Oh, so the prosecutors will be happy with the judges’ verdict, I look forward to seeing their statement. I think they wanted him in prison, which the judges obviously did not agree with.

Poor crew of the Shonan Maru 2, the vessel that turned and crushed Pete’s boat? They were nearly involved in the murder of 6 people aboard the Ady Gil, poor crewmen indeed.

The Japanese probably wouldn’t mind paying for Pete’s gruel, as they already are getting bilked to support a wasteful and unnecessary whaling program in 2 oceans, and funding the ICR’s huge slush find for bribing IWC delegates and supplying them with whores, as has been publicized widely, not to mention keeping certain pro-whaling politicians happy and in their corner. I think the Japanese public knows how rotten their system is.

I love Japan’s judicial system. Wrongly convict on perjured evidence, then suspend the sentence. Talk about saving face. It’s ALL about saving face for the Japanese people isn’t it?

Japan decided to overlook the fact that Pete Bethune was nearly murdered on the high seas by the Japanese whale poachers who rammed his ship.

What is relevant to the trial is the whalers perjured themselves by claiming injuries inconsistent with human toxicology tests for butyric acid. Video evidence shows them exposing themselves to an unknown substance which they claimed was “water” at trial. They’re also shown rubbing their faces in distress immediately after firing this substance at the activists into an unfavorable wind. Now “why” would a couple of whalers fire a “mist” of water at activists over the side of a moving ship? The injuries they described were consistent with direct exposure to pepper spray. It’s clear they shot themselves in the face with their own riot control agent and not “water”.

Pro-whalers often make claims about facts but the facts are that according to human toxicology tests where “butyric acid” was purposely applied to human skin it takes 52 minutes before any sensation of burning is felt AND redness of the skin is hardly noticeable. 24 hours later there is some minor scaling in the exposed area. This does not match the description of injuries given by the whalers at trial.

The whalers reported immediate chemical burns to the face resulting in red blistered skin and red extremely irritated and painful eyes. These injuries are consistent with direct exposure to oleoresin capsicum (also known as pepper spray).

At trial, the whalers “claim” the backpack dispersal equipment they were using was only filled with “water”. However, video evidence of the whalers clearly shows them firing a “mist” over the side of their ship in the direction of sea shepherd cameras. The whalers IMMEDIATELY rub their faces in distress after this and go below deck.

This incident was documented on Feb 11th. The same date these whalers “claimed” at trial to have been struck by Bethune’s butyric acid. The date of the injuries is also documented by Japan’s whaling fleet doctor.

Also, additional evidence was withheld from the trial. Despite ICR photos of intact bottles of Sea Shepherd stink bombs, only a broken bottle was offered as evidence at trial so the judge could “smell” the evidence of acid. There was no sample of the stink bomb liquid provided for independent chemical analysis. Most likely because Sea Shepherd activists have handled this material and gotten it on themselves and never experienced any injuries. Samples of the diluted butyric acid would have supported the defense argument that the stink bombs are not dangerous.

It’s clear the whalers shot themselves in the face with their own pepper spray, covered it up and lied about it in court to convict Pete Bethune.

It’s clear David lives in a world of ideological bias against environmental activism.

@Hufingraz

“Who gives a shit, who gives a fuck?”

After reading your screaming tirade; it appears that YOU do.

@Hufingraz

“I give a shit about the whaling”

Really? Do you oppose the killing of endangered Bowhead whales by the U.S.?

“I don’t give a shit about anything you just commented on”

So you say. Yet, you continue to reply to my posts.

I think that Sea Shepherd can continue to say they have not injured anyone because Japan has shown no true proof of injury.

@Cho cho ma

There was a trial in a court of law. Evidence and testimony was presented by the prosecution. bafun and his defence lawyers had the opportunity to present evidence refuting the prosecution. A judge considered the evidence presented and found bafun guilty of assault. Therefore, bafun and SS are guilty of illegally assaulting and injuring people.

@Animux

“..where whalers perjured themselves and withheld evidence that supported the defense..”

Do you have evidence to back up your claims? If so, did you come forward with this evidence and present it to bafun’s lawyers?

Or, instead of taking your word for it, we could just check with the international body responsible for evaluating this species which has listed the Antarctic Minke whale as “Data Deficient”.

http://www.iucnredlist.org/apps/redlist/details/2480/0

“Justification:
Although there is no accepted estimate of current abundance, the population size is clearly in the hundreds of thousands. The data analyzed by standard methods suggest a reduction of approximately 60% between the 1978–91 period and the 1991–2004 period. However, alternative hypotheses to explain the apparent decline are still under investigation. If the decline is real, its extent and causes are currently unknown, and it may still be continuing. The corresponding population reduction thresholds (criterion A2) are 30% for Vulnerable and 50% for Endangered, measured over a 3-generation time window, which in this case is estimated to be approximately 66 years (22 years per generation). If the decline proves to be largely or mainly an artifact, or proves to have been transient in the light of analyses of more recent data, the species would qualify as Least Concern. If it were real, the species would qualify as Endangered. Pending resolution of the uncertainties relating to the apparent decline, however, the species is listed as Data Deficient (DD).”

http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2010/05/27/2911484.htm

“The largest aerial survey of whales along the Australian Antarctic coastline has found far fewer minke whales this year than last, despite covering three times the area.”

I do indeed David. The “ice” explanation is merely an assumption. The fact remains they increased the search range to 3x greater than previous expeditions and found far fewer whales. Once more revealing the difficulties in establishing whale populations to a certainty. It’s one more reason why Japanese estimates, tainted by an obvious desire to exploit whales regardless of population stability, can not be trusted.