Day 246 - 09 May 96 - Page 19


     
     1   Q.   In your communications objectives you have the position of
     2        McDonald's as seekers after the truth, to minimise the
     3        negative impact of the Defendants's evidence, witness
     4        statements and out of court activities, and to
     5        counterclaims that McDonald's prevent free speech and any
     6        other inaccuracies which might arise before, during and
     7        after the trial.
     8
     9        So, the second of those you were concerned about the truth
    10        coming out during this trial by way of our witnesses'
    11        evidence and you were trying to negate the impact that that
    12        might have?
    13        A.  I am not at all worried about the negative impact of
    14        evidence.  If there is evidence to come forward, which is
    15        honest and truthful and can be substantiated, I think it
    16        should be brought before the court for his Lordship to deal
    17        with.  That is not a problem.  I have a difficulty, and
    18        would fully support the statement as a result, in allowing
    19        things to be said which are totally capable of not being
    20        substantiated.  Again, that is a matter for his Lordship.
    21        It is not a matter for me.
    22
    23   Q.   If we turn to page 8, this is a draft statement for
    24        internal briefing sheet, do you know who this was a
    25        briefing for?  Was it for employees, management?
    26        A.  Well, it says "internal".  I would guess it would have
    27        been certainly for management.  Whether it had gone down to
    28        restaurant managers or not, I am not sure.  But it
    29        certainly says "internal".
    30
    31   Q.   Right.  Again, you cannot help us with the purpose of this?
    32        A.  No, I cannot.
    33
    34   Q.   Can I ask you, under "Why we are bringing the case", is
    35        written "Since 1988 London Greenpeace has consistently
    36        spread malicious, false and damaging accusations about our
    37        company through their own publications and propaganda which
    38        have damaged our business reputation and, most importantly,
    39        questioned our integrity", in this draft it says "1988".
    40        Do you know why it was that in the versions that were
    41        actually published it was changed to 1984?
    42        A.  I do not know.  Maybe they made a mistake.  I have no
    43        idea.  Maybe the typist hit 88 twice rather than 84, I can
    44        only speculate on that.  I am glad it was titled "draft".
    45
    46   Q.   You see, you said on Tuesday that the parts in the leaflets
    47        that were actually distributed which said that the leaflet
    48        had been distributed worldwide since 1984 you accepted were
    49        incorrect?
    50        A.  I am sorry, you will have to refer me to the question 
    51        in the transcript. 
    52 
    53   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Just put your point on this.
    54
    55   MS. STEEL:   The point is that it appears as though it is less
    56        of a mistake, Mr. Preston, and more of a deliberate act to
    57        change it to 1984, which you knew was incorrect, in order
    58        to give a false impression to the public and the media.
    59
    60   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  That is not my recollection having rechecked

Prev Next Index