have a cellular tower, which they considered to be a health risk, moved from its property.

This was revealed in Supreme Court yesterday during a civil suit in which Bermuda Digital Communications Ltd. (BDC) is hoping to keep its lease on land at the Fairmont Southampton Princess where it maintains one of its base stations.

West End Properties Ltd., a subsidiary of the hotel, issued notice that it would terminate BDC's lease on the site after a group of residents began a campaign to have the cellular tower brought down on health grounds.

In the second day of proceedings, BDC lawyer Narinder Hargun finalised his case, in which two scientific experts on radiation biology had earlier testified that cellular towers posed no increased health risks to residents.

Representing West End Properties, attorney Jai Pachai called the organiser of the group Community Against Radiation Emissions (CARE) Stephen Thomson to the stand.

He described how the formation of the group in 1998 had been spurred on by concern at the building of the tower at Faraway, the complex that houses many Fairmont Southampton Princess employees and their families and is about 200 yards from his house.

It was revealed that the group sent letters to the hotel's general manager Norman Mastillier threatening that if action was not taken against BDC's planned tower, CARE would begin a letter writing campaign to newspapers and politicians in Canada, where the hotel's former operator Canadian Pacific is based, saying that the hotel chain was not "environmentally friendly''.

Asked if any actions had yet been taken in this direction, Mr. Thomson said letters had only been sent to Canadian Pacific's head office but not to the media or individuals in the country's political circles.

Questioned by Assistant Justice Philip Storr, the activist said his position on carrying out such "adverse publicity'' remained as firm as ever, despite the expert evidence from Professor John Moulder on Monday that cellular towers do not pose a health risk.

But it was revealed that Mr. Thomson was not even in court when the evidence was presented, at the request of Mr. Pachai.

Testimony also came from CARE member Jody Schaeffer, who lives on at Faraway and whose husband is a hotel employee.

Asked to say how she felt about the tower's presence, the mother of two said: "I don't like it at all. I feel like we've been set up as guinea pigs.'' Mrs. Schaeffer expressed fears that the tower might pose a health risk, especially to her children, and added: "I don't want to see it running at all and if it does then we won't live there any more.'' In cross-examination, Mr. Hargun asked if she would reconsider her position if she saw "overwhelming'' scientific evidence that cellular towers were safe.

"The way I look at it,'' Mrs. Schaefer answered, "it will take years of study and evidence in order to conclude that the towers are safe.

"In the meantime, I have to look after my children and I don't think there should be any risk to their safety.'' Also testifying, Faraway resident Carole Valentine said she had been under a great deal of stress since the tower had been there.

"I have to look at it every day and its a constant reminder of the dangers we could be exposed to,'' she said.

Ms Valentine added that she had been losing hair and sleep due to the fact that the tower was there, "although my doctor says this is because of stress''.

But asked by Mr. Hargun what she based these fears on, the witness said: "Only on what I have been told and also on reports that I read in some English newspapers.'' Asked if "overwhelming'' scientific evidence pointing to the fact that the towers are safe would sway her, she said: "Yes, it would.'' ENVIRONMENT ENV HEALTH HTH CLUB CLB