Day 030 - 03 Oct 94 - Page 04


     
     1   MR. RAMPTON:  So be it.  I have a number of comments to make
     2        about the Defendants' conduct in this regard and I shall
     3        make them, unless your Lordship tells me not to, if I may
     4        in a moment.  But your Lordship will see that Professor
     5        Crawford's new statement is ten pages long as opposed to
     6        the page -----
     7
     8   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I do not have that, I do not think. (Handed)
     9
    10   MS. STEEL:  The other paper that was handed up was a loose
    11        document he referred to in his previous statement.
    12
    13   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Are you talking about Professor Crawford
    14        now?
    15
    16   MS. STEEL:   Yes, the NATO paper he referred to in his first
    17        statement.
    18
    19   MR. RAMPTON:  Yes.  Some of the material referred to by both
    20        Mr. Cannon and Professor Crawford we have seen before; a
    21        good deal of it, however, we have not.  In fact, with its
    22        appendices Professor Crawford's new statement is 15 pages
    23        long.
    24
    25        My Lord, I observe that the original statements of
    26        Mr. Cannon and Mr. Crawford, which your Lordship has read,
    27        were both served in July 1993.  The Plaintiffs' expert
    28        evidence on this topic -- by "this topic" I mean
    29        specifically the relationship between diet and the
    30        aetiology of cancer -- Professor Wheelock's first report
    31        was July 19th or June or July 1993; his second and third
    32        and Dr. Arnott's first in January 1994.  Professor
    33        Wheelock gave the whole of his evidence in July 1994;
    34        Dr. Arnott (who is the cancer specialist) gave
    35        evidence-in-chief in July 1994.  There then followed a
    36        break of six weeks.  He was cross-examined on 12th and
    37        13th September 1994 and none, or virtually none, I should
    38        say, of this new material (and a lot of it is not only
    39        expanded in form but new in substance) was put to him.
    40
    41        What the reasons for that may be, I am not greatly
    42        concerned to enquire.  I do observe that if anybody in
    43        this case is pleased to play what Mr. Morris has described
    44        as lawyer's tricks, it certainly is not the Plaintiffs.
    45        What I do say is this -- I do urge it with some feeling --
    46        I could cross-examine both Mr. Cannon and Professor
    47        Crawford on the basis of the short amount of time that
    48        I have had to consider this new material over the
    49        weekend.  In fact, I did not get these things until last
    50        night. 
    51 
    52        In the interests of my client, however, or my clients, 
    53        I should say, it seems to us all on this side of the court
    54        that would be an irresponsible if not a negligent thing to
    55        do.  It is necessary, we believe, and if your Lordship
    56        agrees, that our experts should have a chance to consider
    57        this new material.   I say that for this reason,
    58        principally, that both these statements are very
    59        considerably more positive or emphatic on the relationship
    60        between diet and cancer than either of the two original

Prev Next Index