25.03.2013 Views

jkdKx

jkdKx

jkdKx

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

appearance that Cabrera was neutral and independent and that the RICO Defendants and their co­<br />

conspirators were not the report's true authors. This submission purported to urge Cabrera to<br />

consider various documents and third-party reports, criticized his legal analysis of liability, and<br />

gave suggestions as to how he might support his existing findings and introduce new ones. But it<br />

had been the RICO Defendants and their co-conspirators themselves who had decided which<br />

documents to review, how to present the legal case, and what findings and support to put forward<br />

in Cabrera's report. Thus, the RICO Defendants and their co-conspirators wrote their<br />

"questions" to further the false appearance of independence from Cabrera.<br />

166. Cabrera filed a response to the Lago Agrio Plaintiffs' comments on November<br />

17,2008 in a supplemental report. Ignoring Chevron's objections, the comments put forward by<br />

the Lago Agrio Plaintiffs are reflected (at times word for word, including errors) in Cabrera's<br />

supplemental report, which increased the damage recommendation to $27 billion, with little<br />

explanation and no legally or scientifically valid support. As Donziger had planned, the RICO<br />

Defendants and their co-conspirators were indeed able to "jack this thing up to thirty billion."<br />

167. The RICO Defendants and their co-conspirators also dictated other portions of<br />

Cabrera's response by secretly drafting his "answers" to their own comments and questions.<br />

Some of the "questions to the Perito [Cabrera]," according to an internal Stratus email, were<br />

"assigned to us." In an email dated August 1, 2008, Beltman outlined for his colleagues what<br />

"we need to do for the comments on the Cabrera report." His email listed the various answers<br />

that needed to be prepared, and what they should say. Beltman repeatedly referred to the Lago<br />

Agrio Plaintiffs' questions in the first person and to their own work as that of"Mr. Cabrera."<br />

For example, he says that "[ w]e comment on the lack of consideration given to cleanup of rivers<br />

and streams," and "[w]e comment that Cabrera does not consider metal contamination in his<br />

cleanup costs." He then suggests possible responses to those comments. Beltman likewise<br />

expressed his desire that work performed by U.S. consultant 3TM "be in a form that someone in<br />

Ecuador could have written," and another Stratus employee noted that Stratus needed to revise<br />

67

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!