Jury says Greenpeace owes hundreds of millions of dollars for Dakota pipeline protest

Bad news for free speech in this country, more and more like China every day with the war on dissent

 

Next up, if you make fun of Teslas, you can be held liable to Tesla shareholders for their stock losing value.

 

You mean the cops turned to violence. What did Greenpeace do that was violent? Seems like the oil company just went after the biggest name linked to the protests because they publicized it and had more reach than some native American activist. There was no infrastructure damaged, the pipeline people are basically saying it cost them money because they couldnt build it as fast as they wanted.

 

This really is not unlike when the cops sued a prominent BLM activist simply because he had promoted a protest where someone else did something later on:

Mckesson v. Doe - Wikipedia

 

There is a HUGE difference between free speech and physical terrorism. What Greenpeace is guilty of is eco-terrorism... destruction of property.

 

They didnt destroy any property, Rick. The protest was attempting to stop the building of something. The lawsuit doesn't even argue that, just that the protests cost them more money to build because Greenpeace publicized them. Its like arguing a boycott cost a company money, and them successfully suing the boycotters because they lost money from the boycott.

 

@Gatorrick22 I didn’t follow these protests so I’m curious to know since you hit disagree, what property did they destroy?

 

free speech may be protected but violence and damage to property is not

 

Again, the suit doesnt even allege that, it alleges that promoting the protests costs the builder more money. If Greenpeace had blew up or sabotaged a pipeline, they wouldn't be being sued for money, they'd be in a lot more trouble lol.

 

Jeez. How can people clean up after themselves if they are dispersed and arrested by the cops? Like use some common sense here lol.

 

I don't know if this is the correct case or the operative complaint, but it does appear that the allegations included trespass, conversion, vandalism, and property damage?

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&sou...UQFnoECBgQAQ&usg=AOvVaw0A2b_WuLt6juBU1Ch3kNTZ

 

That’s a lot of trash. They should consider recycling

 

I'm sure there were plenty of charges leveled at protestors, but what link those have to Greenpeace specifically is far more dubious ...

 

That’s the rub. They’re saying it wasn’t them.

 

Can you tell me which of the specific verdicts alleged violence? I see verdicts for conversion, nuisance, defamation, tortious interference, and conspiracy (as well as aiding and abetting those things). Which of those is a verdict about "turning to violence" vs. speech and protest on private property?