Day 305 - 25 Nov 96 - Page 36
1
2 Can I just say -- because I found this a second ago -- that
3 on day 265, page 68, line 32, I asked Mr. Clare if there
4 was any significance in who took the minutes.
5 I said: "There was no significance in who took the minutes;
6 it was just thrown open to volunteers?" He said: "Yes, it
7 was thrown open to volunteers and those who were there if
8 they wanted to." So just, really, that was the point
9 I made earlier about it is irrelevant whether or not who
10 took the minutes.
11
12 In the first statement, paragraph 5 -- and this was also in
13 relation to the meeting of 18th January 1990 -- Mr. Clare
14 said that I was very knowledgeable about the
15 anti-McDonald's campaign and about the group's activities,
16 past and present, in general.
17
18 Firstly, even if that were true, knowledge of something
19 does not mean that you are or were involved with it. But
20 also, secondly, the reality was, as we heard from any
21 number of witnesses in this case, it was generally the case
22 that when there were new people present at meetings
23 somebody would go through something of the history of the
24 campaign or the group, or whatever was being discussed, so
25 that everybody was able to participate and they could
26 understand what was going on and they could participate if
27 they wanted to. So, therefore, anybody who attended the
28 meetings of the group over any length of time, more than a
29 couple of meetings, would fairly quickly get to learn the
30 group's history and the history of campaigns.
31
32 Mr. Pocklington agreed, on day 261, page 49, line 28, that
33 when there were new people attending meetings the history
34 would be explained. In fact, when Mr. Clare was
35 cross-examined about what he had written in relation to me
36 being knowledgeable about the anti-McDonald's campaign --
37 and this was on day 267, page 17 -- he said that this
38 comment would have been what he gleaned from that meeting,
39 and he could not recall whether I had said it or whether
40 somebody else had said it.
41
42 I did ask him about the fact that he had said that I seemed
43 to know a lot about the group and most of the campaigns,
44 and that he had gone on to McDonald's but that he was
45 specifically interested in McDonald's, so he would not have
46 bothered to make a note about all the other campaigns that
47 I talked about, and he said that that was probably right.
48
49 He went on to say in the same paragraph that I had said
50 that I had assisted with production and distribution of
51 anti-McDonald's leaflets. He did not say in the statement
52 which anti-McDonald's leaflets he was referring to. But if
53 you look at his notes, they actually said that I had
54 admitted assisting with production and distribution of all
55 anti-McDonald's leaflets. That was on page 62 of his
56 notes. Obviously, that was just completely ridiculous.
57 I did not say that, or anything like it. It is a
58 particularly ridiculous thing to suggest that I would have
59 said, bearing in mind the number of leaflets produced
60 around the world about McDonald's; and, really, it just
