The documents below provide significant evidence that FA Blockhus took extraordinary steps to verify the truth regarding the allegations made against him and to establish whether any factual connection existed between his personal phone activity and the alleged threatening text messages submitted by FA Lense. Most importantly, the records demonstrate that a formal digital forensic examination was commissioned specifically for the purpose of analyzing FA Blockhus’s mobile device data, including the SIM card associated with the phone number at issue. Despite this extensive effort, no evidence was ever produced linking FA. Blockhus to the alleged text messages relied upon by United Airlines to justify his termination.

The documents establish that on or about February 7–9, 2022, FA Blockhus, retained Complete Discovery Source, Inc. (“CDS”), a professional digital forensic and e-discovery company, to perform forensic services relating to the matter identified as “Blockhus/United Airlines.” The executed Statement of Work specifically states that CDS was to image and analyze a SIM card used across several Android devices associated with FA Blockhus. This was not a casual review or self-generated analysis; it was a professional forensic examination conducted through a recognized third-party forensic services provider under formal agreement with legal counsel.

The agreement itself confirms the seriousness and legitimacy of the forensic process. The Statement of Work outlines professional forensic collection, examination, and reporting procedures, including secure chain-of-custody protocols, forensic imaging procedures, data retention safeguards, and attorney work-product protections. The forensic review was commissioned specifically to determine whether evidence existed connecting FA Blockhus to the alleged text messages that United repeatedly claimed he had sent to FA Lense.

Significantly, despite United Airlines repeatedly asserting that FA Blockhus sent threatening and harassing text messages, no verified forensic evidence was ever produced establishing that the messages originated from his device, his SIM card, his accounts, or any phone number associated with him. The forensic imaging and analysis of FA Blockhus’s SIM card and related mobile data failed to establish any connection between his devices and the alleged messages submitted by FA Lense.

This point is critically important because United repeatedly portrayed the allegations as though they had been conclusively verified, while simultaneously failing to establish the most basic evidentiary foundations. Even more troubling, there was no visible phone number or year displayed on the screenshots of the alleged text messages. Yet despite this discrepancy, United management and Corporate Security continued treating the allegations as established fact without ever demonstrating a verified origin for the messages.

The forensic examination further supports FA Blockhus’s long-standing position that the allegations against him were never properly authenticated or objectively investigated. Rather than conducting a thorough forensic inquiry before terminating a twenty-four-year employee, United appears to have accepted FA Lense’s allegations at face value while disregarding evidence that contradicted those claims. Had the company conducted the same level of forensic review prior to termination that FA Blockhus later undertook independently through legal counsel and forensic specialists, the deficiencies in the accusations would have become immediately apparent.

Additionally, the fact that FA Blockhus voluntarily submitted his own SIM card and mobile device information for professional forensic analysis strongly undermines any suggestion of consciousness of guilt. Individuals who knowingly sent threatening communications would not ordinarily subject their devices and communications history to independent forensic examination through professional discovery experts. FA Blockhus’s willingness to undergo such scrutiny demonstrates his confidence that the evidence would not support United’s allegations against him.

The absence of forensic evidence connecting FA Blockhus to the alleged text messages is particularly significant when viewed together with the broader factual record, including:

• the lack of authentication of the text messages,
• the absence of a verified originating phone number linked to Mr. Blockhus,
• the absence of an actual date
• the absence of a single witness to support Lense's claims
• the absence of any circumstantial evidence
• the failure to interview Mr. Blockhus prior to termination,
• the documented ongoing contact initiated by Ms. Lense, between Oct 2020-Dec 2020
• and United’s decision to proceed with termination while Mr. Blockhus was on approved FMLA leave.

Taken together, these facts raise substantial concerns regarding the integrity and reliability of the investigation conducted by United Airlines. The forensic evidence—or more accurately, the absence of any forensic evidence linking FA Blockhus to the alleged messages—directly undermines the foundation upon which United based its termination decision.