Testimony from Bernard Renwick regarding his brother Roger Sylvester's family justice campaign which was surveilled by SDS, followed by testimony from MSS and MWS (anonymized witnesses) regarding their brother Michael Menson's family campaign for justice. Both campaigns sought accountability for deaths involving police and were infiltrated by undercover officers despite being legitimate justice campaigns.
00:24:50 Good morning, everybody. Uh, this morning's proceedings are going to be broadcast with a 10-minute delay. Those with mobile devices may use them to report what they've heard in the hearing, but only 10 minutes after the
00:25:05 hearing, but only 10 minutes after the event that they're reporting. Uh, they may not be used for recording or photography. Yes. Stand up.
00:25:14 I swear by Almighty God I swear by Al almighty God God that the evidence I shall give that the evidence I shall give shall be the truth shall be the truth the whole truth the
00:37:55 Mr. Renick, to the extent that you can, can you describe how Roger's death affected you and the family?
00:38:06 affected you and the family? Well, as I said, Roger was central to the family. Um, he everyone loved him. I think
00:38:07 think the effect the I mean my parents has lost a son and basically no one should have to bury their son. You expect your son to bury you. Um
00:38:24 I mean after Roger's fall and Roger's death I mean at Christmas time we missed him. We missed, you know, I mean, to this day, I miss his presence. And I think I've now got grandchildren.
00:38:39 And I think I've now got grandchildren. I think if he was around, he'd be doting um you know, with my to was my grand my grands. Um, everyone loved Roger. Um, we
00:39:00 grands. Um, everyone loved Roger. Um, we he was central to the family. He cracked jokes. He made everyone feel good about themselves. He was a peacemaker. Um,
00:39:07 Um, you know, he was there for everybody who needed help. Um, he got on very well with
00:39:09 with not just members of the family but elderly people. You know, he, you know, put himself out of the way to get them to cross the road, find out how they
00:39:24 to cross the road, find out how they were, and he'd run chores for them. Um, you know, we still, to this day, we still miss him. uh particularly my parents and you know my I recall during the time you know Roger had this psych
00:39:37 the time you know Roger had this psych cyclical you know illness where he was happy
00:39:45 happy and you know highs and lows I think it bipolar but the times he was well I've lost my train of thought now but he he was able to bring a smile to
00:40:00 he he was able to bring a smile to everyone's face. Um, to this day, every every time, you know, I always gets reminded by people who I don't know, but they knew Roger and they would say to me, I knew Roger and if I had a penny
00:40:21 me, I knew Roger and if I had a penny for the number of times that someone has said to me, um, I knew Roger, I'd be a rich man because he was well known, you know, in the Tottenham area. Thank you. It's right that there was an inquest into Roger's death in 2003, isn't isn't there?
00:40:29 there? Yes. Yes.
00:40:39 Yes. Yes. And that inquest concluded that Roger was unlawfully killed. Absolutely. In 2004,
00:40:46 In 2004, that inquest verdict was quashed by the high court following a judicial review challenge. Is that right? That's correct. Yes. And in 2005, the Crown Prosecution Service decided not to charge any of the police officers
00:41:01 not to charge any of the police officers involved with criminal offenses. Is that right?
00:41:01 right? That's correct. We have uh Mr. Renick, the statements that were made by the family in response
00:41:13 that were made by the family in response to both the 2004 high court decision and the 2005 decision by the CPS because you've exhibited those to your to your witness statement and those describe the the impact and the reaction of the family to those decisions. I'm not
00:41:29 family to those decisions. I'm not proposing we call them up at this stage. Um but they can be found at A4 and A5 UCPI 37870 and 37871.
00:41:39 Mr. Renick, the focus of most of the rest of my questions now is going to be on the period 1999 to 2000. Um, that's principally because this is the period in which, as far as we can see, the campaign was being reported on by SDS
00:41:52 campaign was being reported on by SDS undercover officers. Um, so if we don't cover those later matters that I've just referred to in any further detail, it's important to emphasize that the evidence that you have provided about the
00:42:05 that you have provided about the inquest, about the judicial review and the CPS decision are all in evidence before the inquiry and they will be um considered in due course by the chair. Turning to the formation of the family
00:42:19 Turning to the formation of the family justice campaign, um it's right, isn't it? It was set up in January 1999. Yes, it was. I mean it started the it's his gen the genesis of the campaign was in Victor my cousin's house um he we
00:42:31 in Victor my cousin's house um he we decided we have to address the negative press that Roger was um was having uh he wasn't a demon that he was being betrayed. Yes, he had a mental he had
00:42:49 betrayed. Yes, he had a mental he had mental issues but he he was not a demon. And so we we had to do something to address that. and the campaign was started to get the the truth of what happened. And if any of the officers did wrong, then they should be held accountable
00:43:01 accountable because I mean Roger would have been alive if they had not laid hands on him. And then to start a campaign to demonize him, you know, it's typical stereotype.
00:43:12 him, you know, it's typical stereotype. He was big, you know, strong, you know, those to to, you know, my mind. sort of racial stereotypes. You know, it's pe
00:43:25 racial stereotypes. You know, it's pe some people's worst fears and he was not like that. So, we had to address that. It was, as you say, initiated by um your cousin, and I think you've you've recounted in your witness statement um
00:43:40 recounted in your witness statement um recalling being at the hospital in the period actually before Roger was um declared dead and and and your cousin had grabbed hold of your arm and said, "Burn, we can't let them get away with this." Do you recall that?
00:43:53 this." Do you recall that? That's correct. Yes. My my cousin Victor um I mean he we were experiencing the loss of Roger. It was traumatic. He was with us one day, phoned me up in the
00:44:08 with us one day, phoned me up in the morning to wish me a happy birthday and he was no longer with us. Um, and so, you know, we we knew we had to to do something. V Victor was adamant. Um, I think Victor is his first cousin, so,
00:44:22 think Victor is his first cousin, so, you know, we had to do something to to get to the truth. And as people of color, you know, justice seems to elude us. So we we had to act. We
00:44:34 elude us. So we we had to act. We couldn't just let it be because the the police were having a a field day basically demonizing him. And I think it's a tactic they they have used in the
00:44:45 it's a tactic they they have used in the past. Um it's like breaking a window and say, "Oh, look at this window. This is what you should be looking at." But the question the thing is what? And it's a diversion away from what they actually
00:45:03 diversion away from what they actually did to Roger, you know, to demonize him to make people believe that, you know, it was justifi their actions were justified. One of the examples that you gave in your witness statement was about
00:45:15 your witness statement was about reporting which describes Roger as violent and voseiferous. Yes.
00:45:22 Yes. And you say that that was disinformation for which the Metropolitan Police were subsequently required to apologize. Yes. Yes.
00:45:30 Yes. Yes. You also refer in your statement to the demonizing of Roger in the press and the media. Is that right? Yes, of course. Yeah. And I think it's right that these factors taken together were what
00:45:42 taken together were what made the family feel that they were had no choice but to establish the campaign in January 99.
00:45:55 in January 99. Yes, that certainly is the case. Yeah. Um I think without the campaign you know and the campaign was also to publicize
00:46:04 you know to make I mean when in the past I used to hear of people d you know when people someone
00:46:16 people d you know when people someone died in custody you'd hear about them in the press and it was always a negative of that person and I managed I came across a book called um deadly silence I think it was I think it's I can't
00:46:31 think it was I think it's I can't remember who published it but I read that book and there seemed to be a pattern that there's an individual dying in custody there's a demonization of that person and then it goes to an inquest and when it
00:46:43 goes to an inquest and when it eventually gets to an inquest people tend to remember the demonization of that person um not what was done to them. So I think I I at the time thought
00:47:03 them. So I think I I at the time thought it's an art form that the the police you know exercise in order to shine a light away from their actions and I mean if you restrain someone they will die you know it's human nature you restrain someone
00:47:15 human nature you restrain someone compromise their breathing they will die and what they tended to do was to say oh that person struggled, you know, against, you know, they they weren't cooperative.
00:47:30 Just picking up that point that you made about the inquest, I think you've described in your statement that um a moment where the forensic pathologist had made given statements or made
00:47:43 had made given statements or made comments to the media outside of the inquest about Roger, providing them with information that was untrue.
00:47:54 that was untrue. Mhm. and for which um that individual was subsequently reprimanded. Is that right?
00:47:56 right? Yes. That that was I think if I remember rightly uh Dr. Patel he basically I think he briefed members of the press and I recall him saying that um he was
00:48:10 and I recall him saying that um he was trying to allay fears. Now that insensed the family because the job of a pathologist pathologist is to find out how a person died. um his job isn't to
00:48:21 how a person died. um his job isn't to allay public affairs, you know, his job is to do whatever uh he has to do to determine the cause of death. The contents of Roger's notes in public, you know, from him,
00:48:35 public, you know, from him, that's not his job. Alaying public affairs is not a pathologist's job. So we, you know, we were very insensed. We
00:48:46 we, you know, we were very insensed. We complained to the GMC and we we actually have him had him reprimand reprimanded.
00:48:55 Turning then to back to the formation of the campaign and this is something that you mentioned a few minutes ago. The first meeting of that campaign was uh at your cousin's home. Is that right?
00:49:13 your cousin's home. Is that right? That's correct. At Victor's house. Yes. Uh who attended that meeting? Don't don't have to refer to names but just in in general terms. Well, all most of all cousins
00:59:48 Mr. Renick, we're going to turn now to some of the reporting about the activities of the the campaign. Um, now the first intelligence report that the inquiry has seen that mentions the campaign is dated the 21st of January
01:00:00 campaign is dated the 21st of January 1999. I'm not proposing we turn that one up, but I would like to go to one that's dated 4 days after that, please. It's B2 MPS01717.
01:00:24 Now, we can see from the the the top of this document that it is a Metropolitan Police special branch intelligence report. And in that table that that runs along the top there, we can see
01:00:35 along the top there, we can see reference to the the date of that report as the 25th of January 1999. Um, and just slightly further down that
01:00:49 Um, and just slightly further down that that bit that's been blown up there, we can see the word title and next to it the words windmill tilt. Can you see that?
01:00:55 that? Yes. So windmill tilt is the code name that was given by the SDS to the undercover officer that we know as David Hagen or HN81. Now we won't see that name David Hagen
01:01:13 Now we won't see that name David Hagen in any of these reports but we might see in some of the ones that we go to this reference windmill Tilta and where we see that we can presume that the intelligence in the report came from David Hagen. Okay. Okay.
01:01:23 Okay. Um can we just zoom out again please? Thank you. Um this is a report of a march which took place on the 24th of January 1999
01:01:38 January 1999 and I think you say in your statement that this would have been the first event that was organized by the campaign. Is that right? Uh yes.
01:01:43 Uh yes. And and bearing in mind the date of it, 24th of January, then this would have taken place less than a week after Roger died.
01:01:49 died. That's right. Yes.
01:02:01 That's right. Yes. Is it right that the march was from Roger's flat in Tottenham to the Tottenham police station? Uh, is that the march where my parents were wearing the t-shirts?
01:02:08 t-shirts? Yes, it is. Yes.
01:02:19 Yes, it is. Yes. Um, can we please just expand the first paragraph of of of text, please? Thank you. It it reads this. The March visual that took place in Tottenham on the 24th of January 1999 turned into a tense confrontational confrontational affair
01:02:32 confrontational confrontational affair and clearly exhibited the discord that is felt within the black community towards the police. Now, I'm going to revisit in just a moment what you have to say about that description, but for the time being, we'll just um keep
01:02:45 the time being, we'll just um keep reading, please. So, can we then go to the next main paragraph, please?
01:02:57 Some 250 persons assembled at the outset of the march outside Sylvester's house. These people were predominantly young black youths of both genders. Pausing there. 250 people. Do you think that sounds about right?
01:03:13 that sounds about right? There were quite a lot of people. Um I mean I didn't at the time um
01:03:23 um guesstimate I I didn't um consider how many but there were quite a lot of people young old mix of people that the description of them consisting of predominantly young black youth of both genders. Do you recognize that description?
01:03:34 you recognize that description? There were you young black youth there, both genders, but also they were my parents and my parents' friends. Uh we had the um my parents um priests uh
01:03:47 had the um my parents um priests uh minister attended. So it's it wasn't just predominantly black youths. Okay. Um can you bring up the next paragraph please?
01:03:58 And we'll just start on the on the second sentence which begins about halfway through that the second line where it says it was organized and stewarded by the New Monitoring Project
01:04:11 stewarded by the New Monitoring Project NMNP and the SWP Socialist Workers Party had been informed during the buildup to this protest that their presence wasn't welcome.
01:04:19 welcome. Can you recall if the NMP were involved in organizing the stewarding of that event?
01:04:29 I can vaguely remember
01:04:38 someone I mean Gilly Gilly Mundy was
01:04:48 was he helped and I I'm not I'm think N the NMP he was he knew somebody who was in that organization. If it assists you um Mr. Renick in your witness statement at paragraph 3.2 to you say that you think that the NMP did
01:05:00 you say that you think that the NMP did help to organize the stewarding and they were put in contact with the family by the organization Inquest and the individual um Gilly that you've just referred to
01:05:15 referring this to this um the the point that we can see in this paragraph about the Socialist Workers Party's presence not being welcome. Do you recall any interaction between the family and the SWP in the leadup to this event?
01:05:29 SWP in the leadup to this event? No, I mean they have been around with, you know, circulating their leaflets. Um, but we haven't I mean I don't have any I'm not aware of any contact
01:05:40 any I'm not aware of any contact personal contact with them. Um, they appeared at our functions but they weren't part of our organizing of the function. and they they were around.
01:05:51 function. and they they were around. Can we bring up the next paragraph, please?
01:06:00 It says this. The event opened with a speech and prayer from a local vicar and the laying of a wreath. It was explained that out of respect for the family, the procession should be silent.
01:06:11 procession should be silent. Now, I'm going to pause there and I'd like to turn up, please. We'll come back to this report, but I would like to turn up um a photograph that I think you've referred to a couple of minutes ago. It's A6 UCPI 37872,
01:06:25 It's A6 UCPI 37872, please.
01:06:30 And on the second page of that, please.
01:06:39 Thank you. It's right, isn't it, that this is a photograph of yours and Roger's parents at um the start of this uh vigil.
01:06:53 at um the start of this uh vigil. Yes, that that was at Summer Hill Road. Uh the door on the left was Roger, the entrance into Roger's flag.
01:19:56 Mr.
01:20:06 Ren, um, I think it's quite clear from your evidence already, but for the avoidance of doubt, the friends of Roger Sylvester, was that a name that the family campaign ever referred to itself as?
01:20:23 ever referred to itself as? No, absolutely not. We were always Roger Sylvester Justice Campaign, RSJC. Thank you. Um that report can come down now please. Next we're going to turn to something we've touched on lightly already which are the examples of reports that you
01:20:38 are the examples of reports that you refer to in your witness statement that talk about movement for justice MFJ in the context of the family campaign. Um I'm not going to ask you about all of those reports, but I will just call up
01:20:56 those reports, but I will just call up two uh which are two days apart from one another um from around January 2000. Um the first of those is B16 MPS02788.
01:21:09 Uh and we can see if we look at just expand the table at the top again please.
01:21:13 please. Thank you. uh the date of this report 5th of January 2000 and then can we go to the first main paragraph um of this report please?
01:21:28 Thank you. So titled Roger Sylvester campaign we can see intelligence there again that code name windmill tilt. It says this. There is to be a vigil outside Tottenham Police Station on Tuesday the 11th of January 2000 at 6 p.m. to mark the first anniversary of
01:21:42 p.m. to mark the first anniversary of the death of Roger Sylvester. His family who have initiated the vigil have invited other groups to attend the event, but those with long memories such as MFJ will not be attending as they were snubbed by the family when the campaign originally commenced.
01:21:57 campaign originally commenced. And I think you say in your witness statement that this um anniversary visual was something that was organized by the family campaign. Is that right?
01:22:10 by the family campaign. Is that right? Absolutely. It was. Yes. That we we decided to mark that day because I mean although the inquest said Roger's death was on the 18th, that's was when the life support system was switched off, but the family believed that Roger
01:22:24 off, but the family believed that Roger actually died on the 9th on the night of the 11th. Um, and we say that because when the autopsy was um done on Roger, his his brain was decaying.
01:22:40 his his brain was decaying. So that 18th was just the life support system being switched off.
01:22:47 I want to ask you about the description that we can see here of the MFJ movement for justice being snubbed by the family. Is that description accurate?
01:23:07 I think it is because we we had no dealings, you know, you know, we had no plan, no meetings with them. We didn't know who they were, but we knew that we had to make sure that Roger's name was
01:23:23 had to make sure that Roger's name was um you know didn't Roger was not going to be remembered uh because of some rioting that took place and movement for justice was I know we had
01:23:34 movement for justice was I know we had meetings whenever we had meetings in the police consultative group there were a few occasions where um a lead Alex would appear and I sense that the
01:23:49 consultative group um uh people were not happy with him being there. Um you know they they wish he had disappeared and we never associated with him. I'm sure I was in a room with Movement for Justice
01:24:04 was in a room with Movement for Justice but there was no conversation between us at all. The reason why I ask you about this description about being snubbed is because
01:24:12 because you you say that there wasn't any sort of interaction between the family and the MFJ. One reading of this description snubbed might suggest that an approach had been made and they had been
01:24:23 had been made and they had been rebuffed. So my question is around whether that that is accurate or whether actually what it's more of what you said a moment ago that there was just never
01:24:38 a moment ago that there was just never any interaction between the two of you. I don't believe that we had any inter interaction. I mean, I knew of him because I've heard people talk about him, but I don't believe I had any
01:24:49 but I don't believe I had any interaction. I'm not convinced that sh the other members of our campaign had any interaction with him. Thank you. That can come down now, please. Uh we'll just turn up very quickly one further report on this subject. It's B17 MPS02796,
01:25:01 MPS02796, please.
01:25:09 And again, if we just expand the top table, please. And we can see um information obtained on the 6th of January 2000 and the
01:25:23 on the 6th of January 2000 and the report typed up on the 7th. Um can we expand the first paragraph of this report please?
01:25:29 Title Roger Sylvester campaign intelligence. We can again see windmill tilt and then it says this. The movement for justice MFJ do not intended to offer much support to the Roger Sylvester campaign. This is due to the Sylvester
01:25:44 campaign. This is due to the Sylvester family refusing any support from the MFJ at the start of their campaign. Now a year on the family feel they have achieved nothing by cooperating with the authorities and are seeking help from groups like MFJ.
01:25:56 groups like MFJ. So once again we can see the suggestion here of
01:26:04 here of support being offered and refused and we we've spoken about that in the context of the last report we've seen. I want to just ask you about the bit that says um
01:26:21 the bit that says um the family feel they've achieved nothing by cooperating with the authorities. What is your how how do you sort of read or interpret that? What's the accuracy of that? That's not true. You know, we we're always confident we're on the right track. And I think
01:26:40 we're on the right track. And I think this, you know, we would like to seek, you know, we wanted to seek help, you know, with Em. No, that's not true. you know, we we were getting on with our purpose
01:26:48 purpose um for justice for Roger and we were quite happy with the the course we were we were we were we were on
01:27:06 this was what in a year later I mean okay we didn't have the inquest we were gathering learning what happened to Roger we were not disponded despondent
01:27:18 Okay. Can we just expand the bit at the bottom of the page that's under the heading source comment, please?
01:27:27 Both the MFJ and PCAC, police crimes against civilians, hope that the Sylvester family will become more militant and outspoken, in essence leads the campaign themselves.
01:27:38 the campaign themselves. What's your response to the suggestion made at the end there that the family may not have been leading the campaign themselves?
01:27:51 themselves? Well, it was our campaign. We were leading it and I think we were doing a very good job of, you know, the objective of the campaign. Um, as I said, we were never
01:28:03 said, we were never despondent. We we knew we were on the right track. Um,
01:28:12 we I think we were not a militant family, you know, we we used every opportunity to um to pass the message on to what happened to Roger. Um
01:28:25 to what happened to Roger. Um yeah we and we didn't have to be militant and as I've said we militancy and you know breaking you know rioting and what have you the focus becomes the riot not what the officers did to Roger
01:28:39 riot not what the officers did to Roger and so there was no need to be militant you know there's a process that we were following and it was the process that
01:28:51 following and it was the process that was there for us to follow and we were going through that process I mean we were exercising in our you know our free speech and doing what bereieved families do. We weren't looking to be militant. We wanted our job was to convey to the
01:29:07 We wanted our job was to convey to the public this has happened to us. It could happen to you and it's not a nice
01:29:21 happen to you and it's not a nice it's not a nice feel. And so if you are aware of what was happening to us, you know, take note, you know, it's it's it's I mean I I had I remember when Brian Douglas was um Brian Douglas was hit over the head with um the Trangent with these new tangent and I recall
01:29:32 with these new tangent and I recall hearing it on the news, but then again Brian Douglas was this huge guy. He was strong and what have you. And
01:29:46 strong and what have you. And immediately I switched off not realizing a few years down the line you would be in that position. So I was con I'm sure the others were conscious that of this
01:30:00 the others were conscious that of this that we need to let people know it could happen to them and we are we were going through a lot of turmoil and the last thing we wanted was to mil be militant and divert attention away from what was
01:30:12 and divert attention away from what was done to Raj on the night. Thank you. We can take that report down now please. We're going to look at one final report um very briefly please um Mr. Renick. It's B10 MPS01988.
01:30:26 And we can see if we just expand the top again that this is a report uh the report written up on the 16th of April 99 based on information provided on the 15th. Me zoom out again please.
01:30:39 15th. Me zoom out again please. And we can see the title of this report is Roger Sylvester funeral 16 April 99. Intelligence again we can see from
01:30:54 Intelligence again we can see from windmill tilt. I'm just going to read um the text that we can see there. Alexard of the movement for justice will be attending the above funeral. There is no intelligence to indicate that the
01:31:05 no intelligence to indicate that the funeral will be anything other than a dignified event. I think you say in your witness statement that you think hundreds of people came along to us. Oh, there was there was there was quite a few people. I mean, it was then we
01:31:20 a few people. I mean, it was then we realized how much Roger was loved in the community. There was more people than we anticipated. Can I ask you what your reaction is to
01:31:37 Can I ask you what your reaction is to seeing the fact of Roger's funeral being recorded and documented in a police intelligence report? I mean that that was a time a solemn time for us, a sad time for us. And you know we we weren't being allowed the
01:31:55 know we we weren't being allowed the dignity to grieve privately. Well, okay. I mean it was a public event but to be in a state you know to be you know in
01:32:14 in a state you know to be you know in sorrow grieving you know saying our last goodbye and to be monitored I mean we I it's just a violation of our human of there was no dignity given to us you know we were under scrutiny uh at a time where you know we needed to be left, you know, just to grieve. I mean, to say a last goodbye. Suraj,
01:32:30 I mean, to say a last goodbye. Suraj, thank you. We can take that report down, please.
01:32:38 Mr. Those reports that we've just gone through um represent a proportion of those
01:32:51 those written by or based on intelligence from David Hagen that refer to the campaign. And I know that you refer to others in in your uh witness statement um that you've prepared. Um
01:32:55 Um if someone were to suggest to you that the reporting on the family campaign by police officers was justified because
01:33:07 police officers was justified because there was a public order risk posed by the events and activities that it carried out. What would your response to that be? Well, I mean, can you ask me that question again? Forgive me. It wasn't long question. If someone want to suggest that the
01:33:22 someone want to suggest that the reporting that we've seen was justified because
01:33:28 because uh the activities the family campaign carried out post some sort of public order.
01:33:34 order. No, there was no justification. We we were exercising our uh our free speech um our right to free speech and you know it's there's a there's a time
01:33:48 you know it's there's a there's a time and place there's a time there's a place for surveillance but I I don't think it's
01:33:50 it's to have surveillance on a grieving family who has lost a loved one I think that is
01:33:59 that is It's what's the word I'm looking for?
01:34:06 That's not a place for surveillance. You're grieving. They've lost somebody. We possess no threat um to anybody. All we were doing was looking for answers.
01:34:17 we were doing was looking for answers. And to be under scrutiny because someone thinks we may cause, you know, issues or violence or what have you, that that
01:34:33 violence or what have you, that that that was not us. you know, we looking for the truth and that's all we were doing.
01:34:40 doing. When you address this point in your witness statement, you say, "I can see no such reason for any such concern other than an assumption shaped by the simple fact that we were a black family."
01:34:53 family." Yeah. Well, I'm sure that there is something to that there's some truth in that. Um, I mean, as I've said before, um, justice we for black families, people of color, justice is a bit elusive. You know, we tend not
01:35:08 is a bit elusive. You know, we tend not to get justice. We, you know, we have to fight for it. Um, yes, it's it's
01:35:17 what we have to go through.
01:35:25 Just a couple of questions about the undercover officer David Hagen. Now, you say in your witness statement that neither you or anybody in your family knowingly had contact with
01:35:40 family knowingly had contact with someone called David Hagen at any time. No.
01:35:40 No. Absolutely not. No. And it's not a name that's would have been familiar to you. Does not ring a bell. didn't know he existed
01:35:48 existed until until now before. And I want to ask you about um sort of any subsisting concerns that you had at the time about
01:36:04 you had at the time about possible infiltration into the campaign. And I'm going to refer to an example that you give in your witness statement about a burglary.
01:36:16 about a burglary. Um this is about an individual who's a member of your family. I ask you please not to use that individual's name when you
01:36:16 you Okay.
01:36:21 Okay. Um but um c can you can you um expand upon on on on that and and and any concerns that you might have had about you know what that meant at the time?
01:36:34 you know what that meant at the time? Yeah, I mean that individual was our secretary. Um she took notes and so you know her she wrote her notes the notes of the meetings that we would have that we have. So, uh, I can't remember the
01:36:47 we have. So, uh, I can't remember the exact details of the the burglary, but you know, she there was a b burglary. I'm not sure whether she reported it, but we we we we I'm
01:36:58 but we we we we I'm conscious of incidents like that. I mean, that was just one. The other was another was when um one of our members
01:37:10 another was when um one of our members of the campaign um he was at cricket. he was playing cricket and he had a call from his his son um saying that there are two people wanting to come in to
01:37:23 are two people wanting to come in to assess the property for sale. He wanted he was asking his dad whether he he didn't know he was selling the house. Um there was another incident where um allegedly someone made a 919 call to my
01:37:34 allegedly someone made a 919 call to my parents' house uh seeing that there's a fire in the house and so um the um fire brigade people men sort of bulldoze
01:37:45 brigade people men sort of bulldoze themselves into the house to look for a
01:37:58 themselves into the house to look for a fire, push past my sister and my parents to go to the back of the house to see whether there was a fire or not when clearly there wasn't. And we we we were conscious of being surveyed uh you know you know we thought whatever surveillance that we that would taking place would be maybe
01:38:14 taking place would be maybe electronically but certainly not um a man or hum you know someone you know having us under surveillance you know we we we in fact we joked about being bugged but we laughed at it at the
01:38:28 bugged but we laughed at it at the you know, we weren't doing anything wrong,
01:38:30 wrong, so
01:38:31 so let them do what they they they think they need to do. We cannot prove it, but we were very conscious of it. But that that burglary that you know that I mean
01:38:45 that burglary that you know that I mean I've given you another two example came to mind, but um it it did happen.
01:38:56 to mind, but um it it did happen. Final few questions for you, Mr. Renie. You say in your statement that you first found out that the family campaign had been reported on when you were contacted by Operation Hearn in 2013. Is that right?
01:39:05 right? Yes. Yes.
01:39:09 Yes. Yes. How did discovering that information at the time impact you? Well, we me personally I mean I as I said we knew we we thought we were we being you know there was some surveillance but we thought it was electronically but
01:39:21 electronically but we didn't realize that there were actually people who were monitoring us who you know and also well monitoring us from in an indirect way. Um
01:39:35 from in an indirect way. Um there see I think there's a difference between human monitoring and electronic monitoring to to be rubbing shoulders with somebody who's reporting on you.
01:39:53 with somebody who's reporting on you. You know when you're just you're trying to seek justice and it's it's it's not nice.
01:39:58 not nice. It's it's not the thing you expected.
01:40:05 And then looking back from today, having now seen the extent and character of reporting on Roger, the family and the campaign,
01:40:15 campaign, how does that impact you now?
01:40:24 Sorry, could Yeah, sorry. No, forgive me. Yeah. when we we look back from today, bearing in mind that you've you've now seen the extent of the reporting that was carried out, um
01:40:34 um what what's the impact on on you of of discovering that information? Well, I mean, I think it's
01:40:43 we didn't I didn't expect to be monitored. Um you know, as I've said, we I personally thought we were doing the
01:40:54 personally thought we were doing the right thing. Um, we're exercising our freedom of speech. Um, we were voicing our opinions. We were trying to expose what was done to Raj.
01:41:02 Raj. Um, and
01:41:08 Um, and you know, we were being monitored. I'm not
01:41:15 I'm not happy about it, but it has happened. And I think for other people people who in future um, they've got to bear that in mind. They may well be monitored whilst grieving.
01:41:29 whilst grieving. And how have your experiences shaped your views about the police? I think the police they have a I'm kind of old school. I mean I recall Dixonov at dot greed you know where the
01:41:42 Dixonov at dot greed you know where the police officer was part of the community but it seems as though with the policing we have now is one whereby if there's you know you don't see them but if there's an incident they
01:41:55 there's an incident they descend in numbers it's as though they're not part of the community I mean I remember the days where you see a
01:42:08 I remember the days where you see a police officer walk in the street and he would know you would know him. This is going way back when it's, you know, little and I think we need to get back to that type of policeman policing. It's, you know, to have
01:42:20 It's, you know, to have they're non they're not seen, but when there's an incident, they they come in numbers. Um, and I mean I have three young grandsons and I I I
01:42:34 young grandsons and I I I shudder to think what they would go through. You know, the way police officers treat young black males. You know, young black males are seems to me they're an endangered species. You know,
01:42:52 they're an endangered species. You know, they're treated with a lot of force. And my three grandsons, I hope they don't have to go through that. Mr. R, those are all the questions that I have for you. Is there anything that you would like
01:43:07 you would like to say to the inquiry now that you have the opportunity to do so? Well,
01:43:13 Well, there's a place for surveillance and surveilling grieving families at their that
01:43:27 grieving families at their that vulnerable time is not the time when you're looking for answers. Um for me personally um
01:43:32 um I when you lose somebody you you know there's a different stages of grief and in Roger's case myself and for the rest of my family that
01:43:45 rest of my family that um grieving process is not linear where you go from um the in uh what's the first one anger um uh I can't remember but it's not it doesn't go through the stages linearly
01:43:57 doesn't go through the stages linearly so you go from one stage uh where you I think one of the stages where we spent a lot of time was bargaining where you know we looking for truth and then the
01:44:12 know we looking for truth and then the next stage was depression I think I seem to have forgotten the the the first two denial uh anger and um um yeah but you don't go through that stage linearly
01:44:25 stage linearly In death in custody, we we spend a lot of time in asking questions and it doesn't help your help you mentally.
01:44:34 mentally. Um and it because the process was so long and drawn out, you you know, you find yourself going, you know, back to stages when you should really get towards the um acceptance as the at the
01:44:52 towards the um acceptance as the at the end. And the the whole process of going through going through this death in custody um procedures don't allow you to grieve um
01:45:00 um properly.
01:45:06 properly. You get there eventually, but it's it's nonlinear.
01:45:11 Thank you, Mr. Those are all of my questions for you. Thank you. We're now going to break for 15 minutes. The purpose of this is twofold. is to let the transcribers have a break and
01:45:27 let the transcribers have a break and you and also if there are any questions that uh people want council to the inquiry to ask uh then now is the time for them to put them to him. Will you bear with us while we do that? Yes.
01:45:36 Yes. Thank you.
02:00:28 Yes. So I understand there to be no rule 10 questions but there will be some brief re-examination. Yes.
02:00:30 Yes. Thank you sir. Mr. Remick notwithstanding the many years since Roger's death Mhm.
02:00:40 Mhm. and the various legal proceedings that have taken place. Do I understand correctly that this is in fact the first time that you personally have given evidence?
02:00:53 evidence? Yes, it is. Yeah, my my mother has and my cousin Anne who's now deceased did a inquest, but for me the first Can I ask you specifically about
02:13:28 In fact, those are the end of my questions. Thank you very much. Yeah, I just like to Yeah, one of the I think I can't remember was that my cous Yeah. We you know, we think is meaningless
02:13:40 meaningless this apology. A and by meaningless do I understand part of the point to be the question of if you're apologizing what are you apologizing for exactly it's they're apolog I mean one of my cousins suggested well they're only apologizing because they've been
02:13:55 only apologizing because they've been caught with their pants down literally and um
02:13:57 and um we apologizing for what we know is what we don't know they're not apologize we don't know what we don't know but they're only apologizing
02:14:10 don't know but they're only apologizing because of what we know and it's because they've been caught with a pan stone. Maybe that's a good time to sit down, sir.
02:14:15 sir. Okay,
02:14:28 Mr. Henrik, thank you for taking the trouble to make a witness statement and to attend the hearing and to give oral evidence in the calm and reasonable manner that you have. Um, it is invariably impressive to hear people who have gone through great personal tragedies like you and your family
02:14:48 tragedies like you and your family be able to speak about them in a manner that doesn't betray bitterness and ranker and excessive emotion, but
02:14:59 ranker and excessive emotion, but calmness and reasonleness. And I'm, if I may say so, I'm not not only grateful but impressed. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to to do this on behalf of my my parents and Roger.
02:15:12 and Roger. May I just raise two two matters. Um, first the impression that I have from your evidence is that although uh you think it um wrong, even outrageous that you and your family's campaign were
02:15:24 you and your family's campaign were reported upon by an undercover police officer. Nevertheless, the contents of the reports about what he it is one officer in particular, HN81, you're
02:15:37 officer in particular, HN81, you're you're satisfied that the contents of what he says are broadly speaking true. Is that fair?
02:15:52 Is that fair? Some of it's true, but not Yeah. The Yes. I mean, we've had no contact with um
02:15:53 um uh
02:15:55 uh friends of Roger or Roger justice um um movement for justice.
02:16:06 justice. Yeah. But broadly what the tenor of the reports is that um
02:16:15 your campaign was run by you as a family as a family and uh you did not want disorder or any intrusion by those who might cause it. Absolutely. Absolutely. Family.
02:16:27 Absolutely. Family. Um, may I ask a question of you? Um, only for information purposes, but is there a report of Mr. Justice Andrew Collins's, uh, ruling?
02:16:38 Collins's, uh, ruling? I'm sure we can obtain it. Uh, I'd be grateful if you would because I'm far from sure that I can get it on Bailey, and I certainly can't unless I know the name and title reference.
02:16:51 know the name and title reference. So would you mind possibly if I I ask a follow-up question to the the issue you raised about of the reporting? Absolutely. Um
02:17:03 Um certainly in so far as the reporting describes the family leading the campaign, the family being I think moderate or something to that effect. Wholly accurate. Is that right?
02:17:18 Wholly accurate. Is that right? Yes, we were always moderate. We moderated our our message um throughout. But would it be fair to say that you consider some of the reporting
02:17:30 consider some of the reporting to be either inaccurate or portraying prejudice? And if I could just give remind you of one example, um the report of the march being predominantly young black youth. Mhm.
02:17:38 Mhm. Is that an example where whether or not it's accurate or inaccurate, it betrays a perception um that is not justified?
02:17:57 um that is not justified? Yeah. I mean, it's it was a mix. It wasn't young, just young. I'm I'm pretty sure there were white people there. Um it was
02:18:02 it was people who felt a, you know, a grieved. So it was it was it was not just predominantly young black people
02:18:13 black people and the predominantly young black youth goes to the prejudice or stereotype of danger.
02:18:14 danger. Yeah. Yeah. It's Yes, it does. stereotyping. So I'm very grateful. Thank you very much.
02:18:28 much. Thank you very much indeed. Um, I want now to ask uh my team what we are going to do next. Whether we're going to resume evidence with uh other witnesses in the near future or whether we're going to have a long lunch break. Forgive me while I do that. Okay. It doesn't concern you. And if you want to go now, by all means do,
02:18:42 go now, by all means do, but you sit and wait and listen if you wish to.
02:18:43 wish to. Okay.
02:18:43 Okay. Yes.
02:18:48 Yes. So, I understand that the intention is to rise now and then resume again at about 20.
02:18:49 about 20. Yes. Very well. Then that's what we'll do.
02:45:54 It is good afternoon. Uh proceedings for the rest of today will be broadcast but by sound only after 10 minutes have elapsed.
02:45:55 elapsed. Uh the um uh those with mobile devices in the anti- room to the hearing room may use them to report what they have heard in the
02:46:06 report what they have heard in the hearing room. Uh but only after 10 minutes have elapsed since the event that they're reporting. They may not be used for recording. Yes.
02:46:14 Yes. Would you like to stand up? Repeat after me. I swear by Almighty God I swear by Almighty God that the evidence I shall give
02:46:25 that the evidence I shall give that the evidence I shall give shall be the truth shall be the truth the whole truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth and nothing but the truth
02:46:41 I swear by Almighty God I swear by Almighty God that the evidence I shall give that the evidence I shall give shall be the truth shall be the truth Truth. The whole truth. The whole truth. And nothing but the truth. And nothing but the truth.
02:46:57 Yes. Good afternoon. Thank you for attending to give evidence to the inquiry. I will refer to you throughout this
02:47:09 I will refer to you throughout this hearing as MSS and MWS because you have been granted anonymity. Either of you can ask to have a break at any time. We will accommodate that.
02:47:22 any time. We will accommodate that. And if you need me to repeat or rephrase a question, please let me know and I will do so. I will now address each of you
02:47:35 I will now address each of you separately in respect of the statements you have each provided to the inquiry. Can we show on screen please UCPI 508377?
02:47:38 508377? That's a tap A2 of your bundle sir.
02:47:46 MSS, you gave a signed witness statement to the inquiring of 22 pages dated 13th of June, 2025. Do you recognize the document on the screen? I do.
02:47:57 I do. Is this your witness statement? It is.
02:48:02 It is. Can we go to to the um last page of the statement, please? Is that your signature? Yes. Yes.
02:48:12 Yes. Yes. And can you confirm that the contents of this witness statement are true and correct to the best of your knowledge and belief? I can con um confirm that. I just say that where I mention
02:48:26 that where I mention investigations by number that I've said there are two but there are different elements. So when I talk about them today I'll probably just refer to them by name if that's okay. That should be fine. Thank you. you uh produced a second witness
02:48:40 you uh produced a second witness statement as well. Could we have we take that document down please? Could we have UCPI 5039437 on the screen?
02:48:54 MSS is do you recognize this statement is yours as well? Yes, I do. And if we could go to the last page. Is that your signature? Yes, it does.
02:49:08 Yes, it does. And can you confirm that the contents of this witness statement is true and correct to the best of your knowledge of belief?
02:49:11 belief? Yes, I can. Thank you. That puts your witness statement into evidence. I will now address MWS.
02:49:21 Could we have on screen please document UCPI 5038379?
02:49:26 That's a tab A1 of your folder. Sir,
02:49:35 MWS, you gave a signed witness statement to the inquiry consisting of 86 pages dated 6th of June, 2025. Do you recognize this document on the screen? Yes.
02:49:42 Yes. Is this your witness statement? Yes, it is. Can we go to the last page, please? The witness statement. Is this your signature? Yes, it is. And can you confirm that the contents of your witness statement are true and
02:49:54 your witness statement are true and correct to the best of your knowledge of belief?
02:49:55 belief? Yes.
02:49:57 Yes. Thank you. If we could take that statement down and if we could put up UCPI
02:50:03 UCPI 509441
02:50:16 MWS, you produced a second witness statement. Is this Do you recognize this document?
02:50:24 Yes. And it's dated 26th of November, 2025. Is that right? Yes. And that's your witness statement? Yes, it is. And if we go to the last page, please. Is that your signature? Yes, it is.
02:50:36 Yes, it is. And are the contents of that witness statement true and correct to the best of your knowledge? Yes, it is.
02:50:43 I've been handed a note. If you could perhaps speak a little bit louder, that would be that would be um that would be good. Thank you so much.
02:51:01 Just a note, when I refer to statements in my questions, unless specifically stated, I will be referring to your first witness statements. MSS, you mentioned in your own statement that you broadly agree with and adopt the evidence set out in MWS's first witness statement. Is that still the case?
02:51:10 case? That is.
02:51:12 That is. Thank you. Before I start, I'm going to give you a very high level indication of the areas of questions which I'll be covering. I'm going to start with Michael's life and
02:51:24 going to start with Michael's life and his character will understand the kind of person Michael was. I'll go into the initial police investigation into Michael's death and the family's experience of his engagement with the police during the initial investigation.
02:51:45 I'll ask questions about the family's criticism of the police and the decision to approach the media independently. I'll then move on to ask about the formation of the family campaign for justice for Michael.
02:51:57 I'll move on then to the inquest, the nature of the inquest, the verdict, and the impact it had on the investigation. I will ask you questions about undercover police surveillance, the family's campaign.
02:52:09 family's campaign. I'll be referring throughout to the final report produced by the police complaints authority into the initial investigation and some of the key
02:52:21 investigation and some of the key conclusions and assessments it reached of the actions and attitudes of some police officers. I will refer to this report as the PCA report.
02:52:34 report. And finally, I will ask about the impact on yourselves and your family in its long journey to secure justice for Michael.
02:52:41 Could we have up on the screen please OS2 photo one?
02:52:54 Michael was your brother. This is a photo of Michael. Do you recall when approximate this was taken? I think it was taken it would have been taken
02:53:07 taken maybe a few months before he started to become unwell. And may I start by asking you please to tell us a little bit about Michael, what kind of person he was and how you and your family remember him.
02:53:32 It's yeah I it's quite we've been here so many times before and it's quite difficult to talk about I understand about about this but um yeah he's our sibling and
02:53:45 quite a big family and he I think he was for me he was notable because he was actually a very kind of a quite gentle
02:53:56 actually a very kind of a quite gentle person. Yeah. Yeah. Not above jokes and, you know, cheekiness, but he was one of my younger siblings. And I think the word that summed him up was was just kindness. He was kind and thoughtful of people. Um,
02:54:09 thoughtful of people. Um, kind of never self-promoting or putting himself above people. Um, which is perhaps when he became when his music career took off and he became wellknown. And it was it was a real joy
02:54:27 wellknown. And it was it was a real joy and delight for us all because he wasn't a pushy person or a flamboyant person and he was really kind of inclusive and by that I mean when he was having success you know he he sought to include us you know we go to recordings or
02:54:40 to recordings or I played the violin really badly at school but he you know he invited me to be part of the a video that they Um, he was always
02:54:56 self-deprecating. He was always thinking about how other people might benefit from where he was, what he was doing. And,
02:55:05 And, you know, I know people always speak well of of of the dead and their siblings, but he just was a really kind and gentle person. and um
02:55:17 very
02:55:24 a very quiet kind of pivotal person in the family. Um what was you like as a child?
02:55:34 Um I mean I probably I because we were a large family and all have different relationships with each other. I for me he was quite I was struck by his quietness, his gentleness. I think he was
02:55:50 was I remember occasions where I don't know maybe as siblings we were laughing at another sibling and he he was never involved in that. He would never never kind of join in any kind of teasing or anything and he'd always look out for
02:56:02 anything and he'd always look out for people. I remember even though I was his oldest sister, he would check in, you know, on me. And that's that's my childhood memory of him, always being
02:56:14 childhood memory of him, always being thoughtful. One of my brothers broke his leg. And I remember Mike being really, you know, caring of him, sort of nurturing him and holding him and
02:56:27 nurturing him and holding him and checking he wasn't in pain. and he was, you know, my sibling was quite little, but I have those sorts of memories of just how attentive to other people's needs that he was even as a child. Did he enjoy school when he was growing up?
02:56:36 up? Yeah, he he did enjoy school. We were kind of all a bit weird. We all loved school and he enjoyed that. I remember him going to school one day when he wasn't very well and he was just desperate to go. Um,
02:56:50 we know he was a talented musician. Um, was he always interested in music growing up? Was that a big thing for him?
02:57:00 him? I don't remember him being interested in music when he was very little. Um, when we were at school particularly, but he was a he was a singer. We sang in a church choir and he often he had a far
02:57:12 church choir and he often he had a far better voice than any of the rest of us. He often sang the solo and um and was just very I don't know the word meek doesn't really describe it but he was always he he did it but was always really
02:57:25 he did it but was always really unassuming about that. I remember a an occasion where
02:57:31 I was singing a solo and I had to say sing the word psalms and it begins with a P and I for some reason I kept reading it with the word P and he came and helped me practice so I could get it
02:57:42 helped me practice so I could get it right just even though it would make not made much more sense for him to have done it because his voice was better and etc. But he those little things were examples of what he was like as a as a child and as a person.
02:57:58 child and as a person. And apart from from music and what other activities did he enjoy outside of school?
02:58:08 school? Sports. I mean particularly with with you know my brothers they they play sports. We we just did you know we we had a little car washing round. We'd go around with our bucket of water and wash cars for our neighbors and things. We just did gentle things. We were
02:58:19 We just did gentle things. We were quite a quiet family. We didn't do lots of activities, but we we we entertained each other and played with each other. I remember sitting and listening to
02:58:30 remember sitting and listening to stories together. We there were some traditional Ghanaian stories that we'd sometimes be told and we particularly loved and we'd rehearse them with each other. But um
02:58:49 other. But um and he did well at school. He he just wasn't any trouble ever any trouble. Could we take down that photo now, please, and put up in its place OS4 photo 3.
02:59:05 Michael became part of the group Double Trouble
02:59:12 Trouble and they enjoyed considerable success as well. How did you and your family feel about his music career
02:59:19 in some respects because he was he wasn't a flashy person. It was it was surprising but also really delighting. It was everyone was so happy for him and um and you could really see him come alive and what was happening and
02:59:35 just how thoughtful he was about it wanting to to kind of represent the family well. Um you a family of kind of quite high moral values and religious family and he wanted to make sure that
02:59:50 family and he wanted to make sure that his music career was still in line with with us as a family and as I said you know including us. I remember myself and some of the siblings going to
03:00:07 some of the siblings going to recordings. He just he was inclusive and joyful and I I think to some degree he just was really grateful for the the success that they had and wanted to wanted to build on that. Thank you. You can take that photo down now.
03:00:17 now. It has been suggested that Michael experienced some mental health difficulties in his late 20s. Is that accurate? It is. How did this affect him?
03:00:28 How did this affect him? I think it it was really very very difficult. It was um personally remember him feeling really saddened by it and and feeling maybe
03:00:41 I remember him being sad, being confused by it, not feeling he wasn't in control of that, wanting to do what he could to to kind of recover and get better and
03:00:55 to kind of recover and get better and just desperately trying to get back on track in his life. Um, I remember the sense that
03:01:06 I guess mental health problems cause people to feel out of control of themselves. And that was really very difficult to for him to know that his intention, his where he wanted to be was one place, but
03:01:19 one place, but how things were mapping out were not the direction he wanted to go in. Um, I remember when he when he had at times when he was unwell, he was always saying, "I'm really sorry." It was really apologetic to us as a as a family. And we were trying to
03:01:35 family. And we were trying to to support him, but he was aware of the impact it was having on on people, having, you know, things that happened, having to take him to hospital or times he was confused or not sleeping. And he kept saying, he'd
03:01:46 not sleeping. And he kept saying, he'd always say, "I'm really sorry." I'm just saying, you know, it's not about being sorry. We're here. you know, we you would do this for any of us and we're here to support you.
03:01:57 here to support you. Was he positive about his future in any way?
03:02:00 way? Yeah, he he he was he was really determined. He was determined to to over to overcome it, not to let it kind of defeat him. And it, you know, it wasn't a straight road. had it ups and
03:02:13 wasn't a straight road. had it ups and downs and sometimes he'd do better and other times he he would you know he would be less less well and I'm you when things started to deteriorate
03:02:25 you when things started to deteriorate he was always really kind of just just so so desperately keen to try and get get his life back on track and not be at the mercy of this illness that that came and went.
03:02:37 and went. I'm going to move on now to
03:02:48 I'm going to move on now to the attack on the 28th of January, 1997. I appreciate I'm asking you both to relive a very painful period. Again, if either of you need a pause or a break, simply let the chair know. This was the day Michael was attacked
03:03:00 This was the day Michael was attacked that resulted in him receiving severe burns and being taken to hospital. Is that right? Yes, it is. Yeah.
03:03:11 Yes, it is. Yeah. I want to ask you now about your family's initial contact with police on the day of the attack. MWS, I'm going to direct these questions to you.
03:03:21 I don't need to take you there, but according to your statement at paragraph 91, you state that your family had first contact with the police at the family
03:03:34 contact with the police at the family home on the night of the attack on 28th of January, 1997. Is that correct? Yes.
03:03:37 Yes. Were you at home at the time? Yes.
03:03:41 Yes. And can you recall what was the reason for the officers visiting your home? They came to inform us that um Michael had set fire to himself
03:03:52 had set fire to himself and he had been taken to hospital. That was the summary of what they told us. And what was their tone and manner like when they told you that?
03:04:06 They were reporting what they say were what they knew.
03:18:50 So, I was asking you about the withdrawal of TI Williams from the investigation. Is it right that DCI Robert Scott took over as a senior officer after that? Yes.
03:18:59 Yes. And
03:19:04 And after that meeting at the home, is it roughly accurate that meetings took place between the family and the police every Fortnite with the police? Yes, and this was mainly with the family leazison officers. Is that right? That's right. Yes.
03:19:22 That's right. Yes. Now, when you spoke to the police during these meetings, did they claim to know what happened to Michael? And we spoke to the police who wanted to know what they were doing with the investigation
03:19:34 investigation to to know what they were how they were progressing the investigation. Did they have a theory as to what happened to Michael?
03:19:47 happened to Michael? They didn't simply didn't believe us. They they suggested that he had did it to himself. And how sure about that did they come across?
03:20:01 across? They were sure. They said there was nothing to suggest that anybody else was involved. This is words that stay with me from meetings with the police. And did they at any stage entertain the possibility of something other than suicide?
03:20:10 suicide? No.
03:20:17 No. And this was the case even though they were aware of what Michael had said to you. They were aware, but I don't believe they they uh took it as a working as a line to examine.
03:20:35 working as a line to examine. What was DCI Scott's response when you and your family asked him to investigate Michael's death as you believed it was not a suicide? He was unbelieving. He um suggested that that we wouldn't we couldn't accept that Michael had done
03:20:47 couldn't accept that Michael had done this to himself and uh as I said there was nothing to suggest that anybody else was involved and they were um
03:21:03 was involved and they were um running their investigation on that basis.
03:21:09 Your family's relationship with DCI Scott and his team
03:21:18 deteriorated and eventually broke down completely around the time of the inquest, which was in September 1998. Is that roughly accurate? What's accurate is that he didn't enjoy being asked questions about how they
03:21:32 being asked questions about how they were investigating, examining Michael's death, what they were doing, what
03:21:44 death, what they were doing, what resources were being deployed, what what uh information they had been received, and when we asked questions regarding their investigation, the meetings became extremely defensive on their part. And um I would go and say that
03:21:59 that they didn't accept that we would dare to question them and ask and uh question their authority and their assessment of what had happened. So to say that um
03:22:15 what had happened. So to say that um that the the relationship had broken down is
03:22:18 down is we were simply answering asking questions based on what we knew and on on any reading
03:22:32 on any reading you would e need to rule in or rule out. And my view is the meetings I had with the police
03:22:44 is the meetings I had with the police there, they were unwilling to examine anything other than that Michael had done this to himself. Can we have up on screen please UCPI 508692?
03:22:55 That's tab A19 sir.
03:23:06 If we could go to page one, paragraph 2, it reads,
03:23:12 P1 Menson says about making a complaint that he told DCI Scott that he wanted to make a complaint about the investigation and about how P2 had been treated. DCI
03:23:23 and about how P2 had been treated. DCI Scott told him that any complaint would seriously undermine the morale of the investigating team and affect how they would undertake the investigation.
03:23:44 P1 Manson says he took this as a veiled threat and it made him feel powerless to try to challenge what was happening. If we go to the next paragraph, paragraph 3,
03:23:51 P3 Benson says she also raised the issue of a complaint, but cannot be sure to whom. She says she was told either by DCI Scott or someone else in its presence not to complain because the
03:24:05 presence not to complain because the people working on the inquiry might not pursue it with as much enthusiasm and vigor.
03:24:07 vigor. She says such threats were implied on several occasions and they made her feel anxious and afraid of antagonizing the officers for fear that they would withdraw their efforts further.
03:24:21 withdraw their efforts further. MSS, may I direct questions to you now? Do you recall getting a similar response from DCI Scott as these examples? I do.
03:24:34 I do. And did you discuss this or other such responses among your family? I we we did we tal we talked about it because I said more than one person said it to me in that way you know be
03:24:45 it to me in that way you know be reasonable you know how can you how can you expect people who are being criticized to to do a good job to to have be motivated the word that kept
03:24:57 have be motivated the word that kept being used was motivated how to expect them to be motivated if you're criticizing them and I I couldn't believe what I was hearing there was the suggestion that if we if we you
03:25:11 we you made waves. That that could impact and negatively impact the investigation was unbelievable to hear and also frightening because what mattered
03:25:22 also frightening because what mattered to us was that relatedly they undertook the appropriate investigation and I think MWS mentioned possibly before
03:25:33 I think MWS mentioned possibly before about resources. They imply that if we complained, if we spoke to press, if we did various things that they would dilute the limited resources and they would not be directed where attention should be. So we felt
03:25:49 where attention should be. So we felt between a rock and a hard place. they weren't doing what they should have been. And whenever we tried to ask them or suggest that we would complain so that more um appropriate action could be taken, they
03:26:06 appropriate action could be taken, they said that it could make things worse. It was really hard to know what was the right course of action to take. And what was the general feeling about this within within your family? You don't want to mention any names, but the general feeling among members of yourself and members of your family to
03:26:18 yourself and members of your family to this situation that you found yourselves in with the police. How did it make you feel?
03:26:27 How did it make you feel? I remember a sense of real disbelief that we were being told this, but also a real anxiety that what what if this was the case? What if unintentionally we hampered things? maybe we should hold off from complaining until later if it was going to impede the the investigation. Then we that I remember
03:26:40 investigation. Then we that I remember that being discussed at length, but in the end we decided this is this is insanity. You know, we have to you know this was an opportunity a window of opportunity that existed. They had already absolutely not done what they
03:26:53 already absolutely not done what they should have in the the first 12 hours as they talk about so often but subsequently those first 16 days and thereafter and we couldn't run the risk of just waiting just being fobbed off by them and holding off from complaining
03:27:09 them and holding off from complaining and we it was a risk that we had to take because nothing was being done. You eventually engaged the services of a solister. Is that right? That's right. And can you tell us who this was?
03:27:20 And can you tell us who this was? It's Michael Short then of Bindman's. And what was DCI Scott's reaction when you told him that you had engaged legal advice?
03:27:35 advice? I I remember one conversation with him where he I think I'd said that um NWS had had engaged been the one and he said, "I can't believe you let him do that." And I I remember being shocked. Obviously, I can't remember the exact
03:27:47 Obviously, I can't remember the exact words, but he implied that why did I let him do that? And I said I said, you know, we need we need to get answers. We need to know that you guys are doing it, taking things seriously, and we can't run the risk of losing more time.
03:28:01 Same document. Can we go to page two, please? Paragraph three.
03:28:06 Starting on two, that's it. Thank you.
03:28:16 We can see that on 27th of March 1997 a letter was sent to the police from your solistister Mr. Schwarz and copies of the letter were also sent to the then commissioner of police Paul Condan and
03:28:27 commissioner of police Paul Condan and the then home secretary Jack Straw and the letter makes reference to the complaints by the family about the police investigation. Could we go please to the end of the following paragraph at the top of page three.
03:28:45 Subsequently, a report was prepared for assistant commissioner Dunn about Michael's case to which an addendum was added describing the family as openly hostile.
03:28:53 hostile. What was your reaction to hearing the officer describe your family as openly hostile?
03:29:03 I mean, the only way I can describe it is manipulative. throughout throughout the documentation there's reference to us as as hostile rather than and the manipulation that's that's been engaged
03:29:17 manipulation that's that's been engaged throughout with with the use of language is
03:29:24 is it it's shocking but it's also it's really deeply hurtful rather than recognizing that we were people who are asking legitimate questions in a legitimate manner
03:29:35 manner um as time was running away and the possibility of trying to find the appropriate answers was was happening. Rather than recognizing is that they chose to characterize us as hostile. Not at any point did they do what any
03:29:49 at any point did they do what any thoughtful sensible person would have asked, which was ask why, you know, why is why is this family upset? Why are they why are they asking questions? Why did why even if they thought we were
03:30:03 did why even if they thought we were hostile, why might they be hostile? They didn't stop and ask what's going on here. What have we done? What have we not done? What do we need to be held account to? What actions do we need to take to address the fact that this family who have never been in the eyes
03:30:16 family who have never been in the eyes of any legal proceedings ever or police
03:30:29 of any legal proceedings ever or police issues ever? Why is this family suddenly seeming so in inverted commas hostile? So they just jumped to the conclusion that about us and used language to other people including the press, including from what we understand the coroner to
03:30:41 from what we understand the coroner to characterize us in a certain way as if it was something that came from us innately rather than a direct result of their actions and their inactions and that's incredibly
03:30:52 that's incredibly incredibly hurtful especially given what we were going through.
03:31:02 I'm going to read out another passage from MWS's witness statement. There's no need to put it up on screen. It's page 34, paragraph 104. And for the transcript, it's document UCPI50 38379
03:31:11 38379 at tab A1. MWS claims he met with DCI Scott around five times. Is that correct?
03:31:24 five times. Is that correct? Yes. And at paragraph 104, you state the following. During one of those visits, DCI Scott made a particularly hurtful and as it turned out, inaccurate comment about Michael. He said something along the
03:31:37 Michael. He said something along the lines that Michael had caused his own death and that the family did not want to accept it and that was why we were blaming others, the police. Now, we don't know if these were his exact
03:31:48 don't know if these were his exact words, but do you recall learning about that exchange? If I'm going to ask you, MSS
03:31:59 me. I was going to ask him, but I could ask either of you. I'm sorry that you said that again, please.
03:32:07 The paragraph I just read out, we don't know that these were his exact words, but do you recall learning about that? I do.
03:32:14 I do. And hearing it again now, how does it make you feel?
03:32:21 I've used the word manipulation. I think that's really what it felt like. It felt like they were manipulating our vulnerability and trying to make us feel afraid to to
03:32:34 trying to make us feel afraid to to speak up and to ask to talk about it. I remember thinking, you know, if it transpires, they're right and if this has this this was Mike hurting himself, then I'm willing I'm prepared to to to
03:32:45 then I'm willing I'm prepared to to to bear that. But what they were trying to do is make us feel afraid if we raise if we are saying the police are doing are not investigating proper properly and we're wrong, how embarrassed we would
03:33:00 we're wrong, how embarrassed we would be, how ashamed we would be. And I just thought this is too important to worry about that. What we need to know is what's happened especially in the given that he had said clearly to my siblings in you know unambiguously that he'd been attacked.
03:33:18 that he'd been attacked. So about to start a different topic might now be an appropriate time to break for for lunch. Yes it would. And um we will resume um as soon as possible after quarter past.