Day 259 - 10 Jun 96 - Page 04
1 them ---
2 A. Yes.
3
4 Q. -- some time before?
5 A. Yes, yes. I saw the photographs within two or three
6 days of the demonstration, because I sent them to the
7 agencies.
8
9 Q. You would have seen them since then as well, you know,
10 during the court case when Mr. Rampton referred to them in
11 opening speech, and so on?
12 A. Yes.
13
14 Q. You said that you were interviewed by Mrs. Brinley-Codd the
15 day after, or you spoke to Mrs. Brinley-Codd the day after
16 the picket in 1989, and that at that stage there was no
17 plan to go to court; it was a possibility?
18 A. It was the logical end of the sequence. If you did not
19 withdraw the leaflet and if we went to court and you did
20 not apologise, then the next stage would be a trial. But
21 we did not think it would reach that far at that time.
22
23 Q. So, at that stage, you were actually intending to serve
24 writs?
25 A. No, no. At that time, I was quite happy, had we been
26 able to just write to you and say, "Look, this is wrong.
27 Stop distributing it, and that is the end of the matter";
28 but as the inquiry continued, it became evident to our
29 solicitors and to the counsel then advising us that that
30 kind of approach would be inappropriate. So that was when
31 they decided to go for writ; and that was after we had
32 received almost all of the evidence from the agencies.
33
34 Q. Anyway, you said that because it was not a definite thing
35 that litigation was going ahead, there was no proof of
36 evidence taken in 1989, and it was taken in 1990. That is
37 what you said on a previous occasion?
38 A. Yes.
39
40 Q. So, what happened was that you went in in 1990 and
41 explained what had happened on the picket; notes were taken
42 and a statement was drawn up from that?
43 A. That is right.
44
45 Q. Right.
46 A. I mean, Mrs. Brinley-Codd took notes from me the next
47 day, but not, as far as I am concerned, as a preparation to
48 preparing a statement. That was done in 1990.
49
50 Q. So, she did not just draw up a statement from the notes
51 that she had taken on in 1989 and not bother to speak to
52 you again before then?
53 A. No. I am pretty sure we had another meeting. We
54 talked about it on several occasions.
55
56 Q. There were some details wrong in this first statement,
57 i.e., that there was no picket in 1986 and 1985?
58 A. Yes. That was a misinterpretation of what I said.
59
60 Q. So, is the position that you signed a statement without
