Afternoon session examining HN1 'Matt Rayner', an undercover officer who infiltrated various left-wing and anarchist groups. Questioning focuses on his deployment methodology, relationships formed, intelligence gathering practices, and justification for targeting specific groups. The session covers his involvement with London Boots Action Group, home visits to executives, the Grand National disruption, and the transition to London Animal Action.
00:00:02 attempt to get the um the level of um sort of contempt for this organization conveyed to everyone walking into that building and walking up right if we take that down please and pull up the report after the event MPS
00:00:13 after the event MPS 0739
00:00:22 0739 391 the 29th of July of 1992 it's c53 sir again hm1 your identifier on the first page and if we look at the body of the report
00:00:34 the report report disorder occurred sorry before we go to zoom in disorder occurred
00:00:42 no um if the body of the report indicates that it did indeed attract 100 animal activists from around the country and it describes them as hurling abuse
00:00:54 and it describes them as hurling abuse at shareholders entering and leaving so that's the sort of thing that you were describing just a moment ago is it the yeah you asking me about the sort of think um one of the one of the adje I've used it would have described this type of activity yeah yes and then it goes on Brenda
00:01:10 yes and then it goes on Brenda MCN uh who has obtained shares in the company gained access to the meeting although his pocket tape recorder was detected by the X-ray machine at the entrance his attempts to ask searching questions on boots forv section policy
00:01:22 questions on boots forv section policy also were thwarted when the questioning session was brought abruptly to a hold so the tactic was was it that members of London boots Action Group would themselves become shareholders and there thereby gain permitted access to the
00:01:35 thereby gain permitted access to the meeting so that was a tactic used for this event yes and once they were inside they were proposing were they to
00:01:46 they were proposing were they to question uh question the B question whoever was involved from boots yes um but on this occasion it appears that the session was brought to an end before they got very far that's that's what that's how that reach yes I don't
00:01:58 what that's how that reach yes I don't recall how it came to a how came to an end but the buildup to it was certainly
00:02:09 end but the buildup to it was certainly that your pre-event report recorded that disorder was possible your post event report records no disorder can I ask this is only about six or so months into your deployment how were you going about assessing the risk of disorder for this sort of event involving London boots
00:02:27 sort of event involving London boots Action Group U well this was a national event um and I think look it's just because I think this this sort of context don't worry R get any a sentence um just a reminder of these events which took place over 30 years ago Boots the organization
00:02:46 organization was um such a clear Public Enemy Number One the organization the retail um stores on the High Street uh but specifically the HQ um because of their Laboratories um hence the extraordinary
00:02:58 Laboratories um hence the extraordinary attempts um to take action in all shapes and sizes and forms from the most extreme end to the weekly picketing with two or three people um so um no one
00:03:12 two or three people um so um no one would really have needed me particularly to have predicted at an event such as this um an AGM the annual the annual meeting by the boots Community um that this would be the subject of attention
00:03:29 this would be the subject of attention stunts um and other forms of activity so I would like the assessment of what was likely to happen and in fact some of that did um transpire um so the attempts at stunts within the auditorium uh the holding of abuse that did take place the
00:03:42 holding of abuse that did take place the fact that nothing else took place beyond that um I would argue was because of whatever action was taken between those two reports that prevented it are you suggesting that some action might have been taken which prevented
00:03:54 might have been taken which prevented disorder that was otherwise intended to occur well I can't make that definitive link um but my assessment of what could
00:04:06 link um but my assessment of what could have happened some of most of which did um and the absence of disorder um that was ideally the sequence um preemptive reporting action taken and disorder
00:04:17 taken and disorder thwarted is it possible that in fact on this occasion the London boots activist group uh
00:04:24 group uh activists didn't seek to cause any disorder beyond that which is described in your post of event report well it wasn't just London boots Action Group This was um this attracted um people
00:04:35 This was um this attracted um people from outside of that group The the boots campaign was the central campaign or one of the central campaigns that had a
00:04:46 of the central campaigns that had a national following is it possible that the activist present did not seek to cause as much disorder as you thought might have occurred um well it's possible um but there was a high likelihood that such
00:04:59 there was a high likelihood that such was the tension and the feeling and the sentiment and a commitment that I've described um with no guarantees it was far more likely and um it would take place and it wouldn't bar preemptive
00:05:12 place and it wouldn't bar preemptive action whatever that might have been and I all I all I'd say is some of that assessment proved actually to be the case there was um according to Mr grit's evidence a boots AGM in 1993 which
00:05:25 evidence a boots AGM in 1993 which attracted a large demonstration from activists but the inquiry has not found um a report about it do you recall whether or not you reported on that
00:05:43 whether or not you reported on that AGM um I don't recall that do you recall whether you attended the AGM
00:05:51 AGM um no I um the one I attended um as part of the protest was the one in London we've got reports um on the boots AGM in 1994
00:06:02 AGM in 1994 as well as in 1992 so we've got two the two years either side does that assist you as to whether or not you might have gone to the one in between
00:06:14 gone to the one in between um no it doesn't the only one I recall going to was the one at the um the window the second Center unless they all there let's take down this report look at the ones from 1994 MPS
00:06:25 1994 MPS 0741
00:06:27 0741 018 uh the 15 of July of 1994 this report Bears your uh Security Service unique identifier hm1 it's c261
00:06:46 sir and it is a report on the 15th of July looking forward to an AGM again at the Queen Elizabeth II Conference Center but this time in July 1994 do you see
00:07:00 but this time in July 1994 do you see that hm1 yes um and under lik hood of disorder you have um obstruction possible mood vifer uh numbers likely to attend 60 to 80 and if we look please at the body of the
00:07:15 the report uh we see that the AGM will be picketed by animal rights activists displaying banners and placards and shouting verbal abuse at those attending the meeting it is believ that up to 40
00:07:27 the meeting it is believ that up to 40 protesters have obtained boot shares in order to enter the meeting and attempt to disrupt the proceedings later in the day there may well be impromptu demonstrations at Boots branches
00:07:39 demonstrations at Boots branches nearby so Advance reporting that there will be pickets and uh up to 40 protesters entering the meeting having obtain
00:07:46 obtain shares um yes there could be yes right if we take that down please and look at the report after the event MPS 0741
00:07:56 0741 019 that's c264 sir uh hm1 your identifier again on the cover sheet and if we go down into the report it's the in fact the date of it
00:08:10 report it's the in fact the date of it is the 26th of July so now looking back to events on the
00:08:17 21st um and if we look please at the body of the
00:08:23 report there is perceived success about bringing the meeting to a close um it says after about 80 minutes of heckling and General noise abuse to the obvious
00:08:34 and General noise abuse to the obvious frustration of the boots directors and the anger of their shareholders it suggested that Brenda
00:08:46 shareholders it suggested that Brenda MCN who had made had made a purchase of shares and redistributed them to other activists so that around 20 uh protesters got in to the
00:08:54 AGM you say in your witness statement it's paragraph 193 if you want the reference that you were present for this AGM
00:09:07 is it possible that you attended Two Boots agms um I don't remember attending to it is possible um it is possible but I don't recall I recall specifically
00:09:28 one um the reference in the bottom paragraph on that page is to an internal demonstration coinciding with protesters outside heckling
00:09:37 heckling shareholders as they arrived and departed or entered and departed um in your witness statement you say that others heckled but you didn't you remained outside but you
00:09:50 didn't you remained outside but you weren't a Heckler is is that right yes I think so as I recall again did you not stand out as an activist who came along to this event but didn't join in the general activity that was going
00:10:01 that was going on uh no I don't think so and why not were there others who were simply standing there and not not even heckling or making any vocal
00:10:12 even heckling or making any vocal contribution uh there would have been a whole Spectrum um of Engagement um from obvious hecklers to those that were there um supporting in other ways and
00:10:30 there um supporting in other ways and those other ways would be peaceful and lawful in their entirety yes yes right thank [Music]
00:10:34 [Music] you uh can we take that report down please I'm going to uh move to some other reporting on activities um of London boots Action Group starting with
00:10:51 London boots Action Group starting with MPS 0739 372 please on the 29th of July of 1992
00:11:07 and your security service identifier there on the first page it's c52 sir [Music]
00:11:12 [Music] sorry and the report itself um submits the latest edition of the group's newsletter and presumably you obtained that through attendance at the meetings or just association with the group
00:11:24 or just association with the group yes and it's described as aely produced by Paul grait and then the report lists five uh points of potential
00:11:37 five uh points of potential interest or in fact it say specific interest
00:11:42 interest yes and I want to ask you about point three please which suggests that the newsletter gives a open support to the ALF campaign of direct action against
00:11:54 ALF campaign of direct action against boots and companies that use animals in their scientific research program and if we turn please the newsletter is in fact attached to the report so if we could turn to through the
00:12:05 the pages uh to page five
00:12:11 please thank
00:12:24 you sorry bear with me a moment
00:12:34 I may have the wrong page
00:12:48 reference what I may have to come back to that one I may have the wrong page reference I'm sorry about that if we focus on the report uh for now
00:12:57 please the report summarizes what's contained in the newsletter by suggesting it gives open support to Al direct action against boots what did that entail in practice
00:13:14 that entail in practice hm1 um well I think it's more a um it's a it's more an ideological statement than a set of orders um it's
00:13:26 orders um it's aligning the campaigning I guess Mission um of a desire to bring an end to boots use of animals through experimentation
00:13:38 use of animals through experimentation with absolutely what the stated ideology is as part of its campaign to end um Ione abuse and and the ALF stated ideology that the London boots Action Group newsletter was supporting included
00:13:51 supporting included what direct action well I think I think you know reading that newsletter which um you just flushed up it is uh you can see there um open support for the prisoners um as they described so
00:14:04 the prisoners um as they described so people that have been incarcerated for direct action at the extreme end uh that gives a flavor I think just seeing those um uh names of individuals associated with the company and the slogan
00:14:18 with the company and the slogan underneath um they must pay um it's pretty
00:14:20 pretty um uh it's pretty um unambiguous um in its commitment to
00:14:33 unambiguous um in its commitment to um a level of direct direct action which i' thought would have met um anyone's threshold of interest if you're seeking to avoid those things happening right so if we take the examples from the newsletter if we scroll down to the page with the photographs all and
00:14:50 with the photographs all and the that that's what you were referring to isn't it time we made them pay well that's one that's one example I mean there's not much in that used letter and um if you take all of it in its entirety I mean I just would have thought any
00:15:02 I mean I just would have thought any neutral reader would have come away with um an unambiguous inference of of a level of support for direct action but in terms of this page that you referred to this page is um encouraging people to pick it the AGM isn't it in
00:15:15 pick it the AGM isn't it in particular um if you look at the bottom pick it boots AGM isn't it time we made them pay question mark pick it boots AGM yes it's there with it's there with um reference to a specific
00:15:27 reference to a specific event and then if we scroll down to the text you're saying that taken as a whole the text of the newsletter gives the message that there
00:15:41 newsletter gives the message that there is support there for the sort of direct action that might be taken under the banner of the AL um yeah and again you know some some context here um another really
00:15:51 really um uh or another element of direct action was this concept of home visits uh and so a picture like that um uh
00:16:03 uh and so a picture like that um uh inviting um campaigning against named individuals um played right to the heart
00:16:14 individuals um played right to the heart of uh what across the industry became um the subject of um personal campaigns home visits um and harassment so uh I think I say if you take about newsletter as a
00:16:29 take about newsletter as a whole uh it does to me certainly convey um a level of um campaigning that is not to be ignored the uh report describes it as
00:16:45 ignored the uh report describes it as open support on behalf of London boots Action Group they didn't keep it a secret that they were supportive in theory at least of what the AL was doing certainly against boots did they no not at
00:17:05 at all if we take that down please and look at another uh report of a London boots action group meeting this is MPS 0739
00:17:12 0739 48 a report on the 11th of December 1992 c107
00:17:17 sir and again your identifier on the cover page hm1 and if we scroll down it's a report on a meeting a monthly planning meeting of the London boots Action Group
00:17:34 uh can we uh look please in particular at the third paragraph uh in the body of the
00:17:44 report where the matter of security is said to have been raised by someone whose name we've redacted and then to read on she expressed concern at the open discussion of animal rights matters at meetings in the presence of people
00:17:57 at meetings in the presence of people who were not known to the group this has been a recurring theme since London boots Action Group started and Paul grait and privacy pointed out that the group published a newsletter easily available to Boots and the police
00:18:10 available to Boots and the police detailing its activities it was pointed out that no illegal activity should be discussed other than with trusted people and even then not at a
00:18:24 meeting and then if we please uh have a look at the following paragraph as well
00:18:31 perhaps could we have them both together so that hm1 can see them together thank you right it follows Paul grait Drew attention to a press release from the West London Al cell attacks on
00:18:43 from the West London Al cell attacks on butcher shops and branches of boots were condoned but reservations were expressed at the planned campaign against voxal General Motors there was condemnation also of the AL cell's plans to follow
00:18:57 also of the AL cell's plans to follow boots employees with the intention of damaging their homes it was judged justifiable to attack the directors and the Viv sectors But Not Mere employees it is hoped that the AL
00:19:10 Mere employees it is hoped that the AL press officer Robin Webb will put a stop to this
00:19:17 to this scheme so what we see there it appears is that at a public meeting yes of London boots Action Group open to whoever wanted to come along there was
00:19:38 whoever wanted to come along there was open support uh expressed for attacks on butcher shops and branches of of boots is that right yes and also General um support expressed for action against directors uh of companies uh deemed involved with animal abuse and the Viva sectors but not simply employees of those
00:19:54 those companies um yes and that's that's sort of um uh that second paragraph I think reflects um you a diverging a convergence of views U against which campaign should be focused on and which
00:20:10 campaign should be focused on and which shouldn't and within those organizations who is it who who is within scope and who isn't so no particular unanimous agreement on that but the general premise of direct action in this way yes um absolute agreement but on the part of
00:20:22 um absolute agreement but on the part of London boots Action Group it at least it appears that they were not in favor of the idea of involving simple or mere employees of boots uh in the sorts of actions that might be taken by the AL um so I don't think as a group ever
00:20:34 AL um so I don't think as a group ever committed to us if you like a a stated um a stated policy when it came to these differences of opinion uh this is a summaries I recall of the discussion uh
00:20:52 summaries I recall of the discussion uh that took place in which these uh these issues were aired by different individuals all right so when it says for example attacks on butcher shops and and branches of boots were condoned we shouldn't understand that everybody at the meeting necessarily signed up to
00:21:10 the meeting necessarily signed up to that as a proposition it just means that some people present condoned them um yeah although you know if I'm I'm reading that again and reminding myself um that reached to me um that there was
00:21:28 um that reached to me um that there was unanimity uh on that as a starting point um and the the disagreement kicks in with the rest of that sentence but reservation and that disagreement was on the face of
00:21:38 it with uh what is described as the West London Alf cell is that right it's it's the West London Alf cell who seems to plan to follow boots employees with the intention of damaging their homes uh yes so a disagreement
00:21:53 their homes uh yes so a disagreement with those at the London boots action group meeting with that P planned course of action um that's what it looks like
00:22:07 of action um that's what it looks like to me yeah and also I hope that the AL press officer Robin Webb would put a stop to that suggestion so not only condemnation of the plan but a hope that it won't be put into practice well that would have been the view of an
00:22:20 would have been the view of an individual um I think either that or it's
00:22:28 it's a um it's in the press release from West London alfl I can't I don't recall what was in that press release well it is hoped
00:22:29 hoped that that Robin Webb will put a stop to the scheme that's unlikely to have been from a press release by the West London Alf cell isn't it because they were the
00:22:42 Alf cell isn't it because they were the ones planning the action so that's why I think it's a comment um from someone um at the meeting discussing position if it if it was a
00:22:55 position if it if it was a comment um rather than a a consensus of sorts would you not have written into your report for example gravit poor grait hopes that the Press officer will put a stop to the scheme or whoever it might have been um well I could have done um
00:23:07 been um well I could have done um wouldn't that have been more useful to the reader of the report if it was clear whether the content of your report was a comment from a particular individual
00:23:20 comment from a particular individual given that you were reporting on which individuals should be the subject of further consideration yes and and quite often it was so I'm not quite sure why it
00:23:31 it uh why it's been done in that way um but more often than not it was what you are describing um and yes it would have been more helpful on this occasion to have ascribed those comments to
00:23:42 ascribed those comments to individuals looking back at the first uh paragraph where it says it was pointed out that no sorry the first of those two that were on the
00:23:54 screen it says it was pointed out that no illegal activity should be discussed other than with trusted people and even they're not at a meeting is that a sentiment that you recognize as having been expressed amongst the members of
00:24:06 been expressed amongst the members of London boots Action Group uh yes that came up all the time and was that the upshot of it that illegal activity was the subject of discussion but not at
00:24:24 the subject of discussion but not at meetings uh yes I me it was it was never discussed at meetings that would have been
00:24:28 been foolish foolish because the meetings were open and public um yes and not everyone knew everyone um to the degree that this type of
00:24:37 of activity um was in safe hands and those that were going to involve themselves in illegal activity would share that
00:24:48 illegal activity would share that information then only with those that they felt they could trust yes so it follows that to the extent that members of this group shared with you their involvement in or plans to become
00:25:00 involvement in or plans to become involved in illegal activity they must have regarded you as somebody that they could trust yes right thank you can we take that
00:25:17 yes right thank you can we take that down um and uh put up on the screen one further report in a similar vein MPS 0739
00:25:19 0739 418 that's dated the 12th of February of
00:25:40 1993 that's c127 sir hm1 your identifier on the first uh page on the cover sheet and if we uh look down this is a report on the London boots action group meeting of for February
00:25:42 February 1993 30 in
00:25:56 attendance sorry bear with me a moment yes uh can we zoom in it's the first paragraph the First full paragraph
00:26:12 please and I want to ask you about what follows from the word nevertheless about 2third of the way down please so you describe the meeting and you say nevertheless it is apparent that London boots Action Group currently enjoys a healthy degree of morale and no
00:26:26 enjoys a healthy degree of morale and no doubt benefits from the regular presence of a high percentage of an anal activists committed to and in many cases involved in the AL doctrine of Acts of direct action in support of Animal
00:26:39 direct action in support of Animal Welfare at the time you wrote this report February 1993 you had been in the field for just over a year is that
00:26:51 field for just over a year is that right yes on what did you base uh the assertions in this part of this paragraph that there was a regular presence of a high percentage of
00:27:02 presence of a high percentage of activists first of all committed to the AL doctrine of Acts of direct action uh well because uh the complete um or the the um available intelligence
00:27:17 um or the the um available intelligence to date on the individuals who regularly attended um more often than others London boots action group meetings uh were identified in such
00:27:30 were identified in such activity right so not necessarily your own observations of those individuals but what you were picking up from intelligence from elsewhere also uh well picking up Yes actually seeing in other
00:27:42 picking up Yes actually seeing in other u in other intelligence reports right so you're deployed at this stage you are seeing with some regularity other special Branch material and that is informing what you say in this report um yes plus it's also um as part
00:27:58 report um yes plus it's also um as part of the targeting strategy um those that were known to be um suspected of being involved in direct action uh that information was passed to me right so where you say here in many
00:28:09 me right so where you say here in many cases the activists had been involved in uh the AL doctrine of Acts of direct action we shouldn't take from that that you had by February 1993 direct directly
00:28:23 1993 direct directly witnessed either by seeing them do it or by them telling you they had done it their involvement in direct action yeah absolutely not no there's more these are
00:28:36 absolutely not no there's more these are the named individuals at this group rest of the rest of the machine um tell me what is
00:28:51 known so I'm not sure I quite followed that answer um yeah so um I I would know who those people were um and they'd be listed in the report um and then the feedback from uh from special Branch as to what was known about those individuals and their links um to and
00:29:05 individuals and their links um to and support for direct action would be fed back to
00:29:06 back to me I see but my question was really aimed at how it is that you came to include in your reporting an assertion that a high percentage of
00:29:19 assertion that a high percentage of those attending the meetings of the London boots Action Group were either
00:29:33 London boots Action Group were either committed to or particularly involved in Alf direct action yeah no no absolutely understood the question I I was trying to make the point of it was with the wider knowledge I had um not from being told directly U but what was already in the system as it were um with regards to that
00:29:48 that activity what was the utility of you as an undercover officer regurgitating in your reporting information that special Branch had already obtained for in another
00:30:02 for in another way well it was quite of The Wider picture there wasn't a so there's historic reporting um which is one thing and then there's current reporting as to uh the significance of the attendance of
00:30:15 uh the significance of the attendance of people at a regular campaigning group um either with a view to um where these individuals are on that Journey that we talked about or in some cases uh being
00:30:27 talked about or in some cases uh being able to cooporate um that they perhaps not as interesting from a criminality direct action public order perspective and they might have been at one stage but might it not give the impression to a reader of this report somewhere away
00:30:39 a reader of this report somewhere away from the SDS but within special branch that there's an SDS officer reporting on London boots Action Group who is able to say from their own personal
00:30:53 say from their own personal experience that a number of people who attend London boots action group meetings are involved in Al direct action if you included in your
00:31:04 action if you included in your report um well I think to the customers and readers um of this material um uh was s of connected with the industry and the business and familiar with the generic subject matter were were experts in themselves in in the environment the
00:31:19 in themselves in in the environment the individuals the movement what was going on um Across The Wider The Wider Community up and down the country so you're saying they they might expect that in a report that on its face emanates from an undercover officer
00:31:34 emanates from an undercover officer there is included intelligence that in fact comes from elsewhere
00:31:38 elsewhere um well in that stated description um of who they were it would
00:31:50 description um of who they were it would have been probably reflected also in the references to their names that appear normally um at the bottom of those reports all right can we take that down and I'll ask about a different topic um please which
00:32:08 about a different topic um please which which is the uh Grand National Race that was disrupted and declared void in 1993 as a result of activists running onto the
00:32:09 the course in your witness statement you agree that you did go to um the location of the Grand National in 1993 is that
00:32:25 of the Grand National in 1993 is that right yes and uh when you went to uh the Grand National you did so d driving a
00:32:37 Grand National you did so d driving a number of other activists with you is that correct yes and those activists included Paul grait did they not
00:32:42 not yes he recalls uh going with you along with perhaps six or seven others does that sound about right does it does yeah and you drove in your van is that right
00:32:57 and you drove in your van is that right yes and that he says you had volunteered to take people there in your van is is he right about that he is how did you come to hear about a proposed trip to the Grand nation in
00:33:09 proposed trip to the Grand nation in 1993 I think it would have been one of the things we planned um one of the meetings Paul grit's evidence was that he recalled it being discussed at the
00:33:20 he recalled it being discussed at the London boooks action group meeting in March of
00:33:25 March of 1993 does that sound likely it's highly possible yes it would have been at one of those meetings for sure the Grand National takes place in early in took place in early April so presumably that would have been about the right timing
00:33:44 timing yes the inquiry has not located a report of uh a monthly meeting of the London boots Action Group in March of 1993 um can you think of any reason why if you attended you wouldn't have reported that fact um no I can't no
00:33:58 fact um no I can't no Paul grit's evidence is that at that meeting in March of London boots Action Group discussion was had about disrupting the grand national race and
00:34:14 disrupting the grand national race and that was the purpose of the visit to the Grand National do you remember that um I don't remember specifically but I mean the the whole purpose of going to the Grand National would have been to bring attention to um our cause
00:34:26 been to bring attention to um our cause so yes I'm sure disruption was discussed
00:34:34 generically so when you volunteered to drive uh people to the Grand National to a Tre you understood
00:34:46 Grand National to a Tre you understood that one of the things on their mind at least would have been possibly disrupting the race well um no at no stage um had I been privy to a plan quite as audacious as that what plan
00:35:02 quite as audacious as that what plan were you privy to well uh the standard um turning up leafleting running running the gauntlet of people that didn't want to be Leed at a national event banners um
00:35:14 banners um Etc Mr grit's evidence was that in the van on the drive up there was discussion amongst the people who you were driving
00:35:27 amongst the people who you were driving of disrupting the race by running on to the
00:35:29 the course um so that might well have taken place um in in the back of the van I was not made privy to that um at all um probably
00:35:38 probably deliberately why do you say probably deliberately I was I was regularly Under
00:35:50 Suspicion not by Mr grait well um I I assume
00:35:59 not and were any of the other people in the van people um who have had expressed explicitly suspicions about you uh yes did they include George
00:36:13 you uh yes did they include George yes I'll come I I don't I don't remember I don't remember that individual being in the
00:36:14 in the van that's what I was asking you did it include no oh no sorry no the suspicions bit I was answering sorry yes I don't mean to do so George was suspicious of you but George was not in the van on the way up to the Grand
00:36:28 way up to the Grand National um no there were others probably um still
00:36:37 undecided but you had volunteered to drive them all there hadn't you yes that's that was pretty routine so you say if there was discussion you didn't hear it I I definitely didn't hear it are you quite
00:36:52 definitely didn't hear it are you quite sure about that absolutely positive yeah I I would have enjoyed hearing about it that's how I know I didn't what do you mean you would have enjoyed hearing about it well it would have conveyed a level of trust which I knew I didn't have so you say that by the spring of 1993 just over a year into your deployment you wouldn't have been
00:37:03 deployment you wouldn't have been trusted with information about an activity of this sort well on that specific occasion I wasn't um and I have no idea what the evolution of the real
00:37:17 no idea what the evolution of the real planning was from from the trip up there to it becoming a reality um but at no
00:37:29 to it becoming a reality um but at no stage in that in that time frame uh was was I made aware um until it was until it was was almost well as it was in Flight as it were Mr grit's evidence is that on the Saturday the day of the race you and he were at the entrance uh area to the course protesting I think
00:37:41 course protesting I think leafleting uh does that ring any bells yes and that some of the group some of the people who you had driven up had
00:37:54 the people who you had driven up had found a way into the uh into the course onto the course and that they told you that they had do you remember that um no all I remember is something quickly
00:38:06 all I remember is something quickly happening um and the event being stopped as a result of people running onto the course Mr grit's evidence is that those people asked you and asked him if you were coming with them to go in and
00:38:19 were coming with them to go in and disrupt the race so I don't um I don't recall being asked [Music]
00:38:27 [Music] um I really don't um I do recall a sub Flur of
00:38:28 Flur of activity um of people quickly leaving the if you like the the picket line uh and as I say within seconds it
00:38:43 line uh and as I say within seconds it was it was all over where was the picket line was it outside the course gosh I can't remember it wasn't um yes it was outside it wasn't in an area that required ticket access so in order to have got from
00:38:55 access so in order to have got from there to the actual Race Course course those who went to disrupt the race would wouldn't have been able to do that in seconds would they no no The Disappearance of those individuals I
00:39:08 Disappearance of those individuals I remember um so being there one moment uh not there the
00:39:15 next can we have up please on the screen your witness statement um MPS 0748 95 I think it will be page 187 at the
00:39:24 the bottom where you um deal with this hm1 it should be paragraphs thank you 214
00:39:41 412b um you say this the second half of this paragraph hm1 I was too far away from the start of the course to see what went on there but I did notice fewer people in the vicinity of where I was
00:39:53 people in the vicinity of where I was which I could then put down to activists going to the start of the course does that mean you realized at the
00:39:59 the time that the uh fewer people being in your vicinity was likely to mean they'd gone to the start of the course or do you mean that's what you put it down to
00:40:16 you mean that's what you put it down to retrospectively um I don't remember the sort of exact sequencing I just all I remember was it happened very quickly um the presence of people the absence of those people the running onto the course and the event being
00:40:31 the course and the event being curtailed if we look over the page at paragraph 412c
00:40:38 please uh you said I was unaware of any plans to prevent the race from going ahead were you aware of any plans for people to run onto the course regardless of its intended effect no are you sure
00:40:55 of its intended effect no are you sure about that absolutely positive um I mean it would have just been considered just so audacious I'm not even sure when we
00:41:06 so audacious I'm not even sure when we were planning this um whether anyone had that um Beyond intent or aspiration uh to do something as straightforwardly dangerous as this Mr grit's evidence is that it was discussed at the London boots action group meeting in March and again in your van on the way up and
00:41:19 again in your van on the way up and you're saying you you didn't hear that is that right um well I definitely didn't hear it in the van coming up I um I don't remember specific talks of running onto the pitch as the race was about to start being discussed in open
00:41:34 about to start being discussed in open court I mean there have been as I recall it these sorts of things that have been sort
00:41:35 sort of um ridiculously ambitious sort of uh aspirational um intent but I don't even remember this coming up as something specific and by that I mean um actually
00:41:49 specific and by that I mean um actually running on uh sort of almost suffer jet style into the path of advancing horses
00:42:01 Mr grit's evidence was that after the action had taken place uh you learned that the race had been abandoned so it wasn't immediately obvious to you is that
00:42:08 that right uh it wasn't immediately obvious no but I I think it was soon obvious um uh because there were Tano announcements and it quickly became the subject of saturated news
00:42:24 saturated news coverage he he recalls you waiting there for the release of those who had taken part in the action because in fact they were released um without being charged is that your recollection that is what happened
00:42:38 yes your witness statement says that 1993 was the only occasion on which you attended the Grand National are you sure about that um it that's what I recall
00:42:49 about that um it that's what I recall yes I think this this one so dominated um in terms of the events
00:42:58 events um which uh do um vividly have vividly remained with me is it possible that you went again in 1994 which is what Mr grait recalls well
00:43:09 1994 which is what Mr grait recalls well it is um but it might have been just the only reason I can't recall now I just think it must have been so insignificant and nothing happened in comparison with the events we've just been talking about which is why I can't recall it I'm not
00:43:20 which is why I can't recall it I'm not denying I did though if we have a look at a a report of a meeting of the London boots Action Group in March 1994 please MPS
00:43:31 1994 please MPS 0744
00:43:39 660 that's your c224 sir um a report bearing your unique identifier hm1 and if we go to the body of the
00:43:49 report oh I must have the wrong
00:43:58 reference sorry bear with me one [Music]
00:44:09 moment no I think I've got the wrong reference on the screen oh no I haven't
00:44:22 sorry sorry it's just a it's just my mistake in describing it I think so it's um this is a report from March of 1994 hm1 sorry for the confusion um which reports that a certain individual is currently determined to mount a high-profile publicity stunt at this year's Grand National at a Tre rumors
00:44:36 year's Grand National at a Tre rumors abound within the movement about what might happen at the event but most realistic activists recognize that it will be difficult to prevent or disrupt the race again one of privacy's ideas is to fly an aerial Banner over the course
00:44:49 to fly an aerial Banner over the course and he is exploring the cost of hiring a light aircraft for the purpose the plan is unlikely to come to fruition if only on the grounds of money another possibility under consideration is the blocking of the course where it crosses melon Road it is possible that there
00:45:01 melon Road it is possible that there will be attempts to damage the course infrastructure in the days before the race takes place do you remember coming into information of that nature regarding a grand national meeting
00:45:18 regarding a grand national meeting yes and did you attend does that assist you as to whether or not you attended the Grand National in the year that that individual was contemplating those
00:45:30 individual was contemplating those actions um I'm afraid it does help but I'm not denying what I did I think um the sort of the events um that we've just been describing became so sort of significant almost sort of folkloric
00:45:41 significant almost sort of folkloric admired and famous at anything else sort of to do with the Grand National par into insignificance um on the basis that that wasn't repeated even if people had the aspiration to do so right and do you recall ever attending um the Grand
00:45:55 recall ever attending um the Grand National in the same year that Andrew Kohl's also attended
00:46:05 um no and on the event that I know I did attend um I I wasn't aware of him being there were you aware of him going in another year or not aware of him going there at all um no idea sorry not not aware than
00:46:26 going all right thank you um just going back then please to some more reporting from London boots Action Group um as a group uh could I ask that we have on the screen MPS 0745
00:46:43 0745 799 it's your c157 sir it's a report of the 18th of May 1993 so just after the Grand
00:46:47 Grand National it's got your identifier on the first page hm1 and could we please have a look um it's a planning meeting May 93 a
00:46:58 it's a planning meeting May 93 a paragraph little Roman 2 of the points of
00:47:03 interest and I'll just read this in it says Paul graphic canvas the views of the group regarding the contamination of products with substances likely to harm the public if consumed the matter arose as a result of the contamination of
00:47:16 as a result of the contamination of boots products with broken glass which was claimed by the Nottingham based animal rights militia a rift developed between the arm and Robin web spokesman for the ALF who refused to announce the contamination as an Alf action on the
00:47:29 contamination as an Alf action on the basis that it was not the policy of the ALF to risk indiscriminate injury to the general public the London boots action group meeting agreed to follow the AL
00:47:42 group meeting agreed to follow the AL Line If ever asked to comment on this or similar
00:47:43 similar contaminations the philanthropic attitude of the group however does not extend to those directly involved in the control and management of the Viva section section industry Who Remain fair
00:47:57 section section industry Who Remain fair game and who are not regarded as members of the general public now on the face of this whatever that was going on um with the notingham based animal rights militia you don't
00:48:14 based animal rights militia you don't appear to have had any direct experience of what they were doing is that right you're reporting this hearing it from the outside and um it appears to have given rise to a rift between the animal rights militia and the AL in so far as there was a spokesperson for the ALF
00:48:29 was a spokesperson for the ALF because it risked indiscriminate injury to the general public is that right yes and the uh mood or the view of the London boots action group meeting was that the AL line was the one to follow
00:48:43 that the AL line was the one to follow so not risking indiscriminant injury to the general public is that right um correct um although I note at the end there a sort of get out clause yes where does that come
00:48:58 where does that come from on what basis did you assert that I think from the entirety of the conversation that ensued as as part of a discussion so you think that that is reflecting the nature of the discussion at the London boots action group
00:49:10 at the London boots action group meeting yes now given that what started the discussion on the face of it was the question of contamination of product of boots
00:49:22 boots products presumably what is reflected in that final sentence is not a suggestion that there will be some sort of product product contamin ation uh aimed at those
00:49:36 product contamin ation uh aimed at those controlling and managing the Viv section industry it's a reference to some other sort of action is it um I think it's a reference to um the the views held by some in that room um that they wouldn't want to be
00:49:50 room um that they wouldn't want to be constrained by a policy line uh when it came to that particular group of individuals who were loathed if you like with
00:49:59 with load the most so those heading up the vi section industry all right perhaps some assistant in the same report if we zoom out of that
00:50:07 please uh it goes on at little
00:50:16 three uh following on from this there was great enthusiasm for the idea of arriving unannounced at the home of a boots director living in berkhamstead and holding a demonstration outside his house plans for the event will made in
00:50:31 house plans for the event will made in private to avoid disclosure to press or police so was a visit to the home of a director the sort of thing that the group wanted not to be constrained from doing uh
00:50:42 doing uh correct um the plans in private to avoid disclosure to the press or the police that was presumably because they didn't want to be interrupted they wanted their
00:50:54 want to be interrupted they wanted their visit to be successful yeah I think they uh the intent there is that the person is there to receive the message did you regard participation in a visit of this nature to be Al
00:51:08 of this nature to be Al action um so that again um there's no setpiece answer to that it's an indication uh that it was not least because
00:51:14 because of um
00:51:19 of um a pattern of how some of these home visits
00:51:23 visits previously um had led to either confrontation um or um a campaign which was ultimately um wasn't just a home visit it wasn't just
00:51:37 wasn't just a home visit it wasn't just a turning up shouting and and going away it was a more sustained targeting of a person and their family uh all right so any any anyone of a number of things um even if not planned depending on who turned up
00:51:49 up um could happen but the sort of home visit accepting there may be a spectrum of of what could happen the sort of home
00:52:00 of of what could happen the sort of home visit that you just mentioned turning up maybe shouting some slogans and going away again simply making your presence known that that was that that need not even have involved any criminal offense is that fair to say yeah so at that
00:52:12 is that fair to say yeah so at that point none of that was discussed it was shall we commit to a home visit if so um let's do it um let's do it on a separate occasion and not in this setting I want to move then a bit in a
00:52:25 setting I want to move then a bit in a bit more detail to the topic of and some examples of home visits um with London boots Action Group in the first instance before I do so in your witness statement it's paragraph 25A you say that you always spoke to your
00:52:38 say that you always spoke to your managers when there was a proposed home visit can you explain why um yeah so this was um this was
00:52:49 why um yeah so this was um this was always managing uh the tension between a uh need to prevent um the subject of these visits uh being
00:53:11 uh being um subjected to harm um or disorder that might result in harm and the need to if you protect the small number of people uh that knew about it uh which if the police were waiting you might might compromise um whoever is providing that information so so you you mean for
00:53:23 information so so you you mean for example well in this case me in this one we're talking about yeah um uh and so this was a sort of a fairly routine discussion but it was a very serious one in which
00:53:28 in which ultimately uh the role of this intelligent was to prevent harm to individuals and damage to property and then there's a spectrum as to certainly when it came to damage with no
00:53:40 when it came to damage with no individuals around whether that could be tolerated but harm to individuals um and their wider family was deemed to take precedence even if it
00:53:53 was deemed to take precedence even if it was through a preemptive warning that um had them not there for example U when the visit was due to take place so that's that was something owned by in discussion with me um the the office so can I just check that I've understood that correctly if you were reporting
00:54:08 that correctly if you were reporting that a home visit was to take place but the belief was perhaps that the wrong address was going to be targeted or there'd be nobody at home a decision might be taken to let you go to the home visit and have
00:54:20 to let you go to the home visit and have it go ahead unimpeded by police presence to protect your cover yeah I think it would be a judgment call um but the the only bit to add to that if I if I missed it first time around was what steps could be
00:54:31 could be taken um that enabled the subjects of the visit just not to be there it wasn't a question of the wrong address um but not be there when we got there and therefore there no one there be no one to so if you like um registered desend
00:54:45 to so if you like um registered desend right and if if that were the situation then the balance would fall in favor of protecting your cover and letting the
00:54:57 protecting your cover and letting the home visit go ahead yes but if there was any intelligence report by you that suggested there might be harm to individuals if the visit went ahead then that would probably tip the balance in the other direction um I think it would but it would normally tip the balance in terms of um the individual not being
00:55:11 terms of um the individual not being there as opposed to a police presence being there and ready and
00:55:17 waiting Andrew Kohl's in his witness statement to the inquiry paragraph 228 for those who are um following suggested that he didn't participate in home visits at all because it would have
00:55:31 visits at all because it would have brought him too close to involvement in potential violence you didn't come to the same conclusion did you uh no I didn't um I didn't partake in in very many at all but no I didn't come to that conclusion there was an element
00:55:41 element of um I think on the occasion that uh I would have been involved I was transporting people so had an element of
00:55:56 control and certainly your managers from what you've said didn't come to the conclusion that this was activity that you shouldn't participate in as an undercover officer no not at all but it was a very careful discussion um uh on
00:56:07 was a very careful discussion um uh on each and every case which was slightly different depending on what it was about the nature of the individual and the people expected to be going right can we
00:56:19 people expected to be going right can we have a look then at some examples please MPS
00:56:21 MPS 0745
00:56:27 0745 801 11th of June 199 3 that's c163 sir your identifier on the cover sheet of this report hm1 and it's a report on a planning meeting of the London boots Action
00:56:46 Group and um what I want to look at is the list of planned um events uh and if we look please uh over the page
00:57:02 I wonder if I've got the wrong
00:57:08 reference sorry bear with me
00:57:21 please no I have it's paragraph six please and the comment below it
00:57:31 um one of the planned events arising from this meeting of London boots Action Group is described as a picket outside a boots director's house in burkhamer hartfordshire and the comment is this event is known only to a few persons and is being
00:57:50 only to a few persons and is being coordinated by privacy and privacy final details are yet to be arranged
00:57:55 arranged um the comment that this event is known only to a few persons it must follow that you were one of the few persons who knew about it is that fair yes and so how did you come to be one of the few persons who was let into the circle of
00:58:06 persons who was let into the circle of trust in relation to a home visit here um I think because I I was trusted and uh probably made it clear that um if there was a need for transport I'd be prepared to
00:58:20 transport I'd be prepared to drive all right so probable that you would have volunteered to drive if necessary I think I think it's probable I don't remember that being spe specifically but um I was trusted sufficiently regardless of that um as being told about
00:58:35 being told about it so do I just understand this correctly this is June 1993 you think you would have been trusted to be one of the few persons who knew about picketing outside of boots director's house but not trusted enough
00:58:49 director's house but not trusted enough to be told about a planned disruption of the Grand National by running onto the course um in April well that well that that was certainly the case yes
00:59:00 can you think of any reason why you might have been less into the circle of Trust on this in June but not the Grand National in April well this is
00:59:15 National in April well this is relatively benign um you know if if all it is is a noisy picket um outside um but outside an individual such as this um there's um I think the world of difference between that and the
00:59:27 difference between that and the disruption of a national event um with all the of ensuing consequences and Associated dangers so this one's relatively benign so even if they made
00:59:39 relatively benign so even if they made the wrong call on this nothing would be lost you say in your witness statement paragraph
00:59:40 paragraph 182 um for those following that you didn't take part in this picket is that right um
00:59:50 right um yes and how are you able to recall that you didn't take part in this
01:00:01 recall that you didn't take part in this particular one well I can't with sort of 100% certainty um but I certainly don't remember um being at it all right if we take that down please could we have up on the screen MPS 0745
01:00:22 818 uh it's another report that bears your identifier it's from the 21st of January of 1994
01:00:28 and can we go over to look at the body of the report please it is uh a meeting of London boots Action Group in January of 1994
01:00:45 now um and can we look at the third paragraph there please in that uh report the larger of the paragraphs thank
01:00:53 you and privacy announced that he had obtained a list of home addresses of directors of the self store called from
01:01:04 directors of the self store called from publicly available information but some of which is in fact out of date he was eager to arrange future dates for demonstrations at such places by contrast George spoke of the futility of arranging surprise events at
01:01:16 futility of arranging surprise events at London boots action group meetings since the information would inevitably be passed to the police in advance he accepted the effectiveness of the protest but stated he would make his Arrangements known Only By Word of Mouth to certain individuals ual and the report then goes on in fact
01:01:31 ual and the report then goes on in fact just such a demonstration took place on Thursday the 13th of January when a group of activists turned up excuse me turned up outside an address in privacy believing it to be the home of Jeffrey
01:01:46 believing it to be the home of Jeffrey maand Smith the chairman of selfridges it transpired however that he lived there no
01:01:48 there no longer I just want to ask you a number of questions about that section please hm1 firstly if we uh zoom out of that
01:01:59 hm1 firstly if we uh zoom out of that please this is reporting a meeting on the 11th of January of
01:02:13 January of 1994 but if we look down at the second page please the end should be the end it's dated the 21st of January so 10 days
01:02:20 later can you um explain how it might be that it could take 10 days for your reporting on a London boots action group meeting to to to find its way into a formal intelligence
01:02:33 formal intelligence report um I'm I'm afraid not the only reason I can't is because I I wasn't part of the process um once it was handed in um the rest of the machine took care of that side of the house if we go back please to the paragraph that
01:02:46 we go back please to the paragraph that um we had on the screen before the third larger
01:02:52 paragraph there is a comment there that says in fact just such a demonstration took place on the Thursday the 13th of January so subsequent to the 11th of
01:03:04 January so subsequent to the 11th of January meeting but before your report is
01:03:05 is submitted there is additional information about a demonstration taking place on the 13th of January um is that likely to be intelligence that you reported so you
01:03:17 intelligence that you reported so you were able to say in fact they did carry out such a demonstration it's quite possible yes
01:03:28 could we look please at the following paragraph um in the
01:03:36 report uh privacy suggested that in order to avoid the risk of the authorities obtaining details of such events potential demonstrators could
01:03:50 events potential demonstrators could arrange to meet at a specific time and place and decide only there and then whom to Target in pursuance of this policy activists intend to meet at Houston Station on Sunday the 30th of January prior to a home visit to what will probably be the address of a boots or
01:04:01 or selfes
01:04:06 selfes director so does it follow from this that it was announced at the meeting that there would be a a meetup on the 30th of January at Houston or is that information you were able to obtain in another
01:04:17 in another way um so one I I don't recall but if you look at what is suggested here is probably obtained subsequently um and and would you have obtained that by
01:04:32 and and would you have obtained that by expressing an interest in taking part in the home
01:04:33 the home visit um I would have thought more it would have come to my attention um by word of mouth and do you want to
01:04:46 word of mouth and do you want to attend and this is one is it that you did
01:04:50 did attend um if it assists you in your witness statement in relation to a report about an event on the 30th of January you say you think you must have attended because there's a report on it yes well that that must be the case
01:05:10 then um could we just look at the cover sheet um to this report please before we leave it and zoom in on point two with all of the handwritten annotations thank
01:05:26 you the minute uh on the cover of this report hm1 indicate in in um handwriting the security office is excuse me the security offices for the Sears group bracket selfes is aware of the threat as is Boots
01:05:42 PLC I think I asked you yesterday about whether you knew about your intelligence being shared for example with boots um do you think that your intelligence about these sorts of things
01:05:57 intelligence about these sorts of things was likely being shared with the private companies um not specifically uh no but the uh the threat assessment um these organizations were afforded um contributions to own threat assessments by uh by the animal rights
01:06:17 movement so your intelligence would inform the threat assessment which would inform the organization yes can we take that report down and
01:06:29 yes can we take that report down and look at the report of what took place on the 30th of January please MPS 0739
01:06:31 0739 636 it's the 1st of February of
01:06:40 1994 and again it Bears your identifier
01:06:48 hm1 sorry so it's c207
01:07:03 and what we see from the report um do if you want to check the cipher list for EAB please do so before I carry [Music]
01:07:12 [Music]
01:07:25 on okay thank you right so this is reporting the EAB organized home visit visits to a number of directors of selfes department store on Sunday the 30th of January um selfes has been singled out because it sells fur Goods
01:07:40 singled out because it sells fur Goods EAB was accompanied by a small number of London boots action group members they were made to addresses and those have been redacted for privacy the protesters failed to contact anyone at the first two addresses and at the third they were confronted with a video security system
01:07:52 confronted with a video security system after a brief period of abusive shouting the protesters left the area threatening to return at a later date to prevent any leakage of information the targets for
01:08:05 leakage of information the targets for the Excursion had deliberately not been divulged to the activist before they assembled at Houston Station in the morning and then the comment is this form of harassment is seen by animal rights activist to be a powerful form of protest which is likely to remain
01:08:23 popular um as I mentioned before in your witness statement you say you think you must have attended this do you recall attending
01:08:29 not vividly but um I accept that I probably
01:08:30 probably did Mr grait gave evidence that he recalls you telling him that you went to the home of a self's director but Mr grait remembers you saying that the
01:08:45 grait remembers you saying that the director and his family were were there in their garden and were upset by the visit do you recall attending a home visit of that description in connection with the self's director um I don't recall him being there in the garden but I'm quite prepared to accept that I was there on that on that
01:09:04 occasion the description here of a home visit um is of the sort that you mentioned earlier isn't it the turning up a bit of shouting and then the protesters leaving the area so very much at the lower end of the
01:09:18 at the lower end of the scale the ones we've been talking about here
01:09:22 yes thank you I'm about to move to a different topic I wonder whe that's an appropriate moment for break certainly we'll have our 15-minute break as
01:09:47 usual I think it's that on the screen the flat screen at the front of the desk
01:27:53 e e
01:28:49 thank you um hm1 moving from London boots Action Group onwards in September 1994 London boots Action Group merged with other groups and London Animal Action was formed is that about right in terms of your recollection yes can we have on screen please MPS 0741
01:29:07 0741 031 a report of the 23rd of September of 1994 it's your c277 sir 272 I'm sorry thank
01:29:23 you m a report bearing your identifier and can we look at the report itself please
01:29:32 all right this is a described as a monthly planning meeting of London boots Action Group um and if we look please at the first two paragraphs of the report the body of the
01:29:49 report it records that as a result of the prolonged debate during recent months regarding the future name and composition of the London boots Action Group the following decisions were finally reached one the group would now
01:30:01 finally reached one the group would now be known as London Animal Action a name it was felt which more accurately reflected the nature of the organization as the principal Animal Rights group in London dealing with a wide range of animal Liberation and Welfare issues it
01:30:15 animal Liberation and Welfare issues it would of course maintain its open policy of being fully supportive of direct action so in terms of from the point of view view of you as an undercover
01:30:27 view view of you as an undercover officer sir this was uh in a sense more or less a continuation was it not of London boots Action Group rather than a change of much significance or do you disagree with that no I don't I don't disagree with that um I think it was it
01:30:43 disagree with that um I think it was it was everything that London boots action group was um but it went beyond the focus um just of an anti- boots campaigning group and in terms of the personalities involved Mr grait remained involved certainly at the beginning in
01:30:58 involved certainly at the beginning in the early days of London animal action didn't he yes that's his own call and Beyond Mr grait the personalities involved in London Animal Action overlapped did they with those involved in the London boots Action Group yes can we take that down please and look at a report on the inaugural
01:31:16 look at a report on the inaugural meeting of London Animal Action uh and can we scroll down uh please to the report
01:31:17 report itself thank
01:31:26 you and and can we look at the first uh paragraph to begin with
01:31:35 please so reporting on the inaugural meeting of laa formerly the London boots Action Group the report says it attracted an array of well-known activists all Keen to make a go of the new group which already has the support of a range of animal rights groups
01:31:48 of a range of animal rights groups around the capital which hither to had shunned London boots Action Group are you able to assist now with the basis for the assertion there that laa had the support of animal
01:32:01 that laa had the support of animal rights groups around London which had Shan London boots Action Group um well only as I as I recall sort
01:32:13 Group um well only as I as I recall sort of the uh the correspondence between the groups participation at um um each other's um activities events um and I think a reflection that um other groups didn't necessarily want to be um
01:32:28 to be um specifically linked to or constrained by a boots Focus so by definition um it had a broader catchment zone of support and
01:32:39 zone of support and interest right can we zoom out please and um I want to have a look at the third paragraph please beginning the pulled
01:32:52 funds and the report also records that Paul grait had negotiated the shared use of an office for laa at London Green Piece 5 Caledonian road
01:33:05 at London Green Piece 5 Caledonian road so does that um communicate that London Animal Action was to share an office with London Greenpeace
01:33:19 um that's what it that's how it read yes and did you as a result as somebody involved with London Animal Action thereby gain access to offices that were used also by London green piece on Caledonian Road no did you ever go to the office on Caledonian
01:33:30 the office on Caledonian Road um well I might have done with
01:33:37 Paul and when you went to that office were you conscious of the fact that it was an office also used by London green peece presum presumably yes based on this report yeah um but it had no particular significance in that
01:33:54 particular significance in that respect at the time at around this time the what was known as the m litigation was ongoing do you recall that yes involving Helen steel and Dave Morris as the primary defendants at that stage did you have access to paperwork
01:34:09 stage did you have access to paperwork through the office used by London Animal Action that was connected to concerned with the mlal litigation no did you have access to paperwork linked to them at liable trial in any other uh context no
01:34:26 liable trial in any other uh context no are you sure about that yeah I'm pretty sure yeah I had absolutely no involvement I didn't even really have any interest um in that in that particular campaign you knew that the campaign
01:34:38 campaign you knew that the campaign existed did you oh yes it was um it was very well known well I'm going to ask you to have a look at two um exhibits hm1 and In fairness to you I'll make it clear you won't have seen these before they were provided to the inquiry very
01:34:51 they were provided to the inquiry very recently um this month by and steel um so I'll give you a a good chance to uh look at them uh can we start please they don't have um control numbers on them
01:35:02 don't have um control numbers on them yet but they are HS 54a and 54b I don't know if they can be put on the screen at the same
01:35:22 time for
01:36:16 can we just on sorry just to ensure the text on the the image on the right there's more text I think at the bottom that we can't see at the moment is it possible to expand that box so that we can hm1 can see it all over
01:36:24 over once expand it downwards well that'll do thank
01:36:34 do thank you what hm1 I would explain Miss steel has submitted an additional witness statement um in which she says that on the right hand side of the screen as we look at it so 54a her exhibit
01:36:45 look at it so 54a her exhibit 54a it is a leaflet uh that was put out by the McDonald's corporation during the course of the mlal trial
01:36:59 course of the mlal trial and uh included in a court bundle which is I assume where you see the number tabs here a court bundle that was used by her and David Morris as defendants in
01:37:13 by her and David Morris as defendants in the litigation and what she says is that they obtained that leaflet that we see there on 54a from you and that 54b is your handwritten note when you provided the leaflet to the campaign if
01:37:24 provided the leaflet to the campaign if not directly to miss steel then perhaps to Mr Morris or someone associated with the campaign and I'll read the the handwritten note reads houndslow 9th of July 1994 4 p.m. handed out by staff to
01:37:38 July 1994 4 p.m. handed out by staff to me and then the signature and name m rer appear
01:37:49 appear underneath do you recall uh obtaining a leaflet of that nature and handing it either to Helen steel Dave Morris or somebody else associated with the campaign
01:37:51 campaign um doesn't stand out but I can see that I did I that's my that's my handwriting it it sort of rings a vague Bell um and
01:38:02 it it sort of rings a vague Bell um and in what in what circumstances might you have come to provide to the m liable defendants or the M liable campaign a leaflet that you had been handed in
01:38:17 leaflet that you had been handed in McDonald's um possibly at a at a picket or a demonstration um it's hard to imagine because I don't actually remember being handed one but um an event um in support
01:38:30 event um in support of um in support of the campaign um very very rare that I attended any of those as far as liable campaign uh was concerned but it's it's it's it's highly possible thank you we can take that
01:38:44 down is it possible that you had more contact with the m liable campaign or the M liable defendants than you recall without being shown documents like that
01:38:57 without being shown documents like that um no I I mean the reason I'm absolutely certain I had so little involvement it was
01:38:58 was um it was just a campaign that was so distant from what I was involved in I wasn't even particularly even within my
01:39:15 wasn't even particularly even within my sort of cover or particularly interested in it um and certainly wasn't prepared to devote time to it um because it didn't seem sufficiently close to um uh the the other activities and um lifestyle I was involved going back then to your
01:39:27 involved going back then to your involvement in London Animal Action there came a time when you became a signatory on the London Animal Action bank account do you recall that yes the report we have puts that at April
01:39:39 report we have puts that at April 1995 yes and was that a role that was akin to being a Treasurer or something similar within the group well
01:39:53 similar within the group well um I guess so um if if you had to put a title to it um it's it's roles and respons responsibility was taking collection tins and bags of coins um to co-op bank and being a co- signature on checks so checks made out by the group
01:40:05 checks so checks made out by the group to other entities or other individuals yes yes I was one of the signatures and in your witness statement you say you became the signatur because Paul grait asked you to be is that right yes you
01:40:18 asked you to be is that right yes you also say in your witness statement that you were happy to carry out this role because it showed and encouraged trust in me um and you say it enhanced your credibility and by extension your access to information known only by a trusted
01:40:30 to information known only by a trusted few in what way did being the signatur encourage trust in you and enhance your credibility and access to information known only by a trusted
01:40:43 known only by a trusted few um well I think if you are entrusted with the the funds of the group uh there's a direct correlation between a
01:40:56 there's a direct correlation between a level of trust um that's being placed in you um and then in terms of uh what the money was being used to support um and fund to the very limited degree there was money available for any of that um
01:41:07 was money available for any of that um it provided that level of visibility it involved taking on a position of trust and
01:41:08 and responsibility Vis A the group didn't it um yes it did yes um it was a a level of trust um that I that I had that did
01:41:20 trust um that I that I had that did anybody or did any of your managers know presumably yes because it was in a report that you had taken on this role yes and did you consult them before doing
01:41:27 doing so uh um yes I absolutely and why absolutely um well I was quite I was quite pleased to have been
01:41:38 quite pleased to have been asked so you considered it something to be proud of um yes did you ask them because you thought there was any chance that it might be frowned upon that you should take a position of trust and responsibility within a group on which
01:41:53 responsibility within a group on which you were reporting well I wanted that to be part of the collective if you like authorization process that this was appropriate and when you checked with your managers did they approve
01:42:04 your managers did they approve disapprove what was their reaction um yes they did approve what was the nature of the discussion you had can you
01:42:22 discussion you had can you recall um I think it was one in which um the um implicit levels of trust being a little more formalized with a position of of responsibility with funds um is is a is a stage um and it was a discussion around whether it was
01:42:35 was a discussion around whether it was appropriate to say yes to that and was there any shadow of a doubt as to whether you should say yes to it um no there wasn't and I think the context of the discussion was you know what does it actually involve um and how much money are we talking about and what is the
01:42:51 are we talking about and what is the sort of the daily responsibility and it was as I described earlier um largely the sort of collection money from collecting tins um taking to the co-op and then being a co- signature on the distribution of those funds um to
01:43:08 campaigning the U focus of London animal actions um efforts in its relatively early days was in part demonstrations um outside or in connection with fur shops and the fur industry is that right that
01:43:26 and the fur industry is that right that was a big part of it and and uh you were involved were you not in pickets of a shop called Noble Furs yes and thereafter a fer or or company uh hawleys
01:43:40 hawleys yes you participated regularly I think in the pickets of noble Furs is that right yes and what did that involve um a picketing of a shop during opening hours at weekends um and leting and by picketing you mean standing
01:43:55 and by picketing you mean standing outside maybe leaflets banners that sort of thing yes that's absolutely could we have up on the screen please MPS
01:44:11 07415 it's a report of the 15th of November 1994 about a monthly meeting of laa it's
01:44:13 laa it's c285
01:44:21 sir and if we can scroll down please to the body of the report
01:44:29 thank you I want to focus on the third paragraph please hm1 Brendan MCN reported that the picket of noble Furs was continuing and was having some
01:44:41 was continuing and was having some success however some visitors to the fur picket had caused a souring of the
01:44:53 picket had caused a souring of the friendly relationship between police and demonstrators causing the police to try and stop them collecting donations to the cause it was emphasized that cooperation with the police was imperative lest the picket be closed down before the first shop had felt the full effect of a continual picket and
01:45:04 full effect of a continual picket and thereby a valuable opportunity to raise money would be lost does that description fairly uh reflect the attitude of the protesters
01:45:23 reflect the attitude of the protesters in the noble fur pickets to the police who policed the demonstrations um not all of them uh but some um had um hence Brendan's advice sorry I should have been clear it's my fault were the majority of those who picketed are interested in
01:45:36 who picketed are interested in cooperating with the police in order to ensure the success of their picket longer term okay yes absolutely um it was a it was a focused campaign not against the police um but against the
01:45:48 against the police um but against the fur trade but the the intervention such that it was of the police in keeping those pickets um in order such that it was required was not unwelcome as far as those who were doing the picketing was concerned um no
01:46:00 the picketing was concerned um no because mainly so long as the picketing um uh confined itself to leafleting and non- obstruction U of the highway as it was the police would be um happy for it
01:46:15 was the police would be um happy for it to take place and the protesters were by and large complying with the instructions of the police save for the few that are mentioned here by Brendan mcnell uh yes absolutely absolutely um
01:46:28 mcnell uh yes absolutely absolutely um yeah was that typical of the nature of the pickets that took place outside Noble Furs and other fur shops under the guise of London Animal Action in 1994 95 well I think wherever there was a
01:46:40 95 well I think wherever there was a police presence um this balance between being allowed to stay there um and uh not antagonizing the police and thereby getting our message across
01:46:49 across and it was deemed to be successful in just being there um and almost being a sort of physical deterrence to um potential
01:47:07 potential Shoppers uh that would have been deemed a success in its own right so that the police allowed that to happen um was really not to be interfered with understood thank you can I ask about another aspect of the activities that you appear to have taken part in under
01:47:20 you appear to have taken part in under the guys of London Animal Action um and that is protests concerning the live animal exports that were taking place um which I think you attended some with London animal action and actually London boots Action Group but is this right
01:47:33 boots Action Group but is this right they were organized under the banner of the southeast animal rights Coalition or the animal rights Coalition does that
01:47:47 the animal rights Coalition does that ring a bell um yes it does the the focus um that was another big campaign um the focus of the demonstrations was um the port um through which um animals were traveling y so we see I'll come to the example but we see some uh act actions at DOA which was one of the ports is
01:48:02 at DOA which was one of the ports is that right um DOA was one sh another yeah and I think there were also uh protests at centry centry airport is
01:48:15 protests at centry centry airport is that right um yes all right can we have up on screen I I'll go broadly chronologically if I may MPS 0739
01:48:22 0739 45 this is the 17th of November 1992 So within a year of your deployment commencing hm1 so it's c99 and we see your identifier on the cover sheet to this report and if we look um it's a report
01:48:36 report and if we look um it's a report about something that took place at the DOA Eastern docks the organization at the top is the southeast animal rights
01:48:55 Coalition 100 to 150 present um other organizations London boots Action Group does that tend to indicate that your involvement in this was through the London boots Action Group yes and we see no disorder recurred mood ferous
01:49:05 ferous frustrated and if we look please at the body of the
01:49:15 report uh we see the demonstration called by uh the Southeastern animal rights coalition to protest at the export of live animals by ferry companies especially seing stenaline disorder had been anticipated by local police who were present in large numbers thereby preventing the demonstrators
01:49:32 thereby preventing the demonstrators from obstructing entry to the ferry port or preventing the movement of livestock trucks arriving there the protesters tapped to content themselves with hurling a few eggs at Lor's and shouting abuse the event was judged a success because of the media coverage obtained and the forthcoming series of monthly
01:49:43 and the forthcoming series of monthly pickets will go ahead in an attempt to persuade celink Stenner to abandon the carriage of live animals
01:49:58 uh so as I understand you're reporting that it's the presence of a large number of police who prevent obstruction or to the ferry port is that right yes so does it follow from that that your understanding was the that the intention of the demonstration was to obstruct
01:50:10 of the demonstration was to obstruct entry to trucks carrying live animals yes but instead what happened was some throwing of eggs at Lor's uh yes that that took place that's unlikely to have caus too
01:50:27 place that's unlikely to have caus too much of a nuisance to the lores is that fair to say um yeah because most of it was prevented um this this was an ongoing I think this was one snapshot of what was a um a regular set of campaigns the report records that the
01:50:39 campaigns the report records that the event was judged a success because of media coverage obtained was that one of the main aims of those protesting to draw attention to the practice of
01:50:56 draw attention to the practice of exporting animals live animals in trucks in this manner yeah that certainly was an important part of that
01:51:08 campaign it goes on the report to refer to uh activists eight activists from the London boots Action Group leaving the demonstration and making their way to dova Town Center where they harass staff in Boots and McDonald's by the now
01:51:21 in Boots and McDonald's by the now routine method of seeming to purchase Goods but leaving without taking or paying for them and subjecting the helpless employees to tirades of abuse the Imperial cancer research fund shop came in for the same treatment were you one of the eight
01:51:34 treatment were you one of the eight activists from London boots Action Group who engaged in that behavior um I was certainly present um as part of the as part of the picketing
01:51:45 as part of the as part of the picketing of the of boots so one of the eight who went into DOA Town Center I I I would imagine so I do remember going to into
01:51:58 imagine so I do remember going to into DOA Town Center with London boots action and did you engage in behavior of the sort described there putting Goods together as if you were going to purchase them but not paying for them or taking them um no so I know for a fact I didn't do that and how is it that you know for a fact that you didn't do that um because I've never done
01:52:13 um because I've never done that so as a member of One of only eight from London boots Action Group who went to do that to what extent did you stand out from the crowd not taking part in that sort of activity um I think others not everyone
01:52:31 activity um I think others not everyone was doing others had leaflets um to hand out um maybe a bit of supporting noise um there was a fairly impromptu wandering
01:52:37 wandering around um uh at random uh non-planned I don't think it was particularly uh longlasting is there any reason why your report from the time doesn't explain that of the eight activist who went to DOA Town Center only some of them
01:52:51 DOA Town Center only some of them engaged in the behaviors that are recorded there um no not really um but that was describes a general mood um and the adoption of a type of
01:53:03 adoption of a type of campaigning which had been used before would it not be useful to identify which activists were involved in that sort of activity um yes it would and I don't
01:53:16 activity um yes it would and I don't know whether I've done that elsewhere um when talking about more specifically individuals but yes well you're quite sure that it wasn't you involved as one of them in the in the harassment and yes
01:53:33 harassment and yes yes can we take that report down please I want to ask you about some other actions associated with the southeast animal rights Coalition um again broadly chronologically uh MPS
01:53:51 chronologically uh MPS 07398 please the 23rd of March 1993 c146 sir
01:54:00 and we see your uh identifier there on the first
01:54:10 page and in the body of the report um it's sorry before we zoom in the report itself we see it's a demonstration 30 to 35 attended it was said to be good humored and no disorder but see below in
01:54:25 humored and no disorder but see below in the heading to the report and then if we do zoom into the body of the report please it says this demonstrators from the London Brighton Portsmouth Hastings
01:54:36 the London Brighton Portsmouth Hastings and maidon areas assembled in hawkhurst hawkhurst to take part in this searc coordinated event having formed no real prior plan as to what exactly was likely
01:54:52 prior plan as to what exactly was likely to ensue the first 20 or so activists to arrive at the farm entered the complex and in the absence of any effective opposition from the owner or his employees dawned their masks and led by privacy privacy and Jeff Shephard attempted to locate the slaughter house Itself by the time the remaining
01:55:04 Itself by the time the remaining protesters arrived from hawkhurst it had been decided that police might arrive at any moment and therefore a routine demonstration was then held at the entrance to the
01:55:19 farm the uh when asked about this in your witness statement you said that you didn't enter the the farm complex um but that you were at present in relation to this demonstration
01:55:30 this demonstration hm1 how did you know that there was no real prior plan as to what exactly was likely to ensue does that indicate that you had been involved in the planning such that it was for this
01:55:42 such that it was for this event um no um it indicates that I hadn't been made privy to any any plan
01:55:53 hadn't been made privy to any any plan it didn't occur to me there was beyond the we are going to protest outside um this particular location well it's not saying you weren't privy to a plan is it when it says having formed no real prior plan as to what exactly was likely to ensue that that's a comment on the activist not
01:56:05 that's a comment on the activist not having made a plan positively isn't it yeah my my impression of of it was that an opportunity presented itself on
01:56:17 an opportunity presented itself on arrival um and people responded to that opportunity uh Beyond any plan just to um campaign routinely with leaflets and shelting and so the first 20 or so to
01:56:33 shelting and so the first 20 or so to arrive in fact go into the complex put on masks and attempt to locate the slaughter house that's your report how did you know what the first 20 or so did on arrival unless you were amongst them um well I think I might
01:56:47 amongst them um well I think I might have been um I don't recall this event vividly but maybe I um It's Perfectly feasible I drove
01:56:54 people so you may have driven them there but the report doesn't suggest that of the first 20 or so to arrive only some of them entered the complex does it um no so does it follow that you
01:57:07 it um no so does it follow that you entered the complex um no it doesn't I mean I I didn't enter the complex um that's for sure um but on arrival um people people did why does the report not make a
01:57:24 did why does the report not make a distinction between some of the first 20 and Ing and some of them not if that's the
01:57:29 the case um I don't know I don't recall did you know that some of those who were attending had masks with them before you arrived
01:57:35 arrived no did you know that people were contemplating enter entering the complex no wasn't aware of um what we were going to do other than work it out when we got there can you think of any
01:57:53 when we got there can you think of any reason why people would have gone uh in possession of masks if all that was really planned was a routine demonstration of leafleting and the like well that suggests there might have been a plan but um I wasn't privy to it so
01:58:06 a plan but um I wasn't privy to it so your best recollection is that you drove some people to the event but didn't get involved that is my recollection um it is a long time ago and it really doesn't stand out I'm
01:58:23 afraid the um we can take that down please the um other sort of action that was engaged in by the Southeastern animal rights Coalition or under the banner of the animal rights Coalition was also was home visits again is that
01:58:34 was also was home visits again is that right do you recall that and if we pull up on the screen please um MPS 07
01:58:46 39693 it's c176 it's a report dated the 14th of September
01:58:51 September 1993 now before I ask you hm1 about this it it
01:58:52 it it has your a unique identifier on the cover page uh but when asked in your witness statement you were not um confident that this was your reporting
01:59:03 confident that this was your reporting in fact but I just want to see if any of it rings a bell could we have a look at the body of the report please it it's a report on a meeting of the animal rights Coalition in Nottingham in September of
01:59:21 1993 um and I want to uh look please at the first two paragraphs of the body of the report
01:59:29 um which the report says the following items of note were discussed at the meeting a the holding of unannounced demonstrations at the home addresses of animal abusers has been found to Be an
01:59:46 animal abusers has been found to Be an Effective and virtually risk-free way of instilling fear into the victim and his family Ronnie Lee commented that the wearing of masks or bad clavas not only
01:59:57 wearing of masks or bad clavas not only concealed the identity of protesters but also added to the air of Menace it is envisaged that this form of demonstration will become more widespread with leading figures from the pharmaceutical medical research and meat Industries and from the hunting fraternity being singled out for
02:00:09 fraternity being singled out for attention and whether or not you recall reporting that information hm1 does the nature of it chime with what you were
02:00:20 nature of it chime with what you were hearing whilst deployed undercover in regard to home visits
02:00:27 um well it doesn't conflict with it um but I I do recall reading this and thinking this isn't mine not least because I don't ever recall being at a meeting um in the presence of Ronnie Lee but the um your question itself is it
02:00:40 but the um your question itself is it certainly doesn't conflict with a a a view that was held to what extent were the home visits that you either were
02:00:51 the home visits that you either were involved in or knew about to what extent did do you consider that those who were taking part were hoping or intending to instill fear into the target of the visit
02:01:07 visit um I was just aware so whether I sort of clinically distilled it in that way I was just aware that um in terms of The Wider picture on what these home visits had led to and were capable of leading to there was the whole spectrum
02:01:19 to there was the whole spectrum of campaigning on the street and disappearing to the leafleting of neighbors um to the more threatening knocking on doors um and then associated
02:01:38 knocking on doors um and then associated with articles in the Press um so you had the full range and Spectrum um of the nasty stuff and the sort of semi-legitimate right can I just when you say associated with articles in the Press can you explain what you mean by that please um yeah so some of um so um in sort of
02:01:50 yeah so some of um so um in sort of literature um used by uh the animal rights movement to campaign against individuals for example at the at the helm at the Vex movement or those um
02:02:07 helm at the Vex movement or those um involved in live exports those concerned with the fur trade and the owner of um fur outlets in London um part of the media campaigning against them was through the use of media but what does that have to do with home
02:02:21 home visits um well it was part of the um uh either the um we know where you live um type messaging um and in some cases the um dropping of accusations through
02:02:32 dropping of accusations through neighbors letter boxes as to the nature of the individual they were living next to in your experience of home visits
02:02:46 to in your experience of home visits direct experience how often did those uh engaging in the visit wear a mask or balak
02:02:50 balak laava um whilst doing whilst engaging in the
02:02:54 the visit I think on the the rare occasion I was involved in the home visit I didn't see much of that did you understand that those uh who you went on home visits with or with whom you discussed home
02:03:05 with or with whom you discussed home visits uh wanted to uh arrive with an air of Menace as is suggested here so those um those that I went on there
02:03:24 those um those that I went on there wasn't that there would far more often be once you got there um uh putting a scarf around your um to conceal your identity um but it wasn't um those I were I went on was not uh with a view to turning up as a ball CL uh menacing a bunch of
02:03:41 individuals thank you can we take that down please before we do can just look at the second
02:03:52 page um if you look down the list of those uh noted as identified as attending it includes Matt rer your cover
02:04:01 cover name is there anybody else who could possibly have um produced this report uh naming you other than
02:04:16 you um well I think um not not knowing everyone who was there or Rec calling everyone who was there um in a group such as this with this number of people there um there were other people who
02:04:28 there um there were other people who were cooperating with the police that could have given information about this group other the meeting sorry um a large number of people there sorry sir forgive me this goes out under
02:04:45 sorry sir forgive me this goes out under the um name of the DCI then in charge of the
02:04:50 the SDS uh the SDS did not run uh nonp police informants did it um no correct so excluding then a non-p police informant uh I'm not aware of any other
02:05:05 informant uh I'm not aware of any other undercover officer deployed at this time who might have produced this report uh the problem I have with it so I'm not denying I was there I just I really don't recall being there but I I
02:05:20 really don't recall being there but I I its content um even if I wasn't doesn't sort of look odd in any shape or form but
02:05:22 form but so it's 30 years ago lapses of memory are entirely understandable but in in the light of what I've just said to you is the likelihood that this is your report and you did attend the meeting
02:05:34 report and you did attend the meeting even though you now do not remember its detail I think it's possible so I really do um it just I would have expected this to have stood out um a little bit more than it is doing um so that's clearly a
02:05:45 than it is doing um so that's clearly a failing on my part if I was there and I now can no longer remember over 30 years ago thank you so ju just um I think just worth mentioning although it doesn't change
02:05:57 mentioning although it doesn't change the nature of the questioning that this is at a time when Andrew Kohl's was also deployed alongside hm1 his his name does not appear his cover name does not appear on the report um indeed um but he is unlikely to have
02:06:16 um indeed um but he is unlikely to have put in the name of someone he would know as fellow undercover officer his name simply just adding some information to the picture that there was another animal rights um deployment at the same time acknowledged but um
02:06:28 time acknowledged but um I I'm not aware of any and do not remember any suggestion that this was K's
02:06:34 K's report can we take am I allowed to come
02:06:45 report can we take am I allowed to come in of course um so on the subject of you why would I be there um so sometimes that is
02:06:46 that is there um with a view to getting that report to a wider audience that Ence of me might have actually identified if someone else is reporting that I was there as an undercover um SDS officer so
02:07:05 there as an undercover um SDS officer so sometimes there was a PL hiding in plain sight if you like on a c report for a wider
02:07:14 wider audience so by a rather roundabout means it is possible that this is that your name is put there to divert from the fact that this is not your report is that what you're saying it's it's possible I was there but I wasn't the author
02:07:30 yeah I think we're we're all agreed are we not that the fact that you are named uh means that you must have been at the meeting whether or not this is your
02:07:46 meeting whether or not this is your report yeah I think I think that we must assume that yes agreed thank you thank you can we take that down please and another report relating to the animal rights Coalition MPS
02:07:58 rights Coalition MPS 0245 731 it's a report dated the 29th of November
02:08:01 1995 it's your c405
02:08:14 sir and this uh hm1 is a report of a national meeting held in Oxford in November of 1995
02:08:29 yes you you uh have this report so that it's clear it doesn't have a cover sheet uh but because of its date and its uh control number I can tell you that it was found on a hard drive recovered from the SDS at the end of the life of the
02:08:42 the SDS at the end of the life of the SDS right so it was on a computer and it will have been attributed to you by the inquiry because it will have appeared or be have been found in a folder uh bearing
02:08:54 bearing a a an identifier used by the SDS and linked to you do you follow
02:08:59 [Music]
02:09:10 yes all right I'll pause for that to be checked that ought to be the case but that don't take it as red that it definitely is in a folder with your identifier until somebody's checked right but it's found on an SDS hard drive that I can that I'm confident of
02:09:27 can I ask you I'm not going to ask you the detail about the meeting but um if we scroll down please um to the end of the
02:09:38 um to the end of the report sorry the end of the body of the report thank
02:09:50 you um and I want to look please at the final uh three paragraphs of it in particular
02:10:04 and they read as follows considering the nature of those activists present it was hardly surprising the high level of enthusiasm that greeted privacy's suggestion that before people started going home a home visit be made to Professor Colin Blakemore it is fair to
02:10:16 Professor Colin Blakemore it is fair to say that Blakemore remains probably the most hated figure in the Viva section industry and indeed is considered the leading protagonist and representative of the particularly aboard science leaving in two convoys one led by
02:10:30 leaving in two convoys one led by privacy and the other by privacy about 25 activists descended upon Blake Moore's Home unsuccessful in soliciting any answer from the door activists engaged in bouts of shouting abuse Barry
02:10:46 engaged in bouts of shouting abuse Barry Horn wasted no time in investigating the passages down either side of the house and much attention was given to the security cameras and windows suffice to say that everyone left after a quarter of an hour without any untoward incident having
02:10:59 occurred
02:11:13 um are you able to assist as to how commonly this sort of spontaneous home visit occurred after meetings or or would this have been an unusual occurrence I think um unusual in terms of that level of spontaneity
02:11:26 more usually something that was planned and thought about in advance that was my
02:11:35 experience in your witness statement it's paragraph 246 you say that you remember participating in this home visit to uh Mr Blake Moore's
02:11:49 Mr Blake Moore's Home yes is that right yes I do recall baby and you you recall it being spontaneous and you say that your involvement was limited to adding your voice to the shouting outside the house is that right
02:12:07 is that right yes why did you uh take part in the home visit attended it appears by only a proportion of those who had been at the larger
02:12:14 larger meeting
02:12:20 um
02:24:49 e e