Day 012 - 18 Jul 94 - Page 52
1 MR. JUSTICE BELL: On what basis?
2 MR. MORRIS: I just think a lot of assertions have been made.
No evidence has been brought. Implications are said about
3 the assistant Attorney General for the state of Texas; the
letter written by the Attorney General of Texas, Jim
4 Mattox, certain implications have been said about that,
about that he is incapable of writing his own text for his
5 own letters he signed. I just find the whole thing -----
6 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No one said he is incapable of writing his
only text for his own letters. You do not have to be in
7 the law for very long before you realise that people in
high positions often have letters drafted for them. They
8 should read them through. They should make sure they
reflect their views. They do not draft them any more than
9 a minister or Prime Minister drafts all his own speeches.
10 MS. STEEL: Has Mr. Rampton any evidence at all to suggest this
letter was not written by Jim Mattox? If not, this is a
11 false point.
12 MR. JUSTICE BELL: He can put it. You can answer it, if you
wish. This is one side of the coin at the moment. That is
13 all I am hearing.
14 MS. STEEL: He should not be trying to insinuate something
unless he has some evidence that what he is insinuating
15 is, in fact, the case.
16 MR. JUSTICE BELL: If he feels he has some basis for it, he can
perfectly properly put it. If you call Mr. Gardner, he
17 can answer it. If you are unable to call Mr. Gardner but
can get in touch with him, he can make a supplemental
18 statement which you can make subject to a Civil Evidence
Act notice. At the moment I do not know how important, if
19 indeed it will have any importance at the end of the day.
At the moment there is a direct conflict between this
20 witness's evidence and Mr. Gardner's Civil Evidence Act
statement as to whether McDonald's withdrew this
21 advertising campaign under pressure from one two or three
of the Attorneys General. There is a direct issue.
22
MS. STEEL: I understand that.
23
MR. JUSTICE BELL: Somebody is either not telling the truth or,
24 putting it at its very lowest, being inaccurate,
historically inaccurate; I may have to decide who it is.
25
MS. STEEL: I understand that, but, I mean, perhaps because we
26 are not a 100 per cent aware of the law with regard to
cross-examination in this way, you know, perhaps it would
27 be helpful if we had some assistance. I mean, it seems
strange to me that Mr. Rampton can make an assertion that
28 this letter was nothing to do with Jim Mattox in reality,
when he has no evidence to that effect. He is asking a
29 witness who has no way of knowing whether this letter was
written by Jim Mattox or not. It is all totally
30 hypothetical.
