Court told of animal rights bomb plot

first_imgMr Price added that Broughton had a history of being found in possession of incendiary devices and was convicted in 2000 at Northampton Crown Court of conspiracy to cause an explosion likely to endanger life.Hidden notebookHe told the court that police who raided the defendant’s home in Semilong Road, Northampton, found items used in the home-made explosives and a notebook containing a list of those people he had been targetting hidden under the carpet.The officers also found 14 packets of sparklers, a security pass for Oxford University and a battery connector hidden inside a water tank in his bathroom.“The devices shared one feature, which was of particularly distinctive importance,” said Mr Price.“They all, the two devices found at the sports pavilion, and the two devices at the portacabin, were improvised from fuses involving ordinary fireworks bound together as a thread.”“He did not have them (the sparklers) for use at a future children’s firework party,” said Mr Price.Mr Price said that the portacabin owned by The Queen’s College was targeted by activists claiming to work for the Animal Liberation Front on the 18th November 2006, with familiar unexploded devices found in an office at Templeton College on February 26th in 2007.Authorities found 12 litres of fuel in the device at Queen’s College, and 20 litres of fuel in the device found at Templeton College.Police who searched the destroyed premises found two home-made devices in the roof which had used ordinary firework sparklers as a fuse.“Bite-Back”Mr Price said that on both occasions anonymous messages had been placed on the “Bite-Back” animal rights website claiming responsibility for the attacks.Extremists have consistently posted threats on the website pledging to continue direct action against those associated with the University until the laboratory project is scrapped.Mr Price said other petrol bomb attacks had also been carried out by the group on cars owned by professors and the University boathouse, although neither of these particular cases necessarily involved the accused.Broughton denies conspiracy to commit arson, possesion of an article or articles with intent to destroy or damage property, and keeping explosive substances with intent.He listened carefully as the evidence was given about him and intently studied paperwork relating to the matters before the jury during hearings this week.The trial continues. An animal rights activist planted two home-made petrol bombs at Oxford University, a court heard this week.Mel Broughton was said to have worked with others to wage a terrorist campaign against the University’s plans to build a controversial animal testing laboratory.The jury heard this week that two devices allegedly set off by the defendant ripped apart a sports pavilion owned by The Queen’s College and that a further two unexploded bombs were found beneath a portacabin used by the then Templeton College.John Price, prosecuting, told the jury at Oxford Crown Court that Broughton was a prominent member of SPEAK, the animal rights organisation that has been campaigning against Oxford University since it announced plans in 2004 to build a bio-medical research laboratory on South Parks Road.“a fanatic”“He is a renowned self-proclaimed activist – a fanatic,” he said.“He is a, if not the, leading figure of SPEAK, which campaigned against Oxford University’s laboratory.”The organisation was formed to conduct legal and legitimate protest, but the court heard that there were those within the group that waged a violent and very frightening terrorist campaign against the University.The jury was also told that Broughton’s DNA was found on one of the components used within one of the discovered unexploded devices.Speaking as a witness, scientist Dr Rosalyn Hammond confirmed that traces she found on a swab used on one of the unexploded bombs was a match for the defendant.“The match corresponds with Mr Broughton,” she said.“The probability of getting this result profile from someone other than Mr Broughton is one in one billion.”last_img read more

Are dinosaur fossils minerals The Montana Supreme Court will decide high stakes

first_img Sign up for our daily newsletter Get more great content like this delivered right to you! Country Are dinosaur fossils ‘minerals’? The Montana Supreme Court will decide high stakes case By Jeremy P. Jacobs, E&E NewsJul. 10, 2019 , 11:10 AM They are worth millions, and paleontologists say a federal appeals court ruling would have “fundamental and extraordinary impacts upon the conduct of science concerning the history of life on Earth.”The case hinges on a seemingly straightforward question: Are fossils considered “minerals” under Montana state law?In Montana, rights to a property’s mineral estate are often severed from its surface rights. Historically, fossils have been considered part of the surface estate.That all seemed to change last November when the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the owners of the mineral rights of a ranch where the fossils were found.The ruling sent shock waves through the paleontology world, threatening to upend the way fossil hunters have operated for decades.It would make searching for fossils extremely complicated, said David Polly, a former president of the Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, based in Bethesda, Maryland, because paleontologists would need to navigate both surface ownership—to get to the dig location—and mineral ownership of a parcel. Often, mineral rights are hard to find and frequently change hands between large corporations.More alarmingly, he said, it could raise questions about the ownership of fossils currently in museums.”In principle, it could have opened those to post hoc challenges,” Polly said. “If those started disappearing from collections, it would be a disaster.”Polly’s group, as well as several museums across the country, got involved after that 9th Circuit ruling. They enlisted Gary Guzy, the former White House Council on Environmental Quality and Environmental Protection Agency general counsel.Now, they’ve convinced the San Francisco-based 9th Circuit to pump the brakes. It has referred the case to the Montana Supreme Court, where it will be taken up later this year.Guzy, who now works for the firm Covington & Burling LLP in Washington, D.C., said his clients quickly realized the scope of the 9th Circuit decision.”What seemed apparent was that what had been depicted all along as a private party contractual and almost property dispute really had significant implications for the paleontological profession,” he said, “and the range of institutions that are involved in promoting the knowledge of the history of life on Earth.””Greatest paleontological find of this century”Spanning parts of Montana, the Dakotas and Wyoming, the Hell Creek Formation is one of the world’s most studied areas for clues into life some 66 million years ago.Within the formation is a tract of land in Garfield County, Montana, that was previously owned by George Severson.Around 1983, Mary Ann and Lige Murray leased the land from Severson and worked it as ranchers. Over the following years, Severson transferred parts of the land to the Murrays and his two sons—Jerry and Bo Severson.In 2005, the Severson sons agreed to sell the surface rights to the Murrays while retaining much of the mineral rights.The value of those rights quickly escalated.Shortly after the sale, the Murrays and an amateur fossil hunter, Clayton Phipps, found on their property a mother lode of fossils—a “spike cluster,” as it is known in paleontology.In 2006, they discovered complete fossils of two dinosaurs that appear to have been fighting when they died.The Murrays quickly named the fossils the “Dueling Dinosaurs,” and the scientific importance of the fossils is hard to overstate, said paleontologist Peter Larson, president of the Black Hills Institute of Geological Research in Hill City, South Dakota.”The Dueling Dinosaurs are probably the greatest paleontological find of this century,” said Larson, who has seen the fossils and spoken with the Murrays.Larson explained why such a find is so rare. The dinosaurs appear to have been fighting on a sandbar in the middle of a river. Something happened — probably an earthquake — that liquefied the sand underneath them, sucking them down and preserving their skeletons.”It is a pristine record of an interaction between a prey animal and predator,” he said, adding that they were the most pristine complete dinosaurs ever found in the area.The following year, a triceratops foot was found, then, in 2011, a triceratops skull.Then came perhaps the pièce de résistance. In 2013, a complete T. rex was discovered on the property. The “Murray T. rex” is considered one of only a dozen ever found in such condition.A “bizarre” rulingWhen the Seversons got word of the finds, they quickly sought to declare ownership of the fossils, including the T. rex, which the Murrays were trying to sell to a Dutch museum for several million dollars.The Murrays filed a lawsuit seeking a declaration that the fossils were theirs because they owned the surface rights to the land.A district court sided with the Murrays, leading the Seversons to appeal to the 9th Circuit.There, in a colorful opinion, the court sided with the Seversons.”Once upon a time, in a place now known as Montana, dinosaurs roamed the land,” wrote Eduardo Robreno, a senior Pennsylvania district judge who was on the panel by designation.”On a fateful day, some 66 million years ago, two such creatures, a 22-foot-long theropod and a 28-foot-long ceratopsian, engaged in mortal combat. While history has not recorded the circumstances surrounding this encounter, the remnants of these Cretaceous species, interlocked in combat, became entombed under a pile of sandstone. That was then … this is now.”The 2-1 ruling sided with the Seversons, saying they “have the better of the arguments” (E&E News PM, Nov. 6, 2018).Lawyers for the Murrays declined to comment and said their clients are not speaking to the media. The Seversons’ attorneys said their clients are traveling and could not be reached.The ruling spurred considerable hand-wringing in the paleontological community, Larson of the Black Hills Institute said, calling the 9th Circuit decision a “really bizarre ruling.”Quickly, some of the most important players in the field weighed in, including the 2,200-member Society of Vertebrate Paleontology, the Field Museum of Natural History in Chicago and the Museum of the Rockies.They, along with a Montana property rights group, backed the Murrays in court documents when they asked the court to reconsider the case — or send it to the Montana Supreme Court.”The panel’s decision imposes extraordinary uncertainty upon scientists and the public,” they wrote, and it may “destabilize title to countless important fossils in academic, museum, and private collections around the world … potentially subjecting those fossils to ownership challenges by holders of Montana mineral deeds.”The 9th Circuit took the unusual step of granting the rehearing, vacating their earlier decision and then punting the question to the Montana Supreme Court — a good sign for the Murrays.”Given the frequency of divided ownership of Montana surface and mineral estates, and that Montana possesses vast deposits of valuable vertebrate fossil specimens, the issue is substantial and of broad application,” the court wrote.”Therefore, after considering these factors, and in the spirit of comity and federalism, we exercise our discretion to certify this question to the Montana Supreme Court.”Other aspects of the dispute also appear to be breaking the Murrays’ way.In April, Montana enacted a law that states “fossils are not minerals and that fossils belong to the surface estate.”The law, however, does not apply to existing disputes, though the “Dueling Dinos” case is likely the only existing matter of its kind.”One can always make assumptions, and courts can do whatever they want,” Larson said. “But it seems like our side is in a good position.”Reprinted from Greenwire with permission from E&E News. Copyright 2019. E&E provides essential news for energy and environment professionals at www.eenews.netRelated stories:Not Sold! ‘Dueling Dinos’ Flop at Auction (November 2013)Selling America’s Fossil Record (January 2014) Email Country * Afghanistan Aland Islands Albania Algeria Andorra Angola Anguilla Antarctica Antigua and Barbuda Argentina Armenia Aruba Australia Austria Azerbaijan Bahamas Bahrain Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Benin Bermuda Bhutan Bolivia, Plurinational State of Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba Bosnia and Herzegovina Botswana Bouvet Island Brazil British Indian Ocean Territory Brunei Darussalam Bulgaria Burkina Faso Burundi Cambodia Cameroon Canada Cape Verde Cayman Islands Central African Republic Chad Chile China Christmas Island Cocos (Keeling) Islands Colombia Comoros Congo Congo, the Democratic Republic of the Cook Islands Costa Rica Cote d’Ivoire Croatia Cuba Curaçao Cyprus Czech Republic Denmark Djibouti Dominica Dominican Republic Ecuador Egypt El Salvador Equatorial Guinea Eritrea Estonia Ethiopia Falkland Islands (Malvinas) Faroe Islands Fiji Finland France French Guiana French Polynesia French Southern Territories Gabon Gambia Georgia Germany Ghana Gibraltar Greece Greenland Grenada Guadeloupe Guatemala Guernsey Guinea Guinea-Bissau Guyana Haiti Heard Island and McDonald Islands Holy See (Vatican City State) Honduras Hungary Iceland India Indonesia Iran, Islamic Republic of Iraq Ireland Isle of Man Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jersey Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Kiribati Korea, Democratic People’s Republic of Korea, Republic of Kuwait Kyrgyzstan Lao People’s Democratic Republic Latvia Lebanon Lesotho Liberia Libyan Arab Jamahiriya Liechtenstein Lithuania Luxembourg Macao Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Madagascar Malawi Malaysia Maldives Mali Malta Martinique Mauritania Mauritius Mayotte Mexico Moldova, Republic of Monaco Mongolia Montenegro Montserrat Morocco Mozambique Myanmar Namibia Nauru Nepal Netherlands New Caledonia New Zealand Nicaragua Niger Nigeria Niue Norfolk Island Norway Oman Pakistan Palestine Panama Papua New Guinea Paraguay Peru Philippines Pitcairn Poland Portugal Qatar Reunion Romania Russian Federation Rwanda Saint Barthélemy Saint Helena, Ascension and Tristan da Cunha Saint Kitts and Nevis Saint Lucia Saint Martin (French part) Saint Pierre and Miquelon Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Samoa San Marino Sao Tome and Principe Saudi Arabia Senegal Serbia Seychelles Sierra Leone Singapore Sint Maarten (Dutch part) Slovakia Slovenia Solomon Islands Somalia South Africa South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands South Sudan Spain Sri Lanka Sudan Suriname Svalbard and Jan Mayen Swaziland Sweden Switzerland Syrian Arab Republic Taiwan Tajikistan Tanzania, United Republic of Thailand Timor-Leste Togo Tokelau Tonga Trinidad and Tobago Tunisia Turkey Turkmenistan Turks and Caicos Islands Tuvalu Uganda Ukraine United Arab Emirates United Kingdom United States Uruguay Uzbekistan Vanuatu Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of Vietnam Virgin Islands, British Wallis and Futuna Western Sahara Yemen Zambia Zimbabwe The remains of two “dueling dinosaurs” have sparked an ownership dispute that could set legal precedent. ©BHIGR 2013 Originally published by E&E NewsPristine dinosaur fossils discovered in Montana have sparked a property rights dispute that has hit paleontologists like an asteroid.The lawsuit, now at the Montana Supreme Court, concerns who owns some of the greatest fossil finds in the last century, including two dinosaurs preserved while locked in combat and a rare complete Tyrannosaurus rex skeleton. Click to view the privacy policy. Required fields are indicated by an asterisk (*) Read more…last_img read more