Day 017 - 25 Jul 94 - Page 68
1 as matters progress, that it is not, but that is just the
form in which things happen in our courts.
2
I am just a little surprised at the advice you have been
3 given in relation to not putting documents. You are
entitled to say: "Do you agree with this statement or
4 that statement?" I cannot stop you doing that. It is
generally more helpful to tell the witness where it has
5 come from so that they can actually read the statement in
its context, because this is not a dig at you suggesting
6 you take them out of context, but sometimes the witness,
when he sees the context of the statement, is able to
7 agree or disagree with you, but go on to give some
explanation, if it is relevant. What do you say about
8 that, Mr. Rampton?
9 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, that is right. It depends on the nature
of the document, of course. If it is a document which
10 goes only to credit, it may be described, the witness has
to be asked the question; if the witness denies the
11 question, the document should be placed in front of him
and he must be asked whether he adheres to his in answer.
12 But in all other circumstances, it right to identify the
document and say: "Well, do you know anything about this?
13 What do you say about what it says there?"
14 So far as the general proposition is concerned, I am
gratified that your Lordship thinks that I have been
15 restrained because I certainly have been. It has been
borne of a recognition of two things: First, that the
16 case is not going very fast and repeated interruptions do
not speed things up, that is quite right; but, second, it
17 is borne of a recognition that these two defendants are
not professional advocates. If they had been, I by now
18 would have been -- well, certainly volcanic.
19 But there will continue to be two bases, general bases, on
which I shall continue to make objection -- "interruption"
20 is not the right word -- and those, broadly speaking, are
these: First, if the question is an improper one, such as
21 the questions being asked the other day: "Do you accept
that there is a link between diet and this or that or the
22 other?" when the proper question is: "Do you accept there
is a causal link, if not, what kind of association do you
23 accept?" Second, when the cross-examination goes neither
to credit nor to any issue in the case.
24
MR. JUSTICE BELL: Thank you. Can I just make one point on
25 where the statement comes from a document? If you do put
a statement from a document without actually referring to
26 the document, it will certainly be helpful to me if,
sooner rather than later, you do actually identify the
27 document, because I have to know the context in which a
statement was made if it was made, if only so I can refer
28 back to it later and remind myself where it has come from.
29 MS. STEEL: I mean, we will do that at some stage because
obviously there is no point in asking the questions
30 otherwise. But to me it is blindingly obvious that if we
hold the leaflet up and say to a witness: "Do you agree
