Here´s something for the benefit of the press:
If an aircraft has had a previous incident, this is by no means an indication of a possible cause for a crash many years later. Most aircraft have one or another system failure or whatever in their service life and nearly none of them are newsworthy in any way. After an engine has flamed out and was found to have compressor damage, it will be replaced (look up modular construction if You like - a significant feature of aircraft) and, seeing that that incident was already in 2014, almost certainly was no longer on the wing on this flight. So this is a red herring.
Also there apparently was a runway excursion in 2009 in Lahore. This is already 6 to 7 years ago, and the aircraft has obviously been repaired and flown several times afterwards, as the residual value of the aircraft was such that a repair was worth the while as opposed to disassembling it and selling the parts as spare (both normal procedures). Also this is likely a red herring.
And: Also an ATR belongs to the aircraft category that is required to be flyable with only one engine running. Losing an engine on a turboprop airliner should by no means be a problem if procedures are followed.
There is a reason why aircraft accidents are formally investigated: They are extremely complex and have multiple layers of direct and indirect reasons, contribuents and other issues that might have played a role in them. Quick answers, finger pointing and dishing out blame are all most likely to lead up completely wrong alleys at this stage.