mastro e s q

<div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">rudy pal</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style=""><a href="https://kpfa.org/episode/a-rude-awakening-june-4-2021/">https://kpfa.org/episode/a-rude-awakening-june-4-2021/</a></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small;"><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div style=""><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: medium;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: medium;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: medium;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">amazonwatch</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: medium;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: medium;"><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>on the run from a landmark $9.5 billion judgment in Ecuador, fighting enforcement actions in three countries that threaten strategic company assets, and gearing up for make-or-break appellate hearings does not bode well for the prospects of Chevron CEO John Watson and his management team</b>.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">No worries. Chevron got a little help from its friends in the corporate media last week. The resulting echo chamber is a startling reminder that, like the big banks, Chevron is considered by many to be too big to fail. It is clear that business journalists will come out of the woodwork to defend the company from attacks on their own kind, even if the truth about Chevron’s human rights violations is sacrificed in the process.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The lawsuit brought by Ecuadorian rainforest communities against the oil giant is seen not only as a singular threat to Chevron’s bottom line, but a historic symbol for corporate accountability. This is an unwelcome message to the oil-industrial complex which assumes that environmental damage and human rights abuses can be externalized and that justice can be so delayed that affected communities will never receive the redress or remediation they deserve. After all, Chevron has vowed to fight the Ecuadorians “until hell freezes over, and then we’ll fight it out on the ice.”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>In a case like this with global implications for the environment, human rights, and corporate accountability, it’s telling to see who Chevron’s bedfellows are.</b></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Over the 21 years of the&nbsp;<b><span style="box-sizing: inherit;">Aguinda v. Chevron</span>&nbsp;</b>litigation, the list runs long. It includes people and institutions that have run to the company’s defense, or outright done its dirty work – Ecuadorian government officials, military, judges, junk scientists, convicted felons, the&nbsp;<b>U.S. Chamber of Commerce,&nbsp;</b>and the&nbsp;<a href="http://chevrontoxico.com/news-and-multimedia/2011/0921-wikileaks-cables-expose-chevron-lobbying-of-ecuador-government-to-kill-environmental-case" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; border-top-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-right-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-left-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8);">U.S. Embassy in Ecuador</a>, among others.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">We can now add a trifecta of reporters to that list – two of whom have just published new books. These reporters have swallowed Chevron’s narrative raw and whole. Sadly, this is not so surprising, coming as they do from<b>&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit;">Fortune Magazine</span>,&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit;">Businessweek</span>, and&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit;">American Lawyer</span></b>&nbsp;(the latter considered the right wing litigation bible of corporate America) Roger Parloff, Paul Barrett, and Michael Goldhaber respectively, have been tripping over themselves to promote their books and articles, referencing, cross-referencing, citing, quoting, and linking to each other, to dizzying, albeit deceitful effect.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Let’s focus on Paul Barrett of&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">Businessweek</em>, whose book “Law of the Jungle”</span>&nbsp;(get it, there’s no law in the jungle. Ha!), is a pro-Chevron&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">tour de farce</em>&nbsp;of the&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">Aguinda v. Chevron</em>&nbsp;litigation, as well as Chevron’s countersuit using the RICO statute in New York Federal Court. He plays lip service to one of the indigenous leaders who lost two children due to oil contamination and builds up U.S. lawyer Steven Donziger, only to then take him and his clients down using Chevron’s deceitful narrative. The majority of Barrett’s book is written as if he spent extensive time on the ground in Ecuador, and was at many of the events described. However, he wasn’t.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Barrett watched the documentary film,&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">Crude</em>, by Joe Berlinger. He then wrote as if he was standing right there in front of toxic waste pits, or in the judge’s office, or at the hotel preparing Emergildo Criollo for the shareholders meeting. It’s a deceitful tactic that purports to lend “jungle cred” to Barrett, as if his book is some kind of in-depth investigation from the sweaty Amazon court room or next to rusting Chevron pipelines that siphon off overflowing oil sludge into streams below, to be drunk later by unsuspecting villagers downriver.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Watching another journalist’s film is no substitute for actual reporting. The reality is that Barrett spent precious little time in the Ecuadorian rainforest – two weeks at most. He did not speak to the lawyers for the communities, let alone Donziger, for the book. He never attended even a day of the trial. Barrett speaks no Spanish, so a thorough review of the 200,000 plus Ecuadorian trial record was out of the question. Ultimately, the book is mostly taken from Chevron’s legal briefs.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>A revealing example of Barrett’s pro-Chevron bias occurs in chapter two.</b>&nbsp;He begins by describing an entire scene from the film&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">Crude</em>&nbsp;as if he were there. As evidence of his simple acquiescence to Chevron’s arguments, Barrett uses Chevron’s deceptively edited outtakes from the film to paint a sinister scene of Donziger bullying and pressuring a judge. Barrett’s citation is as follows:</font></p><blockquote class="wp-block-quote" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 24px; line-height: 1.8; position: relative; padding-left: 50px; border-width: 2px 0px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-right-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-bottom-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-left-color: initial; text-align: center; overflow-wrap: break-word; margin-top: 2.5rem !important; margin-right: 0px !important; margin-left: 0px !important; padding-top: 3rem !important; padding-right: 0px !important; padding-bottom: 0.5rem !important;"><p style="text-align: left; box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">We’re going down to have a little chat with the judge. This is something that you would never do in the United States. But in Ecuador this is how the game is played, it’s dirty. We have to – occasionally – use pressure tactics to neutralize their corruption. And today is one of those examples.</font></p></blockquote><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Except the actual transcription is as follows:</font></p><blockquote class="wp-block-quote" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 24px; line-height: 1.8; position: relative; padding-left: 50px; border-width: 2px 0px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-right-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-bottom-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-left-color: initial; text-align: center; overflow-wrap: break-word; margin-top: 2.5rem !important; margin-right: 0px !important; margin-left: 0px !important; padding-top: 3rem !important; padding-right: 0px !important; padding-bottom: 0.5rem !important;"><p style="text-align: left; box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">We’re going to confront the judge&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit;"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit;">who we believe is paid by Texaco. We believe he is corrupt, and we’re gonna confront him, ah, with – with our suspicions about his corruption</strong></span>&nbsp;and let him know what time it is. And, ah, you know, this is something that you would never do in the United States. I mean, this is something you would, I mean, this is just out of bounds, both in terms of judicial behavior, and what – what lawyers would do. But Ecuador, you know, there’s almost no rules here. And this is how the game is played, it’s dirty.&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit;"><strong style="box-sizing: inherit;">And, you know, they’re playing dirty, we’re honest, they’re dirty. They play dirty,</strong></span>&nbsp;we have to occasionally use, um, pressure tactics to neutralize their corruption. And today is one of those examples.</font></p></blockquote><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Barrett left out the bolded text above, changing the context and intent of what was said into its opposite. That’s not reporting; that’s hit job journalism.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">That is not the only instance where Barrett obfuscates the facts, turning what are decidedly black and white issues into murky grey – another Chevron tactic.&nbsp;<a href="http://www.huffingtonpost.com/karen-hinton/how-chevrons-scientists-m_b_5799434.html" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; border-top-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-right-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-left-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8);">One of the company’s trademark products, beside crude, is doubt</a>. Doubt has long been the go-to tool of big business litigators to turn the tables on their adversaries by flipping logic and reason of disciplines like epidemiology on its head. The intentional manipulation of facts creates just enough second guessing of the dangers of chemicals and toxins to allow said guilty company off the hook.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This tactic was used by Chevron in the Ecuador case. What about the causation between sick communities and the waste pits they live on top of? Well, hydrocarbons aren’t necessarily toxic, claims Chevron. According to Chevron’s Manager of Global Issues and Policy, Silvia Garrigo in&nbsp;<a href="http://thechevronpit.blogspot.com/2009/10/chevron-sullying-reputation-of-american.html" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; border-top-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-right-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-left-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8);">an interview with</a>&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;"><a href="http://thechevronpit.blogspot.mx/2009/10/chevron-sullying-reputation-of-american.html" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; border-top-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-right-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-left-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8);">60 Minutes</a></em>:</font></p><blockquote class="wp-block-quote" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 24px; line-height: 1.8; position: relative; padding-left: 50px; border-width: 2px 0px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-right-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-bottom-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-left-color: initial; text-align: center; overflow-wrap: break-word; margin-top: 2.5rem !important; margin-right: 0px !important; margin-left: 0px !important; padding-top: 3rem !important; padding-right: 0px !important; padding-bottom: 0.5rem !important;"><p style="text-align: left; box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“I have makeup on, and there’s naturally occurring oil on my face. Doesn’t mean that I’m going to get sick from it.”</font></p></blockquote><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Interesting though, that when you enter a gasoline station in California there’s a sign disclosing that your mere presence at the pump could expose you to carcinogens. But in Ecuador’s Amazon, you can live on top of a Chevron waste pit and any causality link to carcinogens is questioned.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Barrett avoids the truly scandalous and criminal examples of Chevron’s&nbsp;<a href="http://chevrontoxico.com/news-and-multimedia/2011/1220-chevron-used-secret-lab-to-hide-dirty-soil-samples-from-ecuador-court" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; border-top-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-right-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-left-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8);">tactics to hide contamination</a>&nbsp;during the Ecuador trial, like swapping toxic soil samples with clean ones, and avoiding sampling at depths at which Chevron knew contamination existed, at locations Chevron knew were still contaminated, and were downgradient from known contamination. You’d think that a book purportedly covering the largest environmental litigation in history would merit a real review of the evidence, much of which was provided by even the skewed soil and water samples taken by the company.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Other corrupt and illegal acts that were Chevron’s standard practice during the Ecuador trial are glanced over or omitted by Barrett. This includes the company’s successful cancellation of a judicial inspection of a major toxic site through collaboration with the Ecuadorian military to produce a phony security threat. Perhaps most audaciously, Barrett fails to adequately mention&nbsp;<a href="https://amazonwatch.org/news/2011/0817-chevrons-pr-ploy-backfires-details-dirty-dealings-in-ecuador" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; border-top-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-right-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-left-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8);">a sting operation</a>&nbsp;where Chevron employees posed as remediation contractors in an attempt to entrap the presiding judge.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Barrett also overlooks all the&nbsp;<a href="http://chevrontoxico.com/assets/docs/2014-07-02-donziger-brief.pdf" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; border-top-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-right-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-left-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8);">arguments</a>&nbsp;that render Chevron’s fraud claims ridiculous. If the trial was marred by fraud, why hasn’t Chevron filed an action to nullify the judgment under the fraud protection statute in Ecuadorian courts? Three layers of Ecuadorian courts – eight appellate judges – reviewed and upheld the $9 billion verdict, and&nbsp;<a href="http://stevendonziger.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/2014-07-01-Ecuadorians-brief.pdf" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; background-color: transparent; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; border-top-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-right-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-left-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8);">threw out Chevron’s claims of fraud</a>. But for Barrett, apparently U.S. courts are the only legitimate court system in the world. Barrett lets Judge Kaplan off the hook for his colonial overreach in judging a country’s legal system that he knows nothing about. Kaplan can’t read the native language, nor did he read the trial record. On top of that, Barrett seems unconcerned that Chevron’s star witness received some $300,000 in payments for his testimony, plus a new life for him and his family in the United States, thanks to a Chevron financed and supported asylum bid. Even Kaplan called it a corporate witness protection plan.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Not only does Barrett’s bias show throughout the book, his extracurricular activities lay bare his leanings. On July 20, 2014, Barrett joined Chevron and its legal team from Gibson, Dunn, and Crutcher for a Congressional subcommittee hearing organized by Chevron lobbyists on Latin American democracy. Alongside a Chevron lawyer, and a representative from the American Enterprise Institute, Barrett played the role of expert on Latin America, lamenting Chevron’s legal plight in the country jurisdiction of its choosing, without irony.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">So what we’re left with is a book that’s a copy-paste job from Chevron’s legal briefs and reads as if the case, and the plight of the affected communities, is over. Peter Maass, author of the book “Crude World: The Violent Twilight of Oil,”&nbsp;<a href="http://www.petermaass.com/articles/a_jungle_eco-battle/" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; border-top-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-right-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-left-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8);">reviewed</a>&nbsp;Barrett’s book for&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">Outside Magazine</em>, and concluded: “There are two sides to the story of the biggest environmental lawsuit ever, but a new book tells only one of them.”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Parloff, Barrett, and Goldhaber are quick to claim that from the outset they had high hopes for the Ecuadorian villagers. They had hope that U.S. courts could be used to hold corporations accountable for human rights violations abroad. But given the overwhelming evidence against Chevron, we have to seriously question these claims. Two of the pillars of American business reporting, and a conservative legal magazine hoped that the Ecuadorian rainforest communities who procured the largest environmental judgment in history from the second largest U.S. oil company would prevail? That’s doubtful. The reporters have held on to that story merely to give the appearance of objectivity and to reinforce their framework claiming Chevron as the true victim. Immediately after publishing a number of articles, their “journalist” buddies began chiming in. Thus, the pro-Chevron feedback loop was set in motion.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For example, after Barrett’s book launched on Sept. 23, Joe Nocera, a columnist for&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">The New York Times</em>, wrote a piece about Barrett’s account. Nocera unquestioningly sides with Barrett and Chevron, while failing to mention that his wife’s law firm represented Chevron in a discovery matter directly related to the Ecuador litigation. Shouldn’t a journalist cite such an obvious conflict of interest?</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Then cue Debra Saunders, the “token conservative” columnist for the&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">San Francisco Chronicle</em>.</b>&nbsp;Saunders writes an article the next day about Nocera’s article about Barrett’s book. Feeling dizzy?</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Saunders ends her piece quoting Nocera, with an alleged quote from Donziger, excerpted from the movie&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">Crude</em>, and edited and used by Chevron during the RICO trial. The quote is this: “Facts do not exist. Facts are created.” Sounds incriminating, right? Except Donziger goes on to say, “…and you talk to Texaco, because they create facts. Texaco creates facts. They create standards. … That’s what I am saying. They create fiction.”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This is how the Chevron media echo chamber continues to feed itself. A book repeats Chevron’s flawed arguments during the RICO trial almost verbatim, which produces articles and reviews of the book, which then produces yet more articles about articles about the book – all recycling and reinforcing Chevron’s false and misleading narrative. The great irony is that Nocera, Saunders, and Barrett and the others accuse Donziger of trying the case in the media, when in fact it’s Chevron and its minions who continue to prop up the company’s crumbling house of cards in the court of public opinion, because its legal case is meritless.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">We all know that a good “David vs. Goliath” story sells. But what sells better is the ‘Hero’s fall from grace’ frame that Chevron’s defenders are pushing about Donziger. Except, the demonize Donziger narrative is not new. In fact, it’s been part of Chevron’s playbook long before the New York RICO trial began</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Enter Sam Singer, from Chevron’s PR firm Singer and Associates. Singer is not merely Chevron Apologist-in-Chief; he’s a long time Bay Area PR hit man who prides himself on cleaning up the image of his corporate clients. He’s like&nbsp;<a href="http://www.thepulpfiction.com/tag/the-wolf/" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; border-top-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-right-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-left-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8);">the “Wolf” in&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">Pulp Fiction</em></a>&nbsp;– the guy you call to clean up your mess, hide the bodies, or whatever other unmentionables are needed. A recent piece in&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sfweekly.com/sanfrancisco/sam-singer-chevron-tatiana-the-tiger-public-relations/Content?oid=3115485&showFullText=true" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; border-top-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-right-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-left-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8);"><em style="box-sizing: inherit;">SF Weekly</em></a>, “Trust Me: Who Are you Gonna Believe, San Singer or Your Own Eyes?” exposes Singer and his tactics:</font></p><blockquote class="wp-block-quote" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 24px; line-height: 1.8; position: relative; padding-left: 50px; border-width: 2px 0px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-right-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-bottom-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-left-color: initial; text-align: center; overflow-wrap: break-word; margin-top: 2.5rem !important; margin-right: 0px !important; margin-left: 0px !important; padding-top: 3rem !important; padding-right: 0px !important; padding-bottom: 0.5rem !important;"><p style="text-align: left; box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>When your workspace is engulfed in flames; when your mistress threatens to reveal your illegitimate family; when your restaurant serves up E. coli burgers; when your employees inadvertently kill a young child; when a wild beast rampages through your place of business – you better call Sam Singer. “When things go bump in the night,” assures Singer, “we are there.”</b></font></p></blockquote><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“The truth, after all, isn’t exactly Singer’s milieu. His mission is to push ‘the facts as our clients see them,'” writes Joe Eskenazi for the&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">Weekly</em>. That’s what Singer does for Chevron.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);"><b>According to internal Chevron emails with Singer, the plan was to target Donziger from the get go.&nbsp;Singer’s strategy was to paint Ecuador “as the next major threat to America” like Iran or a “Cuban missile crisis in the making” and Donziger as “the most powerful man in Ecuador, pulling the strings of an emerging banana republic.”&nbsp;</b>Indeed, another Chevron strategist in an internal memo to colleagues was more blunt, noting that the company’s [long-term] strategy is to demonize Donziger.”</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">But even Singer and Chevron’s strategy was wearing thin after Donziger and the Ecuadorians proved more resilient that Chevron thought possible.&nbsp;<a href="http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/sludge-match-chevron-legal-battle-ecuador-steven-donziger-20140828" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; border-top-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-right-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-left-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8);">A recent article</a>&nbsp;in&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">Rolling Stone</em>&nbsp;was a turning point, finally putting the spotlight on Chevron’s phony narrative and the vacuousness of its arguments for anyone willing to look past Chevron’s talking points. Despite this, Parloff, Barrett, and Goldhaber have been quick to take up the slack.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>In the meantime, Chevron was unhappy with the unfavorable coverage it continued to receive in Richmond, California, home to the company’s largest and oft exploding refinery.&nbsp;</b>Richmond’s mayor traveled to Ecuador to tour Chevron’s toxic legacy and saw firsthand the company’s impact on the rainforest and human health. Since then, she has been a vocal critic of Chevron’s disaster in Ecuador. Combined with coverage of a controversial $1 billion refinery expansion plan and&nbsp;<a href="http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Chevron-pouring-money-into-Richmond-election-5704673.php?cmpid=hp-hc-bustech" target="blank" rel="noopener" style="box-sizing: inherit; touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; border-bottom: 1px solid rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; border-top-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-right-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8); border-left-color: rgba(0, 71, 18, 0.8);">Chevron dumping $1.6m into local elections</a>, there was little positive traction for the company in the local press. What was Chevron to do? If you can’t influence the media, become the media!</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Thus, the&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">Richmond Standard</em>&nbsp;was born. A Chevron-funded daily, the&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">Richmond Standard</em>&nbsp;is an Orwellian extension of the corporate media. An&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">LA Times</em>&nbsp;piece by Michael Hiltzik titled, “A Chevron PR website pretends to be an objective news source,” explains</span>:</font></p><blockquote class="wp-block-quote" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 24px; line-height: 1.8; position: relative; padding-left: 50px; border-width: 2px 0px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-right-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-bottom-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-left-color: initial; text-align: center; overflow-wrap: break-word; margin-top: 2.5rem !important; margin-right: 0px !important; margin-left: 0px !important; padding-top: 3rem !important; padding-right: 0px !important; padding-bottom: 0.5rem !important;"><p style="text-align: left; box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">This is what the news business has come to in communities where economics have wiped out traditional local newspapers. Self-interested corporations have stepped into the vacuum. You’d be hard-pressed to find a case as flagrant as Richmond’s.</font></p></blockquote><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">As the&nbsp;<b><span style="box-sizing: inherit;">Financial Times</span>&nbsp;</b>describes it:</font></p><blockquote class="wp-block-quote" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 24px; line-height: 1.8; position: relative; padding-left: 50px; border-width: 2px 0px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-right-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-bottom-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-left-color: initial; text-align: center; overflow-wrap: break-word; margin-top: 2.5rem !important; margin-right: 0px !important; margin-left: 0px !important; padding-top: 3rem !important; padding-right: 0px !important; padding-bottom: 0.5rem !important;"><p style="text-align: left; box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The&nbsp;<em style="box-sizing: inherit;">Richmond Standard</em>&nbsp;is one of the more polished sites to emerge in the age of hyper-local digital news brands such as Patch and DNAinfo.com. That may be because it is run and funded by Chevron, the $240bn oil group which owns the Richmond refinery that in August 2012 caught fire, spewing plumes of black smoke over the city and sending more than 15,000 residents to hospital for medical help.</font></p></blockquote><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The only writer for the “paper” is an account executive for Singer and Associates, Mike Aldax.&nbsp;</b>According to Aldax, “my function is to report the news you’re not seeing in Richmond.” Translation: pro-Chevron stories. Hiltzik reports:</font></p><blockquote class="wp-block-quote" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: border-box; margin-bottom: 24px; line-height: 1.8; position: relative; padding-left: 50px; border-width: 2px 0px; border-top-style: solid; border-right-style: solid; border-bottom-style: solid; border-left-style: initial; border-top-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-right-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-bottom-color: rgb(238, 238, 238); border-left-color: initial; text-align: center; overflow-wrap: break-word; margin-top: 2.5rem !important; margin-right: 0px !important; margin-left: 0px !important; padding-top: 3rem !important; padding-right: 0px !important; padding-bottom: 0.5rem !important;"><p style="text-align: left; box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Aldax says Chevron doesn’t review or edit his stories, but it doesn’t have to. It provides his paycheck, and even subconscious self-censorship can undermine news gathering – especially if one defines news as information its subject doesn’t want the public to know.</font></p></blockquote><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to Singer, the&nbsp;<b><em style="box-sizing: inherit;">Standard</em>&nbsp;has at least found some support. “The rappers…They love us!”[huh?]</b></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>For Chevron and the Ecuador case, there’s no need to bypass corporate media when you have Parloff, Goldhaber, and Barrett. As the company’s prime cheerleaders, they give voice and credibility to Chevron’s recycled claims that were rejected by Ecuadorian courts.&nbsp;</b>Meanwhile, the voices of indigenous and farming communities, who continue to suffer on the ground in Ecuador, are largely drowned out in the U.S.. These three pro-business American reporters give cover to Chevron’s board of directors whose oversight of the liability has been called out by its own shareholders. Parloff, Goldhaber, and Barrett help immunize CEO John Watson who, as Chief Architect for the Texaco acquisition, has let the Ecuador issue come to define the company, while the liability has ballooned into the billions. And they’ve wrongly lifted the spirits of Chevron’s stockholders who are led to believe that the issue is over.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>But here’s the rub. Chevron never intended to file a RICO suit, nor did Watson ever think it would get this far.&nbsp;</b>The company’s strategy has always been to outlast and out-resource the Ecuadorian communities and their legal team. It was Judge Kaplan who, presented with edited outtakes from the movie Crude that Chevron now admits were not properly translated or did not include the full transcript, asked, “does RICO play here at all?” <b>A<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;U.S. federal judge suggested that Chevron ought to file RICO charges, and the company quickly obliged. Kaplan navigated Chevron and its legal team through the trial, and issued a ridiculous verdict ripe to be overruled.</span></b></font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Which is why, during the four years in the run up to and during the trial, Chevron has sought to eviscerate the plaintiffs, their legal counsel, their funders, NGOs, or anyone who has ever dared to support the communities.</span>&nbsp;The company hoped to outlast Donziger and the plaintiffs in a resource and PR battle, because they know exactly how hard it is to win the case on the merits. Ironically, given the tremendous amount of resources and time Chevron has invested in its scorched earth strategy, the communities and their counsel are not only still alive, they are in a remarkably good position.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The seven-week bench trial that Kaplan presided over – and that Parloff, Goldhaber, and Barrett sat through – may have generated back slaps and high-fives from San Ramon to Midland, Texas. But it was never built to last. Which is why, at least according to the rumor mill, Chevron is looking for an exit strategy. The company likely hopes the Ecuadorian government will play a role in its hoped-for rescue.</b></font></p><p style="box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">With a panel from the Second Circuit Court of Appeals looming over the company, Watson has reason to be worried. The last time the Second Circuit had a crack at Judge Kaplan, it vacated his preliminary injunction in the case almost immediately.&nbsp;<b style="">It was also an embarrassing public depantsing of Gibson Dunn lawyer Randy Mastro, who was literally laughed out of court</b>. Don’t expect to see Randy making the oral arguments this time.</font></p><p style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 0px 0px 24px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">But before the Second Circuit hearing, another critical hearing is slated for December. In Canada, the country’s Supreme Court will hear arguments on whether the Ecuadorian communities can indeed go after Chevron’s massive assets as a way of enforcing their judgment. These are major, make-or-break hearings for Chevron. But you wouldn’t know that by reading the work of Parloff, Barrett, or Goldhaber. These three&nbsp;<span style="box-sizing: inherit;">gringos</span>&nbsp;who have been guzzling Chevron’s Kool-Aid for the last four years may very soon wake with a hangover of a lifetime.</font></p><div class="entry-tags" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); box-sizing: inherit; margin: 2.2rem 0px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><a href="https://amazonwatch.org/topic/chevron" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; background: rgba(20, 27, 24, 0.1); touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; display: inline-block; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; text-align: center; line-height: 25px; vertical-align: top; padding: 0px 10px; margin-bottom: 4px; height: 25px; border-radius: 0px !important;">Chevron</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://amazonwatch.org/topic/cofan" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; background: rgba(20, 27, 24, 0.1); touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; display: inline-block; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; text-align: center; line-height: 25px; vertical-align: top; padding: 0px 10px; margin-bottom: 4px; height: 25px; border-radius: 0px !important;">Cofan</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://amazonwatch.org/topic/corporate-accountability" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; background: rgba(20, 27, 24, 0.1); touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; display: inline-block; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; text-align: center; line-height: 25px; vertical-align: top; padding: 0px 10px; margin-bottom: 4px; height: 25px; border-radius: 0px !important;">Corporate Accountability</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://amazonwatch.org/topic/dirty-energy" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; background: rgba(20, 27, 24, 0.1); touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; display: inline-block; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; text-align: center; line-height: 25px; vertical-align: top; padding: 0px 10px; margin-bottom: 4px; height: 25px; border-radius: 0px !important;">Dirty Energy</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://amazonwatch.org/topic/ecuador" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; background: rgba(20, 27, 24, 0.1); touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; display: inline-block; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; text-align: center; line-height: 25px; vertical-align: top; padding: 0px 10px; margin-bottom: 4px; height: 25px; border-radius: 0px !important;">Ecuador</a>&nbsp;<a href="https://amazonwatch.org/topic/oil-and-gas" rel="tag" style="box-sizing: inherit; background: rgba(20, 27, 24, 0.1); touch-action: manipulation; text-decoration-line: none; display: inline-block; transition: all 0.2s ease-in-out 0s; text-align: center; line-height: 25px; vertical-align: top; padding: 0px 10px; margin-bottom: 4px; height: 25px; border-radius: 0px !important;">Oil and Gas</a></font></div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: medium;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">=</font></div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">=</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.thenation.com/article/activism/steven-donziger-chevron/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.thenation.com/article/activism/steven-donziger-chevron/</font></a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">More than a quarter-century ago, Steven Donziger, a young American human rights lawyer, joined the legal effort to force Texaco to clean up the Ecuadoran headwaters of the Amazon rain forest. Between 1972 and 1992, the company dumped toxic waste and spilled billions of gallons of oil-exposed water across 1,700 square miles, an area larger than Rhode Island. In response, a coalition of rural Ecuadorans in the Lago Agrio region sued the US oil giant, and Donziger signed on to help and soon became the lead attorney on the case.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>In 2013, after a legal campaign that stretched across two continents, the 30,000 indigenous people and small farmers whom Donziger represented in a class-action lawsuit won a $9.5 billion judgment in Ecuadoran courts against Chevron, which acquired Texaco in 2001. I</b>t was one of the largest financial judgments ever against an oil company. It looked like a historic warning to polluters across the Global South. Paul Paz y Miño, the associate director of the environmental group&nbsp;<b>Amazon Watch, described it as “the most important corporate accountability case in history.”</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Fast-forward to today, and Don­ziger is under house arrest in New York City, forced to wear an ankle monitor. The lawyer, now 59, is fighting contempt charges.</span><b>&nbsp;Meanwhile, his clients in Ecuador have received nothing from Chevron. Without that funding, they have no way to cleanse the poisoned soil or treat what they say is an elevated number of cancer cases</b>.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The mainstream press has largely ignored the legal attacks against Donziger, but Chevron’s counter­offensive could endanger human rights and environmental work around the world. Donziger’s fate, Paz y Miño said, will set a precedent: “Whether it’s Chevron or BP or Shell or any other oil company, if you cannot hold them to account and the lawyer advocating for that case is personally attacked, who else is going to fight those kinds of cases?”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Chevron’s legal onslaught succeeded largely because of a single federal judge in New York named Lewis A. Kap­lan.</b>&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">In 2014, Kaplan found Donziger and his Ecuadoran allies guilty of bribery and fraud, which makes it extremely difficult for the plaintiffs to collect their damages in the United States. Then Kaplan asked federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York to bring criminal contempt charges against Donziger for refusing to turn over his electronic devices, which contain communications with his clients.<b>&nbsp;When the prosecutors declined, Kaplan appointed private attorneys to prosecute Donziger—a nearly unprecedented step by a federal judge.</b></span></font></div><div>
</div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Judge Lewis Kaplan took the nearly unprecedented step of appointing private attorneys to prosecute Donziger. (Courtesy of Richard Baker / University of Rochester)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Kaplan’s hostility toward Donziger has been on ample display in his 21st-floor wood-paneled courtroom in downtown New York for nearly a decade. At times, he has said the pollution case in Ecuador was “not a bona fide litigation” and dismissed the Lago Agrio residents as “so-called plaintiffs.”</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Martin Garbus, the legendary human rights lawyer who is part of Donziger’s legal team, is 86 years old and has appeared at hundreds of trials, including in the Deep South during the segregation era. He told me that Kaplan’s treatment of Donziger is the worst he has ever witnessed.</span>&nbsp;“<b>In the courtroom, Kaplan displayed a rage, a fury, that he channeled against Steve,” Garbus said. “He tried to humiliate him. You wouldn’t have to be an expert on the law to recognize it. It was brutal. I’ve never seen a guy eviscerated the way Kaplan tried to eviscerate Steve.”</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For his part, Donziger said he hopes the Ecuadorans and their lawyers will hold Chevron accountable. He is a tall man—6 feet, 4 inches—and has been pacing restlessly around his Upper West Side apartment, reading law briefs or talking with his contacts in Ecuador by phone. These days, the coronavirus has driven almost everyone into their homes, but Donziger has already spent months “detained in a small apartment not because we did anything wrong,” he said, “but because we were successful and did a lot of things right. Facing the loss of one’s liberty not because one committed a crime but because of something dark and unaccountable in the system is terrifying. It calls into question most everything I believe about our country and my role in it.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>In an open letter to his supporters last August, Don­ziger wrote, “I never knew when I started working on this case in 1993 that I would face jail for standing up for the rights of my clients, who have been victimized by what is probably the world’s worst oil pollution…. Quite simply, Judge Kaplan and Chevron are working in lockstep to try and destroy me and my clients.”</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Alberto Guerra, a former Ecuadoran judge who admitted to lying about his interactions with Donziger, became the target of outrage after he testified in support of Chevron.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The saga began in the 1980s, when Ecuadorans in the rain forest started to protest Texaco’s contamination. The company left Ecuador in 1992, after having dumped crude oil, drilling muds, and an oily, watery mixture known as formation water into unlined waste pits—a procedure that has been outlawed in Texas since 1969. Texaco also released billions of gallons of oil-laced water into the rain forest’s streams and lakes, even though the standard procedure in the United States has long been to inject the potentially toxic compounds safely deep underground.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Five peer-reviewed scientific studies have shown an increased incidence of cancer and other health risks in the area<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">.&nbsp;</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">(Chevron funded its own peer-reviewed study, which claimed to find no such cancer risk.)</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>About 20 grassroots organizations formed the Amazon Defense Coalition in the mid-1990s, and Donziger, a recent graduate of Harvard Law School, started representing the group in 1993.&nbsp;</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The Ecuadorans originally sued Texaco in the United States, but after years of delay, a federal judge in New York sent the case to Ecuador in 2001. More than a decade later, Chevron lost. Three levels of Ecuadoran courts up to the Supreme Court ratified the verdict and awarded the plaintiffs $9.5 billion. (Though even if Chevron honored the decision, none of the rain forest residents would receive a check. Instead, the Amazon Defense Coalition would use the money to scour the soil of toxins and build treatment centers for cancer patients.)</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">RELATED ARTICLE</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Nation</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">ECUADOR’S BATTLE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE AGAINST CHEVRON</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">James North</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Chevron defended itself at every stage of the proceedings in Ecuador, and for years it never challenged the legitimacy of the process. But in 2010 it changed strategies. Chevron launched a countersuit in a New York federal court, alleging that Donziger and his allies had committed bribery and fraud in Ecuador to win the case</b>.&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">The company invoked the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act,</span>&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">originally designed to prosecute the Mafia, and in 2011, Kaplan presided over a new trial. Donziger and the Ecuadoran codefendants expected that such serious charges would be tried before a jury, but at the last minute, Chevron dropped its demand for monetary damages.<b>&nbsp;Under RICO law, this meant Donziger and the others lost their right to appear before a jury and Kaplan alone would decide the facts of the case.</b>&nbsp;Charles Nesson, a Harvard law professor, wrote recently in the Harvard Law Record that “Chevron amended its demands to cheat Donziger out of a jury.”</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>From the beginning of the RICO trial, Kaplan made his pro-business outlook clear. He lauded Chevron as “a company of considerable importance to our economy that employs thousands all over the world, that supplies a group of commodities—gasoline, heating oil, other fuels, and lubricants</b>—on which every one of us depends every single day. I don’t think there is anybody in this courtroom who wants to pull his car into a gas station to fill up and finds that there isn’t any gas there.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">During the case, Chevron claimed that Donziger and his clients had bribed the original trial judge in Ecuador. Chevron’s star witness was Alberto Guerra, a former judge who lost his position on the Ecuadoran bench because of corruption accusations and later, in testimony before an international trade tribunal, admitted to lying about his interactions with Donziger.&nbsp;<b>The oil giant acknowledged paying Guerra and moving him and his family to a secret location in the United States</b>. In all, Donziger estimated that Chevron has spent&nbsp;<b>$2 million on the ex-judge.</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Catastrophe: Cofan women stand near a pool of oil. Texaco spilled billions of gallons of contaminated water in Ecuador’s Amazon region. (Dolores Ochoa / AP)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Chevron’s lawyers rehearsed Guerra’s testimony with him 53 times and then put him on the stand in front of Kaplan.</b>&nbsp;In his testimony, the disgraced ex-judge asserted that Donziger and an Ecuadoran lawyer, Pablo Fajardo, had offered him a $500,000 bribe and that Donziger and Fajardo had ghostwritten the final judgment against Chevron. Nicolás Zambrano, the judge who had rendered the decision in Ecuador, denied Guerra’s testimony, but Kaplan accepted Guerra’s account, dismissed Zambrano, and found Donziger and his Ecuadoran colleagues guilty in 2014.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Chevron’s legal offensive is an example of a Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation, or SLAPP, suit</b>. Over the past few decades, corporations have brought an increasing number of SLAPP suits against environmental and human rights groups. The idea is to spend so much money that your underfunded opponents are forced to give up.<b>&nbsp;The oil giant presumably also has a related aim: to prevent the plaintiffs from ever collecting their cleanup money</b>.<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;Kaplan’s verdict in the RICO case means Chevron can refuse to pay them in the United States. Chevron has long since sold its remaining holdings in Ecuador, so now Donziger and the Amazon Defense Front have to chase the corporation to other countries where it still does business. Chevron’s lawyers are already trying to use the New York RICO judgment to discredit legal efforts against the company in Canada and elsewhere.</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Kaplan’s persecution of Donziger did not stop after the RICO verdict. Donziger faces criminal contempt charges because he has so far refused to turn over his personal computer and cell phone to Chevron, as Kaplan ordered him to do last March</b>.<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;Donziger said in a press release that he is defending his clients, because his electronic communications would give Chevron’s lawyers “backdoor access to spy on everything we are planning, thinking, and doing.” He said he wants to wait until the US Court of Appeals hears his defense, after which he will promptly hand over his computer and phone if the higher court confirms Kaplan’s directive.</span></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Sean Comey, Chevron’s senior adviser on corporate issues, litigation, and financial communications, declined to comment for this article</b>. As a result, I was unable to ask him a series of questions, including: Is your company still paying Guerra for his cooperation? How much is it continuing to spend on the legal case? Why do attorneys representing Chevron appear at every hearing against Donziger, even ones that don’t involve the oil company? And what is Chevron’s role, if any, in the multiple legal attacks against Donziger?</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Show of hands: Protesters in New York City, some with symbolically oil-stained hands, demonstrate against Chevron in 2013. (Spencer Platt / Getty Images)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Meanwhile, residents in the Amazon rain forest live and work on poisoned land. Donziger cautions that their plight must remain the center of the case. He works closely with&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Luis Yanza, the elected leader of the Amazon Defense Coalition and a lifelong defender of the environment; in 2008, Yanza won the prestigious Goldman Environmental Prize,&nbsp;</span>an award for frontline activists. Donziger and Yanza have talked and e-mailed regularly for more than 25 years, and Donziger, who is fluent in Spanish, estimated that he has visited Ecuador 250 times to consult with his clients.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Yanza told me that cancer continues to afflict people in the rain forest</b>. “I visited several of our communities just last weekend, and each one had two or three cases of cancer, including a girl,” he said. And there is no adequate treatment facility in the Lago Agrio area, he added. “The closest cancer treatment center is in Quito, which is seven to 12 hours by bus, depending on where you live.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Luis Yanza, the elected leader of the Amazon Defense Coalition, speaks at a protest against Chevron in 2008. (AP Photo / Paul Sakuma)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">He is indignant about the attacks on Donziger. “Steven is totally the opposite of how Chevron portrays him,” Yanza said. “He’s dedicated his life—a great part of his life—to defending people in our poor communities.” Yanza also dismissed the insinuations of critics that Donziger is manipulating the unsophisticated rain forest inhabitants. “This is the mentality of imperialism, saying that we don’t have the capacity to think and to act, to make decisions about our own lives. Steven and others in the United States do provide technical and legal help, but the fundamental decisions are made by us here.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Donziger’s critics say that he is mainly after his percentage of the judgment, that he’s an ambulance-chasing attorney who found his way to the rain forest. But if that were true, wouldn’t Donziger have given up by now? Surely he would have cut his losses, dusted off his Harvard Law diploma, and found another potential money-making scheme. Instead, he has remained under house arrest for nearly eight months.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Donziger is also fighting to get his law license reinstated. (It was suspended in 2018 without a hearing, based on Kaplan’s findings in the contempt case.</b>) In September and October, he appeared several times at a New York Bar Association hearing in lower Manhattan, before a polite referee named John Horan. The cramped, low-ceilinged hearing room was filled with human rights lawyers and environmentalists who support Donziger—as well as a few conservatively dressed attorneys representing Chevron. A parade of witnesses testified to Donziger’s honesty and integrity, including&nbsp;<b>Rex Weyler, a founder of Greenpeace; Roger Waters of the rock band Pink Floyd; and Simon Taylor, one of the directors of Global Witness</b>, the influential inter­national anti-corruption organization<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">. On February 24, Horan found in Donziger’s favor and recommended that his law license be restored.&nbsp;</span>Horan, a former prosecutor, sharply criticized Chevron’s vendetta, writing, “The extent of [Donziger’s] pursuit by Chevron is so extravagant, and at this point so unnecessary and punitive, [that] while not a factor in my recommendation, [it] is nonetheless background to it.” Horan’s decision must now be reviewed by a New York state court.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Steven Donziger addresses a press conference in Ecuador in 2014. Today he’s under house arrest. (Rodrigo Buendia / AFP via Getty Images)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>On November 25, Donziger appeared before Senior US District Judge Loretta Preska, who will preside over his criminal contempt trial, to ask that his confinement be ended and replaced by an $800,000 bail bond, guaranteed by a number of his supporters.</b>&nbsp;His attorney, Andrew Frisch, reminded the court that Donziger has a family and is not likely to abandon it to flee the United States. What’s more, Frisch pointed out, doing so would mean abandoning his clients in Ecuador. “For 25 years,” he noted, “Mr. Donziger has had his skin, his heart, and his soul in this cause, which is bigger than him.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In the end, Preska turned down the request. “Mr. Donziger has ties to Ecuador, we know, indeed, to high-ranking government officials,” she said. “We know he has traveled to Ecuador on numerous, numerous occasions…. I find that he remains a flight risk, and accordingly, the request to eliminate monitoring and home confinement is denied</span>.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Donziger’s trial isn’t scheduled to begin until June 15.</b>&nbsp;He is again challenging his home detention, but he could remain confined to his apartment until then. If this effort fails, he will have spent more than 300 days under house arrest.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Donziger described what it’s like to live under these circumstances. “Sleep is difficult because my ankle bracelet actually blinks and talks,” he said. “A voice reminds me to recharge the battery, which allows the state to monitor my every movement.</span>” The bracelet is “like a giant black claw that clings to your lower leg. It’s designed to be a constant reminder of your banishment, to&nbsp;<b>disorient you psychologically. Of course,” he added, “Chevron and Judge Kaplan want me to be consumed with my survival—rather than helping the indigenous people of Ecuador collect their judgment.”</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">James North has reported from Africa, Latin America, and Asia for four decades. He lives in New York City.</font></div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/16448/chevrons-slapp-suit-against-ecuadorians-corporate-intimidation/">https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/16448/chevrons-slapp-suit-against-ecuadorians-corporate-intimidation/</a></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">no lnx many</font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div style="font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style="" /><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4" style=""><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"><b>Chevron’s SLAPP suit against Ecuadorians: corporate intimidation</b></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">by Rex Weyler&nbsp;</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">CO-FOUNDER</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">11 May 2018 |</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">These days, when powerful corporations get caught breaking the law, polluting the Earth, violating human rights, or all of those crimes simultaneously, they don’t pay the fine and make amends, like normal citizens. They attack.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Corporate lawyers spend millions to assault victims with SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation). The most recent SLAPP strategy in the US, popularized by attack-dog New York law firm&nbsp;<b>Gibson Dunn, employs US “racketeering” (RICO) laws</b>&nbsp;against environmental groups, victims of pollution, and their lawyers.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>The purpose of a SLAPP lawsuit is not necessarily to win in court, but rather to intimidate, harass, demonize, and bankrupt the weaker opponent.</b>&nbsp;“The powerful use their abundance of resources to enact revenge,” explains the American Civil Liberties Union. Many jurisdictions now ban SLAPP suits, but corporations still shop around for lax jurisdictions and sympathetic judges.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In 2013, for example, when Greenpeace Canada exposed Resolute Forest Products’ destructive logging in Québec, Resolute filed a retaliatory $7-million lawsuit against Greenpeace Canada and two staff members in Ontario, which did not yet have anti-SLAPP laws. Later, Resolute used US courts to attack Greenpeace USA and Greenpeace International under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, created in 1970 to prosecute organized crime syndicates. “This lawsuit,” said Greenpeace US director Annie Leonard, “is an attempt to silence, vilify, and criminalize activism.” As with most of these intimidation lawsuits, the RICO case in the US was thrown out of court, but Resolute promptly filed an amended suit.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>In perhaps the most vindictive SLAPP in history, Chevron — one of the world’s largest corporations, with over $260-billion in assets — found a sympathetic New York judge to accept a RICO lawsuit against the victims of its vast oil pollution in Ecuador’s Amazon basin.</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Legal thuggery</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Chevron’s Amazon troubles began in 2000 when it purchased Texaco, inheriting liability for the company’s oil field pollution in Ecuador, known as the Amazon Chernobyl. Texaco/Chevron had dumped some 16 billion gallons of toxic wastewater into rivers and abandoned over 900 carcinogenic waste pits. The Indigenous rainforest inhabitants claim they were left with destroyed land, polluted water, and an epidemic of cancer and birth defects.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Abandoned toxic oil dump, Ecuador. Courtesy of Amazon Watch Abandoned toxic oil dump, Ecuador. Courtesy of Amazon Watch]</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">In 1993, the victims sued for damages in the US. Chevron fought for nine years to shift the case to Ecuador, where they may have expected to influence the courts. Chevron fully accepted jurisdiction in Ecuador, where the case began in 2003. Six years later, in light of overwhelming scientific evidence, Chevron realized that they would likely lose. In 2009 the oil company hired the notorious “rescue squad” law firm of Gibson Dunn, found a corporate-friendly Judge, Lewis A. Kaplan in New York, and began a series of SLAPP attacks on the victims, on their lawyers, and on the Ecuadorian judicial system. Over the next five years, Kaplan allowed virtually any Chevron motion, denied defendant motions, mocked the victims and their lawyers, and allowed a RICO racketeering case against two Ecuadoreans — Secoya Indigenous leader Javier Piaguaje and farmer Hugo Camacho — and their American lawyer, Steven Donziger.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Meanwhile, in Ecuador, the Indigenous and peasant villagers won a $9.5 billion compensation judgment, confirmed by appellate courts and by Ecuador’s Supreme Court (Court of Cessation). In response, Chevron sold its assets in Ecuador, fled the country, refused to pay, and threatened the victims with a “lifetime of litigation.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">The company has since retained over 60 law firms, 2,000 lawyers, paralegals, six public relations firms, squads of private investigators, and at least one bribed witness, who later admitted to lying. Lawyers for the victims estimate Chevron has spent over $2 billion to avoid payment of the court judgement, the largest collection of SLAPP suits in history.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher (Gibson Dunn) promotes itself as a corporate “rescue squad” specializing in “shielding clients” from “billions in liability”</b>. They boast of getting George W. Bush installed as US president by stopping a Florida vote recount, and shielding Lehman Brothers from liabilities in the largest bankruptcy filing in U.S. history.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);"><b style="">Randy Mastro co-chairs the firm’s litigation department</b>;&nbsp;</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">infamous for a string of court censures for fabricating evidence, lying and other criminal misconduct. In 2015, the High Court of England sanctioned Gibson Dunn for fabricating evidence to frame the political rival of the firm’s client, the President of Djibouti, Africa.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>In 2005, a federal court in California sanctioned Gibson Dunn for tampering with a witness, “obstruction, gamesmanship and flagrant disregard” of Court orders. I</b>n 2007, the Montana Supreme Court assessed a $9.9 million fine against Gibson Dunn for “blatantly and maliciously trying to intimidate” its adversary, using the judicial system for “legal thuggery”. The following year, a New York federal judge sanctioned the firm for “unacceptable shenanigans”, including hiding documents and outright lies. A California federal judge concluded that the firm’s misconduct is “a product of a culture which permeates” Gibson Dunn.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>As Chevron faced losing the pollution case in Ecuador, CEO John Watson and General Counsel R. Hewitt Pate turned to Gibson Dunn’s “rescue squad” for help.</b>The lawyers, led by </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Mastro, soon revealed their abusive tactics</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">. An Oregon federal judge sanctioned the Gibson Dunn lawyers for using the discovery process — intended to provide information to opposing counsel — to harass a small legal non-profit assisting the Ecuadorian victims. In Ecuador, appellate judges rebuked Chevron’s new lawyers for threatening trial Judge Nicolas Zambrano with criminal charges and prison unless he dismissed the case.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">However, the Ecuadorian decision stood, Chevron owed its victims $9.5 billion, and</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);"> Randy Mastro went to work harassing the victims, their lawyers, and the Ecuadorian justice system before a gleefully encouraging Judge Kaplan in New York.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Judge as prosecutor</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Chevron and Gibson Dunn knew precisely who Judge Kaplan was, when they launched their series of SLAPP suits through his court.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>In 2004, Kaplan allowed the NY Police Department to arrest any “recognizable group” of 50 or more cyclists riding together, as a way of stopping bicycle protests, specifically by the environmental group Critical Mass</b>. Although the First Amendment of the US Constitution protects “freedom of assembly”, Kaplan argued that “traffic flow” held precedent over the right of citizens to assemble in peaceful protest.&nbsp;<b>When Lehman Brothers employees sued Lehmans for failing to protect their pension plan, violating the Employee Retirement Security Act, Kaplan simply dismissed the case.</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">At The Robing Room, a judicial review forum, one commenter warned, “if you are representing big business interests, Judge Kaplan will find a way to rule in your favor. If you going up against big business interests, you are out of luck.” Others describe Kaplan as “working for business interests” and “part of the old-boy network.”</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>“We knew that Gibson Dunn and Chevron had selected Judge Kaplan as an ally,” said Steven Donziger, lawyer for the original Ecuadorian plaintiffs, Frente de Defensa de la Amazonía (FDA).&nbsp;</b>“A normal judge’s responsibility is to insure impartiality, decorum, and legal integrity. In the RICO SLAPP suit, Kaplan served more as a member of the prosecution team. He mocked defendants, laughed at defense motions, praised Chevron, granted their every wish, and insulted the entire Ecuadorian justice system.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Marathon of preliminaries</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>The highly unusual three year discovery and deposition process, prior to the actual trial, revealed a succession of nightmarish legal irregularities:</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">No media confidentiality: The SLAPP began in April 2010, when Kaplan forced filmmaker, Joseph Berlinger to turn over 600 hours of outtakes from his acclaimed 2009 documentary, Crude: The Real Price of Oil.&nbsp;</span>Kaplan ridiculed the journalist’s request to protect confidential sources. “If this is your best argument,” jeered Kaplan, “you’re in a lot of trouble.” A media coalition — including The New York Times, NBC, and HBO — filed a First Amendment objection with the court, and Robert Redford, writing in the Huffington Post, called the decision a “shocking” betrayal of US First Amendment rights.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style=""><b style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Insulting a foreign Court: Kaplan and Chevron lawyer </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Mastro used the Berlinger hearings to insult the courts in Ecuador</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">, where Chevron had insisted the trial be held. Mastro called the Ecuador courts “a sham” that would cause “any American to shudder at … what passes for a judicial system</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">.” Kaplan openly laughed when asked to delay until an Ecuadorian court could provide input. “If this were the High Court in London,” Kaplan taunted, “you can be sure I’d wait.” Despite Mastro and Kaplan’s disdain here, the Ecuadorian justice system appears as impartial and honourable as any such system in any modern nation.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Insulting the defendants: Throughout the proceedings and in written memoranda, Kaplan referred to the 30,000 class-action victims in Ecuador as “so-called plaintiffs”, suggesting that their “standing in this matter is debatable to say the least</b>.” He referred to their case in Ecuador as “the game” and “not a bona fide litigation.” When Donziger’s attorney made a routine request for time to review thousands of documents, Kaplan scoffed, “Don’t tell me about how long Mr. Donziger needs. I know the game here.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>No attorney-client confidentiality:</b>&nbsp;Kaplan invoked a minor technicality to claim that Donziger, the victims’ US lawyer, had “waived” all attorney-client privilege, and insisted he turn over to Chevron lawyers 17-years of confidential communications with his clients, including, emails, notes, and his entire hard drive. Defense attorneys called this “the most sweeping forced production of privileged documents in history.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);"><b>Monster deposition:&nbsp;</b>Federal rules typically limit individual depositions to one day, possibly two days in extraordinary cases. Once Chevron had all of Donziger’s confidential client files, they forced him, with Kaplan’s approval, to endure an unorthodox 18 days of discovery deposition, during which 20 or more Chevron/Gibson Dunn lawyers pelted him with petty and personal questions. According to Donziger’s RICO case rebuttal, Chevron’s lead PR consultant, revealed in 2009:&nbsp;<b>“Our L-T [long-term] strategy is to demonize Donziger.”</b></span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style=""><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Special Master</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">:</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;Judge Kaplan appointed his former law partner, Max Gitter, as “Special Master” or private judge to rule over the protracted deposition, paid entirely by Chevron</span><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">. According to the Amazon Defense Coalition, Kaplan approved secret payments to Gitter, totaling “likely well over $1 million</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">.” Like Kaplan, Gitter approved Chevron requests and dismissed defense requests.&nbsp;</span><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">He revealed his conspiratorial relationship with Mastro and Chevron</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> when he made a ruling based on the contents of a future Chevron document that had not yet been filed with the court. Upon realizing his error, he muttered, “Mr. Mastro, am I correct about that?” Mastro responded, “absolutely correct.”</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Judge proposes Chevron strategy:&nbsp;</b>During the discovery hearings, Judge Kaplan exclaimed: “Do the phrases Hobbs Act, extortion, RICO, have any bearing here?” signaling to Chevron lawyers that they should file a racketeering complaint. Shortly thereafter, on February 1, 2011, Chevron filed their RICO complaint against Donziger, Piaguaje, and Camacho, claiming that the 10-year case before three levels of Ecuadorian courts amounted to criminal extortion. Chevron asked for billions of dollars in damages, from Donziger, a sole practitioner, and two impoverished villagers, which required a jury trial. Kaplan accepted the claim and assigned the case to himself.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>International powers:&nbsp;</b>After the RICO filing, Judge Kaplan presumed to issue a universal injunction, allegedly prohibiting any court in any nation from enforcing the environmental judgment against Chevron, two days before the Ecuadorian court announced that judgment. In September, 2011, the US Court of Appeals vacated the injunction, chastizing Kaplan for inflicting damage on international comity, the principle among modern nations to show respect for each other’s legal systems.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);"><b style="">Implacable hostility:</b>&nbsp;By this time, Donziger and the Ecuadorian victims were almost broke, which Donziger claims, “was the whole point of Mastro’s and Chevron’s strategy.</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">” Nevertheless, renowned defense attorney, John Keker, a former US marine, highly respected for legal integrity, offered to help the beleaguered defendants. “This case has degenerated into a Dickensian farce,” Keker said. “Encouraged by this Court’s implacable hostility toward Donziger, Chevron will file any motion, however meritless, in the hope that the Court will use it to hurt Donziger.”</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);"><b>Fishing expeditions:&nbsp;</b>Chevron served Donziger, Piaguaje, and Camacho, with hundreds of new document requests and over a thousand “requests for admission,” disputed claims that&nbsp;<b>Chevron could argue were “admitted” if the defendants could not respond</b></span><b>. The impoverished Ecuadorian peasants kept almost no documents and rarely engaged in written communication.</b>&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The requests imposed a massive new expense for the defendants.<b>&nbsp;Kaplan also allowed Chevron to serve subpoenas on Amazon Watch, Google, Microsoft, and others, seeking email accounts to track the activities of some 100 lawyers, students, journalists, and academics</b>&nbsp;that supported the Ecuadorian’s cause. “These were fishing expeditions,” Donziger explained, “that violated everyone’s right to privacy.”</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>Scorched Earth:&nbsp;</b>By May 2013, before the actual trial had even begun, the defendants were thoroughly destitute, and their defense attorneys — Keker and Craig Smyser, who had been deferring payment — could no longer continue</span>. Both attorneys expressed outrage at Kaplan’s refusal to grant common sense measures to streamline the burdensome process. “Through scorched-earth litigation, executed by its army of hundreds of lawyers,” said Keker, “Chevron is using its limitless resources to crush defendants and win this case through might rather than merit.”<b>&nbsp;Smyser, called the lawsuit a “legal blitzkrieg” that Kaplan not only tolerated but “encouraged”.</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">After four years of gruelling discovery depositions and document demands by Chevron — the exhausted defendants’ best hope for justice rested on the trial jury. A jury would remove some decision-making power from Kaplan, and would hear overwhelming evidence of Chevron pollution and legal misdeeds. However, Kaplan had new surprises in store.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">[pix Ecuadorians and P. Bellegarde, court, 2018 © Johanna LunaHugo Camacho, Amazon Defense Coalition (second from left) was one of the villagers named in the US RICO case. Here, he joins Domingo Paes, Achuar; Canadian Assembly of First Nations Grand Chief Perry Bellegarde, Janeth Cuji, Kichwa; and&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Rafael Pandam, President of the Indigenous Amazonian Parliament of Ecuador, in a Canadian court]</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>The RICO Trial</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);"><b>No jury:</b><b>&nbsp;On the eve of the trial, Chevron decided, with Kaplan’s approval, to drop their financial damages claim, which meant that Kaplan could drop the jury and decide the outcome himself. “Chevron,” said Donziger, “apparently panicked at the notion of trying to sell their fraud and extortion claims to anyone other than Kaplan.” The defense demanded a jury trial, based on their right to a jury in a RICO case,</b>&nbsp;a long-standing legal principle in cases that carry criminal implications. Kaplan refused. He would decide himself about the defendants’ guilt or innocence.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>No pollution talk</b>: Even though Kaplan had presumed the authority to “set aside” an Ecuadorian environmental judgment with a 10-year, 220,000-page evidentiary record of Chevron’s environmental crimes, and to characterize that entire proceeding as an act of “extortion,”&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">the corporate-friendly judge barred the defense from even mentioning anything “related to the existence of pollution in Ecuador.” The pollution, he said, was “not relevant.”</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>No dirty-tricks talk:&nbsp;</b>Furthermore, Kaplan ruled that the defense could not mention evidence of Chevron’s campaign or Gibson Dunn’s campaign of “dirty tricks” operations, past courtroom crimes, lies, and fabricated evidence. Chevron, of course, was allowed to discuss any alleged history of the defendants, dredged up from four years of ruthless depositions, spies, and private investigators.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Tsunami of paper</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">: On the first day of trial, Chevron placed over 2,500 exhibits into evidence en masse, nearly 10,000 separate assertions, to which the impoverished defense was given less than a week to respond. If they failed, Kaplan could deem the defendants’ objection “waived.”</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>Anonymous witnesses:</b>&nbsp;Kaplan accepted testimony from Chevron witnesses whose identity they kept hidden from the defense, preventing the normal investigation necessary for effective cross-examination. The defense expressed outrage at this violation of “basic legal principles,” which they said would “be right at home in the Spanish Inquisition.”</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style=""><b style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Editing the evidence:</b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;At this point, the&nbsp;</span><b style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">defense caught </span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">Randy Mastro presenting edited video,</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;in which he had cut out critical contextual words from Mr. Donziger’s comments. According to trial transcripts, when the defense brought this to the judge’s attention, Kaplan adjourned, did some research, and responded: “About 15 words were edited out … I assume there was no attempt to mislead.”</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Chevron’s claim that the entire Ecuadorian judicial process — ten years of court trials and appellate reviews in three levels of courts — had been “fraudulent” rested, however, almost entirely upon one, single witnes</b>s.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">[ pix Steven Donziger at oil well © Lisa GibbonsSteven Donziger, lawyer for the Ecuador plaintiffs for 25 years, at oil site in Ecuador’s Amazon]</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>The Witness</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In American Lawyer magazine, in 2009, David Hechler, describes Gibson Dunn’s “game plan,” to shield clients from liability in foreign pollution cases: “find witnesses” who will accuse the foreign court of “fraud.” In a separate American Lawyer story, Gibson, Dunn lawyer Robert Cooper, explains, “We prepared the witnesses to tell our story.</span>”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>In Ecuador, on behalf of Chevron, Gibson Dunn found one such witness, Alberto Guerra, a former Ecuadorian judge who had been removed for misconduct, including accepting bribes.</b>&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">According to Amazon Watch, Chevron lawyer Andres Rivero and Chevron private investigator Yohi Ackerman paid Guerra $48,000 in cash, and agreed to pay him $12,000 a month for at least three years. Chevron lawyers allegedly negotiated and smoothed Guerra’s immigration into the US, paid for his family to move, hired lawyers to get them green cards, and bought them a car, auto insurance, and health insurance.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Justice Now protest, Ecuador. Photo courtesy of amazonwatch.orgJustice Now protest, Ecuador. Photo courtesy of amazonwatch.org]</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">According to a letter from the defense to the US Department of Justice, Chevron has paid Guerra at least $2 million in cash and benefits, in exchange for false testimony. According to an affidavit by legal ethicist Erwin Chemerinsky — Founding Dean of the University of California at Irvine School of Law and a prominent US legal scholar — these payments to Guerra violated fundamental ethical rules of law.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style=""><b style=""><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In New York, over 53 days by Guerra’s admission, Gibson Dunn’s</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);"> Randy Mastro helped him prepare his testimony about “fraud” in Ecuador</span></b><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 153, 0);">.</span><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"> On the stand before judge Kaplan, Guerra claimed that Ecuadorian lawyers promised presiding judge Nicolas Zambrano $500,000 to allow them to write the final judgment, which Guerra claimed they gave to Zambrano on a flash drive. Guerra also claimed that he possessed a draft copy of the fraudulent judgment and that he met with the plaintiffs’ American lawyer Steven Donziger to discuss the alleged “bribe”.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>Quickly, however, Guerra’s story fell apart.&nbsp;</b>Immigration records showed that Donziger was not even in Ecuador when Guerra claims the meeting took place. No evidence of a flash drive was ever produced, and Guerra’s computers did not turn up the draft judgment, or even a single email from the plaintiffs’ attorneys.<b>&nbsp;When this came to light, Guerra changed his story, claiming that after “strengthening my memory”&nbsp;</b>he now recalled working on this draft, not at home, but rather had taken an eight-hour bus ride into the jungle, where he claimed he edited the judgment on a laptop handed to him by one of the Ecuadorians’ lawyers.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>However, this story crumbled as well</b>&nbsp;when forensic analysis showed that the trial judge had never downloaded the judgement from a flash drive and, rather, had opened and saved his own written judgement document more than 400 times over three months on his own office computer.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Furthermore, after the RICO trial, in a separate arbitration under the US-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty, Guerra admitted under oath that he had lied to Chevron’s lawyers about his involvement in the alleged attempt to influence the Ecuadorian judgement</b>. “I did exaggerate about [some things], yes,” said Guerra under questioning. When a lawyer asked him, “And among the ways you tried to leverage your position was to falsely tell the Chevron representatives that the Plaintiffs had offered you $300,000?” Guerra answered, “Yes, sir. I lied there.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Nevertheless, Kaplan accepted Guerra’s testimony and rejected defense efforts&nbsp;</b>— Motion to strike testimony and Motion for terminating sanctions — to strike Guerra’s testimony, which the defense claims was fabricated during the 53-day session with Chevron lawyers.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>The final twist appeared as Judge Kaplan crafted a judgment. By dropping the money claim, Chevron had avoided a jury but also undermined its own case. A plaintiff must seek either money for damages or an injunction, a court-ordered condition placed on the defendant. The Court of Appeals had already reversed Kaplan’s earlier injunction and could do so again. Without a money claim or injunction, Chevron lacked standing.</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Perhaps to avoid this problem, Kaplan based his guilty verdict on a “non-statutory claim for equitable relief” from an allegedly fraudulent judgment.</b>&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">According to Donziger’s rebuttal, the decision lacked “due process,” since the claim had never been presented by Chevron or argued in court, and “relied on vague 18th and 19th century treatises” that “had been effectively repealed and replaced by the statutory framework for enforcement of foreign judgments … during the twentieth century.” Typically, a judge can’t invent a new claim for the plaintiff after a trial has ended.</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>The Republic of Ecuador filed an Amicus Brief, stating that “Judge Lewis Kaplan reached far beyond the issues presented to unfairly—and unnecessarily—impugn the integrity of the Republic of Ecuador.</b>” They stated that Kaplan’s “unfounded commentary”, against a “sovereign democracy”, was based on “unreliable evidence”.&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The Ecuadorian court charged that Kaplan relied almost exclusively on one Vladimiro Álvarez Grau, an avowed political opponent of the Ecuadorian government.&nbsp;</span>“Chevron sought out a favorable forum,” the Ecuadorian court wrote. “The District Court [Kaplan], fulfilling Chevron’s wishes, chose to make far-reaching judgments based primarily on the opinions of a single partisan.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>
</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Finally, the Ecuadorian court confirmed that Chevron Corporation remained responsible for the impact of its pollutio</b>n.<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;“In 2005,” the court wrote, “ChevronTexaco dropped the name ‘Texaco’ and reverted to its original name, Chevron Corporation. There is no indication in the record before us that shortening its name had any effect on ChevronTexaco’s legal obligations. Chevron Corporation therefore remains accountable.”</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Furthermore, in a separate discovery hearing, the US Third Circuit court cautioned: “The circumstances supporting [Chevron’s] claim of fraud largely are allegations and allegations are not factual findings.”</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">This historic SLAPP lawsuit, possibly the most expensive in history, appears to have failed, even after Kaplan’s decision.</span>&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Foreign courts have ignored Kaplan’s injunction, and Donziger and his clients are making progress in Canadian courts, where the victims are attempting to collect the Ecuadorian judgment by seizing Chevron Canada’s assets, and where they have won three consecutive unanimous appellate court decisions. Donziger and the Ecuadorian villagers have said they would welcome Chevron to claim in Canada that the Ecuadorian judgment was fraudulent. “If they had to bring Guerra to Canada before a neutral judge,” says Donziger, “we believe the company’s entire RICO narrative will collapse.”</span></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>SLAPP suits represent a threat to public protest and free speech. They have no place in a democracy.</b></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">References and Links</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Ecuador Supreme Court (Court of Cessation): court ruling in Ecuadorean class action vs. Chevron Corporation.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">ACLU, Slapped: A Tool for Activists: ACLU</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Chevron assets: Fortune magazine.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Chevron: 60 law firms and 2000 lawyers: Amazon Watch, CSR.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Chevron threatens plaintiffs with a “Lifetime of litigation.”: (1) “Chevron Accused of $2 Million Witness Bribery Plot in Ecuador Pollution Case, Alternet, January 31, 2018; and (2) Writ of Mandamus, Feb. 6, 2011: pdf</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Gibson Dunn, “rescue squad,” “shielding clients”: Gibson Dunn promotions</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Gibson Dunn censure by High Court of England: “Chevron Law Firm Gibson Dunn Blasted by High Court of England For Falsifying Evidence: Chevron Pit, March 25, 2015.” Montana Supreme Court assessed a $9.9 million fine against Gibson Dunn: Montana Supreme Court document, 05-378, 2007, MT 62.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Ecuador, appellate judges rebuke Chevron’s lawyers for threatening trial Judge Nicolas Zambrano.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Gibson Dunn in Ecuador: under scrutiny for trying to mislead Congress</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">California, 2005, censure of Gibson Dunn</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Gibson Dunn sanctioned by a federal judge for harassing a witness in a discovery action in Oregon.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Comments about Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on legal review site: The Robing Room</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Robert Redford objects to Kaplan denial of media confidentiality: Huffington Post</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">New York Times, NBC, and HBO file a First Amendment objection with the court. NPR</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><b>Kaplan and Mastro insult the courts in Ecuador: </b>“Writ of Mandamus, US Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, Hugo Gerardo Camacho Naranjo and Javier Piaguaje Payaguaje, petitioners, filed by Attorneys: James E. Tyrrell Jr. NY, Julio C. Gomez, NY, and Carlos A. Zelaya, II, Feb. 6, 2011: pdf</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Allegations of bias by Kaplan: Writ of Mandamus, Feb. 6, 2011: pdf; and “Chevron’s RICO Fraud” pdf</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“Our L-T [long-term] strategy is to demonize Donziger.” — Chevron’s lead PR consultant, 2009: (1) “Chevron’s RICO Fraud” pdf and (2) “Chevron Accused of $2 Million Witness Bribery Plot in Ecuador Pollution Case, Alternet, January 31, 2018</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Chevron’s RICO Fraud: An Abuse of Indigenous Peoples, the Environment, and U.S. Courts in the Chevron v. Donziger Case; S. Donziger and the Ecuadorian Legal Team: pdf.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Defendant’s right to a jury in a RICO case: CSR, 6 February, 2014.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Defense calls anonymous witnesses a violation of “basic legal principles … right at home in the Spanish Inquisition.”: US District Court, Southern District of New York, Case 1:11-cv-00691-LAK-JCF Document 1154 Filed 05/14/13, “Opposition to Chevron’s Motion for an order to Further protecting the Confidential declaration of Doe3.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Gibson Dunn “game plan”: (1) “District Court Denies Enforcement of $97 Million Nicaraguan Judgment,” Gibson Dunn; and (2) “The Kill Step,” David Hechler, Sept. 20, 2009, The American Lawyer</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Randy Mastro and Gibson Dunn lawyers preparing Guerra over 53 days: Huffington Post, Paul Paz y Miño, May 30, 2017.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Guerra bribed by Chevron: (1) “Chevron Accused of $2 Million Witness Bribery Plot in Ecuador Pollution Case, Alternet, January 31, 2018; (2) “Chevron’s RICO Fraud,” legal rebuttal: pdf. Guerra bribed by Chevron: Huffington Post, Dec. 6, 2017; (3) “Chevron Executives Misused Millions of Shareholder Dollars To Bribe a Witness,” Amazon Watch, May 30, 2017.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Alberto Guerra admits lying in RICO testimony: (1) US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Chevron Corporation vs. Steven Donziger, Hugo Gerardo Camacho Naranjo, et. al.; No. 14-826-cv(L), November 5, 2015. (2) “Chevron’s Star Witness Admits to Lying in the Amazon Pollution Case, Vice News, Eva Hershaw, October 26, 2015 (with Testimony from arbitration under the US-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty); (3) U.S. Courts Endorsed Chevron’s Fabricated Evidence: Ecuadorian Villagers and Counsel Slam Chevron’s Star Witness for Lying and Offer Rebuttals to 12 False Findings by Second Circuit Court of Appeals”: CSR wire, May 16, 2017; and (4) Chevron’s RICO Fraud: pdf.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“Judge Kaplan Drastically Overreached With “Unlawful” Injunction To Protect Chevron, International Law Experts Say,” Rainforest Action Network.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Defense documents requesting to strike Guerra’s false testimony, citing evidence that Guerra lied, and admitted to lying: (1) Motion to strike testimony of Alberto Guerra Bastides, pdf and (2) Motion for terminating sanctions, pdf.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“Rainforest Groups Blast U.S. Judge Kaplan for Ruling Designed to Help Chevron Evade $9.5b Pollution Liability,” CSR wire, March 9, 2018.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Republic of Ecuador’s Amicus Brief denouncing the Kaplan judgement based on false testimony from a bribed witness, and denouncing Kaplan’s insults toward Ecuadorian courts.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">US Third Circuit court, Chevron’s claim of fraud are allegations, not facts: Writ of Mandamus, US Court of Appeals, Case: 11-2259, 06/02/2011.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Kaplan’s judgement based on 18th and 19th century treatises: Judgement transcript: District Court, Southern District of New York: Case 1:11-cv-00691-LAK-JCF, Document 1874, Filed 03/04/14, Page 330 of 497.</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">Chevron lacked standing: (Article III , U.S. Constitution; the US Supreme Court has held that federal courts may hear “cases and controversies” but many not simply issue advisory opinions if there is no claim for “relief.”</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">
</div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);">“In Canada, Chevron Faces New Risks From $12b Ecuador Pollution Judgment As Shareholders Step up Pressure,” Amazon Defense Coalition, FDA, March 23, 2018</div></div><div style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255); font-size: medium;"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font></div></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4"></font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font face="Times New Roman" size="4">omfg</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div>
</div><div><a href="https://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/41282-Report-Shows-Chevron-Lawyers-at-Gibson-Dunn-Falsified-Evidence-to-Target-Steven-Donziger-in-Ecuador-Pollution-Case" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/41282-Report-Shows-Chevron-Lawyers-at-Gibson-Dunn-Falsified-Evidence-to-Target-Steven-Donziger-in-Ecuador-Pollution-Case</font></a></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">NEW YORK, Aug. 15 /CSRwire/ -&nbsp;</span><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><span style="font-weight: inherit;">The New York bar’s unprecedented attempt to suspend prominent corporate accountability attorney Steven Donziger without a hearing after he helped Ecuadorian Indigenous peoples win a $9.5 billion environmental judgment against Chevron is based on false testimony from a paid company witness coached 53 days by lawyers at the firm Gibson Dunn & Crutcher, according to a&nbsp;</span><b>bombshell report produced by one of the world’s leading forensic computer investigators</b></span><b>.</b></span></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="font-weight: inherit;">Donziger still maintains his law license and is helping his clients in Ecuador’s Amazon rainforest enforce their judgment by trying to seize Chevron’s substantial assets in Canada, where three appellate courts have issued unanimous rulings in their favor. (See&nbsp;</span><a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk988551" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/40597-Indigenous-Groups-Dominating-Chevron-in-Canada-s-Appellate-Courts-Over-Enforcement-of-Ecuador-Judgment" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">here</a><span style="font-weight: inherit;">.) But behind the scenes,</span><b>&nbsp;Chevron’s batallion-sized U.S. legal team – it has included&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk958557" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/35294-Chevron-Using-60-Law-Firms-and-2-000-Legal-Personnel-To-Evade-Ecuador-Environmental-Liability-Company-Reports" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">2,000 lawyers from at least 60 firms</a>&nbsp;at a cost of at least $2 billion – has trained its sites on demonizing Donziger</b><span style="font-weight: inherit;">&nbsp;as part of a new corporate “playbook” invented by the company’s attorneys at the Gibson Dunn firm and marketed to scandal-plagued clients facing major liabilities.</span></font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">(See&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk600911" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/16448/chevrons-slapp-suit-against-ecuadorians-corporate-intimidation/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">this article</a>&nbsp;for background on Chevron’s intimidation campaign and&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk617055" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/karen-hinton/chevrons-ghostwriting-cha_b_7191074.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">here</a>&nbsp;for an article in the Huffington Post about how Chevron’s defense has unraveled.)</span>&nbsp;</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>According to multiple sources, the Gibson Dunn marketing playbook involves what the firm calls the “kill step” to defeat the enforcement in the U.S.&nbsp;of civil money judgements obtained from foreign courts.</b><span style="font-weight: inherit;">&nbsp;The “kill step” usually involves accusing opposing counsel of “fraud” and other misconduct to try to intimidate them into withdrawing, thereby leaving the corporation’s victims defenseless and unable to continue with their cases. If actual evidence of fraud does not exist, as in the Ecuador matter, the Gibson Dunn lawyers will hire investigators to bribe foreign witnesses to concoct false stories of “fraud” about opposing counsel to be presented in U.S. courts; the firm’s lawyers are theoretically protected from any downside risk by the general inability of U.S. courts to force foreigners to appear or be deposed.</span></font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The Gibson Dunn “kill step” is now being deployed against Donziger, who faces an interim suspension by the New York bar after staff attorneys designated him as an “immediate threat to the public order” based on highly disputed&nbsp;testimony from a Chevron-paid witness who has admitted under oath that he repeatedly lied to the company.</span>&nbsp;Prominent members of the legal community, including First Amendment lawyer Marty Garbus and Harvard Law Professor Charles Nesson,&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk729358" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/41212-Legal-Community-Shocked-by-NY-Bar-Decision-to-Suspend-Renowned-Attorney-Without-a-Hearing-After-He-Helped-Win-Pollution-Judgment-Against-Chevron" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">expressed “shock” and “dismay”</a>&nbsp;at the bar’s decision to suspend&nbsp;Donziger without a hearing. Donziger&nbsp;is fighting the allegations in a post-suspension hearing that likely will take place in September and be open to the public.</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Gibson Dunn used the same “kill step” strategy roughly ten years ago on behalf of the Dole Food Company, which faced major liability in Nicaraguan courts for causing infertility in banana workers after it used an illegal pesticide that had been banned in the United States.</b><span style="font-weight: inherit;">&nbsp;According to multiple sources, evidence emerged in the Dole case that Gibson Dunn’s lawyers and investigators engaged in perjury, witness bribery, and fabrication of evidence to have the company’s liability thrown out of a California state court, according to legal documents. A key part of the strategy was an attack campaign leveled against the U.S. lawyer for&nbsp;the Nicaraguan victims, Jorge Dominguez, that included an attempt to have him disbarred, according to lawyers and others who worked on the matter.</span></font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Among other violations in the Dole case, Gibson Dunn’s lawyers hired an investigations firm in Mexico (called Investigative Research and headed by ex-CIA agent, Douglas Beard) to recruit and pay a Nicaraguan man, Jamie Gonzalez, to provide a false affidavit that fabricated a meeting attended by the Nicaraguan trial&nbsp;judge where the case&nbsp;supposedly was “fixed” against Dole.</span>&nbsp;Although the meeting never took place, lawyers at the Gibson Dunn firm – including Scott Edelman, Ted Boutrous, and Andrea Neumann, all of whom orchestrated the scheme -- used the fabricated “evidence” of the meeting to have&nbsp;an ethics complaint filed&nbsp;against&nbsp;California lawyer Dominguez, much as the firm is now doing to Donziger with &nbsp;testimony from an admittedly corrupt witness from Ecuador bribed with at least $2 million from Chevron to concoct his story. (The attempt to disbar Dominguez failed; the attempt to disbar Donziger in New York is pending but he still maintains his law license in another jurisdiction.)</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><b>Donziger, a Harvard Law graduate who has not received even a single client complaint in 25 years of legal practice, is fighting back against what he called a “wide-ranging conspiracy” hatched in Chevron’s executive suits and Gibson Dunn’s New York offices to try to taint him with “fraud”</b></span><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">&nbsp;by using false or distorted evidence as a way to evade the liability to the Indigenous groups in Ecuador. Those involved in the conspiracy, he said, include Chevron General Counsel R. Hewitt Pate, Gibson Dunn’s chief of litigation Randy Mastro, as well as several Gibson Dunn lawyers who had previously been involved in corrupting the Dole cases, including Neumann and Boutrous. In a&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk314668" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="https://chevrontoxico.com/assets/docs/2017-11-09-adc-doj-letter.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">letter to the U.S. Department of Justice</a>, Donziger laid out evidence that the Gibson Dunn firm and Chevron have carried out a conspiracy to falsify evidence as part of its “kill step” strategy to attack the Ecuador pollution judgment, now worth $12 billion with statutory interest.</span>&nbsp;</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“What Chevron and Gibson Dunn are doing to Steven is lawless and the kind of thing one normally sees in North Korea or Saudi Arabia, not in New York,” said Rex Weyler, the co-founder of Greenpeace and a supporter of the Ecuadorian communities. “It is shocking to witness how the New York judiciary has allowed itself to be used by Chevron and Gibson Dunn as a key arm of the company’s unethical litigation strategy that ultimately is designed to screw over some of the most vulnerable people on the planet who trust and rely on Steven to advocate for them. The Department of Justice needs to open an investigation of this law firm for its pattern of engaging in&nbsp;unethical and even criminal acts in the Ecuador case and others.”</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The Gibson Dunn “kill step” in the Ecuador case resulted in a highly controversial civil “racketeering” judgment in 2014 from New York trial judge Lewis A. Kaplan against Donziger and his Ecuadorian clients that was based largely on the false testimony of Chevron’s paid witness, Alberto Guerra. Guerra’s payments have included an enormous monthly salary at least 20 times higher than his prior salary in Ecuador, health care, and the reimbursement of all income tax payments as well as expenses to move his entire family from Ecuador to the United States. Guerra admitted to taking bribes in Ecuador and has been on the Chevron payroll for several years at an undisclosed location in the United States without doing any work other than serving as a witness. (See&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk391463" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="https://www.commondreams.org/news/2015/10/27/yes-i-lied-vindicating-villagers-star-chevron-witness-busted-perjury" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">this summary</a>&nbsp;of Guerra’s perjury and&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk273498" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://chevrontoxico.com/assets/docs/2017-05-01-aw-ran-amicus-brief.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">this legal brief</a>&nbsp;documenting Chevron’s and Gibson Dunn’s corrupt conduct.)</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Guerra also has admitted under oath that he was coached for 53 days by Gibson Dunn’s lawyers, including Mastro and Avi Weitzman, before he went into Kaplan’s court and accused Donziger of approving a bribe to an Ecuador trial judge so the plaintiffs could “ghostwrite” the judgment against the oil major.</span>&nbsp;Later, Guerra recanted key parts of his testimony under oath in a private arbitration proceeding&nbsp;while a forensic report proved he lied about both the bribe and the allegation that Donziger orchestrated the “ghostwriting” of the judge. Donziger has consistently denied Guerra’s allegations.</span>&nbsp;</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Despite what appear to be the many deep-seated and even fatal problems with Guerra’s testimony, two staff attorneys at the New York bar grievance committee – who oversee attorney conduct – relied on his story about judicial bribery in Ecuador to suspend Donziger from the practice of law without a hearing by designating the New York lawyer an “immediate threat to the public order</span>”. Yet Kaplan’s findings, used by the New York bar in its decision, have been&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk852589" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/41192-Chevron-Suffers-Major-8-0-Defeat-in-Ecuador-s-Constitutional-Court-Over-Landmark-Pollution-Judgment" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">rejected by at least 17 appellate judges in Ecuador</a>&nbsp;and by Canada’s entire&nbsp;Supreme Court when it ruled unanimously in favor of the Ecuadorians in a judgment enforcement action in that country. Four layers of courts in Ecuador – including the country’s Constitutional Court – have affirmed voluminous evidence that the oil major dumped billions of gallons of toxic waste into the rainforest, decimating indigenous groups and&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk938930" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="https://chevrontoxico.com/assets/docs/cancer-summary.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">causing an outbreak of cancer</a>&nbsp;that has killed or threatens to kill thousands of people.</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">(See&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk197316" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/41212-Legal-Community-Shocked-by-NY-Bar-Decision-to-Suspend-Renowned-Attorney-Without-a-Hearing-After-He-Helped-Win-Pollution-Judgment-Against-Chevron" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">here</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk840924" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/41230-Support-Growing-for-Prominent-U-S-Attorney-Who-Took-on-Chevron-and-Was-Deemed-Threat-to-Public-Order-by-State-Bar-Officials" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">here</a>&nbsp;for comments by prominent lawyers, including Harvard Law Professor Charles Nesson and trial attorney Richard Friedman, in support of Donziger. See&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk295261" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/41192-Chevron-Suffers-Major-8-0-Defeat-in-Ecuador-s-Constitutional-Court-Over-Landmark-Pollution-Judgment" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">this article</a>&nbsp;on how&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Ecuador’s Constitutional Court recently ruled 8-0 to affirm the judgment against Chevron</span>.&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk765392" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="https://chevrontoxico.com/assets/docs/2012-01-evidence-summary.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Here is a summary</a>&nbsp;of the evidence against Chevron.)</span><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">&nbsp;</span></font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Donziger, who has been widely&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk644132" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="https://www.donzigerlaw.com/testimonials/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">lauded for his public service work</a></b><span style="font-weight: inherit;">, criticized the New York bar for refusing to consider the extensive evidence that emerged after Kaplan’s trial that renders his findings erroneous or at least highly&nbsp;problematic. Donziger maintains wide support in the legal and environmental communities; several prominent environmental groups and lawyers, including Amazon Watch&nbsp;and Earth Rights International, have weighed in against Chevron with amicus briefs while Greenpeace Founder Weyler calls him a “hero” of the environmental movement. Musician Roger Waters even released a video on behalf of the Ecuadorians criticizing Kaplan.</span></font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Among the evidence ignored by the two&nbsp;staff attorneys of the bar grievance committee who are handling the matter – Jorge Dopico and Naomi Goldstein -- is a critical report from noted forensics expert J. Christopher Racich submitted in a parallel private&nbsp;arbitration proceeding initiated by Chevron against Ecuador’s government. The Racich report completely undermines Chevron’s defense strategy and renders Kaplan’s findings that the Ecuador judgment was “ghostwritten” as false, according to Aaron Page, a human rights lawyer who represents the Ecuadorians.&nbsp;(See&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk627550" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://chevrontoxico.com/assets/docs/2014-11-07-racich-report.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">here</a>&nbsp;for the Racich report proving Chevron’s witness lied and&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk198125" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/37943-Chevron-s-Main-Defense-Unraveling-in-Ecuador-Pollution-Case-Says-New-Forensic-Report-" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">here</a>&nbsp;for a summary of that report.)</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">Racich’s investigation undermines Kaplan’s core findings that were then used by the bar grievance committee to suspend Donziger as follows:</span>&nbsp;</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The report demonstrates that increasing amounts of the Ecuador judgment against Chevron were added to Word documents on the office computers of the Ecuador trial judge and that those documents were edited and saved in painstaking fashion more than 400 times.&nbsp;This corroborates the sworn testimony of the Ecuador trial judge, Nicolas Zambrano, that he wrote the judgment in his office and debunks the testimony of paid Chevron witness Guerra that it was given to the judge on a flash drive just prior to its issuance, after being written by the plaintiffs.</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There is no evidence from the Ecuador trial judge’s computers that any document was copied from a flash drive to create any part of the trial court judgment, as Chevron paid witness Guerra had claimed in testimony relied on by the New York bar staff attorneys to suspend Donziger.&nbsp;</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Chevron’s paid expert, Spencer Lynch, independently examined the same computers and presented no evidence suggesting that any part of the Ecuador trial court judgment was received by trial judge Zambrano via email or from a flash drive – again debunking Guerra’s testimony.</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">There is no document on the computer of Chevron witness Guerra that became the trial court judgment, directly undermining Guerra’s sworn testimony that he edited the judgment on his computer at the behest of the plaintiffs just before it was issued.&nbsp;</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">According to the Racich report, the text and metadata of the documents on the computers of Ecuador trial judge Zambrano that contain the trial court judgment show that “these computers were used to create a document, add text to it, edit text within it, and save the document repeatedly over a four-month period of time.” “Furthermore, there is no evidence in the metadata that the versions of the [judgment documents] were provided in any way by Mr. Guerra, Pablo Fajardo [the lead Ecuadorian lawyer for the villagers], or anybody else,” Racich concluded.</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Donziger criticized the bar grievance committee for relying on Kaplan’s findings and ignoring the Racich report and other critical evidence, while demanding that his designation as an “immediate threat to the public order” be lifted. He also demanded to be allowed a fact hearing to present the Racich report and other critical evidence that will demonstrate that Kaplan’s findings are erroneous and therefore cannot be used by the bar grievance committee as a basis for attorney discipline, although he believes they could be used as a basis for discipline against the Gibson Dunn lawyers who falsified evidence. Further underscoring the problems with the decision of the New York grievance committee is that the District of Columbia bar has decided to not move against Donziger based on the Kaplan decision given that the many problems with his findings and the fact that several issues involved are still being litigated in Canadian courts.</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">(For a detailed rebuttal of Kaplan’s erroneous findings, see&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk865301" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://stevendonziger.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/KaplanRebuttal.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline;">Chevron’s RICO Fraud</a>.)</span></font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“The bar grievance committee needs to demonstrate independence from Judge Kaplan and Chevron’s powerful and unethical law firm and really look hard at the evidence,” said Donziger. “In my opinion, it is a dereliction of duty for the New York grievance committee to assume that obviously flawed findings from a federal judge cannot be questioned when the judge never reviewed the Racich report or other critical evidence before coming to his conclusions, and when his findings have been contradicted by 17 appellate judges in another jurisdiction.</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Further, in my view there is indisputable evidence that Chevron’s lawyers at Gibson Dunn engaged in unethical and criminal activity to frame me with false witness testimony to please their most lucrative client, and that they have done this in other cases as part of a playbook marketed to high-paying corporations,” he added. “This begs the question: why is the New York bar grievance committee not investigating Chevron’s lawyers at Gibson Dunn for their patently unethical conduct, and instead focusing on me, a sole practitioner and human rights advocate?”</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Gibson Dunn’s aggressive approach and willingness to cross the ethical line for its clients has frequently backfired against the law firm.</b></font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In a case eerily similar to Donziger’s experience, Gibson Dunn recently was&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk207111" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://thechevronpit.blogspot.com/2015/03/chevron-law-firm-gibson-dunn-blasted-by.html" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">sanctioned by the High Court of London</a>&nbsp;for fabricating evidence to try to frame a political opponent of its client, then the President of the African nation of Djoubati. The Montana Supreme Court fined the firm $9.9 million for engaging in “legal thuggery” while a New York federal judge sanctioned Gibson Dunn for engaging in “unacceptable shenanigans” including hiding documents and outright lies. In the Ecuador case, the firm threatened the Ecuador trial judge with prison time unless he ruled in Chevron’s favor.&nbsp;</span>(See&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk727189" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/16448/chevrons-slapp-suit-against-ecuadorians-corporate-intimidation/" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">this article</a>&nbsp;by Greenpeace’s Weyler for a summary of Gibson Dunn’s many problems.)</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Some of&nbsp;Donziger’s defenders, including human rights lawyer Page (see&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk853368" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/the-vengeance-phase-of-chevrons-rico-strategy-human_us_599f13ade4b0cb7715bfd3e2" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">here</a>), say he has been targeted with what is probably the most well-financed corporate retaliation campaign in history. Chevron in 2011 sued Donziger for $60 billion – thought to be&nbsp;the largest potential personal liability ever –&nbsp;before dropping the entire damages claim on the eve of Kaplan’s “racketeering” trial to avoid a jury of impartial fact-finders. Under the U.S. Constitution, a claim not involving money damages can be heard by a judge alone – a fact understood&nbsp;by Chevron that Donziger said guaranteed he would not be able to mount a meaningful defense given Kaplan’s obvious bias in favor of the company. (See&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk479921" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/40990-Chevron-Fabricated-Evidence-in-U-S-Court-to-Evade-12b-Liability-to-Indigenous-Peoples-of-Ecuador-Report-Says" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">this press release</a>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk978729" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://stevendonziger.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/05/KaplanRebuttal.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">this report</a>&nbsp;for the many procedural and ethical problems with the Kaplan trial.)</font></span></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">The Racich report also corroborates&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk929048" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://stevendonziger.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/Donziger-Witness-Statement-Final.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">the sworn testimony of Donziger</span></a>, who repeatedly has said under oath he engaged in no wrongdoing and that Guerra's testimony was false. For Donziger’s main appellate brief challenging Kaplan’s factual findings, see&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk164968" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://guptabeck.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/10/Donziger-Brief.pdf" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">here</span></a>.</span>&nbsp;</font></p><p style="margin: 0px 0px 10px; padding: 0px; border: 0px; vertical-align: baseline; line-height: 18px;"><span style="padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-weight: inherit; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">For purposes of protecting his due process rights and bearing witness to a flawed process,&nbsp;Donziger said he&nbsp;&nbsp;plans to invite&nbsp;the public to his post-suspension hearing&nbsp;where he will try to reverse the bar’s decision to designate him as an “immediate threat to the public order.” However, the first “referee” appointed to oversee that hearing, corporate defense attorney Paul Doyle,&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk569071" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/41254-New-York-Bar-Referee-in-Chevron-Pollution-Case-Quits-After-Disclosure-He-Helped-Union-Carbide-Escape-Liability-in-India-s-Bhopal-Disaster" target="blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">resigned</a>&nbsp;after&nbsp;<a id="m-7215377305240686884LPlnk873249" class="m-7215377305240686884OWAAutoLink" href="http://www.csrwire.com/press_releases/41230-Support-Growing-for-Prominent-U-S-Attorney-Who-Took-on-Chevron-and-Was-Deemed-Threat-to-Public-Order-by-State-Bar-Officials" target="_blank" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: inherit; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none; padding: 0px; margin: 0px; border: 0px; font-style: inherit; vertical-align: baseline;">several prominent lawyers backed Donziger</a>&nbsp;and criticized the lack of due process afforded by the grievance committee.<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">&nbsp;It also turns out that Doyle had represented Union Carbide in the Bhopal disaster in India.</span></font></span></p></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">ref 1</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><a href="https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/16448/chevrons-slapp-suit-against-ecuadorians-corporate-intimidation/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.greenpeace.org/international/story/16448/chevrons-slapp-suit-against-ecuadorians-corporate-intimidation/</font></a></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" /><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">many lnx</font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></font></div><div>
</div><div><b>Chevron’s SLAPP suit against Ecuadorians: corporate intimidation</b></div><div>by Rex Weyler 11&nbsp;<b>May 2018&nbsp;</b>|&nbsp;&nbsp;</div><div>
</div><div>These days, when powerful corporations get caught breaking the law, polluting the Earth, violating human rights, or all of those crimes simultaneously, they don’t pay the fine and make amends, like normal citizens. They attack.</div><div>
</div><div>Corporate lawyers spend millions to assault victims with<b>&nbsp;SLAPPs (Strategic Lawsuit Against Public Participation).&nbsp;</b>The most recent SLAPP strategy in the US, popularized by attack-dog New York law firm Gibson Dunn, employs US “racketeering” (RICO) laws against environmental groups, victims of pollution, and their lawyers.</div><div>
</div><div>The purpose of a SLAPP lawsuit is not necessarily to win in court, but rather to intimidate, harass, demonize, and bankrupt the weaker opponent. “The powerful use their abundance of resources to enact revenge,” explains the American Civil Liberties Union. Many jurisdictions now ban SLAPP suits, but corporations still shop around for lax jurisdictions and sympathetic judges.</div><div>
</div><div>In 2013, for example, when Greenpeace Canada exposed Resolute Forest Products’ destructive logging in Québec, Resolute filed a retaliatory $7-million lawsuit against Greenpeace Canada and two staff members in Ontario, which did not yet have anti-SLAPP laws. Later, Resolute used US courts to attack Greenpeace USA and Greenpeace International under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO) Act, created in 1970 to prosecute organized crime syndicates. “This lawsuit,” said Greenpeace US director Annie Leonard, “is an attempt to silence, vilify, and criminalize activism.” As with most of these intimidation lawsuits, the RICO case in the US was thrown out of court, but Resolute promptly filed an amended suit.</div><div>
</div><div>In perhaps the most vindictive SLAPP in history, Chevron — one of the world’s largest corporations, with over $260-billion in assets — found a sympathetic New York judge to accept a RICO lawsuit against the victims of its vast oil pollution in Ecuador’s Amazon basin.</div><div>
</div><div>Legal thuggery</div><div>
</div><div>Chevron’s Amazon troubles began in 2000 when it purchased Texaco, inheriting liability for the company’s oil field pollution in Ecuador, known as the<b>&nbsp;Amazon Chernobyl.&nbsp;</b>Texaco/Chevron had dumped some 16 billion gallons of toxic wastewater into rivers and abandoned over 900 carcinogenic waste pits. The Indigenous rainforest inhabitants claim they were left with destroyed land, polluted water, and an epidemic of cancer and birth defects.</div><div>
</div><div>[pix Abandoned toxic oil dump, Ecuador. Courtesy of Amazon WatchAbandoned toxic oil dump, Ecuador. Courtesy of Amazon Watch © Amazon Watch]</div><div>
</div><div>In 1993, the victims sued for damages in the US. Chevron fought for nine years to shift the case to Ecuador, where they may have expected to influence the courts. Chevron fully accepted jurisdiction in Ecuador, where the case began in 2003. Six years later, in light of overwhelming scientific evidence, Chevron realized that they would likely lose.&nbsp;<b>In 2009 the oil company hired the notorious “rescue squad” law firm of Gibson Dunn, found a corporate-friendly Judge, Lewis A. Kaplan in New York, and began a series of SLAPP attacks on the victims, on their lawyers, and on the Ecuadorian judicial system. Over the next five years, Kaplan allowed virtually any Chevron motion, denied defendant motions, mocked the victims and their lawyers, and allowed a RICO racketeering case against two Ecuadoreans — Secoya Indigenous leader Javier Piaguaje and farmer Hugo Camacho — and their American lawyer,&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">Steven Donziger.</span></b></div><div>
</div><div><b>Meanwhile, in Ecuador, the Indigenous and peasant villagers won a $9.5 billion compensation judgment, confirmed by appellate courts and by Ecuador’s Supreme Court (Court of Cessation). In response, Chevron sold its assets in Ecuador, fled the country, refused to pay, and threatened the victims with a “lifetime of litigation.”</b></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The company has since retained over 60 law firms, 2,000 lawyers, paralegals, six public relations firms, squads of private investigators, and at least one bribed witness, who later admitted to lying. Lawyers for the victims estimate Chevron has spent over $2 billion to avoid payment of the court judgement, the largest collection of SLAPP suits in history.</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher (Gibson Dunn) promotes itself as a corporate “rescue squad” specializing in “shielding clients” from “billions in liability”.</b>&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">They boast of getting George W. Bush installed as US president by stopping a Florida vote recount, and shielding Lehman Brothers from liabilities in the largest bankruptcy filing in U.S. history.</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>Randy Mastro co-chairs the firm’s litigation department</b>;&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">infamous for a string of court censures for fabricating evidence, lying and other criminal misconduct. In 2015, the High Court of England sanctioned Gibson Dunn for fabricating evidence to frame the political rival of the firm’s client, the President of Djibouti, Africa.</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>In 2005, a federal court in California sanctioned Gibson Dunn for tampering with a witness, “obstruction, gamesmanship and flagrant disregard” of Court orders.&nbsp;</b>In 2007, the Montana Supreme Court assessed a $9.9 million fine against Gibson Dunn for “blatantly and maliciously trying to intimidate” its adversary, using the judicial system for “legal thuggery”. The following year, a New York federal judge sanctioned the firm for “unacceptable shenanigans”, including hiding documents and outright lies. A California federal judge concluded that the firm’s misconduct is “a product of a culture which permeates” Gibson Dunn.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">As Chevron faced losing the pollution case in Ecuador, CEO John Watson and General Counsel R. Hewitt Pate turned to Gibson Dunn’s “rescue squad” for help. The lawyers, led by Mastro, soon revealed their abusive tactics. An Oregon federal judge sanctioned the Gibson Dunn lawyers for using the discovery process — intended to provide information to opposing counsel — to harass a small legal non-profit assisting the Ecuadorian victims. In Ecuador, appellate judges rebuked Chevron’s new lawyers for threatening trial Judge Nicolas Zambrano with criminal charges and prison unless he dismissed the case.</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>However, the Ecuadorian decision stood, Chevron owed its victims $9.5 billion, and Randy Mastro went to work harassing the victims, their lawyers, and the Ecuadorian justice system before a gleefully encouraging Judge Kaplan in New York.</b></div><div>
</div><div>Judge as prosecutor</div><div>
</div><div>Chevron and Gibson Dunn knew precisely who<b>&nbsp;Judge Kaplan&nbsp;</b>was, when they launched their series of SLAPP suits through his court.</div><div>
</div><div>In 2004, Kaplan allowed the NY Police Department to arrest any “recognizable group” of 50 or more cyclists riding together, as a way of stopping bicycle protests, specifically by the environmental group Critical Mass. Although the First Amendment of the US Constitution protects “freedom of assembly”, Kaplan argued that “traffic flow” held precedent over the right of citizens to assemble in peaceful protest. When Lehman Brothers employees sued Lehmans for failing to protect their pension plan, violating the Employee Retirement Security Act, Kaplan simply dismissed the case.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">At The Robing Room, a judicial review forum, one commenter warned, “if you are representing big business interests, Judge Kaplan will find a way to rule in your favor. If you going up against big business interests, you are out of luck.” Others describe Kaplan as “working for business interests” and “part of the old-boy network.”</span></div><div>
</div><div>“We knew that Gibson Dunn and Chevron had selected Judge Kaplan as an ally,” said Steven Donziger, lawyer for the original Ecuadorian plaintiffs, Frente de Defensa de la Amazonía (FDA). “A normal judge’s responsibility is to insure impartiality, decorum, and legal integrity. In the RICO SLAPP suit, Kaplan served more as a member of the prosecution team. He mocked defendants, laughed at defense motions, praised Chevron, granted their every wish, and insulted the entire Ecuadorian justice system.”</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Marathon of preliminaries</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The highly unusual three year discovery and deposition process, prior to the actual trial, revealed a succession of nightmarish legal irregularities:</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>No media confidentiality: The SLAPP began in April 2010, when Kaplan forced filmmaker, Joseph Berlinger to turn over 600 hours of outtakes from his acclaimed 2009 documentary, Crude: The Real Price of Oil</b>. Kaplan ridiculed the journalist’s request to protect confidential sources. “If this is your best argument,” jeered Kaplan, “you’re in a lot of trouble.” A media coalition — including The New York Times, NBC, and HBO — filed a First Amendment objection with the court, and Robert Redford, writing in the Huffington Post, called the decision a “shocking” betrayal of US First Amendment rights.</div><div>
</div><div><b>Insulting a foreign Court: Kaplan and Chevron lawyer Mastro used the Berlinger hearings to insult the courts in Ecuador, where Chevron had insisted the trial be held.</b>&nbsp;Mastro called the Ecuador courts “a sham” that would cause “any American to shudder at … what passes for a judicial system.” Kaplan openly laughed when asked to delay until an Ecuadorian court could provide input. “If this were the High Court in London,” Kaplan taunted, “you can be sure I’d wait.” Despite Mastro and Kaplan’s disdain here, the Ecuadorian justice system appears as impartial and honourable as any such system in any modern nation.</div><div>
</div><div><b>Insulting the defendants:</b>&nbsp;Throughout the proceedings and in written memoranda, Kaplan referred to the 30,000 class-action victims in Ecuador as “so-called plaintiffs”, suggesting that their “standing in this matter is debatable to say the least.” He referred to their case in Ecuador as “the game” and “not a bona fide litigation.” When Donziger’s attorney made a routine request for time to review thousands of documents, Kaplan scoffed, “Don’t tell me about how long Mr. Donziger needs. I know the game here.”</div><div>
</div><div><b>No attorney-client confidentiality:&nbsp;</b>Kaplan invoked a minor technicality to claim that Donziger, the victims’ US lawyer, had “waived” all attorney-client privilege, and insisted he turn over to Chevron lawyers 17-years of confidential communications with his clients, including, emails, notes, and his entire hard drive. Defense attorneys called this “the most sweeping forced production of privileged documents in history.”</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Monster deposition: Federal rules typically limit individual depositions to one day, possibly two days in extraordinary cases. Once Chevron had all of Donziger’s confidential client files, they forced him, with Kaplan’s approval, to endure an unorthodox 18 days of discovery deposition, during which 20 or more Chevron/Gibson Dunn lawyers pelted him with petty and personal questions. According to Donziger’s RICO case rebuttal, Chevron’s lead PR consultant, revealed in 2009: “<b>Our L-T [long-term] strategy is to demonize Donziger.”</b></span></div><div><b>
</b></div><div><b>Special Master: Judge Kaplan appointed his former law partner, Max Gitter, as “Special Master” or private judge to rule over the protracted deposition</b>, paid entirely by Chevron. According to the Amazon Defense Coalition, Kaplan approved secret payments to Gitter, totaling “likely well over $1 million.” Like Kaplan, Gitter approved Chevron requests and dismissed defense requests. He revealed his conspiratorial relationship with Mastro and Chevron when he made a ruling based on the contents of a future Chevron document that had not yet been filed with the court. Upon realizing his error, he muttered, “Mr. Mastro, am I correct about that?” Mastro responded, “absolutely correct.”</div><div>
</div><div><b>Judge proposes Chevron strategy: During the discovery hearings, Judge Kaplan exclaimed: “Do the phrases Hobbs Act, extortion, RICO, have any bearing here?</b>” signaling to Chevron lawyers that they should file a racketeering complaint. Shortly thereafter, on February 1, 2011, Chevron filed their RICO complaint against Donziger, Piaguaje, and Camacho, claiming that the 10-year case before three levels of Ecuadorian courts amounted to criminal extortion. Chevron asked for billions of dollars in damages, from Donziger, a sole practitioner, and two impoverished villagers, which required a jury trial. Kaplan accepted the claim and assigned the case to himself.</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</span></div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">International powers: After the RICO filing, Judge Kaplan presumed to issue a universal injunction, allegedly prohibiting any court in any nation from enforcing the environmental judgment against Chevron, two days before the Ecuadorian court announced that judgment. I</span>n September, 2011, the US Court of Appeals vacated the injunction, chastizing Kaplan for inflicting damage on international comity, the principle among modern nations to show respect for each other’s legal systems.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Implacable hostility: By this time, Donziger and the Ecuadorian victims were almost broke, which Donziger claims, “was the whole point of Mastro’s and Chevron’s strategy.” Nevertheless,&nbsp;<b>renowned defense attorney, John Keker, a former US marine, highly respected for legal integrity,</b>&nbsp;offered to help the beleaguered defendants. “This case has degenerated into a Dickensian farce,</span>” Keker said. “Encouraged by this Court’s implacable hostility toward Donziger, Chevron will file any motion, however meritless, in the hope that the Court will use it to hurt Donziger.”</div><div>
</div><div><b>Fishing expeditions: Chevron served Donziger, Piaguaje, and Camacho, with hundreds of new document requests and over a thousand “requests for admission,” disputed claims that Chevron could argue were “admitted” if the defendants could not respond.</b>&nbsp;The impoverished Ecuadorian peasants kept almost no documents and rarely engaged in written communication. The requests imposed a massive new expense for the defendants. Kaplan also allowed Chevron to serve subpoenas on Amazon Watch, Google, Microsoft, and others, seeking email accounts to track the activities of some 100 lawyers, students, journalists, and academics that supported the Ecuadorian’s cause. “These were fishing expeditions,” Donziger explained, “that violated everyone’s right to privacy.”</div><div>
</div><div><b>Scorched Earth: By May 2013, before the actual trial had even begun, the defendants were thoroughly destitute, and their defense attorneys — Keker and Craig Smyser, who had been deferring payment — could no longer continue.</b>&nbsp;Both attorneys expressed outrage at Kaplan’s refusal to grant common sense measures to streamline the burdensome process. “Through scorched-earth litigation, executed by its army of hundreds of lawyers,” said Keker, “Chevron is using its limitless resources to crush defendants and win this case through might rather than merit.” Smyser, called the lawsuit a “legal blitzkrieg” that Kaplan not only tolerated but “encouraged”.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">After four years of gruelling discovery depositions and document demands by Chevron — the exhausted defendants’ best hope for justice rested on the trial jury. A jury would remove some decision-making power from Kaplan, and would hear overwhelming evidence of Chevron pollution and legal misdeeds. However, Kaplan had new surprises in store.</span></div><div>
</div><div>[pix Ecuadorians and P. Bellegarde, court, 2018 © Johanna LunaHugo Camacho, Amazon Defense Coalition (second from left) was one of the villagers named in the US RICO case. Here, he joins Domingo Paes, Achuar; Canadian Assembly of First Nations Grand Chief Perry Bellegarde, Janeth Cuji, Kichwa; and Rafael Pandam, President of the Indigenous Amazonian Parliament of Ecuador, in a Canadian court © Johanna Luna]</div><div>
</div><div><b>The RICO Trial</b></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">No jury: On the eve of the trial, Chevron decided, with Kaplan’s approval, to drop their financial damages claim, which meant that Kaplan could drop the jury and decide the outcome himself.&nbsp;</span>“Chevron,” said Donziger, “apparently panicked at the notion of trying to sell their fraud and extortion claims to anyone other than Kaplan.” The defense demanded a jury trial, based on their right to a jury in a RICO case, a long-standing legal principle in cases that carry criminal implications. Kaplan refused. He would decide himself about the defendants’ guilt or innocence.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);"><b>No pollution talk</b>: Even though Kaplan had presumed the authority to “set aside” an Ecuadorian environmental judgment with a 10-year, 220,000-page evidentiary record of Chevron’s environmental crimes, and to characterize that entire proceeding as an act of “extortion,” the corporate-friendly judge barred the defense from even mentioning anything “related to the existence of pollution in Ecuador.” The pollution, he said, was “not relevant.”</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>No dirty-tricks talk:</b>&nbsp;Furthermore, Kaplan ruled that the defense could not mention evidence of Chevron’s campaign or Gibson Dunn’s campaign of “dirty tricks” operations, past courtroom crimes, lies, and fabricated evidence. Chevron, of course, was allowed to discuss any alleged history of the defendants, dredged up from four years of ruthless depositions, spies, and private investigators.</div><div>
</div><div><b>Tsunami of paper:</b>&nbsp;On the first day of trial, Chevron placed over 2,500 exhibits into evidence en masse, nearly 10,000 separate assertions, to which the impoverished defense was given less than a week to respond. If they failed, Kaplan could deem the defendants’ objection “waived.”</div><div>
</div><div><b>Anonymous witnesses: Kaplan accepted testimony from Chevron witnesses whose identity they kept hidden from the defense,&nbsp;</b>preventing the normal investigation necessary for effective cross-examination. The defense expressed outrage at this violation of “basic legal principles,” which they said would “be right at home in the Spanish Inquisition.”</div><div>
</div><div><b>Editing the evidence: At this point, the defense caught Randy Mastro presenting edited video, in which he had cut out critical contextual words from Mr. Donziger’s comments</b>. According to trial transcripts, when the defense brought this to the judge’s attention, Kaplan adjourned, did some research, and responded: “About 15 words were edited out … I assume there was no attempt to mislead.”</div><div>
</div><div>Chevron’s claim that the entire Ecuadorian judicial process — ten years of court trials and appellate reviews in three levels of courts — had been “fraudulent” rested, however, almost entirely upon one, single witness.</div><div>
</div><div>[pix Steven Donziger at oil well © Lisa GibbonsSteven Donziger, lawyer for the Ecuador plaintiffs for 25 years, at oil site in Ecuador’s Amazon © Lisa Gibbons</div><div>The Witness]</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">In American Lawyer magazine, in 2009, David Hechler, describes Gibson Dunn’s “game plan,” to shield clients from liability in foreign pollution cases: “find witnesses” who will accuse the foreign court of “fraud.” In a separate American Lawyer story, Gibson, Dunn lawyer Robert Cooper, explains, “We prepared the witnesses to tell our story.”</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>In Ecuador, on behalf of Chevron, Gibson Dunn found one such witness, Alberto Guerra, a former Ecuadorian judge who had been removed for misconduct, including accepting bribes</b>. According to Amazon Watch, Chevron lawyer Andres Rivero and Chevron private investigator Yohi Ackerman paid Guerra $48,000 in cash, and agreed to pay him $12,000 a month for at least three years. Chevron lawyers allegedly negotiated and smoothed Guerra’s immigration into the US, paid for his family to move, hired lawyers to get them green cards, and bought them a car, auto insurance, and health insurance.</div><div>
</div><div>[ pix Justice Now protest, Ecuador. Photo courtesy of amazonwatch.orgJustice Now protest, Ecuador. Photo courtesy of amazonwatch.org © Amazon Watch]</div><div>
</div><div>According to a letter from the defense to the US Department of Justice,&nbsp;<b>Chevron has paid Guerra at least $2 million in cash and benefits, in exchange for false testimony. According to an affidavit by legal ethicist Erwin Chemerinsky&nbsp;</b>— Founding Dean of the University of California at Irvine School of Law and a prominent US legal scholar — these payments to Guerra violated fundamental ethical rules of law.</div><div>
</div><div>In New York, over 53 days by Guerra’s admission, Gibson Dunn’s Randy Mastro helped him prepare his testimony about “fraud” in Ecuador. On the stand before judge Kaplan,&nbsp;<span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Guerra claimed that Ecuadorian lawyers promised presiding judge Nicolas Zambrano $500,000 to allow them to write the final judgment, which Guerra claimed they gave to Zambrano on a flash drive. Guerra also claimed that he possessed a draft copy of the fraudulent judgment and that he met with the plaintiffs’ American lawyer Steven Donziger to discuss the alleged “bribe”.</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>Quickly, however, Guerra’s story fell apart.</b>&nbsp;Immigration records showed that Donziger was not even in Ecuador when Guerra claims the meeting took place. No evidence of a flash drive was ever produced, and Guerra’s computers did not turn up the draft judgment, or even a single email from the plaintiffs’ attorneys. When this came to light, Guerra changed his story, claiming that after “strengthening my memory” he now recalled working on this draft, not at home, but rather had taken an eight-hour bus ride into the jungle, where he claimed he edited the judgment on a laptop handed to him by one of the Ecuadorians’ lawyers.</div><div><b>
</b></div><div><b>However, this story crumbled as well when forensic analysis showed that the trial judge had never downloaded the judgement from a flash drive and, rather, had opened and saved his own written judgement document more than 400 times over three months on his own office computer.</b></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Furthermore, after the RICO trial, in a separate arbitration under the US-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty, Guerra admitted under oath that he had lied to Chevron’s lawyers about his involvement in the alleged attempt to influence the Ecuadorian judgement. “I did exaggerate about [some things], yes,” said Guerra under questioning. When a lawyer asked him, “And among the ways you tried to leverage your position was to falsely tell the Chevron representatives that the Plaintiffs had offered you $300,000?” Guerra answered, “Yes, sir. I lied there.”</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>Nevertheless, Kaplan accepted Guerra’s testimony and rejected defense efforts — Motion to strike testimony and Motion for terminating sanctions — to strike Guerra’s testimony, which the defense claims was fabricated during the 53-day session with Chevron lawyers.</b></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The final twist appeared as Judge Kaplan crafted a judgment. By dropping the money claim, Chevron had avoided a jury but also undermined its own case. A plaintiff must seek either money for damages or an injunction, a court-ordered condition placed on the defendant. The Court of Appeals had already reversed Kaplan’s earlier injunction and could do so again. Without a money claim or injunction, Chevron lacked standing.</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>Perhaps to avoid this problem, Kaplan based his guilty verdict on a “non-statutory claim for equitable relief” from an allegedly fraudulent judgment.&nbsp;</b>According to Donziger’s rebuttal, the decision lacked “due process,” since the claim had never been presented by Chevron or argued in court, and “relied on vague 18th and 19th century treatises” that “had been effectively repealed and replaced by the statutory framework for enforcement of foreign judgments … during the twentieth century.” Typically, a judge can’t invent a new claim for the plaintiff after a trial has ended.</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">The Republic of Ecuador filed an Amicus Brief, stating that “Judge Lewis Kaplan reached far beyond the issues presented to unfairly—and unnecessarily—impugn the integrity of the Republic of Ecuador.” They stated that Kaplan’s “unfounded commentary”, against a “sovereign democracy”, was based on “unreliable evidence”. The Ecuadorian court charged that Kaplan relied almost exclusively on one Vladimiro Álvarez Grau, an avowed political opponent of the Ecuadorian government. “Chevron sought out a favorable forum,” the Ecuadorian court wrote. “The District Court [Kaplan], fulfilling Chevron’s wishes, chose to make far-reaching judgments based primarily on the opinions of a single partisan.”</span></div><div>
</div><div><b>Finally, the Ecuadorian court confirmed that Chevron Corporation remained responsible for the impact of its pollution.&nbsp;</b>“In 2005,” the court wrote, “ChevronTexaco dropped the name ‘Texaco’ and reverted to its original name, Chevron Corporation. There is no indication in the record before us that shortening its name had any effect on ChevronTexaco’s legal obligations. Chevron Corporation therefore remains accountable.”</div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Furthermore, in a separate discovery hearing, the US Third Circuit court cautioned: “The circumstances supporting [Chevron’s] claim of fraud largely are allegations and allegations are not factual findings.”</span></div><div>
</div><div><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 204, 102);">This historic SLAPP lawsuit, possibly the most expensive in history, appears to have failed, even after Kaplan’s decision</span>.<b>&nbsp;Foreign courts have ignored Kaplan’s injunction, and Donziger and his clients are making progress in Canadian courts, where the victims are attempting to collect the Ecuadorian judgment by seizing Chevron Canada’s assets, and where they have won three consecutive unanimous appellate court decisions. Donziger and the Ecuadorian villagers have said they would welcome Chevron to claim in Canada that the Ecuadorian judgment was fraudulent. “If they had to bring Guerra to Canada before a neutral judge,” says Donziger, “we believe the company’s entire RICO narrative will collapse.”</b></div><div>
</div><div>SLAPP suits represent a threat to public protest and free speech. They have no place in a democracy.</div><div>
</div><div>References and Links</div><div>
</div><div>Ecuador Supreme Court (Court of Cessation): court ruling in Ecuadorean class action vs. Chevron Corporation.</div><div>
</div><div>ACLU, Slapped: A Tool for Activists: ACLU</div><div>
</div><div>Chevron assets: Fortune magazine.</div><div>
</div><div>Chevron: 60 law firms and 2000 lawyers: Amazon Watch, CSR.</div><div>
</div><div>Chevron threatens plaintiffs with a “Lifetime of litigation.”: (1) “Chevron Accused of $2 Million Witness Bribery Plot in Ecuador Pollution Case, Alternet, January 31, 2018; and (2) Writ of Mandamus, Feb. 6, 2011: pdf</div><div>
</div><div>Gibson Dunn, “rescue squad,” “shielding clients”: Gibson Dunn promotions</div><div>
</div><div>Gibson Dunn censure by High Court of England: “Chevron Law Firm Gibson Dunn Blasted by High Court of England For Falsifying Evidence: Chevron Pit, March 25, 2015.” Montana Supreme Court assessed a $9.9 million fine against Gibson Dunn: Montana Supreme Court document, 05-378, 2007, MT 62.</div><div>
</div><div>Ecuador, appellate judges rebuke Chevron’s lawyers for threatening trial Judge Nicolas Zambrano.</div><div>
</div><div>Gibson Dunn in Ecuador: under scrutiny for trying to mislead Congress</div><div>
</div><div>California, 2005, censure of Gibson Dunn</div><div>
</div><div>Gibson Dunn sanctioned by a federal judge for harassing a witness in a discovery action in Oregon.</div><div>
</div><div>Comments about Judge Lewis A. Kaplan on legal review site: The Robing Room</div><div>
</div><div>Robert Redford objects to Kaplan denial of media confidentiality: Huffington Post</div><div>
</div><div>New York Times, NBC, and HBO file a First Amendment objection with the court. NPR</div><div>
</div><div>Kaplan and Mastro insult the courts in Ecuador: “Writ of Mandamus, US Court of Appeals, Second Circuit, Hugo Gerardo Camacho Naranjo and Javier Piaguaje Payaguaje, petitioners, filed by Attorneys: James E. Tyrrell Jr. NY, Julio C. Gomez, NY, and Carlos A. Zelaya, II, Feb. 6, 2011: pdf</div><div>
</div><div>Allegations of bias by Kaplan: Writ of Mandamus, Feb. 6, 2011: pdf; and “Chevron’s RICO Fraud” pdf</div><div>
</div><div>“Our L-T [long-term] strategy is to demonize Donziger.” — Chevron’s lead PR consultant, 2009: (1) “Chevron’s RICO Fraud” pdf and (2) “Chevron Accused of $2 Million Witness Bribery Plot in Ecuador Pollution Case, Alternet, January 31, 2018</div><div>
</div><div>Chevron’s RICO Fraud: An Abuse of Indigenous Peoples, the Environment, and U.S. Courts in the Chevron v. Donziger Case; S. Donziger and the Ecuadorian Legal Team: pdf.</div><div>
</div><div>Defendant’s right to a jury in a RICO case: CSR, 6 February, 2014.</div><div>
</div><div>Defense calls anonymous witnesses a violation of “basic legal principles … right at home in the Spanish Inquisition.”: US District Court, Southern District of New York, Case 1:11-cv-00691-LAK-JCF Document 1154 Filed 05/14/13, “Opposition to Chevron’s Motion for an order to Further protecting the Confidential declaration of Doe3.”</div><div>
</div><div>Gibson Dunn “game plan”: (1) “District Court Denies Enforcement of $97 Million Nicaraguan Judgment,” Gibson Dunn; and (2) “The Kill Step,” David Hechler, Sept. 20, 2009, The American Lawyer</div><div>
</div><div>Randy Mastro and Gibson Dunn lawyers preparing Guerra over 53 days: Huffington Post, Paul Paz y Miño, May 30, 2017.</div><div>
</div><div>Guerra bribed by Chevron: (1) “Chevron Accused of $2 Million Witness Bribery Plot in Ecuador Pollution Case, Alternet, January 31, 2018; (2) “Chevron’s RICO Fraud,” legal rebuttal: pdf. Guerra bribed by Chevron: Huffington Post, Dec. 6, 2017; (3) “Chevron Executives Misused Millions of Shareholder Dollars To Bribe a Witness,” Amazon Watch, May 30, 2017.</div><div>
</div><div>Alberto Guerra admits lying in RICO testimony: (1) US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, Chevron Corporation vs. Steven Donziger, Hugo Gerardo Camacho Naranjo, et. al.; No. 14-826-cv(L), November 5, 2015. (2) “Chevron’s Star Witness Admits to Lying in the Amazon Pollution Case, Vice News, Eva Hershaw, October 26, 2015 (with Testimony from arbitration under the US-Ecuador Bilateral Investment Treaty); (3) U.S. Courts Endorsed Chevron’s Fabricated Evidence: Ecuadorian Villagers and Counsel Slam Chevron’s Star Witness for Lying and Offer Rebuttals to 12 False Findings by Second Circuit Court of Appeals”: CSR wire, May 16, 2017; and (4) Chevron’s RICO Fraud: pdf.</div><div>
</div><div>“Judge Kaplan Drastically Overreached With “Unlawful” Injunction To Protect Chevron, International Law Experts Say,” Rainforest Action Network.</div><div>
</div><div>Defense documents requesting to strike Guerra’s false testimony, citing evidence that Guerra lied, and admitted to lying: (1) Motion to strike testimony of Alberto Guerra Bastides, pdf and (2) Motion for terminating sanctions, pdf.</div><div>
</div><div>“Rainforest Groups Blast U.S. Judge Kaplan for Ruling Designed to Help Chevron Evade $9.5b Pollution Liability,” CSR wire, March 9, 2018.</div><div>
</div><div>Republic of Ecuador’s Amicus Brief denouncing the Kaplan judgement based on false testimony from a bribed witness, and denouncing Kaplan’s insults toward Ecuadorian courts.</div><div>
</div><div>US Third Circuit court, Chevron’s claim of fraud are allegations, not facts: Writ of Mandamus, US Court of Appeals, Case: 11-2259, 06/02/2011.</div><div>
</div><div>Kaplan’s judgement based on 18th and 19th century treatises: Judgement transcript: District Court, Southern District of New York: Case 1:11-cv-00691-LAK-JCF, Document 1874, Filed 03/04/14, Page 330 of 497.</div><div>
</div><div>Chevron lacked standing: (Article III , U.S. Constitution; the US Supreme Court has held that federal courts may hear “cases and controversies” but many not simply issue advisory opinions if there is no claim for “relief.”</div><div>
</div><div>“In Canada, Chevron Faces New Risks From $12b Ecuador Pollution Judgment As Shareholders Step up Pressure,” Amazon Defense Coalition, FDA, March 23, 2018</div></div><div style="font-size: small; background-color: rgb(255, 255, 255);"><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">ref2</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><a href="https://www.huffpost.com/entry/chevrons-ghostwriting-cha_b_7191074" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;"><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000">https://www.huffpost.com/entry/chevrons-ghostwriting-cha_b_7191074</font></a></div><div>
</div><div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">no lnx many</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Karen Hinton&nbsp;&nbsp;</font><span times="Times" new="New" roman="Roman" font-size="font-size" large="large">Contributor</span></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Chief Strategy Officer/Fenton</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Chevron’s “Ghostwriting” Charge Unraveling in Ecuador Pollution Case</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">05/05/2015 10:38 am ET Updated&nbsp;<b>Dec 06, 2017</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>
</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Will U.S. Appellate Court Consider New Evidence Or Close Its Eyes?&nbsp;</b></font></div><div>
</div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Chevron’s “ghostwriting” charge against Ecuadorian villagers and their attorneys, who together have held the oil giant accountable for toxic dumping in the Amazon rainforest, is unraveling.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">In the unraveling is a string of “missing” serial numbers on USB drives or flash drives that Chevron’s lawyers and forensic experts have failed to produce.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Before I explain, though, let me set the scene.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>The Ecuadorian villagers, who two decades ago sued Chevron for intentionally contaminating their ancestral lands in the Amazon rainforest, have obtained a game-changing forensic report&nbsp; that blows apart Chevron’s fake narrative that it was the victim of a fraud.&nbsp;</b></font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">This report, explained by Courthouse News,&nbsp; concluded that Chevron’s explosive charge that lawyers for the villagers “ghostwrote” a $9.5 billion Ecuador judgment against Chevron is a crock.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">I say “game-changing” because the forensic report — by J. Christopher Racich, one of the leading experts in the field of computer forensics — will be used by the villagers in enforcement courts in Canada, Brazil and possibly other countries to prove the judgment is valid and Chevron has been falsifying evidence.&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Arrogantly, Chevron has refused to pay the $9.5 billion to clean up its toxic mess, forcing the Ecuadorians to try to seize company assets in other countries. Chevron previously sold off all of its assets in Ecuador to make itself judgment proof even though it insisted the trial be conducted in the courts of the South American country.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><span style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">This new forensic analysis found that the 188-page Ecuador judgment was written gradually over a four-month period, from October 2010 to February 2011, when the Ecuador court issued the ruling. (See the 20-page report here.) Importantly, the report also found no evidence “that a litigation document was transferred to (the judge’s) computers while he was drafting the judgment.” (Racich reviewed the hard drives of the two computers used by the Ecuador judge to write the judgment against Chevron.</span>)&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>After losing the case in its chosen forum of Ecuador, Chevron filed a retaliatory “racketeering” lawsuit against the villagers and their lawyers in the U.S. in a last-ditch attempt to try to block enforcement of the judgment</b>. (See my previous blogs for more details about the history of the case.) This new recent forensic analysis was conducted after that trial for a separate but related arbitration claim filed by Chevron against the Government of Ecuador.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">This finding could be the most important one in this seemingly never-ending litigation.&nbsp;&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">That’s because Chevron General Counsel R. Hewitt Pate and his top lawyer, Randy Mastro of the controversial law firm Gibson Dunn & Crutcher (which recently was found by the High Court of England to have falsified evidence&nbsp; in another case), hoped the forensic analysis would corroborate testimony by their discredited witness, Alberto Guerra.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">[2015-05-01-1430506034-8262307-photomastro.jpeg</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Chevron Lawyer Randy Mastro</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">2015-05-01-1430505960-2939122-photoGuerra.jpeg</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Chevron’s Discredited Witness Alberto Guerra]</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Chevron has paid Guerra an estimated $2 million in cash and benefits and moved him and his family to the U.S., apparently in exchange for his testimony. The former Ecuador judge is an admitted criminal; he testified under oath to taking numerous bribes before he was removed from the bench. See here.&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">After being coached for 53 straight days by Chevron’s lawyers, Guerra testified in a U.S. court that one of the Ecuadorians’ lawyers gave the Ecuador judgment to Judge Nicolas Zambrano in late January 2011, just days before the judgment was issued. Racich found no evidence that this occurred.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Meanwhile, neither Chevron nor the arbitration panel hearing the company’s claim that it has not been treated fairly in Ecuador’s court system has released Chevron’s own forensic analysis of the judge’s computers conducted by Spencer Lynch of the&nbsp;<b>New York-based digital firm Stroz Friedberg.</b>&nbsp;From various legal motions filed in the arbitration and the Racich report, though, we know this:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Chevron expert Lynch agrees with Racich that no evidence exists that documents having to do with the judgment were transferred to Zambrano’s computers during the period of time that he was writing the judgment between October 2010 and February 2011, directly contradicting Guerra’s testimony.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">However, here is where the plot thickens.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The 32-year-old up and coming Stroz Friedberg examiner, based in London and schooled at Duke University, claims that five USBs he obtained from Guerra were connected to Zambrano’s computers.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">The only problem is that nothing — as in zero — has been found on Guerra’s computer that resembles the judgment, even though he testified at one point the judgment was on his computer. (We note that Guerra and Zambrano served on the same court at one time and it would not have been unusual for them to share documents.)</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">And, finally, the Chevron bombshell:</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Lynch did not provide the serial numbers of the five USBs.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>Now, forensic experts never forget to write down the serial numbers of flash drives. That would be like a police officer forgetting to write down the tag number of a speeding car he’s stopped.</b></font></div><div>
</div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Here’s what Racich had to say about Lynch’s missing serial numbers.&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“Because the serial numbers were not recorded by (Chevron’s) forensic examiners from Mr. Guerra’s original USB devices (a standard and fundamental step during imaging of any Computer equipment), no forensic examiner can conclude with a degree of scientific certainty that the images currently in our possession are of the USB devices that were attached to Mr. Zambrano’s computers....</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">“In a forensic case involving the acquisition of electronic data, it is highly unusual that these serial numbers were not recorded — Stroz Friedberg recorded them for all other devices they imaged from Mr. Guerra .... Without this information, Mr. Lynch is merely speculating that the USB images taken from Mr. Guerra’s USB devices that we have both examined are in fact the same USB devices that were attached to Mr. Zambrano’s computers.”</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">Forgot the serial numbers? Mistake? Not a chance. Holding back the serial numbers allows Chevron’s lawyers to do nothing but sow seeds of doubt when, in truth, they have nothing but bad news in their own forensic analysis.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">During the recent oral argument in the appeal of the “fraud” charges, Judge Richard Wesley of the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit indicated a “dispute” existed among the three judges on whether they could consider the Racich report in the appeal. Significantly, the lower court judge in that extremely problematic case did not have the Racich report.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">I realize that sometimes evidence obtained after a trial cannot always be used in an appeal, but we are talking about delaying and possibly denying justice to tens of thousands of Ecuadorians because they could not afford the costs to do the same forensic analysis prior to the “fraud” trial and Chevron could afford to pay a witness up to $2 million.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">We also are talking about the reputation of human rights lawyers Steven Donziger* and Pablo Fajardo, who should have a legal path of some sort to clearing their names.&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman"><b>I don’t know about you, but I will take the word of a highly-respected American forensic expert with a stellar reputation over a self-confessed corrupt judge who’s been paid a king’s ransom by an oil company trying to evade responsibility for its contamination.</b></font></div><div>
</div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">PS: If Stroz Friedberg sounds familiar to you, it’s because that’s the firm Chevron lawyer Mastro hired to conduct a forensic analysis of the State of New Jersey’s computers, used by Governor Chris Christie and his entourage of political appointees involved in Bridgegate.</font></div><div>
</div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Mastro’s “independent” and “exhaustive” review of Bridgegate produced no incriminating findings.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" style="background-color: rgb(255, 255, 102);">Meanwhile, indictments against the Governor’s political staff have been handed down by the U.S. Attorney’s office.&nbsp;&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">&nbsp;</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">It would appear Stroz Friedberg and Mastro “missed” something again.</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">*Disclosure: I work pro-bono for a group of indigenous Ecuadorians and their U.S. legal adviser, Steven Donziger, to help hold Chevron accountable for one of the world’s largest environmental disasters in the Amazon rainforest. From May 2008 to March 2013, I was paid by Donziger to represent the Ecuadorians as their U.S. media spokesperson.</font></div></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">==</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">punked by api</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman">
</font></div><div><font size="4" face="Times New Roman" color="#000000" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;"><a href="https://theintercept.com/2019/04/03/branded-content-fossil-fuel-companies/" style="text-decoration-line: none; font-weight: bold; color: rgb(0, 51, 153); outline: none;">https://theintercept.com/2019/04/03/branded-content-fossil-fuel-companies/</a></font></div><div>....</div></div>