Judge warns prosecutor in oil pipeline negligence trial closing

SANTA BARBARA -- Not long into closing arguments in the trial of a pipeline company charged with criminal negligence in a 142,000-gallon oil spill, the lead prosecutor presented to the jury a statement that had not been admitted into evidence, drawing a warning from the judge Thursday.

Plains All American Pipeline faces 11 misdemeanor and four felony charges for alleged negligence in the handling of the spill on Refugio State Beach in 2015. People v. Plains All American Pipeline LP, 1495091 (Santa Barbara Super. Ct., filed May 16, 2016).

After Deputy Attorney General Brett Morris presented the statement from a transcript that had been objected to and sustained during trial, Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge James Herman ordered the exhibit stricken from the record and instructed the jury to disregard it.

"Counsel, be careful" Herman sternly warned Morris.

"My mistake, your honor. That exhibit is not in evidence," Morris acknowledged.

Morris continued, reminding the jury of the details of the spill, the seven animals allegedly killed as a result, and Plains' alleged negligence in handling it. Plains knew the ruptured pipeline was in a high consequence area and yet failed to properly inspect it, and failed to follow emergency response plans after learning about the spill, he added.

He told the jury that Plains prepared its witnesses and paid experts to testify, a statement defense attorney Luis Li of Munger, Tolles & Olson LLP responded to during his closing argument.

"Preparing the witness means showing them documents and saying, 'Here's some documents and we're going to talk about them tomorrow because we want to be efficient,'" Li said.

Morris also told jurors they shouldn't believe the testimony of one witness, in particular: veterinary forensic pathologist consultant Richard Stroud, who, according to Morris, said he didn't believe the animals in the case died from exposure to oil.

"He shockingly testified that oil did not harm this sea lion," Morris said. "He provided an utterly stupefying opinion that oil is actually medicinal."

Morris also thanked the jury for listening to over 50 witnesses over the course of the four-month trial before showing videos of black oil pouring from pipes onto the beach, ocean and grasslands.

After Morris finished his argument, Li emphasized to the jury, "If there are two reasonable conclusions about a person's state of mind, one pointing to innocent, one pointing to guilt, you must find not guilty."

Plains, represented by Munger Tolles; Bird Marella Boxer Wolpert Nessim Drooks Lincenberg & Rhow PC; and Fell, Marking, Abkin, Montgomery, Granet & Raney LLP, seemed to focus its argument on a 2012 pipeline inspection, conducted by an independent company called ROSEN Group, which significantly miscalculated the percent of metal wall loss of Line 901, the pipeline that later ruptured.

According to Li, ROSEN had reported the pipeline only had metal wall loss of 45 percent. A later study revealed that Line 901 had actually had 89 percent wall loss, meaning only 11 percent of the pipeline wall remained leading up to the rupture. According to Li, the results of the test were received after the spill and if Plains had known, the company would have addressed the issue.

"Plains could not, did not, should not have known that their policies or procedure would have caused the leak," Li said.

Li then displayed photos of Plains employees pleasantly smiling and working at their jobs on a projector screen. "The question here is whether these people who go to work and do their very best, just like you do," Li said, "the question is whether the people, the government, can brand them all as criminals?"

At this point Deputy District attorney Kevin Weichbrod objected and Li was told by the judge to "move on."

Arguments will continue Friday, after which the jury will be given a week off before beginning deliberations.