Day 309 - 03 Dec 96 - Page 46
1 slightly on the last part, the example your Lordship just
2 gave. The reason why, as I have understood what
3 your Lordship is putting, the farmer in that situation has
4 culpability, can only be that the practices which, perforce
5 because he needs the money, he or his workers commit in
6 relation to the animals are beyond the pale, unacceptable.
7
8 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes. It does not matter whether he kills a
9 chicken by holding its head with one hand, his body with
10 the other and stretching the neck, or holding its head and
11 twirling it round, or holding its feet and swinging its
12 head against an apple tree -- all of which most people who
13 have wandered around the countryside have seen happen some
14 time or other, if they have not done it themselves. By
15 Mr. Gregory's standards -- and, if I say, his standards
16 seem a pretty sensible to me -- that would be an inhumane
17 practice, but it would not necessarily mean that the farmer
18 is utterly indifferent to the -----
19
20 MR. RAMPTON: It would not follow, no, although he would have a
21 hard time -- if that was his regular way of behaving, he
22 would have a hard time convincing a jury that he was not in
23 fact somewhat indifferent to the pain and suffering of his
24 animals, if that was the way he normally behaved.
25
26 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I raise it because when one comes to
27 justification, it may be important -- if, indeed, it is, as
28 I said a few minutes ago, more important to prove utter
29 indifference, which seems to me to be a state of mind
30 across the board, than certain cruel practices.
31
32 Where does "torture" come into this? As I understand it,
33 at the end of the day, no exception was taken to murder,
34 because it was thought that if you killed hundreds of
35 thousands of animals, someone might describe that as
36 murder, and there you are. It is an area where, whatever
37 one's personal standpoint, a lot of people would say people
38 are entitled, if they wish, to feel strongly about matters
39 and, therefore, use words which in another context might be
40 thought to be intemperate. If that is a reasonable stand
41 to take, what is "torture"? It is just a strong word for
42 dealing inhumanely with, is it not?
43
44 MR. RAMPTON: Yes, indeed it is, but it imparts, we would
45 suggest, it implies within it a factual statement about the
46 degree of inhumanity, both to the people who are actually
47 doing the torturing -- that is to say, the suppliers, the
48 farmers -- and to the people who are (according to this
49 leaflet) responsible for it, that is to say, McDonald's.
50
51 If I am the king of the castle and I say to my hangman: "Go
52 down to the dungeons and torture the Duke of wherever it is
53 until you get the truth out of him", I am as responsible
54 for the torture as if I held the thumbscrew in my own
55 hand.
56
57 I am not suggesting, as I say, that that is the picture
58 which is conjured up by this leaflet, but it must, not just
59 by the word "torture", but the word "torture" taken in
60 conjunction with those vivid paragraphs in the text about
