Day 305 - 25 Nov 96 - Page 30


     
     1
     2        So, I would say from that that it is clear that no weight
     3        could be given to the assertion in his statement that I had
     4        participated in the discussion.  I mean, you could say that
     5        even if I had participated in the discussion, so what?  It
     6        is not a reference to the fact sheet.
     7
     8        Then, going on to paragraphs 12 to 16 of his first
     9        statement, this relates to the meeting of
    10        25th January 1990, which was to discuss the future of the
    11        group.  He refers to arguments against the focus on
    12        McDonald's, and he said that both myself and Mr. Morris
    13        participated.  I think that, again, with this, you should
    14        look at the notes.  There is absolutely no reference to any
    15        contribution from myself in the notes on page 68.  So,
    16        again, it must be an assumption on his part that I took
    17        part in the discussion.  If I did take part in the
    18        discussion, there is no record of what my position was,
    19        whether or not I was against the focus on McDonald's or for
    20        it, or whatever.  There is just no record of any
    21        contribution from me.  When we cross-examined him about
    22        this on day 261, page 23, line 52, he said that he could
    23        not recall what my contribution would have been.
    24
    25        In his second statement, paragraph 21 -- this is about
    26        7th June 1990 -- it refers to me answering letters that
    27        have been sent into the group before -- actually, it just
    28        refers to me answering letters, I think, before the meeting
    29        started; yes, it just refers to me answering letters.  The
    30        point is that there is no note in his statement of which
    31        letters were being answered, there is no evidence that they
    32        were even to the group or that they might have been
    33        personal letters, and there is no mention of any leaflets
    34        being included in the answers.  Therefore, this is
    35        completely irrelevant with regard to any evidence of
    36        distribution of the fact sheet.
    37
    38        In fact, in the whole of Mr. Pocklington's evidence,
    39        despite the fact that he attended at least 26 meetings or
    40        events of London Greenpeace over the course of, I think,
    41        about nine months, there is not a single mention anywhere
    42        of me agreeing to any use of the fact sheet or stating that
    43        I distributed it or of me encouraging other people to use
    44        it.
    45
    46        Going on to Mr. Bishop, from his first statement
    47        paragraph 5, which is about the meeting of 2nd August 1990,
    48        he said that the meeting commenced with the lead persons in
    49        the group -- which, he said, were Mr. Morris, Mr. Gravett
    50        and myself -- commenting on letters we had received in the 
    51        preceding week, since the preceding meeting.  But if you 
    52        look at his notes relating to this date, on page 162 of the 
    53        notes bundle, there is no mention in there of the three of
    54        us commenting on letters.  The only reference is to Dave
    55        asking him to answer a letter from West Germany.  How can
    56        he possibly remember three years later who read out which
    57        letters at each meeting?  That is particularly so, since
    58        there is no note of what the letter said at the time and,
    59        therefore, they cannot have been ones which were
    60        significant and might, as a consequence, be memorable.  If

Prev Next Index