Day 260 - 11 Jun 96 - Page 15
1 been received within the past week or two weeks, and they
2 would be in a pile or on the floor, or wherever?
3 A. Yes.
4
5 Q. Anyone would pick them up read them out and, if necessary,
6 other people might comment on them or, you know ---
7 A. Yes.
8
9 Q. -- if they required any action, other people might comment
10 on them?
11 A. The only thing I would add to that was that I record
12 that the vast majority of the letters had previously been
13 opened; they were not opened at the meetings; they had
14 previously been opened by somebody else at some other time.
15
16 Q. But in terms of who was reading out the letters, it would
17 not be the person who had answered the letter, necessarily?
18 A. Not necessarily.
19
20 Q. It might be, but it could just be anybody; it was random?
21 A. Yes.
22
23 Q. When I said who had answered the letters, I meant who had
24 opened the letters.
25 A. Whoever picked the letters up. As I said, some of them
26 had previously been opened. I was aware that other people
27 unknown went to the office at other times other than at the
28 weekly meetings.
29
30 Q. OK. The reports of previous week's activity was basically
31 where anybody who was present at the meeting detailed or
32 gave a report of any event that they had attended in the
33 previous week, be it an event about the poll tax, about
34 anti-cars, or -----
35 A. That is correct.
36
37 Q. Just anything, not necessarily connected with
38 London Greenpeace; just activities that were being
39 organised by the group?
40 A. That is correct.
41
42 Q. The future events was likewise; it was any coming event,
43 not just events organised by London Greenpeace?
44 A. If a person who was present at the meeting had
45 knowledge of a future event, then they would put, in order
46 to disseminate the information to the other members of the
47 group; that is where it would be put in the agenda, yes.
48
49 Q. But it was not specifically only for things that were
50 organised by London Greenpeace?
51 A. No, no.
52
53 Q. You would probably agree, seeing as it seems to be that you
54 say in your notes in a number of places or you seem to
55 indicate that the meetings did not really seem to be sort
56 of doing much, that, by and large, the vast majority of the
57 reports of the previous week's activity and the future
58 events actually were not events that were organised by
59 London Greenpeace?
60 A. That would be difficult for me to say. I cannot really
