Day 280 - 17 Jul 96 - Page 31
1 MS. STEEL: I am sorry. I did not realise you did not have a
2 copy. In the second column on page 37, it talks about
3 Steve Cockerman, and then it says "his files are filled
4 with notices", that is underlined, "his concerns" and
5 something about "Inspectors at the plant." And then there
6 are a whole series of quotes which are taken directly from
7 his notes which clearly are things that were first made in
8 a written document, and this is just a repetition of what
9 was said in that document. So it should be admissible.
10
11 I do not think I have got much else more to say,
12 except that if you are intending to rule the statement out
13 then we would like to reserve the right to call her as a
14 live witness in order to prove the statements in the
15 document which obviously we did not really want to have to
16 do, bearing in mind that she is in America and it was just
17 a lot easier to serve a Civil Evidence Act notice and take
18 less time, but if that is not going to be allowed then we
19 would want to seriously consider calling her as a live
20 witness, at the earliest possible stage. In fact, I do not
21 know whether she might actually come into the category of
22 coming to prove documents.
23
24 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Of what?
25
26 MS. STEEL: Coming to prove documents in terms of it being an
27 article that she wrote. Anyway, that is basically it, I
28 think, unless there is anything Mr. Morris wants to say.
29
30 MR. MORRIS: I will not say anything except for may be that is
31 again, what Helen just said, if you find against us on
32 this, then, that she be allowed to come the first week back
33 after the summer break for the purpose purely of proving
34 the document, which is something which has already been
35 said, time should be set aside for that purpose.
36
37 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes. That is the only matter I want to hear
38 you on, Mr. Rampton, because if I decide against the
39 Defendants on the written statement I want to make a
40 decision now on whether I might hear her if she came to
41 give oral evidence.
42
43 MR. RAMPTON: Well, it is going to create a difficulty for us, I
44 expect, if that does happen. The reason being that until
45 this point, which is about the 17th July, there has been no
46 indication such a witness should be called. When I had
47 looked at section 2 of the Act and the Brinks Mat case, it
48 became apparent that that statement was never going to be
49 admissible, nor the action. It will mean, if I was to
50 contest the evidence, that I would have to go and interview
51 people -- or I say, 'I', McDonald's people would have to go
52 and interview people in all these different places to find
53 out whether the evidence could or should be contested, and
54 then we open up a factual issue. It will not be right, in
55 our submission, to put us to contradict or rebut factual
56 evidence which thus far has not been evidence at all
57 because it has quite obviously been inadmissible.
58
59 I do partly endorse what your Lordship said this
60 morning about the length of this trial. I doubt anyway
