- McDonald's -

Re: McDonald's Corporate Machine gets FBI to Indict - lesson

Posted by: Luke Kuhn ( Utopian Anarchist Party, USA ) on December 25, 1997 at 00:45:41:

In Reply to: Re: McDonald's Corporate Machine gets FBI to Indict - lesson posted by David Schwartz on December 23, 1997 at 21:53:00:

If the evidence in this trial shows that the rat was cooked with the meat,this will prove McD's guilty of using the CRIMINAL courts for a super-SLAPP. If the evidence shows the rat NOT to be cooked, only then is McD's off the hook-and the person telling the story ON the hook. While there have been such faked incidents, bringing criminal charges is supposed to require strong evidence FIRST-and I suspect McD's intends to use the cases where contamination was faked to threaten those who find REAL contaminated food with criminal prosecution if they don't keep their mouths shut. If there is even one case where a person is indicted and the contaminant shown to have been cooked with the meat, it will prove this contention-and further prove that McDonald's intends to repeal freedom of speech. If this happens, I would suggest they talk to the fur industry about security against the massive vandalism businesses can face when they build up this much bad karma. For that matter, if every one who values free speech just stopped eating there, it could cause McD's to roll over and sink like a whaler that has hit an iceberg.
Of course, in cases where the alleged contaminant is a piece of glass, nothincan be proven one way or the other as cooking heat doen't change it,and rather a piece of metal would blue depends upon cook9ing temperatures. As I don't eat meat, I don't know how much heat it takes to cook it. Also, if the evidence shows genuine contamination, McD's could quietly drop the criinal case and offer the defendant huge dollars to keep it that way,so everyone else only hears about indictments,not dropped cases or acquitals.Remember, in any meat-in-meat case(such as rat) the trial will prove one side or the ther right-and if McD's is proven guilty before the orld, it will cause them a lot more trouble with the public than the McLibel case, which only involved a CIVIL case against judgement-proof defendants(no assets).


Follow Ups:

The Debating Room Post a Followup