Day 313 - 13 Dec 96 - Page 41
1 propositions of law just to re-argue what inferences
2 I should draw from the evidence or what conclusions I am
3 not entitled to draw from the evidence.
4
5 MS. STEEL: This is not about the facts, though, this is about
6 whether or not you are entitled to take such things into
7 consideration.
8
9 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You must leave that to me. I do not see that
10 as a proposition of law.
11
12 MS. STEEL: Well, a further point is just simply that you must,
13 as a point of law, ignore all comment in them because if
14 they were making that comment from the witness it would be
15 deemed inadmissible and there is no reason why it should be
16 allowed just because it is from a report. So, no
17 impressions or 'I think such and such' except where there
18 is clear evidence about, you know, what it is based on.
19 Can I just say, the other day there was something said
20 about it was happening now all over the country that
21 policemen were looking up their notebooks to refresh their
22 memories, and if I make the point that police officers
23 would not be allowed to blank out parts of their notebooks
24 nor to put in an opinion.
25
26 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You know what I was referring to then. It
27 was that one of the authorities we have was explaining what
28 "refresh your memory" means. What it does not have to
29 mean is that when you look at the note you say, 'Ha-ha, now
30 I remember'. What you are entitled to do is to look at the
31 note which you say you made at the time and which was
32 accurate, you say, otherwise you would not have made it an
33 then relate that as what happened. That was what my
34 reference to police officers looking in their notes books
35 was directed at.
36
37 MS. STEEL: Right. They also would not be allowed to put in
38 what other people told them, only put in fact of what they
39 heard themselves stated by the individuals concerned.
40
41 Just another point which is very short, which I think we
42 have made before, is that, as we understand it, on the law
43 no finding can be made in these proceedings with respect to
44 any other leaflets since they are not part of Statement of
45 Claim.
46
47 This is a point which I, sort of, was making the other day
48 in relation to the European Court law, and where I did say
49 that requiring proof of every single fact, particularly
50 given in the circumstances of this case, is contrary to
51 article 10 of the European Convention of Human Rights.
52 Just to say that in our view in a defamation action the
53 appropriate test to be applied by the courts is whether the
54 defendant held a reasonable belief in the truth and
55 accuracy of the alleged defamatory statement, and fair
56 comment scope should be wideranging, i.e. not limited to
57 views which, for example, the Plaintiffs consider to be
58 appropriate, or which you personally consider to be
59 appropriate. The scope for fair comment should take into
60 account that there are wideranging political beliefs, and
