Day 052 - 21 Nov 94 - Page 42


     
     1
     2   MR. RAMPTON:  There are two questions in re-examination which
     3        I asked him which cannot really have left the Defendants
     4        (if they ever were, which I do not accept) in any doubt at
     5        all about what the issue was -- perhaps only one will do
     6        for the moment.  It is on page 34 which is my last question
     7        at line 17, I asked him this:  "Finally, my last question,
     8        Dr. Arnott, in relation to the consideration of
     9        multifactorial elements as possible contributors to the
    10        causation of disease, do you see a distinction between, for
    11        example, cigarette smoking and consumption of a diet
    12        containing a wide variety of different substances?"
    13        Answer:  "Yes, there is a complete contrast."
    14
    15        My Lord, that was on 13th September.  Then, of course, my
    16        Lord, there followed Dr. Barnard and Professor Crawford in
    17        the history of the case.  Both (I think, necessarily
    18        because Professor Crawford followed Dr. Barnard) were
    19        preceded by guidance from your Lordship.
    20
    21   MS. STEEL:  That is the wrong way around.
    22
    23   MR. RAMPTON:  It does not matter.  Certainly Dr. Barnard was
    24        proceeded by guidance from the Defendants that they needed
    25        to grapple with this issue of causation through their
    26        witnesses on the basis that it might turn out at the end of
    27        case that they did not have a defence unless they had done
    28        so.
    29
    30        My Lord, I do not presently have a reference to that
    31        carefully worded guidance which I believe your Lordship had
    32        already prepared because your Lordship gave a day's warning
    33        you were going to give it.  We will find it in the
    34        transcript in due course.
    35
    36   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Mr. Cannon was 3rd October; Professor
    37        Crawford 5th and Dr. Barnard started on 10th.
    38
    39   MR. RAMPTON:  Ms. Steel is quite right; I have them in the wrong
    40        order.  But my belief is that your Lordship's guidance
    41        preceded all of those.  The result was -----
    42
    43   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I can remember it in relation to Dr. Barnard
    44        because I was particularly conscious of the fact that he
    45        was coming from the States to give evidence and,
    46        presumably, was going to go back there.  I think it was
    47        probably -- the 10th was a Monday, I think probably, and it
    48        may well have been on Friday, 7th.
    49
    50   MR. RAMPTON:  It might have been; on the other hand, as your 
    51        Lordship will remember, before Mr. Cannon and Professor 
    52        Crawford -- I did not mention Mr. Cannon simply because he 
    53        is not in any sense scientific or medical -- your Lordship
    54        is absolutely right, it was given on 6th October which is
    55        Thursday, on page 78, beginning at line 38.  That was
    56        before Dr. Barnard gave evidence, if your Lordship is right
    57        (as I am sure you are) that the other two gave evidence
    58        before that.  That is right, Mr. Cannon was on 3rd October
    59        and Professor Crawford on 5th, which is the Wednesday.
    60        Then came Dr. Lobstein and at the end of the day your

Prev Next Index