Day 024 - 15 Sep 94 - Page 49


     
     1
     2        I also do not, frankly, believe their express desire that
     3        they wanted to make it more accessible to consumers, the
     4        facts they need to make their own important choices; if
     5        so, then they would have given those facts to consumers in
     6        the advertisements at issue.  As I had said earlier, they
     7        only gave positive facts and omitted the negative facts.
     8        When they were referring to cholesterol or, rather,
     9        saturated fat in a product or cholesterol in the products,
    10        they did not tell a bad story about it, only the good
    11        story.
    12
    13   Q.   Perhaps if you could read through the rest of that page
    14        and say if there is anything else -- bring things up as
    15        you are reading -- you want to say in answer to that?
    16        A.  As I had said previously, McDonald's in that first
    17        full paragraph on page 2 say that they voluntarily
    18        extended their brochure programme eventually to the entire
    19        nation.  As I have previously testified -----
    20
    21   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  We have really been through that, have we
    22        not, this morning?
    23
    24   MS. STEEL:   But basically you dispute that paragraph, to sum
    25        it up?
    26        A.  I continue to, yes.
    27
    28   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I do not want to steer you away from
    29        anything which you think is important, perhaps at the
    30        bottom of that page and the top of the next, they are
    31        saying that really the booklets followed by this campaign
    32        are part of, taken together, a consistent attitude by
    33        McDonald's?
    34        A.  I would agree with them that it was a consistent
    35        attitude.  I would disagree with their conclusion that it
    36        was part of an attitude to educate the public.
    37
    38   Q.   Then the company's intent, paragraph (2)?
    39        A.  I believe I have previously testified to every point
    40        I would raise in response to that paragraph.  I would
    41        advise the court as to the support for our conclusion that
    42        they acted with intent, there is further evidence before
    43        the court that I have not seen but it does shore up that
    44        conclusion, and I believe I also did discuss, albeit a
    45        little briefly, that McDonald's has not done precisely
    46        what in this case Attorney General Maddox' staff urged
    47        McDonald's to do.  As I said, what we urged them to do was
    48        to find the way to make the book, the fact of the booklets
    49        known to individuals not to advertise their products as
    50        nutritious when they were not. 
    51 
    52   MS. STEEL:   Unless you have anything else important you want 
    53        to say, if we go on to the specific advertisements
    54        themselves?  You may have done it for the first, the
    55        sodium one, in any event, but if there is anything you
    56        would answer in relation to what they have said, then if
    57        you could say so.
    58
    59   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Particularly the footnote perhaps.  What
    60        I want to know really, without prejudice to anything

Prev Next Index