Day 258 - 07 Jun 96 - Page 41
1
2 Q. Right. So are you saying that the photographs were to be
3 passed on without any kind of labelling or anything like
4 that?
5 A. Yes, that was my understanding, that that is what would
6 happen.
7
8 Q. Right.
9
10 MR. MORRIS: While that has come up, as it is obviously
11 something referred to in black and white, unarguable, can
12 we formally have a copy of that letter accompanying the
13 photographs from the Plaintiffs?
14
15 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What do you say about that?
16
17 MR. RAMPTON: I would have to have a look and see if it exists.
18 In all probability it is a fax, I should guess. A letter
19 from Barlow Lyde & Gilbert, I would guess. It is obviously
20 privileged communication, whether it a relevant
21 communication is another question. What does it matter how
22 the Defendants--
23
24 MR. JUSTICE BELL: We will have the argument when you have found
25 it and have an opportunity to look at it.
26
27 MR. RAMPTON: I will look at it.
28
29 MR. JUSTICE BELL: This witness's evidence is that he does not
30 know about the letter.
31 A. Absolutely.
32
33 MS. STEEL: In the photographs that have been served, there is
34 some photographs of the demonstration in central London
35 from November 1991?
36 A. Can you direct me to them?
37
38 Q. I can do, but,, I mean, to save time. If you particularly
39 want to look at them you can?
40 A. Not unless you want me to.
41
42 Q. I was wondering whether they were taken by somebody from
43 McDonald's or from somebody from the inquiry agents firm,
44 or what?
45 A. No, it would not be from the inquiry agents.
46
47 Q. It is the demonstration in central London?
48 A. Yes. What would normally happen is that Lon Lawrie,
49 who is a member of the security department and a very
50 accomplished photographer, took most of our photographs.
51 If he was not available, we may have asked for a
52 professional photographer to go along, but I cannot help
53 you as to who took photographs.
54
55 Q. OK. You said that you instructed Bishops Investigations?
56 A. Yes.
57
58 Q. -- Agency, or whatever you call them, in October 1989?
59 A. Yes, they were the second firm.
60
