Article about a Court of Law throwing out a Case since the groups did not have any evidence that Coke had anything to do with any murders which happened in Columbia
http://web.archive.org/web/20061102074001/http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/coke/2006/10/04/1004bizcoke.html
To which Natalie Responded:
In regards to the court case we believe that the process has not been fair or brought real justice.
For more information about the lawsuit please watch The Coca Cola Case Tues Feb 2 HSC 1A6 7-9pm
http://films.nfb.ca/the-coca-cola-case/index.php
Here are some points for thought:
1. The article you have posted says that:
"Collingsworth said Coke's dismissal was based on a "hypothetical" agreement between Coke and the Colombia bottlers, which the judge said didn't give the company control over security and labor practices at the bottling plants.
Collingsworth said the labor union wasn't allowed to depose witnesses to show Coke did have oversight over such operations"
If the labour union was not allowed to give witness testimony that Coca-Cola was in fact responsible for security and labour practices how did this impact the trial?
2. Judge Martinez may have not been a completely impartial judge. He is a very active alumni of the University of Miami (he graduated from law school there) and he is actively involved with the Miami Hurricanes football team which is sponsored by Coca-Cola (Sorger).
