Day 025 - 16 Sep 94 - Page 64


     
     1        had done so and violated the law or that they had agreed
     2        to stop doing so.
     3
     4        We found that the representations of most companies as to
     5        their reasons for the former or the latter were generally
     6        self-serving and not of much interest to us.
     7
     8   Q.   I am going to ask you a question to which I am fully
     9        conscious I may not get an answer that I like, but I am
    10        going to ask it just the same.   What prompted you to
    11        spend your own money, if it be yours, to come over here to
    12        give evidence in this case?
    13        A.  Because, although I may no longer be working for the
    14        State of Texas, I think it is important that what went on
    15        there, if that is of interest to this court, be heard.
    16
    17   Q.   I had better put it to you, because I might in the end
    18        invite his Lordship to draw this conclusion, therefore, it
    19        is only right you should hear what I have to say.  My
    20        suggestion is that you are over because you have a grudge
    21        against McDonald's.  I shall tell you what I think it is.
    22        May I do that?
    23        A.  I suspect so, Mr. Rampton.
    24
    25   Q.   First of all, that McDonald's gave you -- I will not use a
    26        vulgarism -- a beating up in 1986 which you did not like?
    27        A.  What would that be, sir?
    28
    29   Q.   Over the issue of the brochures.
    30        A.  What was the beating up?
    31
    32   Q.   You wanted to get in on the act and they beat you to it?
    33        A.  No, sir, not at all.  In fact they took a greater
    34        beating.  When the Associated Press reporter learned of
    35        what McDonald's had, in fact, done, the subsequent
    36        coverage from the Associated Press and from other local
    37        press, including the Washington Post, was significantly
    38        worse than it had been good in the first instance before
    39        McDonald's.  I thought that McDonald's tried to get cute
    40        with the press and lost, as I think is often the case when
    41        you try to manipulate, whatever they are, I think the
    42        force of the state.
    43
    44        I thought we were absolutely -- we being the Attorneys
    45        General, we being the public -- the winners in that
    46        particular tussle, so I do not bear them anything for
    47        that, other than something akin to pity that they do not
    48        know how to play the press better than they did.
    49
    50   Q.   You do know how to play the press quite well, do you not, 
    51        Mr. Gardner?  Can you turn back to file VI A? 
    52        A.  Yes. 
    53
    54   Q.   Tab 34.
    55        A.  Yes, sir.
    56
    57   Q.   The first letter to McDonald's is, in fact, a mailgram,
    58        I think, of 10th April.  It does not matter what the page
    59        number is.  It is out of order in my bundle.
    60        A.  The April 10 mailgram I talked about before?

Prev Next Index