact the source of ignition, it would unfortunately be against their interest to emphasize it, inasmuch as the industry would then be able to assert that the problem was fixed - no further action required. For this reason, we are keenly interested, not just in the TSB's draft and final reports, but in any other information we can extract from the investigative process.

We understand that our interest in finding the truth of what really happened to SR111 stands, unfortunately, to some extent, in opposition to the goals of the TSB. So while we applaud their diligence and effort, we cannot blindly accept the pronouncements of their report as the ultimate authority.

I totally agree with you Mark. If anything the fact that the RCMP had to investigate this (despite the fact that beanspiller NEVER said he saw the draft report)in my mind gives his story more credibility, not less. Not just my opinion.