7 ms·

This is insane. What can the public do about this?

rce 5y ago
Why is it insane? The article said he fabricated and withheld evidence and won the case via bribery and fraud. I'm not familiar with this case, but that seems to be the findings of the court Oil polluters should be held responsible for their acts. At the same time, bribery, fraud, withholding and fabricating evidence must also not be allowed to stand
- woodruffw 5y ago
  The article says that Chevron has accused him of those things. Chevron, to my mind, is not a famously honest company, and the fact that the US Attorney for the SDNY declined to case suggests that this might be more scorched earth by a large corporation than about actual justice.
  - WillPostForFood 5y ago
    The NY Times article says the judge appointed the law firm, not Chevron as this article claims. After the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York declined to prosecute the case, Judge Kaplan took the rare step of appointing a private law firm, Seward & Kissel, to prosecute Mr. Donziger in the name of the U.S. government
    - sacred_numbers 5y ago
      It may have been a judge that appointed the firm, but it's kind of suspicious that he would appoint a firm that had previously represented Chevron to represent the US Government. That seems like a pretty big conflict of interest.
      - jahewson 5y ago
        That’s not a conflict of interest - the prosecution is supposed to be “against” the defendant.
        cgio 5y ago
        Maybe so, but on behalf of its client, the government? The court? Not on behalf of someone else who is not paying. Hard to imagine there was no other law firm that would take this job, and if not then that’s one more negative sign for validity of prosecution, right?
        6510 5y ago
        see the interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKbpptFKaXc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKbpptFKaXc
        woodruffw 5y ago
        The judge’s selection is the conflict of interest, not the prosecution itself. Selecting a private firm that’s financially entangled with the aggrieved party to discharge the duties of the Department of Justice is extremely unusual and concerning.
    - r00fus 5y ago
      I've never heard of this kind of thing happening before. I wonder how close Kaplan is to Chevron.
      - jahewson 5y ago
        It’s very rare for a disbarred lawyer to spend 7 years ignoring court orders. Kaplan is really pissed off and wants consequences.
    - DeathArrow 5y ago
      I find it weird that in the US law system a private company can prosecute someone. What's next? Hiring private judges and juries?
      - hellbannedguy 5y ago
        In certain parts of the USA we have judges who were never lawyers.
      - soco 5y ago
        Not that surprising when you remember the private prisons.
      - useragent86 5y ago
        It can't. The NYT article says: > After the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York declined to prosecute the case, Judge Kaplan took the rare step of appointing a private law firm, Seward & Kissel, to prosecute Mr. Donziger in the name of the U.S. government. So the real problem here is people not reading the article, jumping to conclusions, and spreading misinformation in the comments (on HN?!). And probably the SDNY being too biased to enforce the law against a lawyer who cheated in a case against an oil company. Anyone who's been following the SDNY in the news for a while shouldn't be surprised about that.
  - makomk 5y ago
    The US courts also found that he had, in fact, done those things. Their main evidence for this was internal e-mails and memos by Donzinger and his colleagues where they talked about, planned, and carried out exactly those actions. (I read the ruling back when this last came up on HN.)
- paulirish 5y ago
  one of these things is not like the other.
- danuker 5y ago
  Here's from the Wikipedia article on the judge (Kaplan). > Kaplan has been accused of displaying a pro-corporate bias in the case.[12] At the hearing, Alberto Guerra, a former Ecuadorian judge, testified for Chevron, claiming Donziger bribed him and others to win the case by fraud. Guerra's testimony was cited by Kaplan as a key factor in his decision. In 2015, Guerra claimed his testimony against Donziger had been largely a lie.[13] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_A._Kaplan#Chevron_vs_Donzinger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_A._Kaplan#Chevron_vs_Don...
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
- beebeepka 5y ago
  Being accused of bribery by Chevron (a company as dirty as they come) is all the evidence you need, huh?
- 6510 5y ago
  He says he was put under house arrest for appealing the handing over of his laptop because it has his clients confidential information on it. interview : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKbpptFKaXc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKbpptFKaXc
LurkingPenguin 5y ago
Why should the public do anything about this? A US court found that the $9.5 billion judgment against Chevron in Ecuador was procured by fraud, bribery, and racketeering. From Wikipedia: > In 2018, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague ruled that the $9.5 billion judgment in Ecuador was marked by fraud and corruption and "should not be recognised or enforced by the courts of other States."[18][19][20] The amount Ecuador must pay to Chevron to compensate for damages is yet to be determined. The award found that Ecuador violated its obligations under international treaties, investment agreements and international law. The Court of Arbitration's findings of fraudulent activities included that the evidence placed before the Court is "the most thorough documentary, video, and testimonial proof of fraud ever put before an arbitral tribunal", that the plaintiffs championed by the film actually were engaged in blackmail and bribery of Ecuadorian judges. Their efforts triggered an order to appoint an "expert" friendly to the plaintiffs, that Ecuadorian government prosecutors "actively cooperated" with the plaintiffs, that the plaintiffs bribed the "experts" and ghostwrote their report and that the plaintiffs paid a retired judge to draft the acting judge's orders—and that the same judge solicited bribes that Chevron refused to pay. Donzinger was disbarred for his actionns: > In 2014, Kaplan ruled that the judgment in Ecuador was invalid because Donziger had achieved it through offenses against legal ethics, including racketeering, extortion, wire fraud, money laundering, obstruction of justice, judicial bribery, coercion, witness tampering, and arranging for expert's reports to be ghostwritten Chevron is certainly not the world's nicest company (to put it kindly) but why should anybody lose sleep over a lawyer who a US court found engaged in illegal behavior to shake Chevron down? If anything, Donzinger is lucky that he wasn't prosecuted by the Southern District of New York.
- tgv 5y ago
  > the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague That's not a real court. That's one of those joke courts with judges appointed by the opposing parties and one who's appointed through a completely obscure process without outside supervision. Their livelihood depends on being chosen frequently. Judge Judy, but with larger stakes.
  - LurkingPenguin 5y ago

rce 5y ago

Why is it insane? The article said he fabricated and withheld evidence and won the case via bribery and fraud. I'm not familiar with this case, but that seems to be the findings of the court Oil polluters should be held responsible for their acts. At the same time, bribery, fraud, withholding and fabricating evidence must also not be allowed to stand

woodruffw 5y ago
The article says that Chevron has accused him of those things. Chevron, to my mind, is not a famously honest company, and the fact that the US Attorney for the SDNY declined to case suggests that this might be more scorched earth by a large corporation than about actual justice.
- WillPostForFood 5y ago
  The NY Times article says the judge appointed the law firm, not Chevron as this article claims. After the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York declined to prosecute the case, Judge Kaplan took the rare step of appointing a private law firm, Seward & Kissel, to prosecute Mr. Donziger in the name of the U.S. government
  - sacred_numbers 5y ago
    It may have been a judge that appointed the firm, but it's kind of suspicious that he would appoint a firm that had previously represented Chevron to represent the US Government. That seems like a pretty big conflict of interest.
    - jahewson 5y ago
      That’s not a conflict of interest - the prosecution is supposed to be “against” the defendant.
      - cgio 5y ago
        Maybe so, but on behalf of its client, the government? The court? Not on behalf of someone else who is not paying. Hard to imagine there was no other law firm that would take this job, and if not then that’s one more negative sign for validity of prosecution, right?
      - 6510 5y ago
        see the interview https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKbpptFKaXc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKbpptFKaXc
      - woodruffw 5y ago
        The judge’s selection is the conflict of interest, not the prosecution itself. Selecting a private firm that’s financially entangled with the aggrieved party to discharge the duties of the Department of Justice is extremely unusual and concerning.
  - r00fus 5y ago
    I've never heard of this kind of thing happening before. I wonder how close Kaplan is to Chevron.
    - jahewson 5y ago
      It’s very rare for a disbarred lawyer to spend 7 years ignoring court orders. Kaplan is really pissed off and wants consequences.
  - DeathArrow 5y ago
    I find it weird that in the US law system a private company can prosecute someone. What's next? Hiring private judges and juries?
    - hellbannedguy 5y ago
      In certain parts of the USA we have judges who were never lawyers.
    - soco 5y ago
      Not that surprising when you remember the private prisons.
    - useragent86 5y ago
      It can't. The NYT article says: > After the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York declined to prosecute the case, Judge Kaplan took the rare step of appointing a private law firm, Seward & Kissel, to prosecute Mr. Donziger in the name of the U.S. government. So the real problem here is people not reading the article, jumping to conclusions, and spreading misinformation in the comments (on HN?!). And probably the SDNY being too biased to enforce the law against a lawyer who cheated in a case against an oil company. Anyone who's been following the SDNY in the news for a while shouldn't be surprised about that.
- makomk 5y ago
  The US courts also found that he had, in fact, done those things. Their main evidence for this was internal e-mails and memos by Donzinger and his colleagues where they talked about, planned, and carried out exactly those actions. (I read the ruling back when this last came up on HN.)
paulirish 5y ago
one of these things is not like the other.
danuker 5y ago
Here's from the Wikipedia article on the judge (Kaplan). > Kaplan has been accused of displaying a pro-corporate bias in the case.[12] At the hearing, Alberto Guerra, a former Ecuadorian judge, testified for Chevron, claiming Donziger bribed him and others to win the case by fraud. Guerra's testimony was cited by Kaplan as a key factor in his decision. In 2015, Guerra claimed his testimony against Donziger had been largely a lie.[13] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_A._Kaplan#Chevron_vs_Donzinger https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lewis_A._Kaplan#Chevron_vs_Don...
deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
beebeepka 5y ago
Being accused of bribery by Chevron (a company as dirty as they come) is all the evidence you need, huh?
6510 5y ago
He says he was put under house arrest for appealing the handing over of his laptop because it has his clients confidential information on it. interview : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKbpptFKaXc https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LKbpptFKaXc

LurkingPenguin 5y ago

Why should the public do anything about this? A US court found that the $9.5 billion judgment against Chevron in Ecuador was procured by fraud, bribery, and racketeering. From Wikipedia: > In 2018, the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague ruled that the $9.5 billion judgment in Ecuador was marked by fraud and corruption and "should not be recognised or enforced by the courts of other States."[18][19][20] The amount Ecuador must pay to Chevron to compensate for damages is yet to be determined. The award found that Ecuador violated its obligations under international treaties, investment agreements and international law. The Court of Arbitration's findings of fraudulent activities included that the evidence placed before the Court is "the most thorough documentary, video, and testimonial proof of fraud ever put before an arbitral tribunal", that the plaintiffs championed by the film actually were engaged in blackmail and bribery of Ecuadorian judges. Their efforts triggered an order to appoint an "expert" friendly to the plaintiffs, that Ecuadorian government prosecutors "actively cooperated" with the plaintiffs, that the plaintiffs bribed the "experts" and ghostwrote their report and that the plaintiffs paid a retired judge to draft the acting judge's orders—and that the same judge solicited bribes that Chevron refused to pay. Donzinger was disbarred for his actionns: > In 2014, Kaplan ruled that the judgment in Ecuador was invalid because Donziger had achieved it through offenses against legal ethics, including racketeering, extortion, wire fraud, money laundering, obstruction of justice, judicial bribery, coercion, witness tampering, and arranging for expert's reports to be ghostwritten Chevron is certainly not the world's nicest company (to put it kindly) but why should anybody lose sleep over a lawyer who a US court found engaged in illegal behavior to shake Chevron down? If anything, Donzinger is lucky that he wasn't prosecuted by the Southern District of New York.

tgv 5y ago
> the Permanent Court of Arbitration in The Hague That's not a real court. That's one of those joke courts with judges appointed by the opposing parties and one who's appointed through a completely obscure process without outside supervision. Their livelihood depends on being chosen frequently. Judge Judy, but with larger stakes.
- LurkingPenguin 5y ago