Day 312 - 11 Dec 96 - Page 28
1 credible evidence that Mr. Morris was the author of the
2 leaflet either.
3
4 So they were not our words and therefore to require us to
5 establish the truth of all the statements is effectively an
6 impossible task and is unreasonable.
7
8 Incidentally, it is worth bearing in mind that that,
9 effectively, was the advice that we got at the start of
10 this case, that we faced a nigh on impossible task in, you
11 know, even getting to court but in producing all the
12 evidence in court and so on, and that really, as we have
13 said before, the only reason we have been able to get
14 through this case is because of overwhelming public support
15 and donations and people working for nothing, experts for
16 example, and witnesses preparing their own statements and
17 so on, but obviously our case could have been a lot
18 stronger if there had not been such a wide range of issues
19 all of which needed to be dealt with.
20
21 But in any event -- and, yes, obviously, if we had had
22 legal aid and back up to, you know, send clerks and so on
23 to take statements, I mean, the point being that we should
24 not have been required to prove all the statements and the
25 fact sheet, but, as I said, it is probably, you know, we
26 should have made that application at the start of this
27 trial. But anyway, it is still something we feel is
28 relevant now to be taken into consideration.
29
30 Indeed, it could, and we would invite you to, throw out the
31 Plaintiffs' case because it is an unreasonable fetter on
32 freedom of speech in all the circumstances that we have
33 gone through.
34
35 No.13: in developing this argument the Defendants further
36 submit that the court is entitled to take into account the
37 Plaintiffs' ability to reply to the words in the fact sheet
38 that it now complains of. The reality of this case is that
39 (A), McDonald's came to an arrangement with Veggies under
40 which McDonald's effectively agreed that Veggies could
41 publish a version of the fact sheet now complained of, (B)
42 the Plaintiffs have an elaborate and well resourced public
43 relations department, they engage in multi-billion dollar
44 advertising around the world, they are capable of
45 publishing millions of leaflets to counter any comment made
46 about them, and they have in fact done so in this case.
47
48 That not only goes for the counterclaim, the documents
49 referred to in the counterclaim, but, obviously, in our
50 view, should have been on the issues rather than, you know,
51 attacking myself and Mr. Morris and other critics on a
52 personal level, but also that goes to all the McFact cards
53 and McFact boxes that we have heard evidence about, the
54 Plaintiffs' publishing, and it also goes for their
55 relationship with the media and their statements to the
56 media which we have heard about.
57
58 In balancing the rights of the Defendants to free speech
59 and the right of the Plaintiffs to protect their trading
60 reputation, the Defendants submit that this feature of the
