Day 236 - 17 04 96 - Page 8

 
 

                                                                  Day 236
 
 
 
 
 
     1        the date of the issue of the writ.  The problem has been is
     2        that we have not, with absolute certainty, yet been able to
     3        identify which of the various copies of the original of the
     4         -- when I say copies of the original, I mean physical
     5        editions of the original -- but they have, the one Barlow
     6        Lyde & Gilbert have, is the one which was collected, or
     7        more than one that was collected by McDonald's, on that day
     8        16th October, 1989.  I believe that we should be able to
     9        complete that exercise by lunchtime today.  I quite
    10        understand that the Defendants wish to see that document.
    11        What I do not understand is why they need to see, at this
    12        stage, to inspect, all the other publication documents of
    13        which there are of course something like, at any rate 3
    14        files.  That I do not understand.  Perhaps Ms. Steel will
    15        explain why it is necessary for the cross-examination of
    16        Mr. Carroll and Mr. Nicholson.
    17
    18        My proposal would be, so that the Defendants can comment on
    19        it, that we leave Court when it is convenient to your
    20        Lordship today; go away and identify certainly as we can
    21        which are the originals relevant to that date of
    22        publication.  Let the Defendants see those originals, by
    23        whatever means may be agreed, and then call Mr. Carroll
    24        tomorrow.  We have also brought with us to court the
    25        original photographs which again, we would for convenience,
    26        surrender to the Defendants so they can look at them.  They
    27        have, I think, already got copies of them.
    28
    29   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  Let me concentrate on Mr. Carroll for the
    30        moment because I have not heard Ms. Steel or Mr. Morris,
    31        but his evidence might be in a rather different, or
    32        different considerations might apply to his evidence than
    33        to Mr. Nicholson's, so far as calling him this week are
    34        concerned because, on the face of his evidence, it seems
    35        far more limited in its scope than Mr. Nicholson's.  He
    36        refers to videos as well as photographs.  When taking him
    37        in-chief, obviously his statement, supplemental statement
    38        can be put in.  To what extent were you going to actually
    39        refer him to photographs or videos in court?
    40
    41   MR. RAMPTON:  I was not going to, only for the purpose of
    42        identifying the items of evidence.  The reason is an easy
    43        one.  Your Lordship has probably forgotten.
    44
    45   MR. JUSTICE BELL:  I remember seeing the 16th October one.  What
    46        I have not checked back is whether I saw videos on other
    47        days.
    48
    49   MR. RAMPTON:  I cannot remember, but I have shown enough of the
    50        video and enough of the photographs to Mr. Carroll that he 
    51        can identify them as the ones which he arranged to be taken 
    52        on the various occasions to which he refers.  Thereafter, 
    53        they really for themselves, and on the October 1989 one,
    54        16th October 1989, one can see Ms. Steel as plain as day,
    55        both in the video and in the photographs.
    56
    57   MS. STEEL:  I might be wrong.  I do not think there is a video
    58        for the ----
    59
    60   MR. RAMPTON:  I am sorry.  You are quite right.  The photographs
 
                                      8