Day 276 - 09 Jul 96 - Page 36
1
2 Obviously, just generally, about that background
3 briefing, I make all the same complaints as the ones that I
4 have made in relation to the earlier copies referred to.
5
6 In tab 11 is another letter passed on by a member of
7 the public where again the line is repeated that "it has
8 never been our intention to seek damages or recover costs
9 from the defendants". There are some letters, one to The
10 Guardian and one to The Scotsman from Mike Love, and
11 obviously where the same points are covered in Mr. Love's
12 letter obviously I would have the same complaints about
13 those.
14
15 MR. MORRIS: Sorry, what tab number was that?
16 A. Tab 14. Finally, there is a fax from -- which I don't
17 know whether they said got put in the bundle but may be it
18 could be put in tab 17 or something, which was the next
19 empty tab, from Mike Love at McDonald's to Annette Heider
20 at Sterne magazine sent on 9th May 1996, and the very same
21 libel action background briefing is still being distributed
22 by the company. And that was even after Paul Preston
23 agreed in the witness box that there had only been one
24 letter sent about a different leaflet, although he claimed
25 they were similar.
26
27 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I think at the moment I probably have that
28 behind Mr. Preston's statement, so I will leave it there
29 for the time being.
30 A. Can I just make some points in relation to some of the
31 things that were said by Mr. Preston? We have never
32 encouraged other people to repeat libels against
33 McDonald's. As I have said before, I am not interested in
34 the dissemination of false information. I am interested in
35 people hearing about the truth about McDonald's, and
36 companies such as McDonald's. I would encourage people not
37 to give in to bullying by multinationals, who would like to
38 see their critics silenced, but is it not something that I
39 demand of anyone? It is just a matter of, you know,
40 encouraging people to stand up for what they believe in. I
41 do not have a malicious purpose. As I said in my original
42 statement, my reasons for criticising McDonald's are
43 because I want to see a world without exploitation and
44 oppression and that is because I care a great deal about
45 other people and about animals and about the environment.
46
47 It was suggested that because the Plaintiffs have
48 given us their witness statements and the documents we
49 should somehow therefore be completely accepting that what
50 they were saying was true. I mean, apart from the fact
51 that even within the Plaintiff's own documents there are
52 any number of things which go to prove the allegations made
53 in the fact sheet and the criticisms made by campaigners,
54 and the same applies in the Plaintiff's, some of the
55 Plaintiff's own witness statements, apart from even that,
56 there is also the fact that obviously we had our own
57 witness statements and documents which in my mind totally
58 justify the criticism that has been made of McDonald's.
59 And to be honest, if I did not believe in the criticisms
60 that have been made about McDonald's, I really would not
