Day 288 - 28 Oct 96 - Page 22


     
     1        other incidents, unquote.  And then you go on, incidents
     2        other than the ones which are specifically set out in this
     3        leaflet such as cutting throats while unconscious.
     4
     5        And then reading again, quote, which are relevant to prove
     6        the truth of the inferential meaning, unquote.  And then
     7        you say, rightly or wrongly I had assumed that that is why
     8        there was being and could be no objection to you using
     9        evidence whether by cross-examination or calling it of your
    10        own initiative about the treatment of animals, whether at
    11        the rearing stage or the slaughter stage, which are not
    12        matters which are portrayed in the leaflet but you say you
    13        are entitled to adduce in evidence to support of your
    14        contention that McDonald's are utterly indifferent  to
    15        animals.  It is a bit confusing, it was not our contention
    16         ----
    17
    18   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I do not think there is anything there which
    19        is different to what -----
    20
    21   MS. STEEL:   Okay.
    22
    23   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   ---- appears is common ground now.
    24
    25   MS. STEEL:   Okay.  I mean, effectively, as we have argued
    26        before, whether or not the Plaintiffs are indifferent to
    27        the welfare of the animals is or could be irrelevant
    28        really, the point being that the question which the leaflet
    29        is dealing with and which we have to deal with is are the
    30        animals suffering to an extent where people would be
    31        entitled to say that it was torture for them whether or not
    32        there is the state of mind which the Plaintiffs are trying
    33        to impute into the meaning.
    34
    35        And obviously we consider that there has been ample
    36        evidence to justify saying that effectively the animals do
    37        feel as if they were being tortured or do feel, if they
    38        could express it themselves, they would express it as
    39        torture.
    40
    41   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   Yes.  Do not forget that it has to be a
    42        defamatory comment or defamatory statement of fact.
    43
    44   MS. STEEL:   Yes.  Obviously the defamatory part is that
    45        McDonald's are responsible because they are creating the
    46        demand and profiting from it.
    47
    48   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   Yes.
    49
    50   MS. STEEL:   We say that in our view all the facts in the 
    51        leaflet are proved, have been proved through the evidence 
    52        given in court, and I am going to go into more detail about 
    53        that later, but that certainly the sting has been proved,
    54        be it the meaning that we assert or the meaning that the
    55        Plaintiffs assert.
    56
    57        I mean, in our view anyone who locks animals inside for
    58        their entire lives with no access to the open air or to
    59        sunshine and with no freedom of movement, or anybody who
    60        has that done to animals on their behalf, i.e. McDonald's,

Prev Next Index