Day 283 - 21 Oct 96 - Page 09


     
     1        it only emphasises the unfairness that unrepresented
     2        members of the public would be able to do such a task that
     3        no jury could be expected to do.
     4
     5   MR JUSTICE BELL:  You must have said that dozens of times, and
     6        it is a gross distortion of the reasons I gave for not
     7        having a jury.  One of the prime reasons was that I could
     8        take bundles home, as you can, I could read statements and
     9        articles in advance, I could look at them again if I had
    10        not understood them the first time, and a jury just cannot
    11        do that.  It does not take a single document out of court
    12        apart from the notes any jury person makes in court.  So
    13        there is no question of pre-reading at home or doing work
    14        at the weekends or in the evenings or early mornings.  You
    15        know as well as I do that that was one of the reasons
    16        I gave, and I particularly said that I was not adopting a
    17        conceit that I was more intelligent than a jury member and
    18        the same would apply to you.  There we are.  I just feel
    19        that I ought to put the record straight because my judgment
    20        was given in chambers.  Wherever you have said the public
    21        consumption that I was saying it was too complicated for a
    22        jury to understand, you completely overlooked that point
    23        that they would only ever have the papers when they were in
    24        court or when they went to their jury room to consider
    25        their verdict.  There we are.  You carry on.
    26
    27   MS. STEEL:   It was certainly the argument advanced on behalf of
    28        the plaintiffs that the nutrition issues in the case were
    29        too complex for members of the--
    30
    31   MR JUSTICE BELL:  I am only interested in the reasons I gave,
    32        the decision I made.
    33
    34   MS. STEEL:   I believe that was part of the judgment though.
    35
    36   MR. MORRIS:   I am sorry if I have misunderstood.
    37
    38   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   It was an important factor in my decision.
    39
    40   MR. MORRIS:   Right.  In any event, we would say that if that is
    41        a concern then the jury really should have all the papers
    42        that exist in the case so that they can peruse them
    43        together and discuss them together, because obviously we
    44        feel quite strongly about having, if you like, a jury of
    45        our peers.
    46
    47   MR. JUSTICE BELL:   In fact, I do not think any jury would have
    48        survived a case as long as this.  Your point, I would have
    49        thought, is that if it is too long for a jury it should not
    50        be there at all.  That is, rightly or wrongly, the point 
    51        you are making. 
    52 
    53   MR. MORRIS:   That is definitely another point, yes, that I am
    54        making.  But it has been necessarily long because of the
    55        huge range of issues which the plaintiffs have been allowed
    56        to sue over and our obligation to defend those views.  So,
    57        although we are completely exhausted -- absolutely a
    58        guaranteed fact -- and it has been very hard to concentrate
    59        in the last couple of months on preparing for our closing
    60        speeches, which is monumental even for a trained team of

Prev Next Index