Day 002 - 29 Jun 94 - Page 26

     
     1        this leaflet was being circulated.  As far as
              I understand, it was for specific enquiries rather than
     2        public distribution in general.
 
     3        Before I go through it line by line, if I could say more
              about the publication which should be dealt with first,
     4        before going through the leaflet line by line.
 
     5        McDonald's have said that it was the only thing they could
              do was to take court action, although it took them six
     6        years to do that.  They never provided any facts to London
              Greenpeace to contradict a single word of this fact
     7        sheet.  This Veggies from Nottingham fact sheet (which
              Veggies had legal writs served on them in 1987 which was
     8        three years before the writ on the London Greenpeace
              group) is associated with London Greenpeace as part of a
     9        network, having communication with each other, not
              formally or organisation connected, but they were in touch
    10        with each other.  So, London Greenpeace were aware of
              Veggies' case.
    11
              This is quite important, certainly in terms of the malice
    12        allegations, but McDonald's complaint to Veggies about the
              London Greenpeace fact sheet that Veggies was circulating,
    13        which at that time was identical, absolutely identical, in
              every way, was the material about the rainforest, the use
    14        of the words "torture" and "murder" for describing the
              rearing and slaughter of animals; whereas Mr. Rampton said
    15        torture and murder were not really here nor there as a
              matter of fair comment.
    16
              However, when they threatened to sue Veggies, that was the
    17        only complaint they made apart from the rainforest
              material.  So Veggies changed the words "torture" and
    18        "murder" to "slaughter" and "butchery" as part of a deal
              that was made with the solicitors, McDonald's solicitors.
    19        Although the text is identical in the section about
              animals to the one that is still being circulated today
    20        and the London Greenpeace fact sheet -- I am not sure if
              you have a copy of this one.  I should give a copy.
    21
              I think it has been disclosed, but I do not know which
    22        bundle it is in.  It is slightly folded out differently.
              If you open it up on the inside it says:  "In what way are
    23        McDonald's responsible for the slaughter and butchery of
              animals?" The section underneath that is identical in
    24        every word to the material complained of in this action.
              The only thing that was changed was "torture" and "murder"
    25        in the headline which Mr. Rampton says is a matter of fair
              comment anyway. 
    26 
              So we then have to look at the other side of page:  "Why 
    27        is it wrong for the beef industry to destroy the
              rainforest?"  There is a rewording of the rainforest
    28        section saying that Veggies saying they do in the have the
              information to prove that McDonald's have used ex
    29        rainforest land or imports.  We now know and McDonald's
              did say to them categorically in a letter to Veggies
    30        demanding an apology saying:  "Neither their USA nor
              Canadian companies or any other company in their group in