Editing McLibel case (section)

===Libel charges===
In 1990, McDonald's brought [[Slander and libel|libel]] proceedings against five London Greenpeace supporters, Paul Gravett, Andrew Clarke and Jonathan O'Farrell, as well as Steel and Morris, for distributing the sheet on the streets of London. This case followed past instances in which McDonald's threatened to sue more than fifty organisations for libel, including [[Channel 4]] television and several major publications. In all such cases, the media outlets [[Settlement (litigation)|settled]] and apologised.<ref>"Over the past 15 years, McDonald's has threatened legal action against more than 90 organisations in the U.K., including the [[BBC]], [[Channel 4]], the ''Guardian'', ''[[The Sun (United Kingdom)|The Sun]]'', the [[Scottish TUC]], the New Leaf Shop, student newspapers, and a children's theatre group. Even [[Prince Philip]] received a stiff letter. All of them backed down and many formally apologised in court." from Franny Armstrong, "Why Won't British TV Show a Film about McLibel?", 19 June 1998, ''[[The Guardian]]''; as quoted in ''No Logo''.</ref>

Under [[English defamation law]] at the time, the defendant had to show that each disparaging statement made was substantively true. This could be an expensive and time-consuming process. Gravett, Clarke and O'Farrell apologised as requested by McDonald's, but Steel and Morris chose to defend the case.<ref>Skau, S. (2013). [http://www.followthethings.com/mclibel.shtml "McLibel"]. followthethings.com Accessed 16 June 2014.</ref>
[[File:DPP Keir Starmer in 2009 (cropped).jpg|thumb|[[Keir Starmer]] provided significant [[pro bono]] assistance during the case]]
The two were denied [[legal aid]], as was policy for libel cases, despite having limited income.<ref name="jobs">"For 313 days in court – the longest trial in English history – an unemployed postal worker (Morris) and a community gardener (Steel) went to war with chief executives from the largest food empire in the world." p. 389 of ''No Logo''</ref> Thus, they had to represent themselves, though they received significant [[pro bono]] assistance, including from [[Keir Starmer]]<!-- not QC until 2002 -->. Steel and Morris called 180 witnesses, seeking to prove their assertions about [[food poisoning]], unpaid [[overtime]], misleading claims about how much McDonald's [[recycling|recycled]], and "corporate spies sent to infiltrate the ranks of London Greenpeace".<ref>p. 389 of ''No Logo''.</ref> McDonald's spent several million pounds, while Steel and Morris spent £30,000; this disparity in funds meant Steel and Morris were not able to call all the witnesses they wanted, especially witnesses from South America who were intended to support their claims about McDonald's activities in that continent's rainforests.<ref name="autogenerated1">''McLibel'' film, 1998.</ref>

In its libel allegation, McDonald's asserted all claims in the pamphlet to be false.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.mcspotlight.org/case/pretrial/state%27o%27claim.html |title=Statement of Claim |publisher=Mcspotlight.org |access-date=13 November 2008}}</ref> They found it difficult to support this position despite the indirectness of some of the claims. The case eventually became a [[media circus]]. McDonald's executives, including Ray Cesca, entered the witness box, enabling cross-examination by the defendants.<ref>{{cite book|last=Vidal|first=john|title=McLibel: British Culture on Trial|url=https://archive.org/details/mclibelburgercul00vida|url-access=registration|publisher=The New Press|date=1997|pages=[https://archive.org/details/mclibelburgercul00vida/page/11 11–20]|isbn=9781565844117}}</ref>

In June 1995, McDonald's offered to settle the case (which "was coming up to its [tenth] anniversary in court"<ref name="first">p. 387 of ''No Logo'', 1st ed.</ref>) by donating a large sum of money to a charity chosen by the two. They further specified they would drop the case if Steel and Morris agreed to "stop criticising McDonald's".<ref name="first"/> Steel and Morris secretly recorded the meeting, in which McDonald's said the pair could criticise McDonald's privately to friends but must cease talking to the media or distributing leaflets. Steel and Morris wrote a letter in response saying they would agree to the terms if McDonald's ceased advertising its products and instead only recommended the restaurant privately to friends.<ref name="autogenerated1"/>