Day 306 - 26 Nov 96 - Page 11


     
     1        the most vociferous and he had made something about us
     2        being leaders, or something, I cannot remember now, in his
     3        notes or in the report of his notes.  Then he says: "That
     4        was the general impression that those three persons led
     5        most of the discussions when they were present."
     6         "Question:  So that was a general picture from the
     7        meetings as a whole, was it?  Answer:  Yes."
     8
     9        As I said, he attended twelve meetings and I only attended
    10        two, I think of which he only recorded one.  I do not know
    11        why I have got this one, I am pretty sure that -- or he had
    12        stated somewhere early on that he could only remember one
    13        meeting I attended.  So, he is making impressions based
    14        upon one example and applying it to a dozen events, which
    15        is an unsafe practice.  That is that.
    16
    17        Anyway, there is nothing wrong with being vociferous.  In
    18        fact, this is an impression that got into his statement on
    19        the top of page 50.  So it seems that by the time of him
    20        doing his statement the same thing is happening, as we can
    21        see a pattern here in the agents, that the McDonald's
    22        content, if any, is elevated at each stage higher and
    23        higher from, first of all, the persons at the meeting; they
    24        predominantly record what people they have been told to
    25        look out for about the subject, which they know they have
    26        to get information on.  So, first of all, that goes into
    27        their notes in a sort of elevated and disproportionate
    28        form.
    29
    30        Then the report is done which, we have seen indications of,
    31        further elevates and creates disproportionality about those
    32        matters.  Then when the statement comes to be written me
    33        and Helen somehow have become central looming characters,
    34        and the statements have been written by the solicitors
    35        based upon, often, reports not made by the witness.  The
    36        witness signs them because they do not actually remember,
    37        but they are reliant on disproportionate material, often
    38        which they have not written themselves, it goes into
    39        evidence at the hearing of their testimony, and then it is
    40        very hard to break down and get to the truth, the person
    41        having not had any memory.  "Are you sure this is the
    42        leaflet you picked up?"
    43        "I do not know; I am relying on what it says", you know;
    44        "It is in my notes; I do not have any memory."
    45
    46        Anyway, I have made that point many times.  But I am just
    47        showing how the confusions and disproportionalities are
    48        present in the testimony.
    49
    50        Then, on page 53, he verifies his note that I did not seem 
    51        to place a lot of importance on McDonald's Company itself. 
    52        That is at line 46.  I asked him:  "Do you remember me 
    53        arguing it should not be called the anti-McDonald's fair?"
    54        Answer:  "I do recall something of that nature."  That was
    55        for the fair for 1990.
    56
    57        The top of page 56, material that are not in his notes or,
    58        in fact, reports -- I get confused over which are notes and
    59        which are reports.  I think paragraph 5 of his statement
    60        refers to me, Helen and Mr. Gravett commenting on letters,

Prev Next Index