Continuation of HN1's testimony focusing on intelligence reports about the Gillette campaign, including contamination hoax threats and home visits to company directors. HN1 denies being the source of contamination hoax intelligence but acknowledges reporting on home visit campaigns. The testimony reveals questions about whether HN1 was tasked to extract information during a meeting with leading ALF activist 'LTD' in Liverpool.
00:00:19 okay I I gather I can carry on back on the stream could I ask we take that down I want to ask you about a slightly different topic
00:00:29 um a slightly different topic hm1 it's MPS
00:00:30 MPS 0245
00:00:33 0245 620 um the report the 31st of October of
00:00:52 1995 again a report found um by the inquiry on a hard drive um from the SDS offices um and I should say when you were shown this from uh sorry when you
00:01:03 were shown this from uh sorry when you gave your witness statement you uh cast doubt on whether or not it contained your
00:01:06 your intelligence um but I just want to ask you about um some aspects of it um it reports um or purports to report the latest position in the
00:01:17 report the latest position in the Gillette campaign by activists at different levels do you remember reference to a campaign against or involving Gillette during the course of your
00:01:28 your deployment um I remember the Gillette campaign being being spoken about the suggestion in section paragraph two of the report is that there was a contamination threat
00:01:40 there was a contamination threat believed to be known only to three or four activists of whom it is certain LTD is
00:01:50 one um and it says the intention to Stage a contamination hoax is still planned to take place although source is unable at present to State on which
00:02:02 unable at present to State on which day were you knew the source yes or no of the information that there was a contamination at hoax uh planned in uh known to
00:02:21 known to LTD and three or four activist in total no were you told of a hoax uh
00:02:23 hoax uh contamination to be leveled at Gillette products no certainly don't recall being
00:02:45 this report was found on the SDS hard drive uh in the folder which bore your identifier do you have any idea why would appear in a folder with your identifier on a computer if it had nothing to do with you um no I can't account for
00:02:59 account for that did you have access to the folder on the computer that bore your identifier no I didn't have access to any computers during my time so it would be the management in the SDS would it as far as you're concerned he would have put things into that
00:03:13 things into that folder um well must have been I mean those see any level of access available there weren't other people coming in and out and using the SDS computers as far as you were aware absolutely not
00:03:32 no could we have a look at what you said about this when you were asked in your Witness statement please um uh it's page 220 paragraph or probably 221 in fact paragraph
00:03:53 490 all right and you were asked about that intelligence report that was just on the screen and you said this I'm certain the office told me there was such a plan and I was asked who could be involved and or know of it there was a
00:04:09 involved and or know of it there was a big anti- Gillette campaign going on in terms of home visits but the concern here was with the contamination of products I never got close to finding out who was involved in the contamination
00:04:24 hoax and then you go on at paragraph 490a uh to say that although you could have obtained the intelligence through l t
00:04:30 t d uh you do not can we go over
00:04:43 please you do not remember and this is a report which you are not able to identify as
00:04:54 identify as yours um in what circumstances do you recall the office presumably that's someone from SDS management the reference to the office
00:05:02 is that right when you use the ter sorry when you use the term the office you mean someone from the detective Sergeant detective inspector or detective Chief Inspector
00:05:09 Inspector indeed do you remember in what circumstances and who told you about the plan or the contamination hoax um not specifically
00:05:24 hoax um not specifically um but it obviously was something of concern
00:05:26 concern um which I was asked about with a view to getting uh any additional information on
00:05:32 on it you were um an associate of LTD by October 1995 weren't you yes and did you make efforts to find out about what's
00:05:47 make efforts to find out about what's described as a contamination hoax when you were asked to
00:05:56 um well no um that would have been um a very foolish thing to do
00:06:03 so why would it have been foolish to make efforts to find out about the hoax when you were asked to do so um because I knew absolutely nothing about it and if it really obviously was if it was real and it was on a tight hold um the
00:06:19 real and it was on a tight hold um the idea but I could know something about it um would have um been potentially
00:06:26 compromising I don't want to put words in your mouth H1 but are you suggesting that if you had made inquiries about it it would have caused suspicion on you well very much so I mean if if this was real and only known to a very few as
00:06:37 real and only known to a very few as most of these campaigns were and this one clearly was um you know what would even be my starting point unless someone volunteered um volunteer at the beginning of that interest or prompted
00:06:50 beginning of that interest or prompted the beginning of that interest so when you were asked by the office as you say in your statement who could be involved did you tell them I don't know and I'm not going to try to find
00:07:05 and I'm not going to try to find out um well no I said I didn't I had no idea and you took no further steps um well no I'd imagine there was a discussion was you what do we know about it um already what can you tell me um
00:07:19 it um already what can you tell me um who are the who's thought to be involved um you know sort of give me a start point if you want um it wasn't of course I'm
00:07:28 I'm not can we go back to the report please 02456
00:07:49 2 at
00:08:00 c393 and if we look please at paragraphs three and four of this report bearing in mind that you so you don't recognize it as yours
00:08:09 as yours hm1 paragraph three records that a full list of the homes of UK based Gillette directors had been obtained from company's house and was being held by privacy and Paul
00:08:20 grait um and it goes on it is anticipated that the information will be put to good use by a very limited number of activists of whom privacy can be trusted not to reveal their details for
00:08:33 trusted not to reveal their details for use in the following type of activity a criminal damage to the homes B the sending of threatening correspondence do you think that that that's intelligence that might have come from you regarding Mr grit's involvement in holding a list of director's home
00:08:49 in holding a list of director's home addresses for the company um I think if he told me that yes I mean the the The Wider campaign um in the same way um as the boots campaign took place um was to Target directors through um specific
00:09:01 Target directors through um specific home visits um and that type of activity so um I don't remember this specifically but it's highly likely that
00:09:12 but it's highly likely that um uh that this is this is accurate right uh but separate from the contamination hoax in terms of intelligence gathering yes absolutely yeah um and and if there was any link um I certainly wasn't aware of it and then
00:09:25 I certainly wasn't aware of it and then paragraph four in a similar vein refers to home visits and these are described as the least cestine plans involved in the campaign although still as yet unknown to the majority of London Animal Action activists Center on a series of
00:09:38 Action activists Center on a series of surprise home visits to director's homes and then there is a list there follows a list of directors underneath and then if
00:09:50 list of directors underneath and then if we've redacted their details for privacy and then over the page it continues uh yet to be
00:09:55 yet to be confirmed these visits are planned to take place at the end of the week activists are unlikely to engage in Al activity on this occasion but rather announce their presence and engage in abuse prior to moving on to the next
00:10:09 abuse prior to moving on to the next victim again is that intelligence about the home visits that might have come from
00:10:10 from you uh yes could have done and to what extent was this sort of activity being discussed within London
00:10:21 activity being discussed within London Animal Action as a group was it linked to the
00:10:28 to the group The Gillette campaign yeah I well was it linked to the group um I don't recall that specific link um I would call it more as those that want to get involved with the national anti-et
00:10:44 campaign and if you um were the source of reporting about uh plans uh for surprise home visits how did you come to know about those plans the report says it was unknown so far to the majority of laa
00:10:55 unknown so far to the majority of laa activists U well unless I've um unless there's other stuff in my witness p not aware becoming aware um of Gillette visits I certainly don't recall going on them unless something spars my memory but this was a general approach as
00:11:09 but this was a general approach as almost tried and tested um of surprise attacks make sure they were surp sorry visits um do everything necessary to make sure they were a
00:11:21 make sure they were a surprise as a as what was deemed to Be an Effective method of of campaigning as part of the wider um the wi protest
00:11:36 part of the wider um the wi protest right just in case it JS your memory can we have up on the screen MPS 0246
00:11:42 0246 075 a report dated the 15th of March 1996 it's
00:11:44 1996 it's c440
00:11:50 sir and this reports um that as a London Animal Action planning meeting on the 12th of March
00:11:57 March 1996 it was decided to bring bring forward to the above date so to Friday the 5th of April a home visit to a Gillette director originally planned for Sunday the 7th of April do you see
00:12:10 Sunday the 7th of April do you see yes do you is that likely to be your reporting um it could be it could well be it suggests doesn't it that home visits to Gillette directors were
00:12:21 visits to Gillette directors were discussed at London Animal Action meetings yes absolutely yeah the um yes indeed
00:12:29 indeed the comment that's been added at the bottom unknown to those present other
00:12:40 bottom unknown to those present other than to privacy the director in question is in fact privacy who lives at privacy um apparently privacy obtained the address from company's house and subsequently verified it through director inquiries at the same time ascertaining his telephone number to be privacy rather difficult with the privacy redactions in place I recognize
00:12:51 privacy redactions in place I recognize but are you able to assist as to whether that's information that's likely to have come from you if you were if this is your report or to have been added by the office I think it could have come from
00:13:04 office I think it could have come from me or added by the office either um but if it did come from me it's it's perfectly possible it did not not contesting that at all all right one final document if I may uh following on from the report
00:13:22 may uh following on from the report about the Gillette uh campaign could we have um please up it's a file note MPS 07461 165 it's b138 sir and um just to allow you to figure out where this
00:13:33 to allow you to figure out where this fits into the jigsa hm1 I was showing you originally a report from the 31st of October
00:13:39 October 1995 the one that spoke of a contamination threat known only to three or four activists of whom LTD was one and that was the intelligence that you thought had not had not come from
00:13:57 thought had not had not come from you this uh file note is dated the 13th of November 1995 so a couple of weeks after that report um and if we uh look please it's about 2/3 of the way down just above the Black
00:14:10 2/3 of the way down just above the Black Box the two paragraphs above that please and I should tell you hm1 the this note is signed off by Robert
00:14:16 Lambert and it says this on Wednesday the 8th of November 1995 hm1 traveled to Liverpool and had an equally important private meeting with another leading Al activist
00:14:32 with another leading Al activist LTD while the meeting did not shed any direct light on a current Alf plan to contaminate products belonging to Gillette it did nonetheless give further indications of hm 1's growing stature within the upper echelons of the AL do you recall being asked at by
00:14:48 AL do you recall being asked at by Robert Lambert to see if you could extract information about the contamination plot during a visit to Ltd in
00:14:54 in Liverpool um I don't recall that being the tasking no do you recall being asked after the visit whether or not you'd got any information from LTD about this um
00:15:07 any information from LTD about this um contamination hoax plot um well that I think that would have been as it had been raised already um if that is the chronology um there would have been what did you discuss um which would have been a routine question absolutely yeah but
00:15:21 a routine question absolutely yeah but not what did you discuss with regard to the contamination hoax just what did you well I think in the conversation had any of that come up um I would have got there first
00:15:32 soorry what do you mean you would have got there first well in my in my subsequent conversations with the office and um Robert Lambert um had anything remotely um approaching information related to contamination plot being volunteered to me
00:15:46 volunteered to me um I wouldn't need it to have been asked about that by the office before volunteering it I see uh a final question the meeting on the 8th of November of
00:15:59 November of 1995 um with LTD the inquiry has not managed to locate any intelligence report about that about a meeting with her on that date is it possible that you met with LTD as described here as a
00:16:11 met with LTD as described here as a leading Al activist and did not report it or is is it more likely that the inquiry has not located a report that you wrote about it um
00:16:23 it um well um I mean there a third option isn't there that um there wasn't anything specifically reportable
00:16:35 right so possible that you attended the meeting but there was nothing that you thought worthy of reporting right possibly
00:16:40 yeah notwithstanding so this is quite late on in your deployment November 1995 um and um you are at meetings with people who are described as leading Al
00:16:51 people who are described as leading Al activists do you think nonetheless it's possible that there was a contamination hoax plan under uh underway with regards to Gillette and you just didn't know about it you weren't told about
00:17:07 about it you weren't told about it um yes absolutely and I um if there was a campaign underway I didn't know about it and is that because uh potentially because those who were involved in that sort of action kept the circle of
00:17:21 action kept the circle of trust uh tight to those who would or might be involved in the action
00:17:33 yes all right thank thank you um so that concludes the section of my questioning um ready to pick up yes one very Qui of course it's just the document about the Gillette director
00:17:46 document about the Gillette director home visit yes um I think it's page 491 of a1's witness statement when he says he doesn't think that that was his and obviously when he made the statement he would have seen the whole document without the Privacy
00:17:57 without the Privacy reductions to flag that now I didn't think it's worth re-examination um then um that is something I think that if it needs to be clarified can be dealt with
00:18:15 needs to be clarified can be dealt with in reexamination is it not or possibly m g can ask about it first thing tomorrow morning yes I mean I'm just conscious that reexamination might be a long time away some weeks time it maybe just better to pick it up now certainly um I just mention that thank um I think for
00:18:37 just mention that thank um I think for that to happen um hn1 needs to see the unredacted document is not uh which I doubt can be conveniently done instantaneously we'll check but do you want me to wait to see if it can be done instantaneously not tonight no we'll pick we'll pick it up
00:18:48 tonight no we'll pick we'll pick it up and get back to you if that's pick it up and get back to me tomorrow yeah
00:19:00 thank really adjourn now until tomorrow morning at
00:19:27 10: for