|
|
 |
|
|
Bubble Trouble?
The Air Force is expected to drop a bombshell this week when it comes to Portland to tell King-56 widows about the likely cause of the November 1996 crash that killed 10 local reservists. According to sources who spoke to Willamette Week on the condition of anonymity, the Air Force has concluded that the crash was probably caused by an air bubble, or vapor lock, in the fuel line or manifold, preventing fuel from reaching the plane's four engines. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
That news is not itself a surprise. The air bubble theory had been gaining momentum for months as the Air Force, under pressure from the crew's widows, politicians and the press, conducted an extensive review of C-130 airplanes in general and King-56 in particular. What is surprising is that the Air Force "goes pretty far in a mea culpa," says one of WW's sources. The Air Force is expected to acknowledge that it should have recognized the fuel line glitch earlier and done more to warn crews flying its fleet of C-130 planes. Neither the Air Force nor Oregon Sens. Ron Wyden and Gordon Smith would comment on the findings of the Air Force investigation, which will be presented to family members of the King-56 crew Thursday in Portland. "I am not going to confirm anything in the report," says Air Force spokeswoman Lt. Col. Linda Leong. "If they have the facts to support those theories, then fine, I'll accept it," says Laura Wellnitz, widow of the King-56 navigator. "If they don't, they better be prepared to engage in a major dialogue. The next question is, why the hell didn't they figure it out sooner? I've waited a year and two months." The Air Force report supposedly ranks 20 possible crash scenarios from "most unlikely" to "most likely." At the top of the list are the two fuel starvation theories. Two electronic devices thought to be the culprits--the synchrophaser and temperature datum amplifier--were found not to have been likely causes, according to a WW source, despite extensive conjecture that they were linked to the crash ("Why did these 10 men die?" WW, June 18, 1997). --BY |
|
|
|
|
Follow-up:
I Won't
Given a recent run of employee complaints against Nike, the Beaverton-based sneaker company might consider expanding its new mantra to "I Can...Complain about Sexual Harassment." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Following a national trend, in the past six weeks, three former Nike employees have filed sexual harassment complaints ("Stop Your Sobbing," WW, Dec. 10, 1997). The complaints--filed in federal court, with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission and at Oregon's labor bureau--run the sexual gamut: a group of men harassing a woman, a man harassing a man and a woman harassing a man. In a Dec. 23 civil-rights case filed
with the state, former Nike worker John "Mac" Clark says he was sexually harassed by a gay male co-worker and was terminated in retaliation for reporting and resisting sexual misconduct. Meanwhile, Chris Funk, 21, says
he was terminated for rejecting his female supervisor's overtures. In documents filed in federal court, Funk claims that his female supervisor asked him to go hot tubbing and told him about her sexual exploits, including how much she liked oral sex. Finally, in a case filed with the EEOC in early December, 29-year-old Maureen Regan, who is white, says she was submitted to an atmosphere of sexual harassment, including taunts about dating black men. Nike wouldn't comment on the recent complaints, but the company says that it has a "zero tolerance" policy on sexual harassment, including same-sex harassment, and that managers are responsible for enforcing the policy. --JF |
|
|
|
|
Follow-up:
Time Served
Nearly four years ago, Portland lawyer David K. Allen gave a junkie named Todd Lewis $40 to buy some heroin. Lewis died of an overdose. A short time later, Allen pleaded guilty to attempted possession of a controlled substance ("The Road to Ruin," WW, March 27, 1996). Serving 18 months probation wasn't exactly a good career move for a criminal defense lawyer, but at the time Allen was more worried about the big picture: what would happen to his license to practice law. In late November, after deliberating for more than a year, the state Supreme Court finally handed down its decision on Allen's fate in the legal community. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
In a long opinion, the six justices agreed that Allen should be suspended from the practice of law for one year. The unusual part of the decision was the court's ruling that the time Allen had already spent voluntarily not practicing law--more than a year--could count toward his punishment. While the concept of "credit for time served" isn't unusual in criminal law, it is a new idea in lawyer discipline. In fact, the Allen opinion essentially creates new law. "We rely particularly on the facts that the accused's misconduct is unlikely to recur, he has a good character and reputation as a lawyer, he has no prior disciplinary record and he has shown genuine remorse," the opinion reads. The Oregon State Bar, however, thinks Allen should not be allowed to seek the credit. It contends that the new law is misguided and has filed legal arguments asking the court to reconsider. --MO |
|
|
