Day 157 - 18 Jul 95 - Page 39


     
     1        moan about -- first, they started off moaning that the
     2        extracts were inaccurate and then, as I pointed out, if
     3        they are inaccurate, they cannot have been -----
     4
     5   MR. RAMPTON:  No, I did not say "inaccurate," I said
     6        "misleading".
     7
     8   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  He never said that; he said they gave an
     9        inaccurate picture of the evidence so far.
    10
    11   MS. STEEL:  I believe initially -- I can check this if needs be
    12         -- that the Plaintiffs said that the quotations were
    13        inaccurate.  Then he backed peddled after I argued that if
    14        they are inaccurate they cannot have come from the
    15        transcripts.  He is now complaining that only extracts are
    16        being reported which, he says, are selective.  The fact is
    17        that any reporting of the case is by definition only going
    18        to be an extract because, basically, no newspaper is going
    19        to report verbatim even the whole of one day's
    20        proceedings.  It is just as simple as that really.
    21
    22        There is no obligation in law that if you are going to
    23        report on a court case you have to report on every single
    24        word that has been said.
    25
    26   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  No, but if my recollection is right, if you
    27        want to take advantage of the various privileges, it has to
    28        be a fair and accurate report taken as a whole, no doubt.
    29
    30   MS. STEEL:  Yes.  The fact that the Plaintiffs have not brought
    31        any action against any either organisation or newspaper
    32        indicates that they do not have a leg to stand on.  They
    33        are just complaining and trying to use this as an attempt
    34        to withdraw transcripts from us to hinder and sabotage our
    35        defence.  The same goes for copyright; if there was any
    36        breach of copyright, then the appropriate action could have
    37        been taken under the Copyright Act.  It is all just a smoke
    38        screen from the Plaintiffs.
    39
    40   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  You must close your submissions unless there
    41        is anything else.
    42
    43   MS. STEEL:  No, I just wanted to say, finally, I just wanted to
    44        reiterate the part about if we were, effectively, censored
    45        from talking about what had gone on in this case to anybody
    46        other than witnesses and legal advisers, either from
    47        referring to transcripts or showing the transcripts or
    48        talking about them over the telephone, or anything like
    49        that, effectively, we are going to be intimidated into not
    50        talking about this case at all, and that is the whole aim 
    51        of the Plaintiffs withdrawing the transcripts. 
    52 
    53        They want us to be frightened to talk about the evidence.
    54        We could argue that that is a contempt of court because it
    55        is an attempt to intimidate future witnesses as we are
    56        future witnesses.
    57
    58   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.
    59
    60   MR. RAMPTON:  My Lord, just to say that your Lordship can be

Prev Next Index