Day 112 - 31 Mar 95 - Page 12
1 them out. See what the target is, 7 degrees, is it not?
2 A. Yes.
3
4 Q. See what the sample shows three times in that day?
5 A. Yes.
6
7 Q. Now please turn over -----
8
9 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Do we have a date on that?
10
11 MR. RAMPTON: My Lord, I have taken these documents to be all
12 documents -- I may be wrong about this -- for 28th
13 February. There is an identical kind of document for each
14 of the dates which we have. If one turns on to page 21 --
15 this is the order in which they were sent to us -- one sees
16 the same document, apparently, for 28th March.
17
18 MR. JUSTICE BELL: I can see that the 6.30 a.m. temperature is
19 the same ---
20
21 MR. RAMPTON: Yes.
22
23 MR. JUSTICE BELL: -- and the 11 o'clock and the 2.30.
24
25 MR. RAMPTON: It is the 4.30, yes, 1.9.
26
27 MR. JUSTICE BELL: It is 14.30, is it not?
28
29 MR. RAMPTON: No, it is 16.30, my Lord, I believe, page 21. It
30 corresponds with the figure on the second page of
31 28th March document.
32
33 MR. JUSTICE BELL: It is 2.30 in the afternoon, 14.30.
34
35 MR. RAMPTON: May I ask which page, my Lord?
36
37 MR. JUSTICE BELL: Page 16 and pages 12 and 13; the temperatures
38 are the same for those times.
39
40 MR. RAMPTON: They are, my Lord. There is a similar
41 correspondence between pages 18, 19 and 21, and between
42 (I hope, but I have not yet checked them), moving to page
43 27, between that page and pages 23 and 24 for 29th April.
44 So, on that basis, if that be right, Ms. Hovi, if one looks
45 at page 27, for example, four intakes, apparently, meat
46 tested for temperature all found to be 3 or 4 degrees below
47 the target of 7 degrees, right?
48 A. Right.
49
50 MS. STEEL: Can I ask about how these relate to, for example,
51 the Preston document that was not allowed to be referred to
52 because it was not admissible evidence? I mean -----
53
54 MR. JUSTICE BELL: The which document?
55
56 MS. STEEL: For example, we were not allowed to ask the
57 Plaintiffs' witness about the Preston document because it
58 was not admissible evidence. There has not actually been
59 anybody who created these documents coming to court to
60 testify that they did create them and that they are a