to name him on air yet because he wants to talk to other family members before he does talk on screen to cnn. he s actually the husband of one of the crew members on board mh370 and says as long as the debris isn t found, there will be no closure. this is hopeless. we cannot rely on this data because data isn t always a hundred percent correct. there is an heir of skepticism here, there is an heir of doubt similarly reflected again in another family member. why aren t they exploring the other places where there are theories and reports? and really, rosemarie, just to explain the backgrounds, they ve been waiting two months for this data to be released. some say she s going to share it with experts. others want something more concrete and tangible to do it
backtracked it using three different sets of models, bra l brazilian models, french models, u.s. coast guard models, they all placed the impact point at a different location, and guess what it, it wasn t where we found the wreckage. what i m trying to say if you don t have very good current models, that debris isn t really going to help you find where you should be looking. so right now i think we should be focusing on the pingers and we should be localizing while we still can hear them then we should just go down right there and start looking with our submersibles. colleen keller, eric, we ll check in with both of you tomorrow. thanks very much. still ahead, more breaking news coverage of flight 370. the smallest search area yet. our richard quest is here. he s standing by with the latest. plus, new details of the stabbing rampage in a pennsylvania high school. we re learning more about the teenager accused of the bloody attack. why did you do it?
which is giving us a new output. you don t have a lot of faith in this? well, it turns out that this search area that the prime minister of australia said before parliament, this is our best credible lead, that turned out not to be a very useful lead at all. it turned out to be incorrect. we established the debris isn t there. that s useful to an extent, but we don t really know on what basis they decided to choose this. so, okay, let s go with the idea that the search area here is obviously where they re still focusing. right. in fact, we know that the new zee land air force spotted something from a plane. they re going to analyze the imagery taken from there. sure. by tomorrow we should get the results from that, what was netted. okay. your thought is don t discount this or are you saying don t discount everything? i m saying we can pretty well discount this. we searched this very well. on the contrary, i would say the reverse. we ve learned that if you see a whol
every co-pilot in the air by suggesting that the first officer didn t have what it could take to make those maneuvers. get out of here. he was perfectly qualified to fly that airplane. it sounds like what miles o brian said earlier today. it s understandable, because you re at the top in control of the plane. when something goes wrong, they don t blame the producers, they blame us. so geoff, 122 pieces of debris, is this the break we ve been waiting for? they spent the whole previous search day looking for this very specific debris, and have been unable to find it. we just don t know. hopefully it will turn out to be what we re looking for. but like i said before, every time we search for something and don t find it, that s information, too. it tells us where the debris isn t.
that be the cause, jeff wise? sure. theoretically, that could be the cause. there could be an unknown cause of fire. fires can rise from a number of causes. there haven t been any indications, there s no evidence for a fire. there weren t any acars transmissions that indicated fire. there were no transmissions by the pilots saying we re on fire. to it s something we can t rule out. there s no evidence for it either. it s one of these many potential things that could have happened 679 let s talk about pilot error. jim tillman, this is for you. everyone is focusing on mechanical error. why isn t anyone focusing on human error on the parts of the pilots. decompression or no, i m sorry, could it be pilot error? jim tillman? yes, you can always say that pilot error could contribute to a crash.