Former Boeing Official Refuses To Comply In MAX Case Citing Self-Incrimination


On the sixth of September, 2019, a former Boeing official refused to provide documents to investigators when compelled by a Department of Justice (DOJ) subpoena. Mr. Mark Forkner, who previously worked at Boeing as Chief Technical Pilot on the MAX project, cited his Fifth-amendment right against self-incrimination, reports the Seattle Times.

737 max 9
Boeing has been the target of various investigations concerning its 737 MAX. Photo: Clemens Vasters / Wikimedia Commons

Who is Mark Forkner?

Mr. Forkner is a life-long aviator. According to his LinkedIn page, he started his career in the United States Air force, later becoming an MD-80 and 737 First Officer with Alaska Airlines.

In 2008, Mr. Forkner returned to the Federal government through the FAA where he worked on Air Traffic Control.


In 2011, he returned to the private sector as Boeing’s 737 Chief Technical Pilot. A little less than seven years later, Mr. Forkner left Boeing for Southwest Airlines where he currently holds the position of First Officer.

Boeing 737 MAX Southwest
Mr. Forkner worked a Boeing from 2011 to 2018, later moving to Southwest Airlines. Photo: John Crowley / Wikimedia Commons

While at Boeing, Mr. Forkner extensively worked on the 737 MAX program. Per his LinkedIn page, he was “responsible for simultaneously leading the international certification of the operational and training programs for the 737MAX”.

According to an investigation by the New York Times, in 2016 Mr. Forkner reportedly asked the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) if it would be okay to remove the MCAS from the pilot’s manual.


The request was eventually approved by the American regulators, under the assumption that the MCAS was a benign and rarely used system. An anonymous source told The Seattle Times that Mr. Forkner was frequently anxious about the deadlines and pressures faced in the MAX program.

Mr. Forkner’s attorney, David Gerger, told the New York Times that his client always “put safety first and was transparent in his work”.

Pleading the Fifth

When compelled to provide documents by a grand jury, Mr. Forkner initiated his Fifth-amendment right against self-incrimination.


Specifically, the Fifth-amendment of the U.S. Constitution protects natural persons from answering any questions, or to make any statements, which could incriminate said person in criminal or civil proceedings.

Traditionally, initiating the Fifth-amendment protects an individual from testifying against themselves. Photo: John Taggart / Wikimedia Commons

Traditionally, initiating the Fifth-amendment protects an individual from testifying against themselves. It does not, however, habitually afford an individual the right to refuse a writ compelling an individual to produce documents as evidence.

University of Washington law professor Jeffrey Feldman told The Seattle Times that while the Fifth-amendment “usually does not apply to being required to produce documents […] the mere act of producing the document” may be considered as an incriminating act.

737 MAX parked
Mr. Forkner is one of many individuals questioned by the 737 MAX inquires. Photo: John Crowley / Wikimedia Commons

In truth, much is unknown about the circumstances which led Mr. Forkner to plead the fifth.

His decision to do so, however, may indicate a desire to obtain immunity from the information contained in the court-requested documents.

It should be noted though, that in U.S. criminal proceedings, juries are not permitted to draw an inference of guilt should an individual fail to testify.

Numerous investigations, lawsuits

In March 2019, the U.S. DOJ started a wide-ranging investigation into the way Boeing was regulated by the FAA following two fatal 737 MAX crashes in 12 months.

As part of the probe, DOJ prosecutors initiated secret grand jury proceedings and issued subpoenas, compelling concerned parties to testify or provide evidence before the investigation.

Grounded 737 MAXs China
The 737 MAX has been grounded across all jurisdictions since March 2019.Photo: Windmemories / Wikimedia Commons

The DOJ investigation into Boeing is only one of many federal inquests following the 737 MAX crashes.  Soon after the DOJ probe commenced, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) embarked on a criminal investigation concerning the 737MAX’s certification process.

In May, the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s embarked on an inquiry of its own.

Since U.S. investigations commenced, numerous parties have filed lawsuits against the American manufacturer, including pilots and leasing companies.

Simple Flying reached out to Boeing and Mr. Forkner’s attorney, David Gerger, for comment but did not receive a reply by the time of publication.


Leave a Reply

newest oldest most voted

Pleading the 5th on documents, huh? What is next – invoking executive privilege?

The more and more this goes on, the dirtier everyone who has anything to do with the decision making process on the Max, looks. So Boeing didn’t submit the requested documents to EASA regarding it’s re-certification and now their chief technical pilot is hiding behind his lawyers.

So much for transparency at Boeing. I am staying far away from the 737 Max, for quite awhile, when they put it back into service.


Well reported. Those documents are Boeing’s not his.

Watch that defense go down in flames.

Its also a pretty odd career path. I don’t see anything that really stands out to be a test pilot and then turn around and go to work for South West. Something fishy.

Samuel Samalin

Whether he has any documents at all, he has chosen to show he’s on the side of the obstruction of justice that Boeing is doing. Mr. Forkner, you and Boeing are no Donald Trumps. The law and justice still applies to you. You will pay for your lack of compassion for the victims of this fraud, 5th Amendment or not.


This is just part of the puzzle. This unfortunate individual doesn’t want to get stuck with the blame for the whole mess. Some people are ready to throw a rope over the nearest tree branch. Let’s see what the investigation turns up.

jack Rainbow

of course, Boeing senior management had no clue that junior leaders like Forkner were asking to remove MCAS from manuals and that the FAA was under the “assumption” that the MCAS was “benign”. Senior officials at the FAA are of course completely innocent of any wrongdoing like taking BACKHANDERS for turning the proverbial blind eye. Nor are they guilty of GROTESQUE INCOMPETENCE in not understanding that the MCAS is a dangerous, pilot hostile and failure-prone system born in overriding commercial exigency. If the 737 max IS re-certified, DON’T take your family on the 737 max. IT WILL CRASH.