Day 306 - 26 Nov 96 - Page 49


     
     1        and it contains so-called facts which were not thought
     2        important enough to include in the original statement,
     3        despite the fact that the purpose of that original
     4        statement was, in part, to prove distribution of the fact
     5        sheet.  I think, really, it is quite significant that it
     6        was only after the evidence of Mr. Carroll had been
     7        rendered effectively worthless that it was thought fit for
     8        Mr. Nicholson to expand on his previous statement in order
     9        to firm up on the evidence.
    10
    11        Just in relation to the October 1987 picket, Mr. Nicholson
    12        said the picket was definitely in the afternoon.  He had
    13        previously said that it was a perfectly normal day.  I
    14        cannot remember what date that was.  But he did not
    15        remember anything out of the ordinary about the day.  Then,
    16        later on, he said that there was no picket in the morning.
    17        It was definitely in the afternoon.  This was on day 259,
    18        pages 11 and 12.  He does not remember that this was the
    19        day after the massive hurricane.  He does not remember
    20        debris all over the place, that the tubes were not running
    21        properly, that roads were blocked by falling trees, and he
    22        just does not remember the hurricane being the night
    23        before.
    24
    25        The point is that he cannot, in reality, have remembered
    26        the 1987 picket, otherwise he would have remembered that it
    27        was a highly unusual day.  I mean, this is an extremely
    28        rare occurrence, the hurricane.  So anybody, if they had a
    29        true memory of that day, would remember the fact that there
    30        had been a massive hurricane the night before.  He is
    31        clearly thinking of something else when he is thinking of
    32        the October 1987 picket.
    33
    34        I will do the point at the end.  On day 259, page 14, line
    35        12 he did not accept there was no picket on 16th October
    36        1988 or around that weekend, over a weekend of action, and
    37        on page 14, line 29, he stood by saying that there were
    38        pickets at the Head Office on both 16th October 1987 and on
    39        or around 16th October 1988, and he stood by saying that
    40        those pickets were organised by London Greenpeace.  He said
    41        that they were, basically, run of the mill and much the
    42        same as the others.  Again, it is not for me to explain
    43        what happened to his -- or why he should think that, about
    44        1987 and 1988, but the point is his evidence is clearly
    45        unreliable, whether it be that his memory is at fault or
    46        that he is not telling the truth, whatever.
    47
    48        There is no evidence at all in this case that any of these
    49        people who I allegedly handed a copy of the fact sheet to
    50        was asked to hand over the copy.  There is absolutely no 
    51        evidence that any members of the public received any fact 
    52        sheets either distributed by me or anybody else on that 
    53        day.  There is no evidence proving the continuity of
    54        exhibits picked up on the day in order for any witness to
    55        positively identify them in court as the leaflet that they
    56        obtained on that day.  All the identification that has gone
    57        on by witnesses for the Plaintiffs about the leaflets on
    58        that day was based on either the size or the fact that
    59        there was a graphic on the front, or on supposition that
    60        there was only one leaflet and, therefore, it had to be

Prev Next Index