Day 288 - 28 Oct 96 - Page 14


     
     1        is no more than an acceptance of the obvious and you have
     2        someone who is thoroughly involved in the industry who is
     3        prepared to accept that?
     4
     5   MS. STEEL:   Right.  Obviously-----
     6
     7   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   There you are.
     8
     9   MS. STEEL:   Mr. Walker is thoroughly involved in the industry,
    10        and he was called as a witness by McDonald's, and he did
    11        make that admission and we should be entitled to use it
    12        against the Plaintiffs because they did show-----
    13
    14   MR. RAMPTON:   That is not very difficult.  I had intended to
    15        use it myself.
    16
    17   MR JUSTICE BELL:  Yes.
    18
    19   MR. RAMPTON:   On the evidence it makes perfect sense.
    20
    21   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I only interrupted because it may not be
    22        necessary to get too tied up with admissions when I am just
    23        looking at whether the evidence is going to prove this that
    24        or the other.
    25
    26   MS. STEEL:   I did not mean it in the sense of formal admission,
    27        but it is an admission by one of McDonald's own witnesses
    28        and they are the sole supplier of beef and pork patties in
    29        this country.
    30
    31   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   Yes.
    32
    33   MS. STEEL:   Right.  Moving on to torture and murder, we
    34        consider that they are obviously matters of opinion, or
    35        comments, which are based on the facts as set out in the
    36        leaflet, and we consider that this was accepted by the
    37        Plaintiffs at the start of the trial and again on a number
    38        of subsequent pages.
    39
    40        On day one of the trial, page 44, Mr. Rampton said,
    41        starting at line 19:  "McDonald's do not dispute the right
    42        of anyone at all, if that should be his honest view, to say
    43        in strong terms, if he wishes, that he disapproves of
    44        keeping and killing animals for human consumption."  And
    45        that refers to the keeping of animals not solely to the
    46        killing, which would be the murder part.  He says, "That is
    47        not what this case is about, it is entirely a matter of
    48        opinion."
    49
    50        Then he goes on:  "What McDonald's do object to, however, 
    51        is gross mis-description of the facts underlying the 
    52        expression of such opinions.  Thus, my Lord, in this case, 
    53        while McDonald's unreservedly accept that a person holding
    54        strong views on the matter might honestly describe the
    55        slaughter of animals for food as murder they emphatically
    56        do not accept that that person or those people are entitled
    57        to colour their opinion and to try and incite support for
    58        it by falsely asserting as a matter of fact that the
    59        animals which McDonald's use..."  Then he quotes the
    60        section of the fact sheet about 'often struggling to escape

Prev Next Index