Day 246 - 09 May 96 - Page 26
1
2 Q. Is that why you are saying you decided not to include them
3 in the leaflet dispensers or was it another reason?
4 A. I believe that is why they finally decided on giving
5 them out on request when they thought they had a customer
6 who needed one to answer their question over the counter.
7 I believe that is why they decided, purely logistic.
8
9 Q. It was not because you were concerned that millions of your
10 customers would get copies of these leaflets and then know
11 about the court case and know about the fact that
12 McDonald's was being criticised for various issues?
13 A. Ms. Steel, we only printed 300,000, hardly millions.
14
15 Q. Well, 300,000. I do not know whether at this stage you
16 decided to only print 300,0000, so?
17 A. Well, I do not know either at this stage. That is what
18 was decided. I do not think it would have been wrong to
19 put them in the dispensers but that was not the decision
20 that was taken nor the instruction given. So be it.
21
22 Q. On page 11 of this document, it says:
23
24 "I hope this prompts some discussion between us on Monday
25 and I look forward to seeing you."
26
27 Do you know who the "I" was, the person who sent this
28 communication?
29 A. I do not know who the person was.
30
31 Q. The next document is on page 12, again from Scope
32 Communications Management dated 28th February 1994, and No.
33 2 under the action section is:
34
35 "2. Agreed to issue background information to all national
36 media before the start of the trial (legal correspondence
37 wherever possible).
38
39 2.1 Ensure they have a fax so that internal articles are
40 not bias" and then in brackets it has "(Defendants are
41 holding pre-trial press briefings on a one-to-one basis)."
42
43
44 I wanted to ask you about that. This here, and also
45 I think it might be in your statement but, if not, it is
46 somewhere else, talks about us holding press conferences or
47 press briefings. Where did you get that impression from?
48 A. Well, again, I was not at the meeting. I do not
49 remember being there, I assume our communications people
50 must have learned something, been told something, maybe
51 been asked a question already in response to something you
52 folks had done, knew they were going on. I really do not
53 know.
54
55 Q. In paragraph 11 of your statement, and I will read it to
56 you so that you do not need to get it out. It says:
57
58 "The hearing in the Court of Appeal took place on 15th
59 March 1994. Before the hearing, the communications
60 department learned that the Defendants were about to hold a
