Day 172 - 12 Oct 95 - Page 54


     
     1
     2   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I suggested it might be helpful that you,
     3        before they were read, said which parts you were going to
     4        object to, but I do not feel so strongly about that that I
     5        am saying you ought to do it.
     6
     7   MR. RAMPTON:  Can I put it slightly differently?
     8
     9   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  What I suggest is that you take any part of
    10        Mr. McGee -- if there are any parts of Mr. McGee ----
    11
    12   MR. RAMPTON:  I can deal with it quite shortly actually, because
    13        now I have made the position clear I can just -- without
    14        reading them out -- say which they are.  Can I start with
    15        what I understand ----
    16
    17   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Just take the ones you absolutely object to,
    18        come what may.
    19
    20   MR. RAMPTON:  Can I please say this first?  It is my
    21        understanding of the civil law of evidence in this country
    22        that evidence which is admissible for one purpose cannot be
    23        excluded simply because it is inadmissible for another
    24        purpose - certainly in a trial of a judge alone; it might
    25        be different in a jury trial, because with a judge alone
    26        one does not have to make a balance between prejudice and
    27        probative value, as one does with a jury.
    28
    29        So, for that reason, I accept the whole of pages 2 and 3,
    30        1, 2 and 3 as admissible, except for the little sentence at
    31        the bottom of the fourth paragraph on page 2 -- it is not
    32        even a sentence; it is a parenthesis -- "People who were
    33        only there because they needed the money" -- your Lordship
    34        has made a ruling about that in relation to Magill's
    35        statement.  On page 2 it is the bottom of the fourth
    36        paragraph.  It is penultimate line:  "People who were only
    37        there because they needed the money".  I made that
    38        objection in relation to Magill and I maintain it in
    39        relation to McGee.
    40
    41        My Lord, broadly, I cannot object to 3 as a read document
    42        because it explains what McGee ----
    43
    44   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I take your objection, but, looking at it in
    45        the broad, there is really no objection to it being read,
    46        is there?
    47
    48   MR. RAMPTON:  I know.
    49
    50   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  You see, it really comes in, him saying that 
    51        -- quite apart from your point about other people, I have 
    52        to allow it in, have I not, as a statement that he was only 
    53        there for the money?
    54
    55   MR. RAMPTON:  Well, I mean, I would not want to waste any time
    56        on it at all, because it is not something that concerns me
    57        particularly, I have to say.
    58
    59        In saying that I do not object to the bottom of 2 and the
    60        bottom of 3, though it consists almost entirely of hearsay,

Prev Next Index