Day 305 - 25 Nov 96 - Page 39


     
     1        and we believe more, because there were lots of pages of
     2        his notebook which were blanked out by the Plaintiffs which
     3        indicate that there were other meetings that he attended.
     4        He took numerous letters belonging to London Greenpeace
     5        which had been sent to the group by members of the public,
     6        letters which did not belong to him, and he took them in
     7        order to provide copies for McDonald's files, and he broke
     8        into the offices of London Greenpeace.  Generally, he was a
     9        completely unreliable and untrustworthy character.
    10
    11        We would say that the fact that he made a statement that
    12        I was present at the meeting on 14th June 1990, which the
    13        Plaintiffs now accept that I did not attend, means that his
    14        evidence cannot be given any weight at all; it is
    15        completely unreliable.
    16
    17        If you look at the notes of that date which appear on
    18        page 139 of the bundle of spies' notes, it could not be a
    19        simple mistake of adding my name to the list of people
    20        present by accident, because he states at the end of his
    21        report: "Meeting finished reasonably early, 9.30, because
    22        Paul and Helen were going for a drink with friends."  When
    23        he wrote that report, he knew that that was untrue, but he
    24        did not care; he just put it down anyway.  It was really
    25        quite fortunate that I actually spotted it by compiling a
    26        list of all the meetings that the spies had attended and
    27        noting that Mr. Bishop did not report that I had attended
    28        that meeting, and that then reminded me that I was on
    29        holiday at that time and I was able, fortunately, to get
    30        hold of a postcard which I sent from the Outer Hebrides and
    31        so prove that I was not at the meeting.  Well, I think that
    32        is generally quite fortunate all round, because we are
    33        therefore able to show that Mr. Clare's evidence is totally
    34        unreliable, and it would be quite.....  (Pause)
    35
    36   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  You have made your point.
    37
    38   MS. STEEL:   Yes.  Just, you know, that can apply to all of his
    39        notes.  He wrote down whatever he felt like at the time,
    40        and they cannot be trusted.
    41
    42        I have sort of finished on the individual witnesses in
    43        relation to the meetings for now, although I might want to
    44        do a list of further points to hand in.
    45
    46        I just wanted to make a general point that just because we
    47        were present at meetings does not mean that we took part in
    48        any discussions; and that if there is nothing in the notes,
    49        nothing recorded in the notes, it cannot be considered in
    50        the balance of probabilities that we spoke in favour or 
    51        spoke at all about that subject.  The test of balance of 
    52        probabilities is not did we say something, but have facts 
    53        been shown that we did say something upon which the balance
    54        of probabilities could be taken that we were in favour or
    55        involved?
    56
    57   MR. MORRIS:  The point, as I say, and I was going to say earlier
    58        on actually, it is not just general assent to say, "Oh,
    59        yes, such and such is a good thing"; it has to be assent in
    60        terms of affecting a decision for a particular course of

Prev Next Index