3 ms·

> Four months before the theft, on May 4, 1987, Saura Taniguti, then director of Ipasgo, the institute of insurance for civil servants, used police force to pre

by ng12 5y ago

> Four months before the theft, on May 4, 1987, Saura Taniguti, then director of Ipasgo, the institute of insurance for civil servants, used police force to prevent one of the owners of IGR, Carlos Figueiredo Bezerril, from removing the radioactive material that had been left behind.[7] Figueiredo then warned the president of Ipasgo, Lício Teixeira Borges, that he should take responsibility "for what would happen with the caesium bomb".[7] The Court of Goiás posted a security guard to protect the site.[8] Meanwhile, the owners of IGR wrote several letters to the National Nuclear Energy Commission (CNEN), warning them about the danger of keeping a teletherapy unit at an abandoned site, but they could not remove the equipment by themselves once a court order prevented them from doing so. It sounds pretty cut-and-dry. They were physically prevented from removing the equipment and they alerted the authorities to let then know how dangerous it was.

mytailorisrich 5y ago
It's not cut and dry at all because, according to Wikipedia, at that point the equipment had already been left abandoned there for 2 years without any mention of any measure to secure it. Again, it's hard to second guess based on a few lines on Wikipedia because there is no details but the main point remains that it does not sound strange at all that those who claim to be the owners be held to account (among others).
- ratww 5y ago
  According to the linked sources in Portuguese, CNEN (the government nuclear energy authority) knew about the Cesium machine from the moment the address of IGR (the owners of the machine) changed. IGN and a lawyer expert in the matter claimed that the authorisation for moving the machine could only come from CNEN. If anything, that's gross negligence from CNEN. IGR seemed very exasperated during the whole process, if they were really fighting court orders that prevented them from having access to the place (and the machine). -- EDIT: However, according to this court sentence [2], it seems that IGR never told anything to CNEM: > Then, under pressure to leave the site, the IGR transferred its headquarters to another address, and ended up abandoning the obsolete Cesium-137 bomb in the old building, without even notifying the CNEN or the State Health Secretariat of the fact. > On 05/04/87, the demolition of the building began, by order of the former partner of IGR, AMAURILLO MONTEIRO DE OLIVEIRA, culminating with the almost total destruction of the original building, which left it without a roof, doors or windows, despite the existence of the aforementioned Cesium-137 bomb on the site, without any warnings or notices. -- [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20040309113338/http://www.jornalopcao.com.br/index.asp?secao=Op%E7%E3oCultural&subsecao=Suplementos&idjornal=67 https://web.archive.org/web/20040309113338/http://www.jornal... [2] https://jus.com.br/jurisprudencia/16292/sentenca-na-acao-civil-publica-no-caso-do-acidente-radioativo-com-cesio-137-em-goiania https://jus.com.br/jurisprudencia/16292/sentenca-na-acao-civ...
  - mytailorisrich 5y ago
    Sure and, as already mentioned, the Wikipedia article does mention that the CNEN ended up being liable for compensation. But sending a letter, even letters, to the CNEN does not absolve the owner's responsibility. It just shows that several organisations seem not to have done what they should have.
    - ratww 5y ago
      The claim by IGR, however, was that the removal was impossible without authorisation from CNEN, and that they legally lost access to the location and the machine. If this was indeed true and they acted on it, then it would absolve them. However a judge disagreed, so they also had to pay 100k. --- EDIT: On the second page of the document above, the judge mentions that owners of IGR were free from paying. Only the nuclear physicist (Flamarion) and a former partner who ordered the demolition (Amaurillo) had to pony up the 100k.

by ng12 5y ago

mytailorisrich 5y ago

It's not cut and dry at all because, according to Wikipedia, at that point the equipment had already been left abandoned there for 2 years without any mention of any measure to secure it. Again, it's hard to second guess based on a few lines on Wikipedia because there is no details but the main point remains that it does not sound strange at all that those who claim to be the owners be held to account (among others).

ratww 5y ago
According to the linked sources in Portuguese, CNEN (the government nuclear energy authority) knew about the Cesium machine from the moment the address of IGR (the owners of the machine) changed. IGN and a lawyer expert in the matter claimed that the authorisation for moving the machine could only come from CNEN. If anything, that's gross negligence from CNEN. IGR seemed very exasperated during the whole process, if they were really fighting court orders that prevented them from having access to the place (and the machine). -- EDIT: However, according to this court sentence [2], it seems that IGR never told anything to CNEM: > Then, under pressure to leave the site, the IGR transferred its headquarters to another address, and ended up abandoning the obsolete Cesium-137 bomb in the old building, without even notifying the CNEN or the State Health Secretariat of the fact. > On 05/04/87, the demolition of the building began, by order of the former partner of IGR, AMAURILLO MONTEIRO DE OLIVEIRA, culminating with the almost total destruction of the original building, which left it without a roof, doors or windows, despite the existence of the aforementioned Cesium-137 bomb on the site, without any warnings or notices. -- [1] https://web.archive.org/web/20040309113338/http://www.jornalopcao.com.br/index.asp?secao=Op%E7%E3oCultural&subsecao=Suplementos&idjornal=67 https://web.archive.org/web/20040309113338/http://www.jornal... [2] https://jus.com.br/jurisprudencia/16292/sentenca-na-acao-civil-publica-no-caso-do-acidente-radioativo-com-cesio-137-em-goiania https://jus.com.br/jurisprudencia/16292/sentenca-na-acao-civ...
- mytailorisrich 5y ago
  Sure and, as already mentioned, the Wikipedia article does mention that the CNEN ended up being liable for compensation. But sending a letter, even letters, to the CNEN does not absolve the owner's responsibility. It just shows that several organisations seem not to have done what they should have.
  - ratww 5y ago
    The claim by IGR, however, was that the removal was impossible without authorisation from CNEN, and that they legally lost access to the location and the machine. If this was indeed true and they acted on it, then it would absolve them. However a judge disagreed, so they also had to pay 100k. --- EDIT: On the second page of the document above, the judge mentions that owners of IGR were free from paying. Only the nuclear physicist (Flamarion) and a former partner who ordered the demolition (Amaurillo) had to pony up the 100k.