Day 305 - 25 Nov 96 - Page 36


     
     1
     2        Can I just say -- because I found this a second ago -- that
     3        on day 265, page 68, line 32, I asked Mr. Clare if there
     4        was any significance in who took the minutes.
     5        I said: "There was no significance in who took the minutes;
     6        it was just thrown open to volunteers?"  He said: "Yes, it
     7        was thrown open to volunteers and those who were there if
     8        they wanted to."  So just, really, that was the point
     9        I made earlier about it is irrelevant whether or not who
    10        took the minutes.
    11
    12        In the first statement, paragraph 5 -- and this was also in
    13        relation to the meeting of 18th January 1990 -- Mr. Clare
    14        said that I was very knowledgeable about the
    15        anti-McDonald's campaign and about the group's activities,
    16        past and present, in general.
    17
    18        Firstly, even if that were true, knowledge of something
    19        does not mean that you are or were involved with it.  But
    20        also, secondly, the reality was, as we heard from any
    21        number of witnesses in this case, it was generally the case
    22        that when there were new people present at meetings
    23        somebody would go through something of the history of the
    24        campaign or the group, or whatever was being discussed, so
    25        that everybody was able to participate and they could
    26        understand what was going on and they could participate if
    27        they wanted to.  So, therefore, anybody who attended the
    28        meetings of the group over any length of time, more than a
    29        couple of meetings, would fairly quickly get to learn the
    30        group's history and the history of campaigns.
    31
    32        Mr. Pocklington agreed, on day 261, page 49, line 28, that
    33        when there were new people attending meetings the history
    34        would be explained.  In fact, when Mr. Clare was
    35        cross-examined about what he had written in relation to me
    36        being knowledgeable about the anti-McDonald's campaign --
    37        and this was on day 267, page 17 -- he said that this
    38        comment would have been what he gleaned from that meeting,
    39        and he could not recall whether I had said it or whether
    40        somebody else had said it.
    41
    42        I did ask him about the fact that he had said that I seemed
    43        to know a lot about the group and most of the campaigns,
    44        and that he had gone on to McDonald's but that he was
    45        specifically interested in McDonald's, so he would not have
    46        bothered to make a note about all the other campaigns that
    47        I talked about, and he said that that was probably right.
    48
    49        He went on to say in the same paragraph that I had said
    50        that I had assisted with production and distribution of 
    51        anti-McDonald's leaflets.  He did not say in the statement 
    52        which anti-McDonald's leaflets he was referring to.  But if 
    53        you look at his notes, they actually said that I had
    54        admitted assisting with production and distribution of all
    55        anti-McDonald's leaflets.  That was on page 62 of his
    56        notes.  Obviously, that was just completely ridiculous.
    57        I did not say that, or anything like it.  It is a
    58        particularly ridiculous thing to suggest that I would have
    59        said, bearing in mind the number of leaflets produced
    60        around the world about McDonald's; and, really, it just

Prev Next Index