A quiet man in his early forties who had worked in operations and client coordination.
He contacted the airline's independent legal team through an attorney.
The witness said he had retained records concerning requests he believed were improper.
At first, he had assumed the work was standard travel coordination.
Then he noticed unusual patterns.
Requests for itinerary information involving people who were not clients.
Questions about whether certain executives were traveling together.
Interest in last-minute changes to private reservations.
And repeated requests to identify which staff members had accessed confidential passenger profiles.
The witness claimed several such requests came from intermediaries connected to Richard's business network.
He also described payments marked as consulting fees.
The independent investigators reviewed his documents.
Compared them with internal access logs.
And began verifying each claim.
The findings were disturbing.
But they also revealed an important distinction.
Not every person who handled the requests understood their purpose.
Some employees believed they were coordinating legitimate corporate travel.
Others had raised concerns.
A few were told the information requests had already been approved by senior management.
The problem was not confined to a single corrupt employee.
It involved failures of supervision, access control, complaint handling, and commercial oversight.
The chairwoman read the preliminary findings late one evening in her London hotel suite.
The city lights glowed beyond the windows.
Her yellow gown hung carefully inside the wardrobe.
She wore a simple white blouse and dark trousers.
A cup of tea sat untouched beside her laptop.
She studied the documents until nearly midnight.
Then called the general counsel.
"Have we verified the account links?"
"Several."
"All?"
"Not yet."
"Then don't characterize the entire network as proven."
"Understood."
She paused.
"What about the employee who was transferred after refusing the seating override?"
"We found her complaint."
Her expression sharpened.
"Where?"
"In an archived personnel system. It had been reclassified."
"By whom?"
"We're still confirming access attribution."
The chairwoman leaned back.
"Was the complaint investigated?"
"Not adequately."
She closed her eyes.
Then opened them again.
"Contact her through an independent channel. Make sure she knows participation is voluntary and that she may have representation."
"Yes."
She looked toward the window.
"And preserve the original personnel records."
"Already done."
The call ended.
For several minutes, she remained still.
Then she opened an old photograph on her phone.
Her father.
Wearing blue maintenance overalls.