Day 205 - 17 Jan 96 - Page 19

     
     1        I make in the course of this case, I shall be absolutely
     2        astonished.  Even for somebody of my experience, one does
     3        get fairly used to making mistakes from time to time.
     4
     5        Everything else that I have said on this topic, including
     6        what I said in opening, has been entirely consistent.
     7        I have deliberately excluded the word "torture" from any
     8        concession I might make in relation to opinions so far as
     9        the word "murder" is concerned.
    10
    11        My Lord, the reason for that is obviously, as I have
    12        explained to your Lordship and I believe your Lordship has
    13        accepted I may be right about, that I can see a distinction
    14        in point of the message conveyed by the two different
    15        words, a distinction which may be important.  It is that
    16        distinction which we sought to draw when we applied for
    17        leave to amend our meaning on the animals in November 1994
    18        and your Lordship gave leave.
    19
    20        We do not any longer use the word "torture", for the simple
         reason that the word "torture" itself is susceptible,
    22        according to its context, on a wide variety of meanings.
    23        If we had stuck with the word "torture" alone, it might be
    24        thought that we were intending to conjure up pictures of
    25        men in black hoods with thumb screws and iron maidens
    26        which, in the context of this case and of this leaflet,
    27        would be a complete nonsense.
    28
    29        What we take the word torture to do, if it does anything
    30        (and that will be a matter for your Lordship at the end of
    31        the case), if it adds anything to the word "murder", what
    32        it adds is an assertion about the state of mind of
    33        McDonald's in relation to the animals which are used for
    34        their purposes.
    35
    36        That being so, if it is right, it is an allegation of fact,
    37        because an allegation that person has a particular state of
    38        mind, whether it be intention or whether it be
    39        indifference, is, of course, a matter of fact and not a
    40        matter of opinion.  It was in order to try to reflect what
         we took in its proper context to be the implication of the
    42        word "torture" in the leaflet that we phrased the amendment
    43        in the way that we did.
    44
    45        My Lord, that is the first thing I would like to say.  I
    46        believe that is what I made clear on 21st November.  I
    47        believe that is the basis on which we were given leave to
    48        make the amendment.
    49
    50        The other thing I would like to say is this, and I can be 
    51        very short about it, it is perfectly clear from that 
    52        extract from the transcript on 21st November what the 
    53        nature of our case was in relation to the word "torture".
    54        I believe that it was clear from the opening.  As I say,
    55        I regret that I blotted my copy book on 3rd October.  But
    56        as from 21st November 1994, it has been perfectly clear
    57        what our assertion is in relation to the meaning of the
    58        word "torture" in its context of the case.
    59
    60        I observe the chronology, and this answers Ms. Steel, I