Skip Nav | Home | Mobile | Editorial Guidelines | Mission Statement | About Us | Contact | Help | Security | Support Us

World

Israeli court finds that Rachel Corrie's death was a 'regrettable accident'

Corporate Watch | 28.08.2012 13:50 | Anti-militarism | Anti-racism | Palestine | South Coast | World

The judge in a civil case in Haifa over the death of Rachel Corrie, a US Palestine solidarity activist who was crushed to death by an Israeli army bulldozer while trying to prevent the demolition of Palestinian homes in 2003, has ruled that the Israeli state is not culpable.

Rachel Corrie's family had launched a civil suit against the state of Israel over her death. The court, in Haifa, first heard evidence in the case in 2010.

Giving judgement today, 28th August 2012, Judge Oded Gershon ruled that her death was a “regrettable accident” but that the state could not be culpable as it happened during war-time. "I reject the suit," the judge said. "There is no justification to demand the state pay any damages."
"She (Corrie) did not distance herself from the area, as any thinking person would have done."

Eyewitness Richard Purssell, from Brighton, England said, during his evidence in Haifa in 2010, “She was standing on top of a pile of earth...The driver cannot have failed to see her. As the blade pushed the pile, the earth rose up. Rachel slid down the pile. It looks as if her foot got caught. The driver didn't slow down; he just ran over her. Then he reversed the bulldozer back over her again."

The initial Israeli Defence Force (IDF) internal investigation, completed within a month of Rachel's death, concluded that the IDF was not to blame. "Rachel Corrie was not run over by an engineering vehicle but rather was struck by a hard object, most probably a slab of concrete which was moved or slid down while the mound of earth which she was standing behind was moved”.

The court in Haifa today found no flaw with this initial IDF investigation.

In 2007 the Corrie family brought a case against Caterpillar in the US, charging the company with complicity in the death of Rachel and of Palestinians killed or injured by Caterpillar bulldozers demolishing their homes, causing them to collapse on top of them. The case was dismissed on the grounds that any ruling would intrude on US foreign policy decisions.

Rachel has become a symbol of international solidarity with the Palestinian struggle and, since her death, actions have taken place all over the world against Caterpillar, the company that made the bulldozer that killed her and has, in the hands of the Israeli military, demolished thousands of Palestinian homes. Occupations of factories, trade fairs and headquarters have been followed by concerted divestment campaigns which in 2009, resulted in the Church of England divesting millions from the company. In the US in 2012 the Quaker Friends Fiduciary Corporation (FFC) divested $900,000 in shares of Caterpillar. Also in the US, after concerted campaigning, Caterpillar was removed from the MSCI-ESG ethical investment index. This led to TIAA-CREF, the US pension fund, which had been targeted by a wide US civil society coalition, removing the company from its Social Choice Funds.

Rachel was part of an International Solidarity Movement (ISM) group attempting to stop the D9 bulldozer from demolishing a Palestinian home in the Philadelphia Corridor, a strip separating the part of the city of Rafah which falls within Gaza from the Egyptian border. By 2004, Israel had demolished 1,218 houses in the corridor. Throughout the Gaza strip over 2,500 homes were demolished in the same period. The corridor was extensively bombed during Israel's assault on Gaza in January 2009.

After the case, Cindy Corrie, Rachel's mother, told the Guardian, “the process has shown there are huge problems here [in Israel] in investigations and the legal system. There continue to be things that need to be discussed, exposed and addressed."

Indeed, according to the Israel human rights organisation Yesh Din “... 91% of investigations [by Israeli police in the OPT] into crimes committed by Israelis against Palestinians and their property are closed without indictments being served. 84% of the investigation files are closed because of the investigators' failure to locate suspects and evidence…Indictments were served in less than 3% of these cases." The Israeli justice system is not weighted in favour of the victims of Israel's military policies. Abu Hussein, Rachel Corrie's lawyer, said after the verdict “In denying justice in Rachel Corrie’s killing, this verdict speaks to the systemic failure to hold the Israeli military accountable for continuing violations of basic human rights.

"

Rachel Corrie's family have called for a global week of action against house demolitions – for more details see  http://rachelcorriefoundation.org/blog/2012/08/27/planned-events-for-the-week-of-action.

Palestinians in Gaza recorded this video in memory of Rachel, calling on people to support the international campaign for Boycott Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) against Israeli occupation, militarism and apartheid –  http://palsolidarity.org/2012/08/gaza-activists-remember-rachel-support-bds/.

Corporate Watch
- e-mail: contact at corporatewatch.org
- Homepage: http://www.corporatewatch.org/?lid=4505

Comments

Hide the following 8 comments

Ummmm!

28.08.2012 15:10

"91% of investigations [by Israeli police in the OPT] into crimes committed by Israelis against Palestinians and their property are closed without indictments being served. 84% of the investigation files are closed because of the investigators' failure to locate suspects and evidence…Indictments were served in less than 3% of these cases. Judge Oded Gershon ruled that her death was a “regrettable accident” but that the state could not be culpable as it happened during war-time. "I reject the suit," the judge said. "There is no justification to demand the state pay any damages. She (Corrie) did not distance herself from the area, as any thinking person would have done."

So let me get this right then.

A state of war (according to the court) means that no justice can be evoked by any civilian court. So if by chance Israel were to find itself in a state of war with some other entity...no recourse to any court can be made no matter what the crime...war excuses all.

So all Israel has to do is maintain by any means it can a state of war with Arabs, and by so doing...it is assured complete amnesty from all crimes in all judicial spheres for the term of that war...as the record clearly shows.

So the Israeli judicial system is not independent...a critical cornerstone of any democracy!

Democrat.


Left out an important detail?

28.08.2012 16:12

This article tells you that the eyewitness testified "couldn't have failed to see her". But left out a very important detail. The plainiffs in this case (Corrie's parents) brought in an expert to testify. Don't know if this was the lawyer's fault, not finding out in advance what their own expert witness was going to say. Because the last thing you want in a law suit is to bring in for your side an expert witness who then ends up testifying against your case! That's what happened here, so of course the suit failed.

MDN


Ummmm (again!)

28.08.2012 16:42

Rachel Corrie in plain view of her killer!
Rachel Corrie in plain view of her killer!

"This article tells you that the eyewitness testified "couldn't have failed to see her". But left out a very important detail."

How does that square with...

"He said the bulldozer was moving slowly, about 1 kilometer per hour, and that the driver could not have seen Ms. Corrie, finding “no base to the plaintiff’s claim that the bulldozer hit her on purpose.”

 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/29/world/middleeast/court-rules-israel-wasnt-at-fault-in-rachel-corries-death.html

And obviously the picture above shows just how carefully hidden she was to the guy in the bulldozer who was working with FULL knowledge that peace activists were close by. This is clearly a case of the bulddozer driver not wanting to see what was right in front of him!

This is an account of what happened by eyewitnesses at the scene.

"The Israeli Army are attempting to dishonour her memory by claiming that Rachel was killed accidentally when she ran in front of the bulldozer. Eye-witnesses to the murder insist that this is totally untrue. Rachel was sitting in the path of the bulldozer as it advanced towards her. When the bulldozer refused to stop or turn aside she climbed up onto the mound of dirt and rubble being gathered in front of it wearing a fluorescent jacket to look directly at the driver who kept on advancing. The bulldozer continued to advance so that she was pulled under the pile of dirt and rubble. After she had disappeared from view the driver kept advancing until the bulldozer was completely on top of her. The driver did not lift the bulldozer blade and so she was crushed beneath it. Then the driver backed off and the seven other ISM activists taking part in the action rushed to dig out her body. An ambulance rushed her to A-Najar hospital where she died.”

 http://electronicintifada.net/content/photostory-israeli-bulldozer-driver-murders-american-peace-activist/4449

And this from Mark Regev who appears to be acting as chief propaganda officer for the Israeli military, a fundamentally undemocratic institution.

“I empathize for the family, they’ve lost a loved one, who as the judge said was killed in a tragic accident,” Mr. Regev said. “But the charges that the Israeli courts are not independent, impartial, and hold the highest professional standards are simply without foundation.”

 http://www.nytimes.com/2012/08/29/world/middleeast/court-rules-israel-wasnt-at-fault-in-rachel-corries-death.html


I'm going to say this again because I think this is what the rest of the world is thinking. The Israeli state is currently awarding itself an amnesty given to it by its own judiciary for military reasons. That does not amount to an independent judiciary.

I fail to see how this makes Israel a democracy!

Democrat


Clarify please.

28.08.2012 16:45

"But left out a very important detail."

Can you please clarify this.

anon


Break laws

29.08.2012 11:43

Laws are made for the ruling elite by the ruling elite. They will not rule against themselves. Sometimes a more hardline stance is necessary!!

Nihilist


the clarification

29.08.2012 11:43

That was NOT contradictory testimony.

On one hand, evidence presented that the bulldozer operator could not have missed seeing Rachel (as well as other protesters) at some point during the day, could not have failed to know that she was, or had been there, and so COULD have been on the other side of that pile of dirt (because he could no longer see her).

On the other hand, evidence that he could not have seen her at the time she was run over.

Now that's perhaps a difference of perception about the responsibility? I think what some of us are saying is that because he could not see her at the moment, did not know where she was, did not know that she wasn't behind that pile of dirt he had to stop working. And others of us who agree that for all he knew she had gone off for a pee break.

MDN


Isreal.

29.08.2012 12:32

"That was NOT contradictory testimony.

On one hand, evidence presented that the bulldozer operator could not have missed seeing Rachel (as well as other protesters) at some point during the day, could not have failed to know that she was, or had been there, and so COULD have been on the other side of that pile of dirt (because he could no longer see her).

On the other hand, evidence that he could not have seen her at the time she was run over.

Now that's perhaps a difference of perception about the responsibility?"


The witness said "The driver cannot have failed to see her".

But the statements made by, for instance, Mark Regev say the exact opposite.

"It's clear by the Corrie family's own expert - they nominated an expert to come to the court - he himself, their representative, said that it was impossible for the driver to see her."

This is perfectly contradictory. How does "The driver cannot have failed to see her" equate to "impossible for the driver to see her."?

Anyway, this is all distration, smoke and mirrors. Israel is clearly not a democracy because it does not have an independent judiciary. On top of that, their chief military spokesperson is a brazen liar.

Confirmation if it were needed that Israel is a military dictatorship trying to fraudulently pass itself off as a democratic state. It isnt, never has been.. It is just another military expansionist dictatorial state.

There is a saying in the UK. "If you save a life, you are then responsible for it."

We saved your life Israel, now we are responsible for forcing you to become a democracy, whether you like it or not.

I hope and pray, that you will survive the experience.

anon


.

29.08.2012 13:02

I think its worth saying at this point that the family of Rachel Corrie have shown true courage and stoicism in this. They have stuck with the principle of law and have carried it all the way to the Israeli courts. Thats a heroic thing to do. In her activism, Rachel chose the same heroic stance by opposing the Israeli state in its efforts to ethnically cleanse the territory of its indigenous population.

And when Rachels family arrived at the court, they found only the military wearing silks.

What a tragedy. To be led all that way on the basis and principle of justice, only to find you have been led by the nose the whole way.

Israel is a beacon of corruption, there can be no doubt.

anon


Publish

Publish your news

Do you need help with publishing?

/regional publish include --> /regional search include -->

World Topics

Afghanistan
Analysis
Animal Liberation
Anti-Nuclear
Anti-militarism
Anti-racism
Bio-technology
Climate Chaos
Culture
Ecology
Education
Energy Crisis
Fracking
Free Spaces
Gender
Globalisation
Health
History
Indymedia
Iraq
Migration
Ocean Defence
Other Press
Palestine
Policing
Public sector cuts
Repression
Social Struggles
Technology
Terror War
Workers' Movements
Zapatista

Kollektives

Birmingham
Cambridge
Liverpool
London
Oxford
Sheffield
South Coast
Wales
World

Other UK IMCs
Bristol/South West
London
Northern Indymedia
Scotland

Server Appeal Radio Page Video Page Indymedia Cinema Offline Newsheet

secure Encrypted Page

You are viewing this page using an encrypted connection. If you bookmark this page or send its address in an email you might want to use the un-encrypted address of this page.

If you recieved a warning about an untrusted root certificate please install the CAcert root certificate, for more information see the security page.

IMCs


www.indymedia.org

Projects
print
radio
satellite tv
video

Africa

Europe
antwerpen
armenia
athens
austria
barcelona
belarus
belgium
belgrade
brussels
bulgaria
calabria
croatia
cyprus
emilia-romagna
estrecho / madiaq
galiza
germany
grenoble
hungary
ireland
istanbul
italy
la plana
liege
liguria
lille
linksunten
lombardia
madrid
malta
marseille
nantes
napoli
netherlands
northern england
nottingham imc
paris/île-de-france
patras
piemonte
poland
portugal
roma
romania
russia
sardegna
scotland
sverige
switzerland
torun
toscana
ukraine
united kingdom
valencia

Latin America
argentina
bolivia
chiapas
chile
chile sur
cmi brasil
cmi sucre
colombia
ecuador
mexico
peru
puerto rico
qollasuyu
rosario
santiago
tijuana
uruguay
valparaiso
venezuela

Oceania
aotearoa
brisbane
burma
darwin
jakarta
manila
melbourne
perth
qc
sydney

South Asia
india


United States
arizona
arkansas
asheville
atlanta
Austin
binghamton
boston
buffalo
chicago
cleveland
colorado
columbus
dc
hawaii
houston
hudson mohawk
kansas city
la
madison
maine
miami
michigan
milwaukee
minneapolis/st. paul
new hampshire
new jersey
new mexico
new orleans
north carolina
north texas
nyc
oklahoma
philadelphia
pittsburgh
portland
richmond
rochester
rogue valley
saint louis
san diego
san francisco
san francisco bay area
santa barbara
santa cruz, ca
sarasota
seattle
tampa bay
united states
urbana-champaign
vermont
western mass
worcester

West Asia
Armenia
Beirut
Israel
Palestine

Topics
biotech

Process
fbi/legal updates
mailing lists
process & imc docs
tech