GEORGE BIZOS
So that was - that you knew.
"But your speculation will not get you anywhere because we know who was involved with Omar, is that not so?  We have all the particulars.  Correct or incorrect, but we do.  Is that correct?"
		"No, I do not know whether that is correct."
Now you see - anyway I won't comment at this stage.
"So you don't know of anyone else that was contaminated by Omar?"
		"No, from the top of my head I am not able to say."
		"Now you say that with regard to Omar it was just purely monitoring, correct?"
		"Yes, that is correct."
		"Other people say that that was an attempt to murder him.  You know that, don't you?"
		"It could be."
So that - don't let me comment, we'll comment at the argument stage of how consistent you are in avoiding questions.
"So if the file is available, then it can only serve for the purpose where one can see what the instruction was or what the approval was, is that not so?"
		"That is so."
		"Then I do not understand your problem."
		"My problem is that I am sitting with continued projects."
		"No, but let us deal only with Omar.  In other words, the person who had the Omar file in his possession or the documents with regard to Omar, is doing the CCB a disfavour and he's doing you a disfavour."
		"That may be so."
		"And you are saying because the file should prove your innocence, is that not so?"
		"That could be."
		"So you are saying 'I do not have do not have access to the file otherwise I would have made it available to you.'"
Is this correctly recorded?