Day 052 - 21 Nov 94 - Page 42
1
2 MR. RAMPTON: There are two questions in re-examination which
3 I asked him which cannot really have left the Defendants
4 (if they ever were, which I do not accept) in any doubt at
5 all about what the issue was -- perhaps only one will do
6 for the moment. It is on page 34 which is my last question
7 at line 17, I asked him this: "Finally, my last question,
8 Dr. Arnott, in relation to the consideration of
9 multifactorial elements as possible contributors to the
10 causation of disease, do you see a distinction between, for
11 example, cigarette smoking and consumption of a diet
12 containing a wide variety of different substances?"
13 Answer: "Yes, there is a complete contrast."
14
15 My Lord, that was on 13th September. Then, of course, my
16 Lord, there followed Dr. Barnard and Professor Crawford in
17 the history of the case. Both (I think, necessarily
18 because Professor Crawford followed Dr. Barnard) were
19 preceded by guidance from your Lordship.
20
21 MS. STEEL: That is the wrong way around.
22
23 MR. RAMPTON: It does not matter. Certainly Dr. Barnard was
24 proceeded by guidance from the Defendants that they needed
25 to grapple with this issue of causation through their
26 witnesses on the basis that it might turn out at the end of
27 case that they did not have a defence unless they had done
28 so.
29
30 My Lord, I do not presently have a reference to that
31 carefully worded guidance which I believe your Lordship had
32 already prepared because your Lordship gave a day's warning
33 you were going to give it. We will find it in the
34 transcript in due course.
35
36 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Mr. Cannon was 3rd October; Professor
37 Crawford 5th and Dr. Barnard started on 10th.
38
39 MR. RAMPTON: Ms. Steel is quite right; I have them in the wrong
40 order. But my belief is that your Lordship's guidance
41 preceded all of those. The result was -----
42
43 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I can remember it in relation to Dr. Barnard
44 because I was particularly conscious of the fact that he
45 was coming from the States to give evidence and,
46 presumably, was going to go back there. I think it was
47 probably -- the 10th was a Monday, I think probably, and it
48 may well have been on Friday, 7th.
49
50 MR. RAMPTON: It might have been; on the other hand, as your
51 Lordship will remember, before Mr. Cannon and Professor
52 Crawford -- I did not mention Mr. Cannon simply because he
53 is not in any sense scientific or medical -- your Lordship
54 is absolutely right, it was given on 6th October which is
55 Thursday, on page 78, beginning at line 38. That was
56 before Dr. Barnard gave evidence, if your Lordship is right
57 (as I am sure you are) that the other two gave evidence
58 before that. That is right, Mr. Cannon was on 3rd October
59 and Professor Crawford on 5th, which is the Wednesday.
60 Then came Dr. Lobstein and at the end of the day your
