Day 307 - 27 Nov 96 - Page 42


     
     1        posed for the publication in question.  Quite what that
     2        would prove I do not know.  Just because the media ask you
     3        to have your photograph taken does not prove anything,
     4        really.  It just means that you have co-operated with a
     5        request from them.
     6
     7        I am going to stop for a moment and hand over to
     8        Mr. Morris, because I am just getting a bit disorganised.
     9
    10   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   How are you going to do it?   You are
    11        dealing with the question of whether it was a privileged
    12        occasion, are you?
    13
    14   MR. MORRIS:   Amongst other things.
    15
    16   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Is Ms. Steel dealing with that?  She has been
    17        dealing with it so far.
    18
    19   MR. MORRIS:   Yes.  No, I am dealing with that and some other
    20        matters.
    21
    22   MS. STEEL:   It is just really to save time, because I am pretty
    23        tired and I am getting a bit incoherent.  So if Mr. Morris
    24        speaks for a while, it will let me get my thoughts back
    25        together.
    26
    27   MR. MORRIS:   I have some general points, I think I will leave
    28        them tomorrow, about the claim as a whole.  I will just try
    29        and deal with the subject of privileged self-defence now.
    30
    31        You characterised it in a sort of colloquial way as a
    32        legitimate response to attack and we will embrace that
    33        definition of privileged self-defence or qualified
    34        self-defence.  I think you can also add legitimate response
    35        to an attack by myself and Helen, it has to be to be
    36        relevant in this courtroom.
    37
    38        The question is:  Is it legitimate?  Is it a response?  Was
    39        there an attack and was it by us, if, indeed, it be an
    40        attack?  I think that this waiver of the normal laws of
    41        libel which have been so heavily brought upon our heads in
    42        this case is not one to be abused and waived lightly,
    43        otherwise it becomes meaningless; or it becomes a defence
    44        which anybody could bring up at any time with any kind of
    45        half-baked excuse.  If that is the law, then we would
    46        certainly pray this in aid in our case, and we will be
    47        arguing about some of the law to do with multi-national
    48        corporations at a later point.
    49
    50        Anyway, I think there has to be a sense of perspective in 
    51        this counterclaim so it is not an academic argument.  If we 
    52        actually look at what has actually happened with this 
    53        issuing of these leaflets and press releases, it is clear
    54        that McDonald's have been playing fast and loose with this
    55        law to try and justify what is clearly a libelous
    56        unwarranted attack on our character on the eve of a major
    57        public trial.
    58
    59        So, not in a particularly coherent order, but was this
    60        issuing of leaflets by McDonald's and press releases a

Prev Next Index