Day 248 - 13 May 96 - Page 42
1 leaflet complained of into the audience and shouting words
2 to the effect that the leaflet explained 'What is wrong
3 with McDonald's'. I was not in attendance at the occasion,
4 but watched it live on the screen and saw this disruption".
5
6 Your statement is not true, is it?
7 A. Well, I described in my statement what I remembered,
8 what I remembered seeing. Certainly what was on that tape
9 may not be all that was shown on the day or what the
10 audience saw. I do not know what version is there.
11 I definitely saw a man throw leaflets into the audience on
12 the screen I watched.
13
14 Q. We asked for a copy of the video that was referred to in
15 your statement and that was what was served on us, and
16 there is certainly no throwing of leaflets into the air
17 there, is there?
18 A. I do not know that it made the video. I told you what
19 I saw on the day, on the occasion. It definitely happened.
20
21 Q. He did not throw anything, did he?
22 A. Not on that video, but he did on the day.
23
24 Q. The leaflets that he was holding were yellow with a blank
25 back, so they cannot have been the leaflet that is
26 complained of?
27 A. Well, that is what he was holding, but there was more
28 to it on the day.
29
30 Q. Mr. Preston, the reality is that you did not see any such
31 thing, that you just wildly exaggerate what happened; you
32 did not bother to check the facts before you wrote your
33 statement, and that is just typical of your approach that
34 when it comes to criticising London Greenpeace you just
35 make the criticism whether or not it is true, without
36 stopping to check the facts?
37 A. That is not so. I reported what I remembered seeing.
38 That was it.
39
40 Q. Going back to your second statement, if you have that there
41 -- sorry, not the second one, the one you made recently;
42 I think it is in tab 1A.
43 A. OK.
44
45 Q. If you turn to paragraph 9, you say, "On the 11th February
46 the Defendants, through the McLibel Support Campaign,
47 produced a press release relating to the impending trial.
48 This was soon followed by another one on the 5th March,
49 1994. Both of these are at appendix 4. Further, on the
50 11th March, there was news coverage of the Defendants'
51 application for leave to appeal which I was informed was
52 seriously inaccurate."
53
54 What news coverage are you referring to?
55 A. I was told by my communications people that there was
56 news coverage of the hearing for leave to appeal, which was
57 not accurate.
58
59 Q. So that was what they told you?
60 A. They told me, yes. That is what I have said. I was
