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

Prev Next Index