Day 258 - 07 Jun 96 - Page 55


     
     1        London Greenpeace would voluntarily withdraw their
     2        pamphlet.  That was the object.
     3
     4   Q.   Without even writing to them?
     5        A.  Well, as I say, I think we did.
     6
     7   Q.   Yes, but in 1989 you know you did not?
     8        A.  No, in 1989 we did not.  I thought we had written just
     9        previously.
    10
    11   Q.   So, if it was a distinct possibility that you were going to
    12        bring legal proceedings against people on the picket for
    13        distributing -- people who were on the picket who were
    14        involved with London Greenpeace for distribution of this
    15        leaflet that is the subject of this case, would it not have
    16        been the most sensible thing in the world to get
    17        photographs of that and to make a note of that fact in the
    18        report of the demonstration?
    19        A.  No, the report on the demonstration was done by Terry
    20        Carroll.  He did not know that I had started an
    21        investigation to find out who the authors and the
    22        distributors of the leaflet were.  I had already put into
    23        effect two teams to carry out an investigation and I was
    24        going to sit back and wait for them to provide me with the
    25        information.
    26
    27   Q.   But you knew -----
    28        A.  Depending upon the strength of that information would
    29        depend upon whether or not we took it further.
    30
    31   Q.   But you knew that you were seriously considering
    32        litigation?
    33        A.  No, that is not right.  I knew that I had been charged
    34        by Paul Preston to stop the distribution of this leaflet.
    35        That was the main objective.
    36
    37   Q.   But you said it was a distinct possibility that you were
    38        going to -----
    39        A.  No, there was a possibility.  There was always a
    40        possibility we would end up in litigation.
    41
    42   Q.   You said "a distinct possibility", in which case would it
    43        not have been the most sensible thing in the world to tell
    44        Mr. Carroll to take photographs of people distributing the
    45        leaflet that you wanted stopped?
    46        A.  No, I did not want anyone to know that I had started
    47        this action.
    48
    49   Q.   How would asking him to do that mean that he would know
    50        that you were starting the action? 
    51        A.  I just asked him to take photographs of the people 
    52        involved. 
    53
    54   MR. MORRIS:  Can I -----
    55
    56   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Are you going on to another document?
    57
    58   MR. MORRIS:  No, it is the same related matter.
    59        (To the witness):  Paul Preston had told you to stop the
    60        distribution of this London Greenpeace fact sheet, yes?

Prev Next Index