I am concerned that Lufthansa, with the assistance of the aviation industry, may seek to force the world to accept that the tragedy of this flight was a criminal act or that it was an act that it, as an organization, could not have prevented. The reason for finding as such, could come down to the amount in dollars that the airline may have to pay in compensation to the victims families and the damage done to the airline industries credibility in the eyes of the consumer. Proposition: If the co-pilot was found to have (1) deliberately ( culpably ) locked the pilot out and destroyed the plane and (2) could be claimed to have been "legally sane" at the time, then a criminal act has been carried out. The compensation paid out would then possibly be subject to "victims of crime" type provisions and not negligence to a duty of care by the airline. I would imagine that "Victims of Crime" compensation would be considerably less than the compensation that would be granted if the airline was found to be negligent. Or that the aircraft design had an inherent flaw that revealed itself in extraordinary circumstances. One of the factors that makes me suspicious is that I feel that a testimony of a stewardess that apparently had been dating the co-pilot has emerged indicating that the co-pilot may have planned in some way what was to eventually occur. Reasons for doubt: I have doubts about the veracity of this rather convenient stewardess revelation and wait for evidence that may support that the co-pilot has indeed actually had a relationship with this stewardess. That the airlines investigation team has refused to release details of the medical reports supposedly in it's possession. Citing privacy regulations. That this young pilot has by all accounts been given a vote of confidence by all those who he has had contact with. ( family, friends and associates) except a stewardess who, by her own admission was or may have been negligent in not informing her employer of a potential threat therefore admitting to pseudo complicity in the actions he took. Eye witness testimony indicated strong and severe strange sounds emitted from the plane as it flew towards it's ultimate destruction The wreckage of the plane appears to be extraordinary. (Entirely with few exceptions, shredded/disintegrated.) That the crucial voice recorder back box was "reportedly" seriously damaged and its recordings are critical in forming an opinion. I would assume that these boxes are typically designed to be virtually destruction proof. Suffice to say that I am not at all convinced at this stage that the co-pilot was culpable. That normal practice may have been to keep the cabin door locked at all times. (possibly an individual agreement between the pilot and co-pilot and not formally industry policy) That the co-pilot may have suffered an incapacitation due to the hidden medical condition that rendered him unable to open the door, That the co-pilot may have reacted badly to surreptitiously taking medication for his hidden condition at high altitude, immediately after the Pilot left the cabin That the co-pilot either accidentally or because of his deterioration towards incapacitation may have over reacted and started an emergency decent process whilst forgetting that the pilot could not get back in to the cabin, due to the policy of locking the door, to take control and render assistance to the co-pilot. (The ultimate nightmare if the co-pilot was actually incapacitated but conscious.) Suicide in otherwise "normal" individuals is usually a "lonely act" and does not involve others directly. The C0-pilot MUST be presumed innocent until proven other wise and if relying only on circumstantial evidence, the benefit of the doubt needs to be considered. Care to discuss?