7 ms·

Chevron's a problem, but this man operated the environmental case as a shakedown operation, bribed Ecuadorean judges, tampered with witnesses, and ghostwrote ex

Chevron's a problem, but this man operated the environmental case as a shakedown operation, bribed Ecuadorean judges, tampered with witnesses, and ghostwrote expert testimony. This is why the fine demanded in Ecuador has been deemed unenforceable in the US, Canada, Netherlands, Brazil, and Argentina. The best time to do something about Chevron was when Donziger was as far away from the case as possible, and the best thing Donziger could do for any environmental cause today would be to stay far, far away from the case, as far as reasonably as possible. He won't. And Chevron's retaliation against him is a disaster area, rife with injustice, too, so you can hate just about everyone involved with this case.

snypher 5y ago
"Chevron's a problem, but". No thanks, I couldn't care less about what this one individual has done. Chevron has operated a global shakedown operation for decades, so I prefer to focus my attention on them, not this bothsidesism.
- nyokodo 5y ago
  > Chevron has operated a global shakedown operation for decades Donzinger is acting like he was a political prisoner when he’s a conman, criminal, and a blight on the eco-movement. If you actually want to help the likes of Chevron then magnify Donzinger’s voice because you’re serving them an easy win.
  - pxc 5y ago
    The United Nations seems to think he might as well have been a political prisoner... they also highlight a number of problems with the case against him > It is reported that, during the trial, Judge K denied the defendants the opportunity to present scientific evidence of Chevron’s alleged pollution and corrupt activities in Ecuador, including the results of 64,000 chemical sampling results. Judge K also refused to examine or consider the evidence used by Ecuador's courts to reach the verdict. However, he allowed Chevron to present “secret” and anonymous witnesses who could not be effectively cross-examined due to purported security threats. In addition, Judge K allowed Chevron to present a witness who conceded that the company was paying him a monthly “stipend” twenty times his former salary. Why should I be concerned with a ruling that Donziger won his case ‘fraudulently’ under circumstances like that? > In 2014, Judge K ruled that Mr. Donziger had committed or participated in acts that fell within the definition of “racketeering activity”, including “extortive” efforts to pressure Chevron through “celebrity advocacy”, government lobbying, a disinvestment campaign, and an NGO-driven media strategy. Judge K enjoined enforcement of the Ecuadorian judgement in the USA and pre-emptively seized any “profit” that Mr. Donziger might personally earn as a lawyer from any enforcement of the judgement. Judge K ordered that he transfer to Chevron all property that he had or might later obtain that could be traced to the Ecuadorian judgement. Racketeering because he tried to organize a boycott against Chevron for poisoning people? > In addition, Judge K reportedly also made remarks about the villagers in Ecuador who sued Chevron, referring to them as the “so-called” plaintiffs and calling Mr. Donziger’s work in Ecuador a “not bona-fide litigation”. By contrast, Judge K referred to 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 on which every one of us depends every single day”, and postulating that “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 because these folks [the Ecuadorians] have attached it in Singapore or wherever else.” Does that sound like a judge prepared to fairly assess whether or not Donziger's case in Ecuador was won fairly? Jesus Christ > In 2017, the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association expressed her concern over a “worrying new approach” in the USA of litigants using the racketeering statute to “intimidate advocacy groups and activists.” The UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders has also expressed concern over the restrictions faced by environmental defenders in the USA. The source reports an alarming trend since 2019, in which human rights defenders were being targeted and harassed through the criminal justice system in the USA. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ac2615b8f5130fda4340fcb/t/61537ea231d36d4b49f955fe/1632861862416/2021-09-24-advance-un-human-rights-working-group-on-arbitrary-detention-letter.pdf https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ac2615b8f5130fda4340...
    - fennecfoxen 5y ago
      The United Nations is probably right. He's sort of a political prisoner. The reason he's in jail is not for his crimes, it's an extraordinary contempt-of-court charge, which is procedurally bonkers. I didn't say the guys on the other side of the table were the good guys.
- fennecfoxen 5y ago
  > I couldn't care less about what this one individual has done. Tough. If you lay down with the dogs, you wake up with fleas. If you post Donziger's personal tweets about Chevron, then it's about Donziger, not just Chevron. It's about a case which arbitrators in the Hague called "the most thorough documentary, video, and testimonial proof of fraud ever put before an arbitral tribunal." This is a case about blackmail. This is a case about bribery. This is a case about fraud. This is a case about racketeering and corruption. You have set it up so that "the rainforest" gets to fight with all that before it even gets to fight Chevron. This is like complaining about real problems in social media moderation by posting the tweets of Josh Hawley, Ron DeSantis, and Donald Trump, the complaining that people object to the messengers, instead of the underlying problem.
- pyuser583 5y ago
  What has Chevron done?
8bitsrule 5y ago
However callous Donziger's tactics, noone died of them. Putting corporate poisoners out of business is no game for the meek.
pxc 5y ago
> As Chevron’s vendetta continued, international outrage grew. Just before sentencing, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights issued an opinion in Donziger’s favor, ruling that his two years of house arrest was illegal under international law and that he had been denied the right to a fair trial. A panel of five prominent jurists called that confinement “arbitrary” and said that both judges, Kaplan and Preska, had shown “a staggering lack of objectivity and impartiality.” In court, Preska briefly acknowledged the UN findings only to dismiss them. > [...] > Only a corporation like Chevron worth billions could have financed such a prosecution. The oil giant paid for a disgraced former judge named Alberto Guerra and his family to move to the United States. Chevron’s lawyers rehearsed Guerra’s testimony with him 53 times before he went on the witness stand, where Guerra claimed that Donziger and an Ecuadorian lawyer had offered him a $500,000 bribe and that the pair had ghostwritten the final judgment against Chevron. Donziger and his defense team estimate that Chevron has spent $2 billion on legal fees and other costs. https://www.thenation.com/article/environment/steven-donziger-chevron-sentencing/ https://www.thenation.com/article/environment/steven-donzige... > In 2014, U.S federal judge Lewis A. Kaplan ruled that the Ecuadorian judgment against Chevron "was the product of fraud." Guerra—who received cash and benefits from Chevron totaling $2 million, according to Donziger—later admitted he lied about the bribery, but the case continued. https://nacla.org/news/2021/08/25/ecuador-chevron-donziger https://nacla.org/news/2021/08/25/ecuador-chevron-donziger The expert testimony that Donziger supposedly ghostwrote wasn't considered in the Ecuadorian ruling anyway, and the judge he supposedly bribed wasn't even on the case when Donziger supposedly bribed him I don't think it makes sense to look at Chevron's accusations and say 'ah, yes, both sides', or to look at the extreme strangeness of this whole process in American courts and then take at face value the judgments of courts of countries aligned with the US (especially other countries in the Americas) and/or US energy interests. The US got a whole lot of countries to line up behind totally baseless accusations of electoral fraud in Bolivia in 2019, too.

snypher 5y ago

"Chevron's a problem, but". No thanks, I couldn't care less about what this one individual has done. Chevron has operated a global shakedown operation for decades, so I prefer to focus my attention on them, not this bothsidesism.

nyokodo 5y ago
> Chevron has operated a global shakedown operation for decades Donzinger is acting like he was a political prisoner when he’s a conman, criminal, and a blight on the eco-movement. If you actually want to help the likes of Chevron then magnify Donzinger’s voice because you’re serving them an easy win.
- pxc 5y ago
  The United Nations seems to think he might as well have been a political prisoner... they also highlight a number of problems with the case against him > It is reported that, during the trial, Judge K denied the defendants the opportunity to present scientific evidence of Chevron’s alleged pollution and corrupt activities in Ecuador, including the results of 64,000 chemical sampling results. Judge K also refused to examine or consider the evidence used by Ecuador's courts to reach the verdict. However, he allowed Chevron to present “secret” and anonymous witnesses who could not be effectively cross-examined due to purported security threats. In addition, Judge K allowed Chevron to present a witness who conceded that the company was paying him a monthly “stipend” twenty times his former salary. Why should I be concerned with a ruling that Donziger won his case ‘fraudulently’ under circumstances like that? > In 2014, Judge K ruled that Mr. Donziger had committed or participated in acts that fell within the definition of “racketeering activity”, including “extortive” efforts to pressure Chevron through “celebrity advocacy”, government lobbying, a disinvestment campaign, and an NGO-driven media strategy. Judge K enjoined enforcement of the Ecuadorian judgement in the USA and pre-emptively seized any “profit” that Mr. Donziger might personally earn as a lawyer from any enforcement of the judgement. Judge K ordered that he transfer to Chevron all property that he had or might later obtain that could be traced to the Ecuadorian judgement. Racketeering because he tried to organize a boycott against Chevron for poisoning people? > In addition, Judge K reportedly also made remarks about the villagers in Ecuador who sued Chevron, referring to them as the “so-called” plaintiffs and calling Mr. Donziger’s work in Ecuador a “not bona-fide litigation”. By contrast, Judge K referred to 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 on which every one of us depends every single day”, and postulating that “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 because these folks [the Ecuadorians] have attached it in Singapore or wherever else.” Does that sound like a judge prepared to fairly assess whether or not Donziger's case in Ecuador was won fairly? Jesus Christ > In 2017, the UN Special Rapporteur on the rights to freedom of peaceful assembly and of association expressed her concern over a “worrying new approach” in the USA of litigants using the racketeering statute to “intimidate advocacy groups and activists.” The UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights defenders has also expressed concern over the restrictions faced by environmental defenders in the USA. The source reports an alarming trend since 2019, in which human rights defenders were being targeted and harassed through the criminal justice system in the USA. https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ac2615b8f5130fda4340fcb/t/61537ea231d36d4b49f955fe/1632861862416/2021-09-24-advance-un-human-rights-working-group-on-arbitrary-detention-letter.pdf https://static1.squarespace.com/static/5ac2615b8f5130fda4340...
  - fennecfoxen 5y ago
    The United Nations is probably right. He's sort of a political prisoner. The reason he's in jail is not for his crimes, it's an extraordinary contempt-of-court charge, which is procedurally bonkers. I didn't say the guys on the other side of the table were the good guys.
fennecfoxen 5y ago
> I couldn't care less about what this one individual has done. Tough. If you lay down with the dogs, you wake up with fleas. If you post Donziger's personal tweets about Chevron, then it's about Donziger, not just Chevron. It's about a case which arbitrators in the Hague called "the most thorough documentary, video, and testimonial proof of fraud ever put before an arbitral tribunal." This is a case about blackmail. This is a case about bribery. This is a case about fraud. This is a case about racketeering and corruption. You have set it up so that "the rainforest" gets to fight with all that before it even gets to fight Chevron. This is like complaining about real problems in social media moderation by posting the tweets of Josh Hawley, Ron DeSantis, and Donald Trump, the complaining that people object to the messengers, instead of the underlying problem.
pyuser583 5y ago
What has Chevron done?

8bitsrule 5y ago

However callous Donziger's tactics, noone died of them. Putting corporate poisoners out of business is no game for the meek.

pxc 5y ago

> As Chevron’s vendetta continued, international outrage grew. Just before sentencing, the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights issued an opinion in Donziger’s favor, ruling that his two years of house arrest was illegal under international law and that he had been denied the right to a fair trial. A panel of five prominent jurists called that confinement “arbitrary” and said that both judges, Kaplan and Preska, had shown “a staggering lack of objectivity and impartiality.” In court, Preska briefly acknowledged the UN findings only to dismiss them. > [...] > Only a corporation like Chevron worth billions could have financed such a prosecution. The oil giant paid for a disgraced former judge named Alberto Guerra and his family to move to the United States. Chevron’s lawyers rehearsed Guerra’s testimony with him 53 times before he went on the witness stand, where Guerra claimed that Donziger and an Ecuadorian lawyer had offered him a $500,000 bribe and that the pair had ghostwritten the final judgment against Chevron. Donziger and his defense team estimate that Chevron has spent $2 billion on legal fees and other costs. https://www.thenation.com/article/environment/steven-donziger-chevron-sentencing/ https://www.thenation.com/article/environment/steven-donzige... > In 2014, U.S federal judge Lewis A. Kaplan ruled that the Ecuadorian judgment against Chevron "was the product of fraud." Guerra—who received cash and benefits from Chevron totaling $2 million, according to Donziger—later admitted he lied about the bribery, but the case continued. https://nacla.org/news/2021/08/25/ecuador-chevron-donziger https://nacla.org/news/2021/08/25/ecuador-chevron-donziger The expert testimony that Donziger supposedly ghostwrote wasn't considered in the Ecuadorian ruling anyway, and the judge he supposedly bribed wasn't even on the case when Donziger supposedly bribed him I don't think it makes sense to look at Chevron's accusations and say 'ah, yes, both sides', or to look at the extreme strangeness of this whole process in American courts and then take at face value the judgments of courts of countries aligned with the US (especially other countries in the Americas) and/or US energy interests. The US got a whole lot of countries to line up behind totally baseless accusations of electoral fraud in Bolivia in 2019, too.