Day 245 - 07 May 96 - Page 32


     
     1   Q.   Were you not interested in it?
     2        A.  I was very interested in it.
     3
     4   Q.   So why did you not asked to be kept informed?
     5        A.  It was his project to deal with.  He had been given his
     6        assignment. I reiterated, and I will reiterate again for
     7        you, I gave one instruction and one alone: Make sure it is
     8        legal and proper.  That is it.
     9
    10   Q.   The next paragraph goes on to say:
    11
    12        "These 2 individuals have chosen to defend the leaflet and
    13        contrary to their claims that they are not actively
    14        involved, they have for many years taken leading roles in a
    15        consistent campaign against McDonald's including
    16        responsibility for organising demonstrations and
    17        anti-McDonald's fares."
    18
    19        Now, I think that that is a response to some of the
    20        leaflets which have gone out which stated that it is not
    21        McDonald's case that we wrote or printed the leaflet, just
    22        that we distributed it on a few specific occasions.  The
    23        case has changed since then, but I believe that is what
    24        that is a reply to; is that correct?
    25        A.  I am not sure what it is in totality in reply to.
    26        There is no question in my mind that you two were involved
    27        in it.  That is what it speaks to.
    28
    29   Q.   What evidence do you personally have that we had a leading
    30        role in the campaign, in a consistent campaign, against
    31        McDonald's?
    32        A.  Well, I know what has come out in evidence so far.
    33        I have been in court watching you defend.  I have watched
    34        you in front of our office place participate in
    35        demonstrations and give out leaflets, I forget which one of
    36        you it was, I think Mr. Morris, but I have certainly seen
    37        it happen.
    38
    39   Q.   Yes, but we are talking about leading roles?
    40        A.  Well ----
    41
    42   Q.   For many years and the implication of this seeing as the
    43        other leaflets were referring to prior to the case
    44        starting.  The implication is that we had leading roles
    45        before the writs were served on us?
    46        A.  I cannot give you an exact date here and now but there
    47        is no question in my mind both of you are intimately
    48        involved.
    49
    50   Q.   Is there a question in your mind as to whether we had 
    51        leading roles? 
    52        A.  No question at all. 
    53
    54   Q.   There is no question.  What evidence do you base that on?
    55        A.  I think that will come out in subsequent testimony.
    56
    57   Q.   Do you have any evidence or not?
    58        A.  I believe we do.
    59
    60   Q.   You personally?

Prev Next Index