Day 020 - 28 Jul 94 - Page 30


     
     1        are actually calling evidence to support it.  Maybe they
              will.  If they do, then I will expect them to give some
     2        sufficient prior notice.
 
     3   MR. RAMPTON:  I am grateful.
 
     4   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  But I am going to hear it and then at the
              end of the day we will hear argument on whether I have any
     5        evidence as to it.
 
     6   MR. RAMPTON:  I am not objecting to it.  In any event, it might
              go to the question of malice.
     7
         MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Apart from anything else, particularly
     8        bearing in mind what the Court of Appeal said, for all
              I know Dr. Gregory would have said:  "Yes, I agree with
     9        that".  Then there would have been some evidence.
 
    10   MR. RAMPTON:  He has said already that he does not.
 
    11   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I know he has, but the Court of Appeal said
              the defendants were entitled to see what they get from
    12        cross-examination.
 
    13   MR. RAMPTON:  Yes, I accept that.
 
    14   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Have you anything else you want to put in
              relation to the slaughter of the broilers?
    15
         MS. STEEL:   Yes, I am trying to finish off rapidly.
    16
         MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Just sit down.  Have a look through your
    17        notes and see what you must in fairness to your case put.
              (Pause).
    18
         MS. STEEL:   You said that 1 per cent of birds missed the water
    19        bath stunner and hence were not stunned.  On page 7.
              A.  Thank you.  Which paragraph?
    20
         Q.   The second one.  It is quite near the bottom of that
    21        paragraph.
 
    22   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Page?
              A.  That is correct, yes, page 233 or 7.
    23
         MS. STEEL:   You told us before that you do not think it is
    24        humane not to stun birds.  Is it actually legal to not
              stun birds?
    25        A.  There are only four exceptions; that is Muslim
              slaughter, Jewish slaughter, neck dislocation and 
    26        decapitation.  Those do not require prior stunning. 
  
    27   Q.   But would they be applicable to these circumstances?
              A.  Actually in these circumstances what happens is those
    28        birds that miss the water bath stunner, for example, and
              then miss the neck cutter, have their heads chopped off by
    29        the back up neck cutter.
 
    30   Q.   You think it is legal?
              A.  It is legal taken literally, is it not?

Prev Next Index