Day 306 - 26 Nov 96 - Page 24
1 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Yes. We will resume at two o'clock.
2 Ms. Steel, I really think, sooner rather than later this
3 afternoon, you should stand up. If you want to say
4 anything about the 16th October 1989, say it to me.
5
6 MS. STEEL: Yes.
7
8 (Luncheon Adjournment)
9
10 MR. MORRIS: Very briefly, finishing off Mr. Clare. Day 267,
11 page 63 at the bottom, in his statement it said, "I arrived
12 on 1st March at 7.30." Then he was challenged that
13 Mr. Pocklington had said 8.34 p.m. or 8.35, or something,
14 an hour later, which may be very significant, could be --
15 not in terms of this meeting, but in general, this kind of
16 mistake, if it is a mistake.
17
18 Then on page 65, at the top of the page, "So some of the
19 things in your statement would be just things that you
20 presumed the case?" Because he had presumed that I got
21 there at 7.30, it turned out. He said, "It would more than
22 likely have started at that time, the meeting." Question,
23 "So you assumed it, so you thought it was OK to put it in
24 your statement?" Answer, "When the statement was made,
25 that is, yes, that is what I thought the time would have
26 been." Then I say, "So, basically it comes down to you
27 just presumed it was 7.30?" Answer, "There is no mention
28 in my original notes, no."
29
30 So here we are, something which is basically not fact, been
31 put into a statement as a fact and verified, but luckily we
32 had the another witness who showed that it was wrong, and
33 that applies in many parts of Mr. Clare's evidence.
34
35 Then at the bottom of page 65, line 52, there is a
36 reference to him picking up a number of leaflets, including
37 the leaflet complained of, at 18th January meeting. Then,
38 top of page 66, he was challenged over this, whether it was
39 the leaflet complained of. He did not write any
40 identifying marks on the leaflet he picked up. He said at
41 line 22, "The leaflets were given to Mr. Spears when it was
42 possible, because as far as I am aware he prepared the
43 reports for the instructing solicitors." Question, "So you
44 have no means of identifying which leaflet it was if it was
45 put in front of you at this stage?" Answer, "It would have
46 been from recollection a leaflet, even a multisided leaflet
47 or a single page." So here we have a recognition that even
48 when something is stated to the leaflet complained of he
49 does not know which leaflet he would have actually have
50 picked up.
51
52 Then on page 67 we have, in his statement, he says,
53 "Aldgate Press printed the 10,000 McDonald's leaflets by
54 mistake", and in his notes we know it said "Organic Press",
55 which he stood by in the witness box. Therefore, the
56 person who has written the statement for him has actually
57 changed his evidence. That is how things have been
58 transformed from notes into statements in an unreliable
59 way.
60
