Day 263 - 14 Jun 96 - Page 10
1 announcements from the stage during the day (co-ordinating
2 events). She was in a relationship with someone in
3 London Greenpeace."
4
5 That, if it was to be put as a formal pleading, can be
6 turned into one, but it should be taken as a particular of
7 the consent argument. Her involvement is central to our
8 consent argument and McDonald's knowledge of that, because
9 of the notes and the reports that she made; and those notes
10 and reports should be disclosed; they are clearly relevant.
11
12 Those particulars were given on 7th July 1996. Do you
13 remember that note? It was a handwritten list of points.
14
15 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I have that, yes. Ms. Steel's list of
16 points. Yes, I have that. I have put it, for future
17 reference, at the front of the publication section in your
18 pale blue volume.
19
20 MR. MORRIS: The seventh agent, although the Plaintiffs say they
21 cannot identify that agent, obviously their contribution
22 will appear in the reports, either by some number or
23 something or just -- the information will appear in the
24 reports. So, really, the reports or the notes (if they are
25 available) of the seventh agent will be the best
26 information, available test, or the best evidence --
27 I cannot remember the word, what the test is -- that if the
28 witness is unable to be identified.....
29
30 For all we know, actually, if we get the reports, we may be
31 able to identify the seventh agent; and we ought to have
32 that opportunity. So, in fact, it is almost certain that
33 we will be able to identify the agent; and the fact that
34 the Plaintiffs do not know the name is not really
35 relevant. The important thing is that the records of that
36 agent will almost certainly lead to identification one way
37 or the other. In any event, the material in those reports
38 related to the seventh agent are relevant, whether or not
39 we can identify that agent.
40
41 It all relates to consent, at least our pleadings about
42 consent. I will be relying, for example -- and there is no
43 secret -- on the fact that Mr. Pocklington attended 26
44 meetings for the time when I attended, in his evidence,
45 something like three or four -- I cannot remember now.
46
47 Therefore, if agents of McDonald's between them may have
48 totalled a tally of 70, 80 or 90 or something meetings, we
49 are entitled to know how many meetings each agent attended
50 and what they did, because it is part of the consent
51 argument on both sides; and it can be that what is sauce
52 for the goose is sauce for the gander. I cannot remember
53 if that is the right phrase. It will be impossible for the
54 court to make any kind of fair judgment on the consent
55 argument, on the Plaintiffs' side of their consent, without
56 knowing the extent of involvement of their agents.
57
58 I am sorry if I am repeating myself a little bit. I am
59 thinking on my feet.
60
