Pete Bethune sues Sea Shepherd for $500,000

Email
Print

Tue, 31 Jul 2012 6:09p.m.

Environmental activist Pete Bethune (file)

Environmental activist Pete Bethune (file)

By Tony Field

Environmental activist Pete Bethune has turned on his former friends and is suing them for half a million dollars.

He's taken the Sea Shepherd Conservation Society to court in the United States, arguing that he is owed the money from the sale of his trimaran, Ady Gil.

It's been more than two-and-a-half years since the boat was scuttled and sank in the Antarctic, after colliding with a Japanese whaling ship.

Now, former allies, Mr Bethune and Sea Shepherd are fighting in an American courtroom.

“I spent five months in maximum security prison in Japan on behalf of these guys, and to have to take them to court is most disappointing,” Mr Bethune says. “It breaks my heart.”

Mr Bethune says he is owed half-a-million dollars from the sale of the trimaran to Sea Shepherd.

“The losers in this are probably the whales, and to just turn my back on half-a-million dollars, I have debts at the moment of $600,000.”

Sea Shepherd refused to comment to 3 News while the case was in arbitration.

But the hearing comes days after founder Paul Watson skipped bail in Germany, where authorities were considering extraditing him to Costa Rica.

Mr Watson posted a statement online saying he is in a safe place, and accusing Mr Bethune of fabricating evidence against him.

“I think now that Sea Shepherd are morally bankrupt,” Mr Bethune says. “I just think that they have completely lost the plot.”

Mr Bethune will be cross examined tomorrow by Sea Shepherd's lawyers.

3 News

Become a fan of 3 News on Facebook and on Twitter.

Post a Comment

Before commenting, please take the time to read our moderation guide


(Won't be published)



Comments

3/08/2012 7:19:37 p.m.

Roger wrote:

To all of you that say he piloted the Ady Gil to be in front of the Japanese ship, rewatch the episode. He was almost out of gas and just adrift in the ocean, the Japanese ship sped up and changed its course to aim near the Ady Gil, and at the last second, turn into it. The Ady Gil had no forward movement, so how would it be Pete's fault?

3/08/2012 4:29:40 p.m.

atrout wrote:

Pete is a totally ego driven campaigner. For him the glory of his 'heroic' actions is much more stimulating than actually saving any whales.He was totally responsible for the loss of the Ady Gil. He chose to accelerate across the bows of the Japanese ship and made the colossal mistake of leaving it too late for either vessel to avoid the consequences. Pete also chose to scuttle the Ady Gil while it was still salvageable. Paul may have suckered Pete into that decision but his actions invalidated any claim he may have had for payment for the boat. He destroyed the asset and that is the end of any claim he might have had. If Pete personally owes $600K then someone must have fronted for the costs of any legal action. Pete is either bluffing for publicity purposes or he doesn't realize the risks of suing Seashepherd in the US. What assets does SS have in the US to claim against. All in all, Pete is showing his usual disconnect from reality. He may suffer but his family will probably suffer more. Pete should have thought through his boarding of the Japanese vessel. The results were inevitable and for sure, Paul was pleased to see him go from his ship into Japanese hands. Paul has no time for Pete because of the clash of egos so evident in the video records. Paul screwed Pete over and it has only just sunk into Pete's mind.

1/08/2012 3:17:27 p.m.

Mike wrote:

Eco-terrorists like Sea Shepherd ... actually expecting to get paid for selling them stuff?

I think its a case of the seller needs to be more careful. Yes Sea Shepherd are as dodgey as, but Bethune knew that going in, and still went ahead.

In the open sea, while there are rules of who has right of way, there are also things like ships dont stop or turn on a dime. There is also a requirement to 'give reasonable room'. A smaller boat, like the Ady Gil was faster, and much more manouvable. It would be like someone passing a vehicle on the road, cutting directly infront of another, and jamming brakes on. Now while you can claim that the following vehicle needs to be able to stop in 1/2 the clear distance ahead, by jaming in an obstacle kind of breaks that rule, as the Ady Gil did. Bethune was lucky so little damage was done to the boat, hence it needed him to scuttle it for it to sink as just stopping in front of the fishing vessel wasn't enough to sink it. Bethune is dishonest, so why expect more from Sea Shepherd than Bethunes own dishonesty?

1/08/2012 12:08:56 p.m.

Silverado wrote:

Pete is clearly the stud in this case! Paul plays along for the camera, but runs when he might be going to a Japanese jail. Pete on the other hand knew that he was certainly going to be held when he boarded the Japanese security vessel. Pete if you get the opportunity to build another boat, please put the rudders where they can turn the boat when you need it most. And good luck in court!

1/08/2012 10:46:15 a.m.

Bev Bailey wrote:

To say 'Bethune has turned on his former friends' makes them sound like school chums or next door neighbours. There was a business arrangement in place - a contract of sale - which Sea Shepherd reneged on after Bethune had served his purpose by garnering more publicity (and donations one assumes) than Watson's group had ever had before through the ramming of Ady Gil and the imprisonment of Bethune on camera on 'Whale Wars' and global news. Hopefully the arbitration result will be based on facts. And to AJ, of course it was still in part Bethune's boat bearing in mind Sea Shepherd hadn't paid him in full.

1/08/2012 7:57:26 a.m.

AJ wrote:

Sale? Pete was quoted in 2010 outside the Japanese court : "All I wanted was justice for the loss of my boat, the Ady Gil". My boat? But now it has been 'sold'? Yeah right. If you hadn't been paid for the "sale" of your boat, maybe you shouldn't have been so reckless putting your small boat in front of a moving big boat. Not a smart way of treating the security you had over the supposed debt.

31/07/2012 10:58:44 p.m.

cyril wrote:

Hahahahahaha there true colours are showing. Its not about the whales. Its the money but hey weve known that all along.