Day 255 - 23 May 96 - Page 38
1 Q. When?
2 A. Round about 1987, 88, 89. That is when it was becoming
3 active.
4
5 MR. JUSTICE BELL: You did not say that between the December
6 1984 letter and the September 1990 letter there had been
7 several letters?
8 A. No, I did not, my Lord. My opinion at that time, my
9 belief at that time was that I had asked twice to write to
10 Greenpeace. That is what I thought.
11
12 MS. STEEL: So we have all got this completely clear, can you
13 say what those two times were?
14 A. No. I have it in my mind one followed the meeting in
15 West London that I referred to in evidence.
16
17 Q. Which meeting was that?
18 A. That was the one with Dick Starman. It was a media
19 meeting, and we had decided that after that meeting we
20 would put the matter on hold and watch it, and I thought it
21 would be prudent to write you once more to see whether we
22 would get a response.
23
24 Q. And the other time?
25 A. I have it fixed in my mind that I had asked for you to
26 be written to again, and I think this possibly followed my
27 visit to the 1988 fare because that was quite active. Now,
28 what happened, I am afraid I cannot help you.
29
30 Q. You did not check these. You did not go and check these
31 facts or what you saw as being facts before you went and
32 told them to everybody at this meeting?
33 A. No I did not. I was of the opinion that was what had
34 happened and I told them that.
35
36 Q. You knew that the whole purpose of this meeting was to do a
37 leaflet and a press release to put out what McDonald's view
38 of the case was?
39 A. Yes.
40
41 MR. JUSTICE BELL: What are the facts you are putting that Mr.
42 Nicholson did not check?
43
44 MS. STEEL: The business about he has just said that he thought
45 that the solicitor had written letters in, I think one was
46 1987 and one was 1988.
47
48 MR. JUSTICE BELL: That is not my understanding of what you
49 said. There was the 1984 letter?
50 A. That was the 1984 letter, my Lord.
51
52 Q. And there was a subsequent letter, which I have understood
53 you to say you thought at different times, you have said
54 either 87 or 88?
55 A. Yes.
56
57 Q. But it was one subsequent letter?
58 A. No. At that time, I believed there were two. We
59 cannot find either of those, my Lord, but I had a feeling
60 on two occasions I had suggested that we should write.
