Opinion by Kip Hansen — 13 June 2025 — 1500 words
On June 28, 2021, a 65-year-old woman, Juliana Leon, was murdered while driving home to Ferndale, Washington from her doctor’s appointment in Seattle. It was a hot day, over 100 °F, and she had pulled her non-air-conditioned car to the side of the highway and rolled her car’s windows down when the murderer struck.
Now her daughter is seeking justice, not in the criminal courts, which have failed to act, but in a wrongful death suit in a Washington State civil court.
According to David Gelles in the New York Times [ here ], Misti Leon, the daughter, told him in an interview:
“I never would have in a million years guessed that a heat dome and climate change would be what killed my mother and what took her from me. There’s no way to comprehend that and to kind of even rationalize it.”
But, now that Misti knows that climate change murdered her mother, she has filed a wrongful death suit against … The Climate? Climate Change Inc.? The Weather?
No, she has filed the suit against “Exxon Mobil, Chevron, Shell, BP, ConocoPhillips, Phillips 66 and Olympic Pipeline Company ( a subsidiary managed by BP).”
How did Misti Leon find out who the murderer was? Did she hire a Sam Spade to investigate the crime?
No, according to the Times:
“Ms. Leon was first approached in late 2023 by a nonprofit group, the Center for Climate Integrity, which helps assemble and promote cases against big oil and gas companies.”
Who is the Center for Climate Integrity?
Richard Wiles.
And who is Richard Wiles?
Let me quote InfluenceWatch:
“Richard Wiles is an environmental activist who supports pushing litigation against energy and fossil fuel companies due to the cost of climate change. Wiles oversees the Center for Climate Integrity (CCI), a project of environmental advocacy group Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development (IGSD). In addition, Wiles heads pro-climate litigation news site Climate Liability News and started the anti-fossil fuel social media campaign #ExxonKnew. ”
“Richard Wiles, Alyssa Johl, and Kert Davies sit as the board of Climate Communications and Law, the nonprofit that funds Climate Docket. Wiles previously worked as senior vice president at Climate Central. Wiles also started #ExxonKnew, a social media initiative organized by the environmentalist advocacy group 350.org that promoted legal action against the conventional energy industry for alleged environmental damages. Wiles also works as executive director of the Center for Climate Integrity [CCI] , an initiative of the Institute for Governance and Sustainable Development [IGSD] that supports litigation against energy companies.”
Is Richard Wiles just a well-meaning fighter for right and justice, just another of the many working men and women donating their time and efforts to forward the things they believe in? No, actually Richard Wiles is listed on IGSD’s 2017 Federal Tax Form 990 as receiving compensation of $295,311 in that year. In 2023, Richard Wiles received a salary of over $ 380,000 as President of Center for Climate Integrity, very near the current salary of the President of the Untied States, from a non-profit with total revenue of $7,570,000 for 2023. He may receive salaries and payments from other groups and organizations as well.
And where does CCI’s money come from?
In 2023 (the latest data available): the first 5 million dollars came from:
Rockefeller Family Fund Inc. , $3,500,000
Silicon Valley Community Foundation , $500,000
Tides Foundation , $1,000,000
[Note: The Tides Foundation distributes money from anonymous donors to other organizations, often politically progressive, through donor advised funds and other grantmaking programs. Disclosure: I am President of a very small non-profit which in the past has received small individual grants via the Tides Foundation.]
What is the evidence against Climate Change? Where does it come from?
The evidence meant to prove the guilt of the oil companies will be provided by CCI and other member groups of the climate lawsuit cabal – recycling more than a decade of boilerplate anti-fossil fuel claims used in filings before courts all over the United States.
But the smoking gun evidence will come from World Weather Attribution [ WWA ], a group which was formed for the specific purpose of creating evidence to be used in law suits against fossil fuels companies. I have stated that correctly – WWA does not find evidence but creates it through purpose-built pseudo-scientific models using algorithms whose sole intention is to “find” that the chosen weather events have been “caused” by climate change, thus allowing the propagandists to blame “climate change” for any damage from the weather. In their odd world, “climate change” is the result of burning fossil fuels, thus, using this twisted line of “logic”, the fossil fuel industry is directly responsible for any and all weather damage.
I apologize for the use of so many scare quotes but, unfortunately, they are necessary because the very meanings of these words and phrases have been changed by these activist organizations to have definitions only suited for use in their propaganda.
“Unlike every other branch of climate science or science in general, event attribution was actually originally suggested with the courts in mind,” Friederike Otto said.[ source ]
Weather, extreme or not, is not caused by climate change – climate is a cumulative average of effects, attributes, of weather. Climate change is noticing that the average weather has changed compared to some past period. Climate Change is not and cannot be a cause.
WWA and its pronouncements are pseudo-science and scientific BS.
[BS – asserted nonsense, rubbish and/or assertions that are insincere or untruthful ].
Don’t take my word for it, see Roger Pielke Jr.’s extremely valuable and informative series on weather attribution:
Tricks of the Trade – Weather Attribution Alchemy, Part 3
Climate Science Whiplash – Why we misinterpret climate science — Weather Attribution Alchemy, Part 4
Is Single Extreme Event Attribution Even Possible? – Weather Attribution Alchemy, Part 5
Behind the Curtain – Inside World Weather Attribution – Weather Attribution Alchemy, Part 6
But that’s ridiculous! Such a case could never be won!
Quite right, in a criminal court the case would be thrown out in a minute for lack of evidence, there would be no way to overcome the requirement of “beyond reasonable doubt “. (Actually, the evidence would be entirely speculative).
But in a civil wrongful death suit, the standard of evidence is far lower.
“The standard in civil cases is the “preponderance of evidence,” meaning the plaintiff must prove that their claims are more likely valid than not.
According to the Legal Information Institute, “51% certainty is the threshold” for meeting the preponderance of evidence standard in most civil cases.
This contrasts sharply with criminal cases, where the burden of proof is “beyond a reasonable doubt,” a much higher standard to meet.” [ source ]
In a civil case, this comes down to spinning a good story to a jury, and a jury that says to itself, “Yeah, it could be like that.” Easy to win if you pick a judge and a venue already biased against the defendant.
# # #
The Climate Litigation movement started in a series of semi-secret meetings, the first in La Jolla, California in 2012 followed up four years later with a meeting in New York at which the attendees formulated legal approaches that might be used against energy manufacturers (oil companies) to garner huge monetary payouts for the plaintiffs and their lawyers. There is a detailed report on this, very thorough, named: “Beyond the Courtroom: A Closer Look at Climate Litigation in the United States ” [also as a .pdf here ]
But, Climate Homicide? Where does that idea come from?
It comes from a paper first written in 2023 and published in 2024 in the Harvard Environmental Law Review written by David Arkush of Public Citizen and Donald Braman of George Washington University – Law School’s Justice Innovation Lab. The title: “Climate Homicide: Prosecuting Big Oil For Climate Deaths” [ as .pdf here ] Its abstract states:
“The Article finds that in jurisdictions across the United States, fossil fuel companies could be prosecuted for every type of homicide short of first degree murder, a charge it does not evaluate. It also concludes that prosecutions could offer highly effective remedies and that prosecutors should be motivated to seek them.”
Bottom Line:
The Climate Homicide [spelling correction – h/t MF] lawsuit is a blatant activist effort to extort vast sums of money out of the fossil fuel industry – using cooked up evidence – shamelessly using a poor woman whose mother died of heat exhaustion while driving a non-air conditioned car in Washington state during a heat wave.
# # # # #
Author’s Comment:
For more than a dozen years, anti-fossil fuel activists and issue-driven predatory law firms have been colluding to reap huge profits by staging various novel law suits against oil producing companies with defendants ranging from groups of youths, cities, counties and individuals.
It might be worthwhile to consider whether the interactions of these incestuous activist groups and organizations might be held liable under RICO laws for attempting to use the courts to coerce, extort and defraud oil companies out of vast sums of money. Any lawyers out there? (I know there are a few….)
Thanks for reading.
# # # # #
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
It was a hot day, over 100 °F, and she had pulled her non-air-conditioned car to the side of the highway and rolled her car’s windows down when the murderer struck. Looks like she chose poorly.
TEWS_Pilot ==> One might ask where the daughter or other family members were when the mother was confronted by the necessity of driving her car, with no air-conditioning, to a doctor’ appointment in Seattle, a hundred miles each way, during an acknowledged heat wave.
Her parents’ genetics are at least partly to blame for her lack of intelligence.
If it a 100 F you windows need to rolled down long before she stopped, why do you need to stop to roll windows down, did she have a defective car? I know of no car that requires you to stop to roll the windows down. Last highway speeds would move the air through the car and create cooling so why stop. The only person responsible for her death was the murder, she was the responsible for giving him that chance, either by stupidity, neglect or other reasons.
I do understand there is a possibility that she wanted to roll down the passenger side window and could not reach it, that a problem I do not have. Her choice of were to stop was not that good obviously, it may not been a choice by due to where her economic situation dictated and lived dangerous part of the city and have windows rolled down is a bad idea. It to bad most city cores have become unlivable because of Democrat policies(defund the police was such a brilliant such idea. most area need more police not less.)
In any case if we did have oil she would not have had to car to drive anyway. Is the daughter legal team and supporters now going to live in oil free life style, I doubt it, they all know that they would last a week trying to live that way. Looks to me the daughter should be suing the lawyer that talked her into this case and the anti oil and law enforcement idiots. They are the ones that truly created problems and conditions that lead directly to her mother death! Oil and CO2 did not create or have much to with the heat dome. Lack of law enforcement and functioning legal system is everything to do with it.
Oh by the way I drove in 100 plus weather many times without AC, no problem other than comfort. Last time was in Arizona on a summer day when my AC failed and I need to drive to Phoenix to pick up some fencing, I think it was well over the average of 107 that time. An yes where I had to go was not the best area of Phoenix, but the fence company was basically in and industrial area and of course we have concealed carry even though I do not carry, of course miscreants don’t know that.
How old are you? I have had at least a dozen vehicles with manual crank operated windows. I currently have a 1998 Ford F-150 truck with manual windows. Not that it’s relevant since it would be unlikely that anyone would not open the windows in 100 Degree weather before driving anyway. Without air a closed car without A/C would be an oven on a sunny day. The fatal mistake is most likely not having a supply of water in the car to stay hydrated.
she was the responsible for giving him that chance
I think you missed a very big point: the claim is that the oil companies murdered her because they made it hot due to climate change. She died of heat exhaustion.
“She died of
heat exhaustionstupidity* . . . it happens all the time and under a variety of circumstances.*A 65-year old woman undergoing medical treatment by a physician choosing to drive herself (presumably alone) a distance of about 100 miles each way in a car without air conditioning in the middle of a day with 100 deg-plus air temperature.
I would argue proximate vs. underlying cause. Yeah, that was a pretty stupid choice.
Good comment!
In a formal failure analysis, there are:
— the proximate cause (the immediate factor that resulted in the event)
— the root cause (the basic, primary factor that, had it not been present, would have precluded the event from occurring)
— contributing causes (those other factors that, had they been absent, would have mitigated the timing or severity of the outcome of the event despite the root cause being present).
Interestingly, there can be separate “management” and “technical” factors under each cause classification. My very wise, experienced, mentor in FA made the statement that all root causes ultimately resolve down to being (mis)management-related, as in failure to realize something or take action to enact/prevent something of high importance to the matter (akin to “due diligence”) . . . something that I didn’t agree with initially but over time came to realize is a great truth. So very many examples of this, from the Titanic sinking, to the Hindenberg airship disaster, to the Apollo 1 launch rehearsal capsule fire, to the STS Challenger and Columbia failures, to the case with the above-cited 65-year old woman (her mis-management of her particular situation).
She should have had the windows down already, and keep driving, and drinking a BIG iced tea, and mop the brow with a wet towel.
Now, When you hear the phrase “climate justice”, you’ll know exactly where it comes from.
doonman ==> The activists have re-defined “climate justice” to mean punishing the fossils fuel companies for the inequalities of modern society.
+100
So because we all use fossil fuels and have therefore “forced” the companies to keep producing them, “we are all guilty”. Those of you aware of the satirical works of Peter Simple will recognise the favourite saying of the fictional psychiatrist Dr Heinz Kiosk.
See: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Creator/PeterSimple
Kip, must you? I’ve already wasted decades of my life on tvtropes 🙂
Modern society is no more unequal than societies of the past, and in most cases less so.
There’s no way to comprehend that and to kind of even rationalize it.”
Because it’s utterly loony.
It would seem that the litigants and the “victim” would have no right to assert the case as they all use FF every day, so their claim is null and void.
How come we didn’t see this in the Darwin Awards nominations?
It was too late. The offspring were already born.
As I often say at my GelbspanFiles blog, that Center for Climate Integrity, and that Richard Wiles and that Kert Davies, and that Rockefeller Family Fund — the latter pair having every indication (along with one other guy – Tides Foundation? Oh, yeh, plus way more) of not only falsely accusing Willie Soon of industry corruption but also offering the basic accusation tactic package technically for sale to any law office wanting to launch an “ExxonKnew”-style lawsuit. Yep, this particular lawsuit dutifully regurgitated two of the accusation elements, as I explain in more detail here.
Russell ==> Thanks for the link to your expose n this same topic — and much more.
Kip ==> Thanks for the kind words! I’ve got lots more on these interconnected characters, apologies for sending you into what might be extended reading at my blog. RFF Associate Director . . . wife. San Fran law firm . . . provider of worthless docs to ’em which date back to the late 1990s. As I also say at my blog, the folks pushing the basic “ExxonKnew” accusation package (familiar names!) are just one big happy tiny little family. I can’t readily find a public contact for you, CO2Coalition doesn’t show one in your bio page; my quasi-encrypted contact is at the 2nd-from-bottom paragraph at my About page. Knowledge is power, networking is priceless.
It would seem that these groups could donate enough to support NPR and PBS without taxpayer dollars.
Yeah, file a civil RICO lawsuit against Wiles, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, et al somewhere in an oil patch, like west Texas.
That week the women died of heat (100°F) my temperature (150 miles SSE of Ferndale) reached 116°F. Let’s say (hypothetically) that the temperature was 3 Fahrenheit degrees warmer than it might have been if whale oil and dung were still the main energy sources. Would I have noticed, and would the sick lady not have died?
“I apologize for the use of so many scare quotes but, unfortunately, they are necessary because the very meanings of these words and phrases have been changed by these activist organizations to have definitions only suited for use in their propaganda.”
The defense’s first order of business should be to define terms to be used. The state of Montana never attempted to do that in Held vs Montana and lost the case where every plaintiff witness used the term “climate event” to mean heavy rain and “climate” to mean the weather in some location on a given day or week. Don’t let them slide and don’t use their own definitions.
The whole intent of litigation like this is to create publicity that galvanizes the Left and demoralizes any normal folks that might be paying attention. The plaintiffs legal fees are already covered by the salaries paid by the NGOs, so there’s no downside. And if the plaintiffs do win in front of a friendly judge and jury, the defendants can look forward to a protracted and expensive trip through the courts.
Desperation anyone?
“The Climate Homocide [sic] lawsuit is a blatant activist effort to extort vast sums of money out of the fossil fuel industry…”
Yes, and through the books of those deep-pocketed targets, those vast sums of money are vacuumed from our wallets. From all of us. What a racket.
I know this is a long shot, but I post material here at WUWT and elsewhere to demonstrate that there is good scientific evidence to falsify the attribution of ANY of the reported warming, or any aspect of any extreme event, to incremental CO2 from fossil fuels. It’s not the static radiative effect that is in dispute – it’s the claim that at least *some* or *most* of the sensible heat gain must have resulted from it. No one knows that. The oil companies need to bone up on the physics of the general circulation to get this point across. For example, in a courtroom the jury can be shown these animated plots of the “vertical integral of energy conversion” from ERA5 and informed, “See the thickness of the index mark at zero W/m^2? The claimed influence of even 2XCO2, off in the future, in the real atmosphere, is a small fraction of that. That computed static influence is massively overwhelmed by all the dynamic motion.” There you go. Vanishingly weak. Negligible. Undetectable by any means we have available to us.
https://youtu.be/hDurP-4gVrY
Thank you for your patience as I keep posting about this.
Dibbell ==> That is one of the many beauties of WUWT. Even if no one agrees and no one listens, you have the right, maybe the duty, to keep speaking out and sharing your understandings. Anthony Watts, Charles the Moderator and the whole WUWT crew are dedicated to this principle.
Thanks, Kip, yes, the WUWT platform is much appreciated for these reasons.
Under the FF-caused-it rationale of the litigants, if the unfortunate lady was driving an ICE car, her death can only have been a suicide.
Pat ==> Cute …. maybe her daughter ought to have offered her a ride in her own car with A/C?
Pat:
No, no no! Those evil oil & gas people forced her drive the car; over and over, probably for years.
Just like they are forcing the world to use FF for >80% of its primary energy… and forcing us to
live more than twice as long [compared to say, 1900]. Such dastardly deeds!
Ok, sarc/ off
If Misti Leon ever wins this trial, perhaps she should be forced to forego the use of any petroleum-based products in her daily life.
Does somebody intend to sue Exxon for all homosexuals murdered by climate? I’d like to be watching the trial!
Sorry, couldn’t help spotting it.<g>
Michael ==> Thanks for spotting that — spell checker auto-substitution? Pride Week?
What does the Climate industry have against homonyms?
I never would have in a million years guessed that a heat dome and climate change would be what killed my mother and what took her from me. There’s no way to comprehend that and to kind of even rationalize it.
She’s right. It’s irrational to blame hot weather and maybe a paltry 1 ⁰C increase in global temperatures instead of a series of poor choices to not get out of the hot weather; say, to catch a ride in an air conditioned vehicle with a friend or daughter, or to take breaks in air conditioned buildings like convenience stores along the way. But add the tantalizing prospect of millions of dollars in a legal settlement and suddenly it’s not so crazy.
P.S. I visited Las Vegas on a 107 ⁰F day when my air conditioning broke. Even with windows down it was miserable but not deadly. But I wasn’t old and didn’t have a serious health condition, though. Luckily there were thousands of air conditioned buildings everywhere and I managed the 6 hour drive home on the freeway with windows down and stops at gas stations to cool off a little.
To environmental activist and litigant Richard Wiles, you are missing the proverbial “pot of gold at the end of the rainbow”. Two hints for you: hurricanes, tornadoes.