Greenpeace International and Greenpeace organisations in the US are preparing to file their appeals of the absurd US$345 million judgment in Energy Transfer's abusive SLAPP lawsuit after the North Dakota District Court denied a motion for a new trial today. From the biased jury through the flawed verdict form, the trial in Morton County was marred by major errors. The Greenpeace defendants will appeal this case to the North Dakota Supreme Court.
Greenpeace International General Counsel Kristin Casper said:
"We continue to demand accountability for one of the largest miscarriages of justice in North Dakota's history. Since the District Court refuses to right the wrongs committed at trial, we will next appeal the many wrongly decided and unresolved errors in the case to the North Dakota Supreme Court. We will never stop trying to ensure the rights and freedoms promised under the US constitution are protected."
"There remains no question the Greenpeace defendants were denied a fair trial. We will not rest until justice is served and Big Oil can no longer use and abuse the legal system in North Dakota or anywhere else."
Energy Transfer's back-to-back SLAPP lawsuits are attempts to erase Indigenous leadership of the Standing Rock movement, punish solidarity with the ongoing resistance to the Dakota Access Pipeline, and intimidate environmental activists from speaking out against Big Oil companies.
Marco Simons, Greenpeace Inc. and Greenpeace Fund General Counsel, said:
"Speaking out against harm is not an injustice - but denying us a new trial after the widely documented improprieties in that courtroom produced a damages award with no evidentiary basis, absolutely is. The law is on our side. We will continue protecting people and the planet through the appeals process, and we will challenge this unjust and unfounded damages award at every opportunity. So long as the courts apply the law, we will prevail."
The cases have been monitored by numerous observers worldwide, and received scrutiny by legal experts for inconsistencies, flaws, and unfair proceedings. Among the numerous egregious flaws documented in the North Dakota District Court trial:
- The Greenpeace defendants could not receive a fair and impartial trial in Morton County, whose residents experienced direct, disruptive impacts during the historic Standing Rock protests.
- Seven out of nine jurors that decided the case had clear ties to the fossil fuel industry, direct experiences with the Standing Rock protests, and/or preexisting negative views of the Greenpeace defendants.
- Despite the fact that thousands of individuals and hundreds of organisations were involved in actions at Standing Rock and speaking out against DAPL - and North Dakota law clearly requires damages to be split among everyone who contributes to alleged harms - the jury and the court assigned 100% of the claimed damages to the Greenpeace defendants.
- The jury's verdict was contrary to the weight of the evidence on each and every count.
- The jury verdict was tainted by the court's admission of inadmissible, prejudicial information.
- The jury was improperly prevented from hearing relevant, admissible evidence that was favourable to the Greenpeace defendants.
- The jury was provided erroneous and incomplete instructions and a flawed verdict form.
