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
