Day 172 - 12 Oct 95 - Page 33
1 which it is sought to exclude, is that it is hearsay, then
2 I am bound by law to rule it out; and that means that you
3 cannot read it out. So that is my attempt to summarise the
4 principle for it which applies. I will hear what you have
5 to say at two o'clock.
6
7 (Luncheon Adjournment)
8
9 MR. MORRIS: Before we start going to the specific points, I was
10 just checking Mr. Atkinson's statement which was taken as
11 read, and Mr. Atkinson's statement contains a lot of what
12 might be called hearsay evidence. Is there a difference --
13 because his evidence was able to be tested in court, does
14 that make a difference, or should it not have been allowed
15 to -----
16
17 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No. I think what to my mind at the moment
18 makes the difference, I think the difference has just come
19 about really by chance, because no one turned their mind to
20 the question when Mr. Atkinson's statement was read. If
21 the point had occurred to me at the time and so I had
22 mentioned it to you, or if you had thought of it on your
23 own account and said you wanted to object to certain parts
24 of the statement being read out, then I would have gone
25 through the same exercise as I am going through now. But
26 there we are.
27
28 As I have said on occasions in the past, the fact that
29 something has or has not happened in the past when a point
30 has not been taken cannot affect my decision if the point
31 is taken in the future. I do not have any particular parts
32 of Mr. Atkinson in mind. You may do. But it does not
33 matter, because that is the principle.
34
35 What happened after Mr. Atkinson, if my recollection serves
36 me correctly, is that the statement was not actually read
37 out; and if you, in relation to any of your Civil Evidence
38 Act witnesses or witnesses who have been called into the
39 witness box, do not want the statement read out, just want
40 me to treat it as read, then as far as I am concerned there
41 is no need to go through this exercise because, at the end
42 of the day, you can say that that is in his statement but
43 it is not admissible.
44
45 MR. MORRIS: Yes. It just seems to me that, as has been
46 stated, you are quite capable of deciding in your own mind
47 the weight to attach to any statement or evidence and also
48 its admissibility, you know, and this exercise that
49 Mr. Rampton has called for is entirely directed at the fact
50 that we, in theory, are only doing this because we want the
51 press to quote certain bits -----
52
53 MR. JUSTICE BELL: No. I am not moved by that at all. I am not
54 going through this exercise because I am supposing that you
55 want to get out in open court bits which are not
56 admissible. But the fact is, if a witness goes into the
57 witness box to give evidence, at any stage the other party
58 (or his counsel, if he is represented) can stand up and
59 say: "I object to the witness answering that question
60 because it is bound to be hearsay", or it is irrelevant, or
