Day 308 - 28 Nov 96 - Page 22


     
     1   MR. MORRIS:  Yes.  OK.  But, obviously-----
     2
     3   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Anyway, you make your points.
     4
     5   MR. MORRIS:  OK.
     6
     7   MR. JUSTICE BELL: I am not unsympathetic to your question.  It
     8        is just, obviously, at the end of the day I have to judge
     9        what I will re-read and what I will not.  Wherever I have
    10        said in relation to specific witness of yours that I will
    11        re-read them I will be faithful to that.
    12
    13   MR. MORRIS:  Yes.  A lot of day 245 was basically putting to
    14        Mr. Preston the evidence that has been in the case, mainly
    15        from their own witnesses, which contradict, which has
    16        shown, demonstrated, that their own statements made by the
    17        Company have been contradicted by their own witnesses or by
    18        overwhelming evidence from other sources, and that
    19        therefore they are not true, and where we have are able to
    20        demonstrate that they knew they were not true we have said,
    21        "That is a lie, is it not?" and, basically, the drift of
    22        it is that Mr. Preston is completely incapable of
    23        recognising truth and untruth.  That is what we would
    24        submit as a result of that questioning and the evidence
    25        that was put in front of him.
    26
    27        He is the person who gave the authority for the leaflets
    28        and counterclaim, and therefore it is significant in terms
    29        of his motivation, his ability, his credibility, and his
    30        malicious intent.
    31
    32        In particular, then, if I just very quickly mention some
    33        things.  On day 245, page 38, line 16, he was questioned,
    34        "The situation as presently stands is that you are seeking
    35        damages and costs but that you may not recover them at the
    36        end of the day?"  Answer, "That is what I have said over
    37        time, yes".  Question, "Right, so that is a pack of lies in
    38        that letter", this was letter we were referring to quoted
    39        today.  Answer, "No, it is not".
    40
    41        Day 245, page 40, lines 18 onwards.  This quotes the bit in
    42        the further and better particulars of the reply to the
    43        Defence to Counterclaim where it had said that "The Second
    44        Plaintiff is fully -- underlined, I under line that --
    45        fully -- "aware that prior to service of the writs in the
    46        main action neither they nor solicitors acting on their
    47        behalf had ever written to London Greenpeace nor to
    48        individuals involved with the group stating that the
    49        Company considered the fact sheet to be defamatory or
    50        requesting that the group ceased distribution of the 
    51        fact sheet".  They are fully aware of that in their own 
    52        pleadings. 
    53
    54        Then, on the bottom of that page, he admits basically they
    55        made a mistake about that point, including 'in the words
    56        complained of' in the counterclaim.  Then, we said, "On the
    57        day that you signed your statement on the 7th March you
    58        sent the very same press release to Mr. Ken Livingstone MP
    59        making exactly the same point which you knew was
    60        incorrect".

Prev Next Index