Day 148 - 05 Jul 95 - Page 23

     
     1   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Can you give me the reference?
     2
     3   MR. MORRIS:  Yes, 27th February, from pages 17 to 21, about the
     4        existence of pesticide residues in beef in the United
     5        States, specifically beef.  I mean chicken and pigs were
     6        mentioned as well, but we are talking about beef, and also
     7        the practice of using growth promoters.  Specifically, he
     8        mentioned two documents which he had in his possession
     9        which on page 17, line 31 -- it may be helpful to read
    10        these pages in any case regarding our application for
    11        amending, because certainly it provides grounds for our
    12        reasonable belief, if not proof.
    13
    14        He said that he had two documents, one was called -- I was
    15        a bit confused because the title sort of changed -- I think
    16        if I just refer you to page 19 line 8, one document was
    17        called the National Quality Audit and was produced by the
    18        Texas AM, whatever that is, and Texas State University and
    19        Colorado State University in co-ordination with several
    20        associations, the National Cattle Association and United
         States Department of Agriculture, according to Dr. Gonzales
    22        on page 19, line 18.
    23
    24        He then said it was called the National Beef Quality
    25        Audit.  The second document, I think, on page 17, line 32,
    26        was called Strategic Alliance Field Studies.  The first one
    27        I mentioned was published in 1991; the second one,
    28        Strategic Alliance Field Studies, was published in 1993,
    29        according to Dr. Gonzales.  It was a little bit confusing
    30        as to actually which document was in evidence.
    31
    32        He gives evidence on their publishing date at page 20, line
    33        1.  I am sorry I cannot be absolutely accurate because he
    34        himself was a little bit vague, but he did say that he had
    35        copies of the documents and that he would make them
    36        available to us.  He said on page 19, line 41, you asked
    37        him:  "Is there a way you can give Mr. Morris which would
    38        be the short route to tracking it down if you wanted to do
    39        so?"  Answer:  "Yes, yes, I can supply you with a copy, no
    40        problem".  That was the National Quality Audit.  Then he
         went on about the Strategic Field Studies.  He accepted on
    42        page 20 they related to the subjects that he had been
    43        cross-examined about.
    44
    45        Anyway, I wrote the same day to Barlow Lyde and Gilbert,
    46        27th February 1995, which letter should be in the
    47        correspondence file, requesting these documents that had
    48        been offered to us saying that we required them.  I do not
    49        believe I received a reply.
    50 
    51        We hoped we would get them without having to make an 
    52        application, but we are now making an application for those 
    53        documents.
    54
    55        I hope you have a copy of that letter that we sent to the
    56        Plaintiffs?  It might be worth checking because,
    57        effectively, that was an application for the documents.
    58
    59   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  No, I do not have a copy.  Supply me with a
    60        photo copy tomorrow or later in the day if you want me to