Amazon Defense Coalition
For Immediate Release
April 5, 2010
Contact: Karen Hinton
Real Fraud In $27 Billion Environmental Lawsuit Is Texaco’s Phony Cleanup & Chevron’s Effort To Cover It Up
WASHINGTON, DC (April 5, 2010) -- The Amazon Defense Coalition released the following statement about a news account that questions evidence submitted in the $27 billion environmental lawsuit brought by Ecuadorian indigenous groups against Chevron for oil contamination. Spokesperson Karen Hinton said:
“The plaintiffs’ reports in question show illegal levels of contamination to human health and the environment. Chevron’s own reports at the same oil well sites also show illegal levels of contamination. While we take Dr. Charles Calmbacher’s statements about the reports seriously, we believe his recollection almost six years after the fact is inaccurate.
“Dr. Calmbacher clearly agreed to have his signature placed on materials, including reports, that were to be submitted to the court, and he acknowledged he was actively reviewing the reports with our local, technical team. We are bewildered, frankly, at his testimony.
“We know that Dr. Calmbacher’s testimony that there were no health risks contradicts public statements that he made in 2004, at the time of the judicial inspections. On August 27th, 2004, a major media outlet quoted him as saying: ''Their defense is a lot like the tobacco industry saying there is no evidence linking smoking and lung cancer,'' said Charles Calmbacher, a certified industrial hygienist who works as an expert for the plaintiffs.” (See below.)
“Finally, it is clear scientific evidence from the four sites in question, including Chevron’s own evidence, strongly suggests that the real fraud is Texaco’s phony cleanup that was used to secure a release from Ecuador’s government.”
New York Times article, August 27th, 2004:
“ChevronTexaco says it has seen no credible evidence to link such problems to oil exposure and cites reports by American experts who take issue with health reports presented by the plaintiffs.
“The company also insists that its tests show no presence of hydrocarbon contamination in drinking water and argues that cancer rates in the areas at issue are lower than in other parts of the country.
''Their defense is a lot like the tobacco industry saying there is no evidence linking smoking and lung cancer,'' said Charles Calmbacher, a certified industrial hygienist who works as an expert for the plaintiffs.”