Final redacted respondents track 2 supplemental rejoinder

Page 128

months, contrary to Claimants’ claim that Judge Zambrano received the Judgment from Fajardo, in electronic form, immediately before its issuance.521 

Judge Zambrano (or Ms. Calva working with Judge Zambrano) actively drafted the Judgment on Judge Zambrano’s computer starting in October 2010 and throughout November and December 2010, contrary to Guerra’s claim that the Plaintiffs provided Judge Zambrano with an electronic copy of the Judgment sometime in late January 2011.522

A portion of the Judgment is found in a version of “Caso Texaco.doc” on Judge Zambrano’s computer dating from sometime before January 19, 2010, contrary to Claimants’ claim that Judge Zambrano received the Judgment from Fajardo immediately before its issuance.523

No flash drives were connected to Judge Zambrano’s computer in the two weeks leading up to the Judgment’s issuance, yet again inconsistent with Claimants’ claim that Judge Zambrano received the Judgment from Fajardo immediately before its issuance.524

No email attachments containing the Judgment were opened on Judge Zambrano’s computer, particularly in the two weeks leading up to the Judgment’s issuance, again inconsistent with Claimants’ claim that Judge Zambrano received the Judgment from Fajardo immediately before its issuance.525

Chevron’s lawyers affirm that Guerra approached them in the last quarter of 2010 with an offer to fix the case, inconsistent with Claimants’ claim that by then Judge Zambrano had already consummated an agreement with the Plaintiffs.526

Chevron claims to have offered Judge Zambrano “millions to come clean” but Judge Zambrano allegedly declined in favor of a dubious promise of US$ 500,000 in the

521

Compare RE-24, Racich Expert Rpt. (Nov. 7, 2014) ¶ 18, with e.g., R-907, Guerra Dep. Tr. (Nov. 5, 2013) at 141 (“I went to Lago Agrio and I saw on a computer belonging to Pablo Fajardo the draft of the judgment”); R1616a, Guerra Decl. (Nov. 17, 2012) ¶ 28, filed in RICO (“Plaintiffs’ attorneys made changes to the judgment up to the very last minute.”). 522

Compare RE-24, Racich Expert Rpt. (Nov. 7, 2014) ¶¶ 10-12, with, e.g., R-907, Guerra Dep. Tr. (Nov. 5, 2013) at 141 (“two or three weeks prior to the 14th of February, 2011 when I went to Lago Agrio and I saw on a computer belonging to Pablo Fajardo the draft of the judgment”).

523

Compare RE-24, Racich Expert Rpt. (Nov. 7, 2014) ¶¶ 25-28, with, e.g., C-1616a, Guerra Decl. (Nov. 17, 2012) ¶ 28, filed in RICO (“Plaintiffs’ attorneys made changes to the judgment up to the very last minute.”). 524

Compare RE-24, Racich Expert Rpt. (Nov. 7, 2014) ¶ 83, with, e.g., C-1616a, Guerra Decl. (Nov. 17, 2012) ¶ 28, filed in RICO (“Plaintiffs’ attorneys made changes to the judgment up to the very last minute.”).

525

Compare RE-24, Racich Expert Rpt. (Nov. 7, 2014) ¶¶ 77-78, with, e.g., Guerra Decl. (Nov. 17, 2012) ¶ 28, filed in RICO (“Plaintiffs’ attorneys made changes to the judgment up to the very last minute.”). 526

Compare, e.g., R-1325, Campuzano Aff. (Nov. 30, 2012), filed in RICO ¶¶ 2-3, with, e.g., Claimants’ Track 2 Supp. Reply ¶ 115.

123


Issuu converts static files into: digital portfolios, online yearbooks, online catalogs, digital photo albums and more. Sign up and create your flipbook.