Day 313 - 13 Dec 96 - Page 21
1 That is a clear indication there that they just do not care
2 about whether or not they are pumping out lies when they
3 are trying to discredit their critics.
4
5 Moving on to paragraph 5.2: Mr. Rampton has claimed that
6 the tone of McDonald's response in these press releases and
7 leaflets was remarkably restrained and, as I said before,
8 we consider that calling somebody liars at least nine times
9 in one document cannot be termed restrained by any stretch
10 of the imagination, and as to not naming us, if they had
11 named us it would not have added anything to their aims
12 since their purpose was to discredit us in relation to this
13 trial and the issues in this trial, and also it would have
14 been contrary to their aims to name us since it would have
15 made it easier for people to contact us and seek our point
16 of view or show support.
17
18 Paragraph 5.3, obviously, repeats the comments set out at
19 5.1 above, but also add that McDonald's were well aware
20 that we were, and are, defending this case because we
21 believe in the truth of the criticisms. Therefore, there
22 was absolutely no justification for calling us liars,
23 particularly not when Paul Preston knows that the meaning
24 of the word is telling a deliberate falsehood.
25
26 In relation to the points set out on that page, we consider
27 that we have dealt with the point about whether or not we
28 were lying, and clearly we were not, we believed in what
29 the fact sheet says, and we believed in what we have been
30 saying in this court case. The fact is that the onus is on
31 the Plaintiffs to establish that we lied. They have not
32 brought any evidence to that effect. In fact, they did not
33 even bother to question me in the witness box about whether
34 I believed in the fact sheet except for the rainforest
35 section of it, which, bearing in mind that they consider
36 the nutrition section to be the most defamatory, you might
37 have thought that they would have bothered to ask me
38 whether or not I believed in that. They did not bother
39 because they knew we do believe in the truth of the
40 criticisms made in the fact sheet and, therefore, we cannot
41 be lying.
42
43 MR. MORRIS: I think this is a case, we have argued that failure
44 to challenge-----
45
46 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Well...
47
48 MR. MORRIS: This is a particularly strong example.
49
50 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I have the point in relation to this.
51
52 MR. MORRIS: Because they did not have any other witnesses or
53 evidence which would have dealt with that point. They had
54 to challenge Ms. Steel in the witness box, and they did not
55 do it.
56
57 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Whether they had to or not, the question of
58 challenges is not just a question of strict procedure that
59 you should or should not. One also has to look at what
60 evidence there is at the end of the day, and it may be a
