Day 287 - 25 Oct 96 - Page 09


     
     1        that because the headquarters was in the same area in
     2        Guatemala City, which seems to me a bit of a bizarre
     3        presumption and only goes to show Mr. Cesca's, we would
     4        say, lack of knowledge about the beef industry in
     5        Guatemala.  But, in any case, it is an admission that what
     6        applied to Procasa would apply to IGG at an even earlier
     7        date.  Obviously, the deforestation would have been even
     8        more recent.
     9
    10        Then on page 37, lines 3 to 11, he was asked if the
    11        allegation about export to McDonald's in the USA from
    12        Guatemala which, as we have seen, has been printed in a
    13        number of magazines and books, for example in Dr. Nations'
    14        article, also in 'Hoof Prints in The Forest'.  I think it
    15        is a reference in Dr. Nations' article.  I could get the
    16        reference, if it is necessary, actually.
    17
    18        In any event, Mr. Cesca did not know of any investigation.
    19        "So far as I know..." - he said - "...we did not even know
    20        about it."  Again, this is another example of either
    21        recklessness by McDonald's in ignoring criticism or
    22        refusing to investigate when they know it may turn up
    23        things they do not want to know about.
    24
    25        This would probably be a suitable time to look at Dr.
    26        Nations' statement.  I seem to have, for some reason, left
    27        the documents at home that I was going to bring today,
    28        which is a bit stupid.  Dr. Nations' statement of April
    29        9th, 1994, for this case, is a letter to McDonald's, in
    30        fact, adduced in evidence by McDonald's.  This is quite
    31        interesting.  Yes, to Ray Cesca.
    32
    33        He said, about the statement made to him by someone from
    34        the company at IGG about exporting to McDonald's US
    35        suppliers, that he was not inclined to take it literally,
    36        because of McDonald's -- he was generalising the export of
    37        beef to the US fast food market as McDonald's.  That is he,
    38        the person that made the statement.  McDonald's being the
    39        best known of the fast food restaurant chains.  There is an
    40        interesting point about McDonald's being a symbol and being
    41        the main market leader.  But he talked about other
    42        information he gathered during his research which
    43        indicated, not showed, that McDonald's US beef supplies
    44        come exclusively from the United States and are in fact
    45        sourced from retired US dairy cattle.
    46
    47        Well, as we have heard, that information could only have
    48        come from McDonald's, or would only credibly have come from
    49        McDonald's, because obviously as a researcher he would want
    50        to get it from the horse's mouth, so to speak.  But, as we 
    51        have heard, McDonald's in the United States is not sourced 
    52        exclusively or even in the main part from retired US dairy 
    53        cattle.  Dr. Gonzales said it was something like 50/50, in
    54        which case it seems that Dr. Nations was given incorrect
    55        information by McDonald's, or, in any event, he was relying
    56        on incorrect information, which goes to emphasise the
    57        danger of hearsay or the weight that should be given to
    58        that particular point when it is a statement of fact rather
    59        than opinion; a matter of fact that is a simple matter of
    60        fact, did they or did they not use exclusively US dairy

Prev Next Index