Mark Jenner (HN15) continues evidence covering his reporting on the National Civil Rights Movement (NCRM), Blair Peach anniversary marches, and the Steven Lawrence campaign. He discusses SDS characterization of police accountability campaigns as 'anti-police' even after Sir William Macpherson's finding of institutional racism. Jenner admits he was 'very offended' by the institutional racism finding and didn't explore what it meant. He also covers reporting on the away team, Frank Smith, and continued surveillance of left-wing groups after threat levels had reduced.
00:15:47 Good morning everybody. Uh today's proceedings will be livereamed after a 10-minute delay. Those with mobile devices may use them to report what is happening in the hearing, but only after 10 minutes has elapsed since the event
00:15:59 10 minutes has elapsed since the event that they're reporting. They may not be used for recording or photography. Mr. Bar.
00:16:05 Bar. Thank you, sir. Uh, could we start with the Hackne Council workers demonstration? We can't hear you.
00:16:16 We can't hear you. Is Can you hear me now? Can you hear me now?
00:16:31 I'll try again. Oh, that sounds better. Yes. Uh, tab C143, sir. 246885.
00:16:58 Uh, this is a document dated the 5th of December 1996. an event proformer uh and the well it's dated the 4th about an event on the 5th. The demonstration
00:17:10 an event on the 5th. The demonstration is planned for Hackne Town Hall May Street and it is said that 200 plus people are anticipated disorder is likely and the mood is angry. If we
00:17:22 likely and the mood is angry. If we could look at the text please and give you a moment to refresh your memory Mr.
00:17:49 Okay. Yeah. So, you are reporting that there is an industrial dispute going on between Hackne Council and some of its manual
00:18:01 Hackne Council and some of its manual laborers about changes to their terms and conditions. Is that fair? Correct. Yeah. uh and you uh are predicting uh that there is um considerable
00:18:15 uh that there is um considerable potential
00:18:17 potential for violence the next day at Hackne Town Hall.
00:18:23 Hall. Can you help us with what was the basis? Well, I think it was my assessment based I can't I first I can't remember where I got this information from. likely is not
00:18:34 got this information from. likely is not it would have been discussed at the Colin Road Center because that is the sort of core business area that obviously Hackne Council is right right in amongst it as far as they're concerned. So I would have we' have
00:18:46 concerned. So I would have we' have discussed it there. Um and I think I'm right in saying that some of the members may even have worked for Hackne Council. I'm not 100% sure of that. So there was
00:18:57 I'm not 100% sure of that. So there was an interest in there in that respect but I think the general consensus was at the center that there would be it would attract other left-wing groups your mainstream groups SWP militant etc on
00:19:11 mainstream groups SWP militant etc on the back of this and there was a potential for violence that was my assessment at the time. The impression one gets is that you are painting a picture of it being the
00:19:23 painting a picture of it being the workers themselves who are very angry. That's right, isn't it? Well, I think that yeah, angry in a sense that they they had obviously grievances with the council, but the anger wasn't from the workers. I think
00:19:35 anger wasn't from the workers. I think the threat of violence is from these the left-wing groups who were attaching themselves to this event. Well, what you've what is written is
00:19:46 Well, what you've what is written is there is speculation among workers and activists that due to the strength of feeling the demonstration has considerable potential for violence. You're reporting both.
00:19:57 You're reporting both. Yes. Well, as I say, there may some of that information may have come from uh some of the workers or people who are employed at the council who were part of the colon. I can't remember the exact
00:20:08 the colon. I can't remember the exact details, but that was the the general consensus of it. So yes, there may some of the workers may have been involved in that. I don't know. I couldn't say that for sure. But by and large, it was the
00:20:19 for sure. But by and large, it was the unknown left-wing groups that would probably be the greater of the risk. Was there any past history of violence in Hackne Council disputes?
00:20:32 in Hackne Council disputes? I don't know. Was there any history of public disorder in Hackne Council disputes? Again, I don't know.
00:20:43 don't know. Um, it may be a statement of the obvious, but if you are a worker taking industrial action and you cross the line and become violent in a protest
00:20:55 the line and become violent in a protest at the town hall, uh, you are risking your employment, aren't you? Absolutely right. Yeah, of course. And that is a strong deterrent to violence.
00:21:04 violence. You would have thought so. Yeah. This intelligence is likely to have um been passed up the chain and and via TO20 to have gone to uh the local uniform
00:21:18 to have gone to uh the local uniform police.
00:21:20 police. That's my understanding. Yes. As I say, as I've said previously, this is intell this report is one that I haven't written. It's based on the information I provided.
00:21:29 provided. Where it's disseminated to, uh I have no control about that. I can only assume it would go to a public order unit responsible for Met Police. That's understood. Uh there's a risk,
00:21:41 That's understood. Uh there's a risk, isn't there, that if a report is unduly alarmist,
00:21:46 alarmist, it could lead to a heavy-handed and counterproductive policing response. Well, that's speculative, of course, and that's not within my remit. I can only base my intelligence on what I pick up.
00:22:00 base my intelligence on what I pick up. Um other people will make threats. excuse me, threat assessments on the back of that. Um, I have no control over that.
00:22:07 that. Uh, might this considerable potential for violence have been unduly alarmist? Well, that's a matter of opinion, isn't
00:22:18 Well, that's a matter of opinion, isn't it? I think violence um is violence and it's it's it's unacceptable and if the risk of it, then I'm going to be pointing that out. It be remiss of me not to.
00:22:29 not to. Were you overstating the risk? I don't think I was. No. Can we take that down please and have C145246905?
00:22:43 Um, this is a report an event performer about the day itself. Thursday the 5th of December 1996.
00:22:55 150 people turn up. Disorder, nonmood, angry. If we expand the text, I'll give you a uh moment to look at that. But I'm
00:23:06 you a uh moment to look at that. But I'm particularly interested in the last paragraph
00:23:37 Okay. So, we can see that uh what was reported is actually some tension between the SWP
00:23:48 is actually some tension between the SWP and uh Hackne workers. Um but there doesn't appear to be any other report of disorder.
00:23:55 disorder. No, that's right. And then concentrating on that final paragraph, the first sentence um makes clear that the threat to public order does not in
00:24:07 the threat to public order does not in fact come from the organized left-wing political agitators. And that's contrary to the answer you gave a moment ago, isn't it?
00:24:16 isn't it? That's right. This is postevent. And what had you learned since then that caused you to report differently? Well, obviously the event itself had uh had passed off relatively peacefully.
00:24:28 had passed off relatively peacefully. There had been a debrief uh at the center uh about the events of that particular day. Um which made me revise my assessment of it in the light of
00:24:40 my assessment of it in the light of events.
00:24:42 events. And then you go on to say, "The council manual workers are angry, committed, and have much more to lose than any left-wing activist. As organized strikes, pickets, and demonstrations continue, so the possibility of disorder
00:24:55 continue, so the possibility of disorder will increase. There is talk among the agrieved workers about threats to attack counselors, especially those on the finance committee, and to attack the town hall itself. Were you at this
00:25:08 town hall itself. Were you at this demonstration?" I can't remember if I was. No, I certainly report I may well have been I can't remember that. Can you recall where you got the information that informed the sentence
00:25:19 information that informed the sentence I've just read out? That would have been via well via the Colin Roach Center. Metaf was obviously well connected there and I think he he'd certainly have uh contacts or workers or
00:25:30 certainly have uh contacts or workers or people that he knew in the council who were directly involved in this. So it would be a reflection of that. Had you heard any agrieved worker utter a threat
00:25:41 heard any agrieved worker utter a threat to attack a counselor? No, this is all secondhand. Did you make that clear when you reported um to the SDS what was going
00:25:53 reported um to the SDS what was going on?
00:25:53 on? No, I clearly didn't. If it's it's raised there. No. Again,
00:26:00 Again, looking back, were you overstating the risk?
00:26:04 risk? Not at all. Well, I don't think you can overstate the risk. If if there is a risk of uh violence in any form whereby members of the public or police officers
00:26:15 members of the public or police officers are going to get injured, I don't think it's possible to overstate that. Uh were any councilors attacked? No, I don't know. Was the town hall itself attacked?
00:26:26 Was the town hall itself attacked? I don't know. Can we take that down now, please, and go to tab C159? Uh that is an MPS number 40185.
00:26:43 We're moving now to a nominal proformer dated the 28th of February 1997.
00:26:51 Um this is about an individual. If we uh expand the text at the bottom please
00:27:02 about whom it is said that they are a good friend of maf and keep him in the Colin Roach Center informed of the situation with Shinfane
00:27:13 informed of the situation with Shinfane in Ireland. The person was a contributor to the CRC magazine RPM. That was however until he was arrested by the RU and held at Castle Ray for a week in
00:27:25 and held at Castle Ray for a week in connection with the Manchester bombing in 1996.
00:27:30 in 1996. Metaf has repeated has tried repeatedly to contact the person since learning of release but has been told that he has disappeared. Metaf is sufficiently concerned for the welfare of his friend
00:27:41 concerned for the welfare of his friend that he is considering a trip to the province to speak to the person's family.
00:27:49 family. Uh
00:27:51 Uh presumably you're aware of who we're talking about here. I'm not actually. No. Right. We we'll get that for you if that is not to hand and I will come back to that.
00:28:04 that. Can we take that down now and have from tab B 40 247160?
00:28:17 This is the SDS annual report for 1996 to 19 97.
00:28:25 to 19 97. Could we have page nine, please?
00:28:33 And at uh nine section nine on page nine we have the section community-based groups. If we uh look at 9.2 please
00:28:49 give you a moment to to read that.
00:29:51 The sentence I want to ask you about is the one which reads, "SDS operations continue to provide intelligence of the aims and intentions of the IWCA
00:30:03 aims and intentions of the IWCA which will enable appropriate measures to be taken to preserve public order and to prevent undue damage to police community relations.
00:30:15 community relations. Can you help us with uh what is meant by preventing undue damage to police community relations? Well, we're in the same situation as this is an end of year report as the one
00:30:28 this is an end of year report as the one that I looked at yesterday. I hadn't seen this before. This is a management overview. Um and I had no input into it or the language that was used there. That's a question for management.
00:30:41 That's a question for management. Do you have any independent understanding of how your reporting on the IWCA
00:30:49 the IWCA uh would prevent damage to police community relations?
00:30:56 Well, yes, I have an opinion of it if you want me to give it. And I in relation to that, the only thing I can think of would be uh the IWCA with AFA, Red Action, etc.
00:31:09 with AFA, Red Action, etc. wanted to go and uh leaflet promote themselves around various estates around London. Now some of these
00:31:21 estates around London. Now some of these estates yes they were as I've mentioned yesterday were quite you know
00:31:29 you know I say a hot bed of BNP but certainly in places like Burmany where it was they had a lot of right-wing support down there but also there were other estates where there were different communities much more diverse communities and the
00:31:42 much more diverse communities and the thing with with that is IWCA
00:31:46 IWCA red action you look groups of people dressed like they were. They dress very similar to right-wing activists on the street, very similar
00:31:57 activists on the street, very similar looks, very similar hairstyles, etc., etc. To have those people going, albeit with good intention, into some of these estates where there were sensitivities
00:32:08 estates where there were sensitivities around racial attacks may be perceived wrongly to been something from the right wing. So I can only assume it was in some in relation to that um which inadvertently could provoke community
00:32:22 inadvertently could provoke community tension which wasn't the intention of the organization. That's a public order reason which yes
00:32:28 yes is the first reason given in the report. But in terms of the police standing within the community uh that um can I take it you can't help with that? I I can't help you with that I'm afraid.
00:32:39 I can't help you with that I'm afraid. No.
00:32:39 No. Can we take that down now please? Can we go back to C159? That's the MPS number 40185. I'm going to have passed up first to the chairman and then to uh you uh the name
00:32:53 chairman and then to uh you uh the name and then to your legal representatives the name of the person whose privacy we're protecting.
00:33:12 Thank you.
00:33:31 Uh, now that you've been reminded as to who that is, uh, Mr. Metav's evidence was that this person's brother was killed by a plastic bullet. Uh, are you in a
00:33:43 a plastic bullet. Uh, are you in a position to agree or disagree with that? No, I'm not. Uh, Mr. Metaf's evidence was that this person was not informing him and the
00:33:54 person was not informing him and the Colin Roach Center of the situation with Shin Fain in Ireland. Are you in a position to agree or disagree with that? Well, I'm I'm not in a position as I got
00:34:05 Well, I'm I'm not in a position as I got this information directly from Metaf himself then. No, I can't obviously comment on his stance on that. No. Um, our understanding is that no one has been brought to justice for the bombing
00:34:18 been brought to justice for the bombing in Manchester. Uh, do you are you able to help us with whether or not this gentleman was ever charged?
00:34:26 charged? I have no idea. I did I didn't even know. You showed me the name and it doesn't ring a bell now. It's not somebody I'm aware of. And presumably you can't help us then as to whether anyone was convicted. I'm afraid not. No.
00:34:38 I'm afraid not. No. If we could uh take that down now and move to the topic of how best to screw up Kurt's life. That's at tab B37247048.
00:34:59 Uh, this is a an internal SDS note. Um, signed by
00:35:08 signed by JW. Is that John Webb? Uh, I would imagine so. Yes. At that time,
00:35:13 time, there's his initials at the bottom. 8th of April,
00:35:18 of April, um, 1997.
00:35:20 um, 1997. It's headed operation LFUPC. And if we could look uh first at paragraph one
00:35:34 meeting today 8th of April with Keith Edmonson,
00:35:39 Edmonson, John Webb Tory nominal 19 acting DCI and DIE area liaison Rey. How
00:35:50 acting DCI and DIE area liaison Rey. How best to screw up Kurt's life? We outlined the Kirk case to date for the anonymous person's benefit and went on
00:36:01 anonymous person's benefit and went on to describe AF AFA plans for BNP candidates and as centers over the next two weeks as told by Mark Jenner.
00:36:13 Mark Jenner. Uh the person we are calling Kurt was the person that you had had some encounters with close to your real home in Suffach.
00:36:25 in Suffach. That's right. Yes. Uh and uh ultimately you had to uh go through with your family an enforced move uh because of
00:36:38 family an enforced move uh because of the risk of compromise that Kurt's presence in the area generated. Correct.
00:36:45 Correct. Uh were you uh aware of a plan to screw up Kurt's life? That's the first time I've ever seen that.
00:36:58 the first time I've ever seen that. Uh, could we zoom out, please, and have two and three up
00:37:33 Okay. And uh having read those paragraphs, it the natural meaning to us appears to be
00:37:44 the natural meaning to us appears to be that despite the dramatic start to this note, what is being proposed is a strategy
00:37:51 strategy uh to see if there is evidence of any past criminal offending by Kurt. uh and surveillance to see if there is any
00:38:05 and surveillance to see if there is any violent behavior by him in the offing. In other words, uh to investigate him criminally, it would appear so. Yeah. Were you aware of that? No, I wasn't.
00:38:16 No, I wasn't. Uh it talks at paragraph two of the SDS objective to getting Kurt out of the equation was explained.
00:38:27 And then the SO12 objectives in pursuing Kurt were discussed and agreed to be the arrest and prosecution of the dangerous of a dangerous criminal.
00:38:41 The SDS objective if that wasn't the same as SO12s which were bringing him to justice. Uh was it to get him out of your way?
00:38:52 your way? Absolutely no idea. Was there any discussion with managers that they were going to see if Kurt could be got out of the way?
00:39:00 the way? No, not at all. I mean, I'm not You'd have to remind me of when the when I first reported that compromise. I'm assuming this must have been after that.
00:39:13 assuming this must have been after that. Well, I'm asking you what what your recollection is. Well, as regards to this, I say I've never seen this document before and I was not aware of the contents or made aware of the contents at the time. I'm sure I would
00:39:24 contents at the time. I'm sure I would have remembered, but I wasn't. I see. Uh, and are you able to help us with uh whether the uh plan led to Kurt's conviction?
00:39:35 Kurt's conviction? Have no idea. Could we look at paragraph four, please?
00:39:49 Give you a moment to refresh your memory about that.
00:40:16 Okay. Yeah. Uh I appreciate the answers you've just given me, but the significance of this appears to be that the SDS were going to be kept in the loop and involved in the
00:40:27 be kept in the loop and involved in the liaison uh between TN19 and the deputy the detective inspector southeast area liaison. Were you aware of any of that? That is not none at all. Now,
00:40:39 That is not none at all. Now, can we take that down now, please? And can we go to par to tab C177 at an MPS number 40352.
00:40:54 We're back now to the Republican forum. This is the 10th of May uh 1997.
00:41:03 And if we could uh just have up the first three uh paragraphs please.
00:41:14 I'll let you uh read those. The question is going to be about the third paragraph though.
00:41:54 Okay. Uh and uh the third paragraph, the speaker who we can see from the paragraphs above has been speaking out
00:42:05 paragraphs above has been speaking out strongly against Shinfane's stance uh in relation to the general election. uh is asserting that it was the Irish National
00:42:16 asserting that it was the Irish National Liberation uh Army who uh were prepared to kill policemen in order to protect Catholic workingclass communities. Were you at that meeting? Yes, I was.
00:42:27 Yes, I was. And is that a fair representation of the sort of assertion that was being made by it Mr. McQueen at that? And uh the
00:42:38 it Mr. McQueen at that? And uh the special branch assessment was that the Irish Republican Socialist Party had close connections with the Irish National Liberation Army. Is that right? That's correct. Yes. Uh could we go to page three now
00:42:56 and the top paragraph first of all?
00:43:01 Give you a moment to read that.
00:43:34 Okay, it reads as if there was a dramatic development during the course of the meeting. Uh, namely that the Irish National Liberation Army claimed responsibility for the murder of a police officer the night before
00:43:46 police officer the night before apparently. So, yes. Um, uh, in Northern Ireland. Correct.
00:43:50 Correct. And that the press had turned up seeking an interview. Yes. Could we go to the next paragraph?
00:44:04 Are you able to help us with the nature of interviews that Mr. McQuillin gave on that evening? No, I'm not. Uh, and would it be fair to say that there was absolutely nothing secret
00:44:15 there was absolutely nothing secret about uh Mr. McQuillin's uh position um in relation to the Irish National Liberation Army's actions. No, none at all.
00:44:28 Could we uh now look at paragraph 3 to five on that page?
00:44:37 I'll let you read them, but the question is going to be um about what uh this intelligence contributed to the intelligence picture.
00:45:34 Okay.
00:45:37 What was the contribution of this information to the general intelligence picture about the in so far as it was relevant to terrorism? It was completely
00:45:48 relevant to terrorism? It was completely relevant given the high profile of McQuillin and uh his entourage. Um there was no question about his terrorist credentials in that respect. Uh I was in
00:46:01 credentials in that respect. Uh I was in a position to give as much information as I could on that entourage coming to London and the various other people that I've described here. uh that's important
00:46:13 I've described here. uh that's important that that is recorded because at some stage that may corroborate with other intelligence from MI5 or from whoever um on that particular day. So that was very
00:46:25 on that particular day. So that was very very important that those things are recorded and yes that's completely the reason why it was done in that way. Would it be a fair summation describe to describe it as contributing to the
00:46:36 describe it as contributing to the general intelligence picture about the IRSP, but of no obvious immediate value? Not any immediate value, but an intelligence is a slow burner. Anyway,
00:46:47 intelligence is a slow burner. Anyway, can we take that down now, please? Uh, can we move now to what I'm going to call Jaime's plot? Uh, tab B4247193.
00:47:06 Uh this is a note for file. Um again it appears to be uh being produced by John Webb. It's dated the 25th of July
00:47:18 Webb. It's dated the 25th of July 1997.
00:47:21 If we could have up the first two uh paragraphs please.
00:48:01 Okay. Yeah.
00:48:05 First paragraph may help with the question you asked me a little while ago. We were looking at a document from April uh 1997 about Kurt. We can see now uh that the
00:48:18 about Kurt. We can see now uh that the move was plans for the move were well a foot by July. Uh would it follow then that your problems with Kurt were live back in the spring?
00:48:32 back in the spring? Again, I can't remember the actual dates, I'm afraid. Onto the second uh paragraph and your contact with Jamie. Uh is the second
00:48:45 contact with Jamie. Uh is the second paragraph factually a factually accurate summation of what had happened? Yes, it is. Um I think as if planning a murder makes it sound very dramatic. I
00:48:56 murder makes it sound very dramatic. I think what this report is saying here is it was taken as serious as that which was quite unusual but that is an accurate summation of what happened.
00:49:09 accurate summation of what happened. So you understand you are being approached to join a small group of people to conspire to commit serious criminal
00:49:21 conspire to commit serious criminal offenses.
00:49:22 offenses. Possibly. Yes.
00:49:27 Can we move on to the third paragraph, please?
00:49:36 Jamie is reported as raising the subject again at the London AFA organizers meeting on the 23rd of July, giving no clues as to the nature of the task uh but saying there was going to be
00:49:49 task uh but saying there was going to be a meeting. If we then look at at the if we zoom out and have the uh last two paragraphs the
00:50:00 and have the uh last two paragraphs the last two large paragraphs. Give you a moment to read those.
00:50:32 Yeah. Okay.
00:50:36 Is the um second of those paragraphs an accurate summation of the speculation that uh passed uh in that meeting between you and your managers about what
00:50:51 between you and your managers about what sort of offending might be in the offing.
00:50:55 offing. I I can't say I mean those the second paragraph there the those various venues which were potential targets that wasn't something which I generated I think that
00:51:06 something which I generated I think that was they were looking around what could this possibly be um I can't remember that that actual meeting itself it did occur to me that this was obviously the
00:51:18 occur to me that this was obviously the office were quite concerned about the ramifications of this because it is what it appeared to be as I reported it initially, but I did think a part of this is this some kind of uh setup to
00:51:31 this is this some kind of uh setup to smoke out an informant. That was in the back of my mind as well. And how would an informant be smoked out?
00:51:37 out? Well, because you know, you get all this sort of this information. It wasn't just me. There was there was a group of people as well. And if that leaked out uh somewhere or someone got to be made
00:51:50 uh somewhere or someone got to be made aware of that, then obviously there was a leak within that five. That's that's how I imagined it could have played out. But again, that's pure speculation on my part.
00:52:00 part. I'd like you to put yourself back into um your mindset at the time that these events were happening and without um any hindsight in the light of what actually
00:52:12 hindsight in the light of what actually happened. Uh if you had been shown those odds
00:52:18 odds uh when this document was created, would you have agreed with those? shown those what? Sorry. Odds. You see, each of the potential actions has odds by them.
00:52:30 actions has odds by them. Uh would I have still gone ahead with it?
00:52:32 it? No. Would you have agreed? Oh, are these the sorts of targets? Yes. I Yeah, I see what you mean. No. Um yeah, I think they are pretty good estimates. The last sentence, whatever the purpose
00:52:44 The last sentence, whatever the purpose of the plot, HN15 will need to be confident that the long-term SDS policy of never giving evidence will hold. What discussions did you have with your
00:52:57 What discussions did you have with your managers
00:52:59 managers at this stage about that issue? I don't remember them discussing that issue uh at all. Um, if they did, then I
00:53:11 issue uh at all. Um, if they did, then I don't recall it, but it really that wouldn't have been for me personally an issue anyway. Were you given any advice as to how you should behave in relation to this apparent conspiracy?
00:53:22 apparent conspiracy? Just never break cover. Can we take that down now and uh go to tab B44247200?
00:53:43 And can we uh where we can I'll orientate it first. This is dated the 5th of August 1997. It's about a meeting on Thursday the 31st of July 1997. It
00:53:56 on Thursday the 31st of July 1997. It says that you went to a meeting on that day where you met the rest of the group of five and it names people we are calling Harold, Jamie, Clive, someone
00:54:07 calling Harold, Jamie, Clive, someone we're not naming at all and you. Could we then have the text blown up please?
00:54:53 Okay. Can you help us with where that meeting took place? Uh, yes. I I can at um it was in uh the
00:55:07 Uh, yes. I I can at um it was in uh the work premises of of an associate of Red Action. Should I see if his name's on the list? I uh Yes. Or if it's not on the list, if it's if it's anonymized, you can just
00:55:19 it's if it's anonymized, you can just write it down. Okay. I'll just see if it's on the list. Uh
00:55:34 yeah, he's known as Clive. That's okay. We can just use the word CL the name the pseudonym Clive. Yeah.
00:55:43 Can you first of all confirm is this an accurate summation of what happened or are there any inaccuracies that have crept in?
00:55:53 crept in? No, I mean again it is a summary of what I said and but it's yeah it is accurate uh yeah as far as it goes definitely. And so what was actually agreed at this
00:56:07 And so what was actually agreed at this meeting?
00:56:10 At the time it was, as I recall it, it was just it was a meeting of of people. We were getting we would know the group of people who were there. There were I'm sure there were more than five. Um but
00:56:23 sure there were more than five. Um but that was it. It was just we would be told in due course uh what we'd need to do. we wouldn't know and as I've said there, we wouldn't know what that particular target was and we've been
00:56:34 particular target was and we've been particularly selected for this this job or whatever it was. And that that was pretty much it. There was no actual firm direction as to where this may may go
00:56:45 direction as to where this may may go other than it was something worthy of of the secrecy that would seem to surround it. Uh but is it fair to say that there was no doubt that this small group of
00:56:56 was no doubt that this small group of people were meeting in tight secrecy in order to prepare to become a group who would commit serious criminal
00:57:08 who would commit serious criminal offenses?
00:57:08 offenses? That was my understanding of it. Yes. And we we've obviously had to gist the particulars, but the words assault, burglary, and robbery, do they give a fair summation of the level of
00:57:22 fair summation of the level of criminality that was being posited? I think this is a obviously this is a a roundup uh by I suppose John John Webb has written this, but yes, amongst those
00:57:34 has written this, but yes, amongst those who knew I I certainly didn't know, but yes, certainly those three offenses would spring to mind. uh others as well. I don't know. That's just speculative.
00:57:45 I don't know. That's just speculative. Uh and in terms of conversations with your managers, if we look at what it says below, no action will be undertaken by the group before September. That HM15 has been invited to join the action
00:57:57 has been invited to join the action group, which is undeniably a heavy team, speaks volumes about his credibility in the field. Dealing with the product of his involvement will be difficult. What discussions did you have with your
00:58:10 What discussions did you have with your managers about you how you should behave in relation to this group going forward? Just go with it. That's all. Just go with it. At that stage um as I say this
00:58:21 with it. At that stage um as I say this is aspirational. This is what may happen. Uh but at that stage nothing had happened but essentially maintain cover and go with it. Simple as that.
00:58:32 and go with it. Simple as that. Did you speak to Bob Lambert um about this
00:58:36 this or did he
00:58:37 or did he I can't I don't remember. I think uh if Bob Bob was still the the DI there, but he never had a great insight into Irish matters. His his his previous history
00:58:50 matters. His his his previous history was outside of the B squad realm, whereas John did. He was the sort of expert, but he had a better insight into into this sort of thing. Uh what I'm driving at is whether Mr. Lambert gave
00:59:03 driving at is whether Mr. Lambert gave you uh to understand at any point that he was familiar uh with operating undercover uh within a criminal conspiracy? No.
00:59:12 No. Uh can we take that down now please? C can you help us? Uh did this group actually go on uh to commit any offenses?
00:59:23 offenses? No, they didn't. What happened? Well, I have to say nothing. which again immediately aroused my suspicions. Was this just a like an an intelligence red
00:59:35 this just a like an an intelligence red herring to to smoke out any um informance? The document we were just looking at was 31st of July 1997. How long did it take for that to play
00:59:48 How long did it take for that to play out for it to become clear that it was a damp squib? I can't say it was it was months. We didn't know because the whole nature of that was that we'd be informed
01:00:00 that was that we'd be informed when we needed to be told. So that was like an open-ended arrangement really. There was no actual end to it. It just didn't happen. So I'm understanding from your answer
01:00:11 So I'm understanding from your answer for a period of months at least afterwards you thought something might happen but in the event it didn't. Correct. Yeah.
01:00:21 Can we now go to the question of Amsterdam? Uh
01:00:30 Uh the
01:00:32 the there is there are various references uh in the document to Amsterdam. Can you help us? First of all, was there ever a CRC
01:00:45 ever a CRC trip to Amsterdam? uh what as in an official delegation? No, there wasn't. Did you go with Allison and two friends
01:00:57 Did you go with Allison and two friends to Amsterdam in on the 28th of November 1997 for a short break? Uh well, I certainly went, so I couldn't give you the exact dates, but yes, that that's true.
01:01:08 that's true. And again
01:01:10 And again on the between the 5th and the 7th of March, 1999 with Allison. Yes.
01:01:17 Yes. Could we have up please tab B46527802.
01:01:30 Uh and if we can have that expanded please.
01:01:34 please. This is uh dated the 16th of October uh 97
01:01:42 97 and it's from DCIHN58. Authority is sought for touchy subject and we know that's you and DI Lambert to
01:01:53 and we know that's you and DI Lambert to travel to Amsterdam for the purpose and duration set out at 1A. If approved, the memorandum at 1B should be signed to enable F-14 to make the necessary travel
01:02:05 enable F-14 to make the necessary travel arrangements.
01:02:08 Can you recall the circumstances in which this document came to be generated? Well, no, I've obviously mentioned this to uh I don't know if I mentioned I was going there with with
01:02:19 mentioned I was going there with with Bob directly or not, but um I think at that particular looking at that obviously uh Bob quite fancied a jolly over there, but I don't I never saw
01:02:31 over there, but I don't I never saw this. Um and I wasn't I don't think I saw Did I seek authority to to travel abroad? Probably not. But it looks like on this case I would have mentioned it to perhaps it was to Bob who then put it
01:02:44 to perhaps it was to Bob who then put it up so he could get a a ride on the back of it.
01:02:47 of it. When you say mentioned it to Bob, it being in fact the trip with Allison and two other people um which we think occurred in a month
01:02:58 um which we think occurred in a month later in November. Did Di Lambert get the jolly he you say he wanted to Amsterdam? I I honestly
01:03:09 he wanted to Amsterdam? I I honestly don't know. I certainly never saw him when I was over there. Well, when you went in May 1999, um did anybody from the SDS uh travel to
01:03:20 um did anybody from the SDS uh travel to keep um overwatch? No. No. I think you know in these sort of situations, unless it was a a political event or something like that, this was just maintaining cover. So, I
01:03:31 this was just maintaining cover. So, I didn't even mention it to the uh the office.
01:03:35 office. But the you've obviously mentioned something about Yeah. Well, I I've mentioned it to Bob. I wouldn't have seen I don't think ordinarily they'd have given me authority to do that, but I' mentioned it there obviously to Bob that I was
01:03:48 it there obviously to Bob that I was going there. Um and he's gone on the back of it, but ordinarily no, I wouldn't have bothered. Uh can we take that down now? But can we stay with the topic of Amsterdam?
01:04:00 stay with the topic of Amsterdam? We have heard evidence of two SDS trips to Amsterdam. Did you go on either or both of those?
01:04:11 Did you go on either or both of those? Uh yeah, I certainly remember one which was a colleagueu's leaving do. Can you remember approximately when that was?
01:04:22 was? Well, I'd have to look and see who the person was and when he retired. So, off the top of my head, I can't. Um I I'll see who he is on the list and that will give me an idea of when he uh
01:04:33 that will give me an idea of when he uh when that particular event was.
01:04:39 If it's an anonymous person, please don't say anomaly.
01:04:55 Can I just write his name down? I can't see it on me. Please.
01:05:26 Thank you.
01:05:39 Uh on this trip then was this a trip well attended by members of the SDS? Yeah, I think it was. Yeah. Uh
01:05:51 Yeah, I think it was. Yeah. Uh when you were in Amsterdam, did you take uh any substances which would be controlled in this country but were not controlled in Amsterdam?
01:06:02 Amsterdam? Yes.
01:06:03 Yes. Did any of your colleagues?
01:06:08 Probably. Yeah. I don't ask me who. I don't know. But yes, it wasn't alone. It was Amsterdam. Yeah. Um, and how not alone were you as the odd colleague or
01:06:19 alone were you as the odd colleague or lots of your colleagues? Well, we moved around. It was it was a big group. Obviously, it was a celebration sort of thing with that. So, there was a lot of drinking and visiting bars, etc. So, I couldn't identify, but I certainly did. Yeah.
01:06:33 I certainly did. Yeah. Uh, and at least some of your other colleagues did. Yes. I mean, I can't say that somebody must have done. I can't say for sure. No, but yes, I'm assuming they would have done. Um, are you seeking to spare their
01:06:45 Um, are you seeking to spare their blushes?
01:06:45 blushes? Not at all. Why would I? I'm happy to admit it. There's no no problem with that. Uh, was there any management restriction on doing that?
01:06:56 on doing that? No.
01:06:57 No. Uh, were any of your managers uh participating in that? Not that I saw. No. No. Were you in their presence all the time? No. when you were taking substances that
01:07:08 No. when you were taking substances that would be controlled in this country. I I can't remember. No, I can't remember.
01:07:13 remember. Might have been possibly. Yeah. And I don't think they'd have said anything anyway quite honestly.
01:07:21 honestly. Uh sex workers. Uh did to your knowledge you or any other member of your party um
01:07:32 you or any other member of your party um use the services of sex workers? No.
01:07:38 Uh, did your party visit the red light district?
01:07:41 district? Yes.
01:07:42 Yes. Can you help us with um what sort of things the party did uh in the red light district?
01:07:51 district? Mainly window shopping. I think it was just looking around the the red light district. I somebody may have gone to a show. I can't remember. I didn't but I can't remember. Uh, somebody may have
01:08:02 can't remember. Uh, somebody may have gone to a show on their own or with other members of the SDS. I don't know. We split up into the small group. So, I I don't know. I mean, they could speculate, but why wouldn't they?
01:08:13 could speculate, but why wouldn't they? And was this general um behavior known by management? Yes.
01:08:21 Yes. Uh, any guidance about that? No, none at all.
01:08:28 Uh can we now uh have up MPS 40515 please?
01:08:42 This is a document um about a forthcom a then forthcoming BN BNP rally due to be held on the 6th of September
01:08:53 held on the 6th of September 1997
01:08:55 1997 in Stephen. Uh I'll give you a moment if we expand the text to remind yourself of the content. Uh, but I'm interested in particular in the bottom paragraph.
01:09:41 Okay. Yeah. I'm understanding this to be forthcoming BMP demonstration in Stephanne full AFA call out. Uh but in order to involve be
01:09:54 call out. Uh but in order to involve be avoid the risk of being coralled by police um you're reporting uh that um direct attacks on the BMP are likely to take place after the event.
01:10:07 likely to take place after the event. Mhm. Yes.
01:10:09 Mhm. Yes. Were you at the meeting um which discussed this? Yes.
01:10:15 Yes. Can you help us with the terms in which tactics at the event were discussed? I think initially um the fact that the AFO were contacted by search light who
01:10:27 AFO were contacted by search light who were
01:10:28 were they weren't trusted particularly it was uh you know they had they'd have to verify that but the fact that they had been in touch uh they had to be looked at um and so that's why I've said later
01:10:39 at um and so that's why I've said later on there that it had to be corroborated by their own sources to make sure that this wasn't just a bogus uh call out um See,
01:10:50 See, and of course on once if search like have this information there go to um anti-fascist port of call it wouldn't
01:11:01 anti-fascist port of call it wouldn't normally be AFA I have to say would certainly be um the SWP and with that of course there' be as I've mentioned is linked Arafa which I
01:11:14 I've mentioned is linked Arafa which I did know one of the the people involved with that small offshoot organation But essentially the ANL and the S SWP and the Socialist Party, they had their own sort of counter, they were organizing a
01:11:25 sort of counter, they were organizing a counter demonstration as I said, but tactically what tended to happen in those situations was the police would be informed. Searchite would always inform the police of of these concerns and then
01:11:36 the police of of these concerns and then there would be a thing. So the police would be there and very helpfully as far as the ANL were concerned, they corral them safely behind the P police line so they could safely demonstrate against
01:11:47 they could safely demonstrate against any right-wing uh demonstrators at the time without getting hurt themselves. That was the general sort of tactic and and AFA's consensus around that. Um but
01:11:58 and AFA's consensus around that. Um but in this case obviously if there was going to be MP personnel which I can't imagine there would have been however then attacks would have been carried out
01:12:09 then attacks would have been carried out away from the main demonstration. Was that something you were assuming or was that something that was expressly discussed? That was expressly discussed. That was common policy in that respect.
01:12:20 common policy in that respect. Why wasn't search light trusted? And when you say they weren't trusted, could you clarify in answering who it was that didn't trust them? Uh I think
01:12:31 was that didn't trust them? Uh I think well certainly the as I said there the AFA hierarchy and or most of the people I knew in Red Action kept them at arms length because I think they they were willingly they'd speak to the police,
01:12:43 willingly they'd speak to the police, they'd speak to the press, they you know and it was they had a certain agenda exposing um fascism and and did a good job of it
01:12:54 and and did a good job of it professionally, but they had too many um other issues where their security wasn't n't considered to be good enough to risk uh direct action on the back of their
01:13:05 uh direct action on the back of their intelligence. Did you attend the actual event in Steney on Saturday the 6th of September? I think I must have done. Yes. Yeah.
01:13:15 Yeah. Uh we can take the document down now, please. Can you help us with what happened?
01:13:25 There's no document. What happened? Well, I don't I don't I I don't as far as I can recall there was a the de the planned demonstration there, the police there, the ANR were there and AFA turned
01:13:37 there, the ANR were there and AFA turned up or I don't think there were any uh I don't recall seeing any um BNP people around that area at that time. So, it was actually a non-event.
01:13:48 So, it was actually a non-event. It was a non-event as far as I can recall. Yeah, it was a non-event which certainly then sort of cemented the sort of doubts about uh search light intelligence in the first place. Could we have up C188
01:14:01 Could we have up C188 which is an MPS number 40542?
01:14:11 This is um a report about information obtained apparently by you on the 13th of September 1997
01:14:22 of September 1997 written up um on the 15th and 16th of September. Uh if we have the three paragraphs of text expanded please I'll
01:14:33 paragraphs of text expanded please I'll let you refresh your memory.
01:14:54 Okay. Yeah, it's the third paragraph that I'm particularly interested in. And you are reporting a U-turn on current policy and a decision to institute a number of attacks on right-wing activists, which
01:15:06 attacks on right-wing activists, which you say will be done by a small team of trusted activists with no publicity. Were you at uh how well how did you get this intelligence
01:15:17 this intelligence uh from Harold himself uh at a in company where this was being discussed? It would have been. Yes. Yes. And uh there's a suggestion that even
01:15:29 And uh there's a suggestion that even within the AFA this action isn't going to be widely broadcast. Why was that? Um,
01:15:39 Um, what are we looking at here?
01:15:45 Which part are you referring to there with that question? Well, it says it's the sec third line of paragraph 3. These will be done by a small team of trusted activists and will
01:15:56 small team of trusted activists and will be given no publicity brackets even within AFA closed brackets in the hope that such tactics will bring a response from the dormant extreme right. Yes. sufficient to retain the interest of
01:16:07 sufficient to retain the interest of rank and file AFA members. Yes.
01:16:11 Yes. So the picture that is being painted is that a subset of AFA are plotting uh to physically attack people on the
01:16:24 uh to physically attack people on the right wing in order to provoke a response and maintain the interest of people uh who wish to be violent. Is that a fair
01:16:36 that a fair inference from what you're reporting? Yes, it was. It was aspirational I would say.
01:16:40 say. Can you help us uh then what actually happened?
01:16:46 happened? Well, the problem with all of this is as I say it is an aspirational thing. It was important for AFA to have uh to keep the activists active and of course
01:16:57 the activists active and of course they're the most motivated when they've got an opposition to fight. uh and they that was lacking considerably on the ground at that particular time. So if
01:17:08 ground at that particular time. So if they get bored some of the less sort of politicized members of apera they'll they'll just lose interest and the group will diminish. There was and certainly the sort of red action continued. Remember this they'd been together you
01:17:20 Remember this they'd been together you know for decades at this point they were looking at a younger you know less well-known trusted part of the um afford setup
01:17:31 trusted part of the um afford setup really to provoke something to get you to really stoke up the fire really. They knew that the the the fascism did exist out there. was finding it uh and once it was found and attacked as was their
01:17:43 was found and attacked as was their policy then that would spark the interest of or keep the interest going of rank and file AFA members. Were they found and attacked? I I no I think that were half the
01:17:54 I I no I think that were half the problem was they were pretty dormant in London.
01:17:58 London. Uh and am I right to understand uh that Harold was a driving force behind this? He was the driving force behind everything.
01:18:08 Can we take that uh down now, please? And can we go uh to the topic of uh Peter Francis's leaving party uh which
01:18:20 Peter Francis's leaving party uh which we understand took place on the 27th of September
01:18:24 September 1997?
01:18:26 1997? Did you attend that? Remind me where it was. Was definitely right. No, I thought you No, I thought you had information where it was. If it was a leaving do, I
01:18:37 it was. If it was a leaving do, I generally speaking, yes, I would have gone, but I can't remember it specifically. But if if I knew where it was, I'd be reminded. Yeah. Can you recall at about this time
01:18:50 Can you recall at about this time whether there had been any rumors about Peter Francis's exfiltration and how it had been conducted by him?
01:19:02 and how it had been conducted by him? There were rumors. Yes. Can you help us as to what the rumors were? Um, I think as if I remember rightly, there was rumors that he'd gone rogue.
01:19:14 there was rumors that he'd gone rogue. Basically, he hadn't stuck to his his plan.
01:19:18 plan. Um, he'd driven a car to France, which he didn't have authority for. He'd set fire to that car, which caused all sorts of problems, I think, for the office.
01:19:29 of problems, I think, for the office. That was it. Whether that was true or not, I don't I've got no to back that up, but that was the story that was we were concerned with at the time. By the time of the leaving de
01:19:41 By the time of the leaving de uh was that all water under the bridge? No, because I can't remember the the cart and horse thing here. I don't know where the the rumors were after that after he'd gone or the the leaving
01:19:54 that after he'd gone or the the leaving do sometimes they happened just before people finished. I I don't know when the the time frame was for that, so I couldn't answer that. Can you recall whether there were any
01:20:06 Can you recall whether there were any actual ramifications arising from the rumored behavior
01:20:13 actions in terms of management? No. But I'd already flagged up my concerns about Francis prior to this anyway, so I wouldn't I wasn't surprised by that. What concerns had you flagged up about
01:20:25 What concerns had you flagged up about Mr. Francis? He was a troublemaker. In what sense was he a troublemaker? He was uh
01:20:32 was uh himself and uh another colleague in the office as far as I could see and I I witnessed this myself
01:20:43 witnessed this myself was trying to set up another colleague uh to have violence done to them which is completely out of order. And I expressed this to the uh management in
01:20:57 expressed this to the uh management in no uncertain terms as this was not on and I just felt he was a wrong back then.
01:21:04 then. Can we move uh now to the question of David Irvine's visit to the Irish History Society, the University of North London. Could we have up please tab
01:21:16 London. Could we have up please tab C198?
01:21:18 C198? Um it's an MPS number 40670.
01:21:28 This is a document that um is based on intelligence obtained from you on the 10th of November 1997 about a then forthcoming uh meeting uh
01:21:41 about a then forthcoming uh meeting uh on the 20th of November. If we could have the text including the source comment expanded please.
01:21:52 Okay. Yeah. Yeah.
01:21:55 Yeah. The source comment, "The number of people who attend will determine the level of action, but the primary aim will be to humiliate strokes threatened, David Irvine, and by association Billy
01:22:07 David Irvine, and by association Billy Hutchinson and the PUP. Can you help us with the basis um for the opinion that the aim would be to humiliate and threaten?"
01:22:20 to humiliate and threaten?" Yes. um on this particular occasion and the there's the slight backstory to this was that Metaf and Headedley had um Metaf in particular was obsessed with
01:22:32 Metaf in particular was obsessed with the actions or alleged actions of Billy Hutchinson over in uh Northern Ireland where he allegedly assaulted a female or or something like that in when he was in the the UVF. Um obviously David Irvin
01:22:46 the the UVF. Um obviously David Irvin was was a former member of of the UVF but these sort of insults um they these two uh people met Metaf and uh Headley
01:22:58 two uh people met Metaf and uh Headley became obsessed with this to the extent that um you know they were made a massive issue think what on earth is this got to do with the Colin Road center you know but it know that was the
01:23:09 center you know but it know that was the issue that they they wanted to address this whole damnation of Billy Hutch son for for some unknown reason. Um but then it was it that was very much a
01:23:21 it was it that was very much a characteristic of of both of them because they they published another document which is related to this accusing um I think they accused militant labor flirtation with fascism.
01:23:33 militant labor flirtation with fascism. So they like to be provocative in their own sort of well I think it was childish way. So that was the background to this. Um it was their own sort of u justification really for walking up and
01:23:47 justification really for walking up and threatening slash humiliating uh Mr. Irving.
01:23:51 Irving. Was anything said specifically about how it was intended to do that? No, I think it was basically confront him before he went into the the building. Um, and can we take it from
01:24:04 building. Um, and can we take it from the paragraph immediately above source comment which reads, "The RSF will be approached to see if they would be willing to print any photos from this action in their newspaper. Uh, that it
01:24:16 action in their newspaper. Uh, that it wasn't proposed to do anything criminal." I think um that I mean that was again Metaf was keen to get this um on published by somebody and I think he thought the RSF would be only too
01:24:29 thought the RSF would be only too willing to do this. I don't think anything ever came of that though. But my question was, can we take it from the fact that people had in mind getting media coverage that the severity of
01:24:43 media coverage that the severity of humiliation or threatening behavior was such was going to be such that it would not
01:24:49 not pass any threshold for criminal conduct. Again, I mean, yes, possibly, but it depends on the the extent to which it's done. He was a, you know, he's an experienced politician, so he expected
01:25:01 experienced politician, so he expected some abuse, but how far they were prepared to go with that, I didn't know at that point. Can we take that down and uh go to tab C101, another again an MPS number 40695?
01:25:16 We're moving forward to a 24th of November 1997 um report about the talk on the 20th of November 1997.
01:25:29 November 1997. Uh I'll I think ask you first of all to look at the first two paragraphs of text on that page.
01:25:53 Yeah. Okay. Were you there? I was. Yeah. And uh is that an accurate summation of what happened? Yes, it is. Can you help us in your own words to
01:26:05 Can you help us in your own words to describe this scene? Um it was a small picket. Um, we looking at maximum half a dozen people. Um, and I think when Mr. Irvine and his his
01:26:18 I think when Mr. Irvine and his his bodyguard appeared, you know, from they've been down the road quite casually walking into the venue, they sort of sort of got into his face and started, you know, sort of shouting it
01:26:29 started, you know, sort of shouting it at him, but he went through the door. He was ushered in through the door by his bodyguard, but then to his credit, he came back out and tried to to speak to these, you know, to Headedley and Metaf
01:26:41 these, you know, to Headedley and Metaf in particular. Try to reason with him. What happened when he did that? It completely took the wind out of their sales. I have to say it was very impressive uh politician in that respect.
01:26:52 respect. And so in terms of the conduct that was directed against Mr. Irvin. Uh what precisely did it involve?
01:27:04 Uh what precisely did it involve? Shouting uh obviously accused him of uh colluding in in the murders and Billy Hutchinson in particular and his alleged activities. Uh it was that it was pretty
01:27:17 activities. Uh it was that it was pretty monosabic in that respect but there was no he wasn't punched or they got close to him. There was jostled is quite a reasonable explanation. It was nothing more than that. Josel and um a frank frank exchange of
01:27:31 Josel and um a frank frank exchange of views verbally. Yeah, I think you could say that politely.
01:27:35 politely. Exchange may be the wrong word. Expression frank expression of views. Yes, but I think certainly if there was to be a winner there, it would certainly be Mr. Irving.
01:27:47 Can we go now to page two and the top paragraph?
01:27:57 groups who had at best been expecting only to disrupt the meeting by vigorous questioning. The total disregard for personal security displayed by Irvin and the subsequent panic arrangements made
01:28:08 the subsequent panic arrangements made by the university that being to hold the meeting in private could easily have led to a disorder situation. The feeling of the IRSP, CRC, and Red Action is that
01:28:19 the IRSP, CRC, and Red Action is that should Irvine ever return to Holloway and displays the same arrogant disregard for both personal security and political insensitivity, then plans will be made for a physical attack?
01:28:33 for a physical attack? Can you help us please uh to explore that in a little bit more detail? What exactly uh were people you
01:28:44 detail? What exactly uh were people you were listening to saying about the evening and the future? This again this is um metaf and that that small group of of
01:28:56 metaf and that that small group of of people and subsequently I think you know I spoke to people in red action as well. I think this this particular perspective is really uh the metaf headley uh they
01:29:11 is really uh the metaf headley uh they were they've been humiliated I think it'd be fair to say so this was yeah if he ever comes back we're really going to do something about it was that sense of thing because as I said previously they'd had the wind taken right out of
01:29:22 they'd had the wind taken right out of the sails by Mr. Irving so again aspirational I would say and sour grapes hot air
01:29:29 hot air yeah I would say so yeah did Mr. Irvine come back during your tenure as an undercover officer? Not that I'm aware of. No. Can we take that down now, please? Can we have up from tab C205 an MPS number
01:29:42 we have up from tab C205 an MPS number 40728?
01:29:49 This is a document um which was uh the intelligence is dated the 8th of December, typed up on the 9th. Uh, I'll
01:30:02 December, typed up on the 9th. Uh, I'll ask for the text to be expanded so you can refresh your memory.
01:30:24 Okay. Yeah. Um, so you are you seem to be expressing an opinion in line about the IW.CA in line with your evidence yesterday, namely as a group it was of little
01:30:37 namely as a group it was of little interest itself from a public order point of view because it was involved in mainstream local issues. Is that fair? That yes, that's fair enough. Yeah. Uh but then it goes on uh to as I
01:30:48 but then it goes on uh to as I understand it talk about red action, your views of red action and apha and discussions of um Dublin style street justice including
01:31:00 Dublin style street justice including the use of hurling sticks. Can you help us um explore that a little bit? Uh what precisely was it being proposed would be done? Again, this is this is obviously
01:31:13 done? Again, this is this is obviously discussion with Red Action, but that that was a a common practice by um in in Republican communities. I think the story here is was in specifically
01:31:25 the story here is was in specifically mentioned Dublin, but um where it was basically as it says there, vigilantes particularly around drugs would be dealt with by concerned citizens uh organized concerned citizens and that was seemed
01:31:37 concerned citizens and that was seemed to be a good way of of dealing with that. So you essentially the as I read Reddit um if you're involved in a community yes you get you know a local
01:31:50 community yes you get you know a local there's a local candidate you want to clean up your community uh so get rid of drugs get rid of fascists and they were well equipped to do that uh
01:32:03 uh you've given evidence about the fascist before so I'd like to uh concentrate here on the question of drugs and other anti social behavior. Did during the course of your deployment AFA or Red
01:32:15 course of your deployment AFA or Red Action ever seek to meet out street justice?
01:32:19 justice? Not in my my time. No. Any use of hurling sticks? No. No. No. There were no hurling sticks in in that part of London as far as I was aware. So again, fighting talk but no action.
01:32:32 So again, fighting talk but no action. Yeah. But I think that it was more the principle of it. Um there was a blueprint over in in the Republic and Northern Ireland and I think it probably they were thinking in terms of a similar
01:32:44 they were thinking in terms of a similar type of fit over here. Could we take that down now please? Can we have up at from C208 an MPS number 40781
01:32:56 an MPS number 40781 please?
01:33:08 Uh this is um a report 19th of January 1998
01:33:15 1998 said to be based on your intelligence. Um could we have the text including the comments expanded please?
01:33:27 This is about the person we are calling Noah.
01:33:43 Yeah. Okay.
01:33:48 Um, can we take it that the source comment is your assessment uh of uh Noah?
01:33:55 Noah? Yes.
01:33:56 Yes. And the handler's comment would be somebody from management? Yes.
01:34:00 Yes. Uh the handlers comment, "Noah's occupation further strengthens Red Action access to a wide range of outlets that could provide excellent logistical support for the provisional IRA.
01:34:14 support for the provisional IRA. Can I take it from your answers yesterday that to the best of your knowledge, Noah never actually provided any such support?" Uh, no. I wasn't aware of that at the time. No.
01:34:25 time. No. Did Noah ever say or do anything to you that indicated that he intended to do so?
01:34:32 so? No, he didn't. Or would be prepared to? No, he didn't. No. Could we take that down now, please? Can we have up uh from tab B45
01:34:45 we have up uh from tab B45 uh 749
01:34:48 uh 749 473, please?
01:35:04 Uh, could we have page 20?
01:35:12 And could we expand it? Thank you. This is a document dated January 1998 and it is said to be a record of a strategy
01:35:24 is said to be a record of a strategy meeting with you. You'll see from the first paragraph that it uh says that you attended a meeting with DCIHN58
01:35:35 attended a meeting with DCIHN58 DI Lambert DS War and DS Titty to discuss the state of your current operation and a targeting strategy for the coming year. Do you recall that
01:35:46 the coming year. Do you recall that meeting?
01:35:47 meeting? I don't. But they, you know, had a lot of these meetings, but not not that one specifically. But if we look at the third paragraph first of all,
01:36:03 and it's reported there that you had recently spoken to Jamie and been asked to purchase blackout material for a vehicle. um you'd done that but were
01:36:15 vehicle. um you'd done that but were none the wiser as to um who or what any possible targets are. Can you help us with whether Jamie in fact said anything to you about why he
01:36:29 fact said anything to you about why he wanted you to purchase blackout material?
01:36:32 material? No, I think this is all linked I think to the uh what we were talking about earlier with that meeting of trusted associates. So you asked to do something, you do it and you don't ask questions. Simple as that.
01:36:44 questions. Simple as that. So that that meeting was the end of July. So here we are. It said that recent in January recently you'd been asked to purchase blackout material. Did you understand it to be the purposes of
01:36:57 you understand it to be the purposes of the group of conspirators, if I call them that? Um or was it unclear whether it was even for the purposes of that? I made the assumption it was due to that
01:37:08 I made the assumption it was due to that because of the obviously there's no sort of context for doing this. So that was only my assumption at the time.
01:37:17 Can we go to the fourth paragraph, please?
01:37:26 Of concern to HN15 was his time in the field and the length of time he would need to begin his withdrawal strategy. After careful consideration and full consultation with HN15 and the support
01:37:38 consultation with HN15 and the support staff, DCI HN58 indicated that he would be applying for a year's extension for HN15.
01:37:47 HN15. This then negated the need for the commencement of any disengagement. Can you help us as to the conversation that led up to the decision to apply for
01:37:58 that led up to the decision to apply for a year's extension to your deployment? It was something that we um you didn't ask for it um because the originally when you you join as you'll be aware
01:38:09 when you you join as you'll be aware that was four years that's what we were told with a possibility of an extension really dependent upon the value of the intelligence you were given whether it was still needed etc etc. So they would
01:38:21 was still needed etc etc. So they would if they thought it was worth asking you for another year that's what they do. Um and that's this is the case here. sort of concern to you
01:38:34 sort of concern to you was your time in the field. What concerns had you ventilated? I think at at the time because I was covering so many different groups and areas
01:38:47 groups and areas um and the more groups I covered, I didn't just drop one and go to another one. These were all simultaneously. That was a lot of disengagement. So, I was concerned this is going to this is going
01:38:58 concerned this is going to this is going to take some doing.
01:39:02 Uh, was the fact uh you were enjoying a relationship with Allison anything to do with your desire to extend your deployment?
01:39:13 deployment? Not at all. No. What influence did your ongoing relationship with Allison have on your views as to the length of your deployment?
01:39:24 deployment? It didn't come into it at all. That was something which I mean I you know I was perfectly aware that if I was finishing in four years then that's that that would be the end of it. There was no
01:39:35 would be the end of it. There was no think I've got to stay on for a little bit longer because I wanted to see her. That's nonsense. No, that wasn't a factor at all. Is it fair to characterize your
01:39:46 Is it fair to characterize your deployment by this stage as be certainly beginning to shift in earnest to af?
01:39:55 Yes, that's true. And I did look for this is the one thing I did look for direction from the office. I did say look I am spreading myself quite thinly here and I need some sort of uh
01:40:06 here and I need some sort of uh indication of what actual direction you want to take me in. That that was another concern. And what was the answer? Carry on with the the sort of the red action stuff really. I mean to be they
01:40:18 action stuff really. I mean to be they wanted everything. They were never going to say oh don't do this or don't that. But the focus was where I was heading basically. uh putting up coming at it from another direction. Why were you still involved
01:40:30 direction. Why were you still involved with the CRC at this stage? I think at that sort of late stage and I think involvement I don't think that they were holding meetings much but I was in touch with me you know he was a contact we go
01:40:42 with me you know he was a contact we go out for a drink together even after I'd sort of moved over to Red Action we were still friends we lived very close to each other and you know we were we go for a drink regularly that wouldn't
01:40:53 for a drink regularly that wouldn't change
01:40:54 change can you help me to what extent were you keeping in touch with Metaf because you were his friend and to what extent because you were an undercover police officer officer. Um, looking for information. Oh, both. Yeah. Friends are not real in
01:41:06 Oh, both. Yeah. Friends are not real in the SDS world. Could we have the last paragraph uh expanded, please?
01:41:15 In a general sense, HN15 expressed satisfaction with his living arrangement and vehicle. His wife and children have moved into a new house and have settled in extremely well.
01:41:27 in extremely well. Presumably, um, Mr. Well, Sergeant Titty who wrote this um had a conversation with you along with your managers uh to come to those conclusions. Can you help
01:41:40 come to those conclusions. Can you help us with what you said to your managers on this occasion about your living arrangements? Well, my domestic living arrangements or SDS your SDS living arrangements. I
01:41:53 SDS your SDS living arrangements. I would have said as I've always said I was living with a contact in a in an address in the burough of Hackne and that you were satisfied with them or how would you have described it?
01:42:04 how would you have described it? I was satisfied with my accommodation. Yeah, absolutely satisfied. Yeah. How how did you express yourself to your managers
01:42:13 managers about my living accommodation? Well, because it was the foundation of um of everything I did. It gave credibility to my backstory. So that so I never underplayed that. It was very important.
01:42:27 Uh and your wife and children as you say, is it right as recorded uh that they'd settled in extremely well? No, I think that's that's been exaggerated. What did you say to them?
01:42:39 What did you say to them? I said that they'd had difficulty settling. It was it was a massively traumatic time at that. So I think that makes it sound as if, you know, everything was well, carry on as normal, but it wasn't.
01:42:52 Sir, would this be a convenient moment to break?
01:42:56 to break? Certainly. We'll break for the usual 15 minutes.
02:05:27 Thank you sir. Could we have up please from tab C211 MPS 40794.
02:05:41 that this is uh intelligence obtained on the 21st of January 1998.
02:05:49 1998. Um bearing your code name and about AFA. If we could have the text expanded, please
02:06:45 Okay. So, uh the context appears to have been a decision by AFA to decide to get involved in providing support to the victims of racial attacks. Um, the first
02:06:57 victims of racial attacks. Um, the first passage that I'm particularly uh interested in is in a few lines down where it says in the early '9s they enjoyed an uneasy relationship with
02:07:09 enjoyed an uneasy relationship with privacy at the Greenwich Action Committee against racial attacks and also had close connections with the family of Steven Lawrence before losing
02:07:21 family of Steven Lawrence before losing out in the left-wing scramble for recruitment amongst victim families.
02:07:29 families. Uh now when you said they enjoyed an easy relationship, we understand that to mean a
02:07:38 mean a uh yes, a
02:07:40 uh yes, a as was reported there. Yes. And this this came from Harold directly. What did Harold tell you about the
02:07:51 What did Harold tell you about the connections that he or other members of AFA had with Steven's family? I think this again this is another classic example. This is intelligent. I
02:08:03 classic example. This is intelligent. I didn't write this report and there is an obvious glaring error in that um because firstly I can't recall AFA a I mean if
02:08:16 firstly I can't recall AFA a I mean if you say AFA having any connection at all with the Steven Lawrence campaign however I did know that they uh was told that they knew activists down at the
02:08:27 that they knew activists down at the Greenwich Greenwich action committee against racial attacks who also would have had connections with the Steven Lawrence campaign, not in isolation. The thought that Afford had
02:08:38 isolation. The thought that Afford had any direct connection with the Steven Lawrence campaign is ludicrous.
02:08:44 The words before losing out in the left-wing scramble for recruitment amongst victim families.
02:08:54 families. Was that something that Harold had told you or was that your analysis of the situation? I I don't think he probably wouldn't have phrased it in those words, but that
02:09:05 have phrased it in those words, but that was my analysis and summarizing what he said. What did Harold say to you about other left-wing groups and Steven's
02:09:18 other left-wing groups and Steven's family
02:09:20 family in this well and in this particular circumstance it was only really in connection with they had no the Steven Lawrence campaign along with various other campaigns were obviously
02:09:32 other campaigns were obviously attractive to other left-wing uh organizations and because of obviously the high profile of that particular case. Um, yes, it was an attractive proposition to
02:09:43 yes, it was an attractive proposition to an outside campaign. The question is, what did Harold say to you about that? Exactly how I've reported it there. They didn't have any sort of influence that the only tenuous influence they may have
02:09:55 the only tenuous influence they may have had was through their connections with Gakara, which was presumably in the earlier 90s. The difficulty I'm having um, Mr. Jenna and for which I am looking to you for
02:10:08 and for which I am looking to you for help is you've been very dismissive of close connections with the family of Steven Lawrence and yet close
02:10:19 Steven Lawrence and yet close connections with the family of Steven Lawrence is what is written down. So I am trying to understand first of all what did Harold tell you
02:10:32 what did Harold tell you about connections with the Lawrence family?
02:10:36 family? There weren't Yes. Okay. Well, there were no direct connections. It was that was an example of the as I put it there a scramble for influence on that particular campaign presumably um from
02:10:49 particular campaign presumably um from the the early '9s that that was used as as an example by him. Well, why does the report say that AFA had close connections?
02:11:00 connections? This is what I'm saying. I didn't write this report. That's taken in in the wrong context. They didn't have close connections with the Steven Lawrence campaign.
02:11:08 campaign. This report will have been based on something that you would have written. Yes. The notes I'd written then is this is written up by the office and the source comment is yours.
02:11:21 Yes. I mean that's the source comment is mine. You that's consistent with with a vowed aims and intent. If you had thought that the assertion
02:11:33 that the assertion that Harold or anyone in AFA had close connections with the family of Steven Lawrence was rubbish. Wouldn't you have said so in the source comment? Exactly. That's why I'm saying that the
02:11:45 Exactly. That's why I'm saying that the the clo there weren't close connections. the this report looks as though it is, but they had connections with somebody or some people at Gakara. Well, forgive me, Mr. Jenner. That
02:11:57 Well, forgive me, Mr. Jenner. That source comment does not qualify the phrase had close connections with the family of Steven Lawrence.
02:12:06 Right? So, that which said that because they didn't have close connections with the family of Steven Lawrence. Moving on to the second part of that sentence. Can I try again? What did
02:12:18 sentence. Can I try again? What did Harold tell you about
02:12:23 about AFA and his own actions visav the family of Steven Lawrence in the early '9s. It was the the that campaign as I said
02:12:35 It was the the that campaign as I said in the sentence previous to that uh they they wanted to provide support to victims of racial attacks. Now the most the prime example of that would be the
02:12:46 the prime example of that would be the Steven Lawrencea campaign. So that was the the context in which that comment was referred to. What did he say to you if anything about
02:12:57 What did he say to you if anything about competing groups? That was a that was that was a common sort of dismissive attitude to all leftwing groups that they were jump on a bandwagon.
02:13:09 bandwagon. So coming back to my earlier question is this in is the phrase before losing out in the left-wing scramble for recruitment amongst victim families in fact your opinion. No, that was the
02:13:20 fact your opinion. No, that was the general consensus then and that's the you know words paraphrasing that but that was the attitude of Red Action AF then they were dismissive of these leftwing groups
02:13:34 was a left-wing scramble for recruitment amongst victim families the way you saw it
02:13:42 it really had an opinion on it but certainly any of those uh groups family- based campaigns or particularly around racist racist attacks. Then of course there was a history of leftwing groups
02:13:54 there was a history of leftwing groups all wanting to provide assistance in whatever way they could in order to further their own profile. And would that view have been shared by your SDS and special branch colleagues?
02:14:07 your SDS and special branch colleagues? Yes, I think so. That was a general consensus. Yeah. And your senior managers in the Metropolitan Police Service. Well, that's going a bit wide, but
02:14:18 Well, that's going a bit wide, but certainly my senior managers within SDS were of that opinion. Yes, I can't speak for outside of that. If we can concentrate now on the
02:14:30 If we can concentrate now on the paragraph below, it is planned that Harold and Privacy will meet up with the Lawrence family and other families who have suffered
02:14:42 and other families who have suffered racial abuse with the idea of recruiting them into a broad liberal umbrella organization with the legitimate aim of
02:14:53 organization with the legitimate aim of promoting public awareness. ness of racial attacks.
02:15:00 Did that happen? No, this is aspirational. Are you sure that did not happen? Well, I'm pretty sure that Harold and the the main leadership of Red Action, I
02:15:13 the the main leadership of Red Action, I mean, the thought of them uh being involved in something of that is just unthinkable in my experience back then. Were you keeping an eye out in case they did?
02:15:23 did? No.
02:15:24 No. Would you have reported it if it had come to your attention? I would have reported it on the grounds I' have been absolutely astounded had that happened. Uh but that just it was never ever going to happen. Now
02:15:38 what was the relevance of uh reporting all of this? Again, it's just background intelligence as to the the way of thinking of uh AFA and uh Red Action. And they'd often at
02:15:52 and uh Red Action. And they'd often at this level, we're talking the top of the organization here, they'd sort of posture how they would see the organization going, etc., etc. I mean, that, you know, to think that members of
02:16:03 that, you know, to think that members of AFA would try and involve themselves with with uh victims of racial attacks is just beyond comprehension as far as I can see.
02:16:12 can see. And again looking at the source comment uh why doesn't that have something to the effect of in his dreams um as the analysis of the likelihood of that
02:16:25 analysis of the likelihood of that actually happening. That's a sort of frivolous comment I just made you know to say something that just wouldn't have been acceptable to say something to the effect that this
02:16:37 to say something to the effect that this is very unlikely to happen. Why isn't that assessment in your source comment? No idea. Don't know. Can we take that down? And uh can we now
02:16:49 Can we take that down? And uh can we now go to DOA on the 28th of February uh 1998 and the uh demonstration at which
02:17:00 1998 and the uh demonstration at which we know you came to be arrested. Mhm. Uh we're going to start with the uh leadup to that if we can have from tab C219 and MPS number 4088.
02:17:17 This is an advanced report based on intelligence apparently from you dated the 24th of February 1998,
02:17:28 the 24th of February 1998, 4 days beforehand. If we could have the text expanded, please.
02:17:43 Okay. And what stance did you take um about attending the DOA counter demonstration with those you were infiltrating? I think I was at that stage I was um
02:17:57 I think I was at that stage I was um I've been the North London organizer. So I had a responsibility within the the organization in terms of um getting members in aware of it and and turning out for this event uh in
02:18:10 and turning out for this event uh in order to give us an idea of how many people we could actually produce on the day.
02:18:15 day. Uh but was it was it always your intention to go? Yes.
02:18:19 Yes. And for what purpose were you uh hoping uh to profit from attendance? Well, obviously there was anticipated um disorder and as an organizer within the
02:18:33 disorder and as an organizer within the organization itself, I'd been expected to go and you know keep things together within the North London AFA group. Uh did you give any thought to how you
02:18:45 Uh did you give any thought to how you would behave on the day? Lead from the front in what way? There was the actual with all of these
02:18:57 There was the actual with all of these uh events, you'd often have someone would and it wasn't known to me, you'd have a meeting point. So, you'd travel down a meeting point and then you have a a forward assembly point, etc., etc. So, I wasn't I didn't I wasn't made privy of
02:19:10 I wasn't I didn't I wasn't made privy of those until on the actual day itself. Uh but yeah, getting people from one place to another and then in a position to avoid the police and then attack the uh
02:19:23 avoid the police and then attack the uh whoever they were the NF I think on the day at the march and that position of leading from the front was that because you were uh one of the organizers. Yes.
02:19:35 Yes. Could we have uh next the video please? It's UCPI 37961.
02:19:44 So we can all be reminded of what was captured on film.
02:19:56 The National Front abandoned a rally in Dova over the arrival of asylum seekers from Eastern Europe after clashes with anti-racist demonstrators. The National Front was protesting at the
02:20:07 The National Front was protesting at the arrival last month of several hundred gypsies from Slovakia and the Czech Republic.
02:20:17 Around 50 members of the National Front arrived in Dova to start their march along the seafront escorted by the police. After only a few minutes, they were confronted by a small
02:20:30 minutes, they were confronted by a small group of anti-racist protesters determined to block their path. As the police moved in to keep the two sides apart, a couple of fireworks were
02:20:41 sides apart, a couple of fireworks were thrown at the National Front. Plans to keep the anti-racist groups well away hadn't worked. As they ran round to try to reach the marchers, the
02:20:53 round to try to reach the marchers, the police blocked them, pushing forward to let the march continue. The number of scuffles grew and became nastier. More police in riot gear moved in,
02:21:05 More police in riot gear moved in, forcibly clearing a path so the national front could get back on their coach to leave. One man was injured. There were six arrests. This was something that police hoped wouldn't happen. Whatever
02:21:16 police hoped wouldn't happen. Whatever the views about the gypsies, angry scenes like this won't take the heat out of the situation. There was clearly at least one supporter for the national front in Doy
02:21:29 for the national front in Doy local people have resented the arrival of hundreds of Czech and Slovak gypsies in their town. But while views are divided on the issue, no one wanted a confrontation on the streets.
02:21:40 wanted a confrontation on the streets. Valerie Jones, BBC News, Dova. Thieves have stolen computer programs worth almost please.
02:21:51 You were at the front um wearing the beanie hat and the bomber jacket gesturing and saying come on. Yeah.
02:22:00 Yeah. Uh can we now explore events on the day chronologically? You get to do before the demonstration started. Was
02:22:13 before the demonstration started. Was there uh any incident? Uh there was an incident. We met up in a in a pub on the outskirts of town. Um it it was a pre-arrangement at the pub. I can't remember where it was, but
02:22:24 pub. I can't remember where it was, but we were to wait there. It was sufficiently far away from the uh for any sort of police involvement or you know police presence. Um and then in the
02:22:35 know police presence. Um and then in the pub um it was which was full. It was a crowded pub, mostly AFA members, but there were a number of other individuals there. And there was I heard a I saw a
02:22:48 there. And there was I heard a I saw a scuffle at the uh near to the bar. There were two two men at the bar dressed in combat jackets and I think one of them
02:23:00 combat jackets and I think one of them was wearing what was described in actually see what was described to be as a a Northern Ireland type flag which is or cross of St. George type of flag which was assumed to be an NF type of
02:23:14 which was assumed to be an NF type of slogan. So these people were identified by some members and they were attacked with um bowls and an ashtray and injured.
02:23:26 injured. Uh could you describe the injuries these men sustained? Uh I couldn't but they looked pretty nasty. There was a heavy ashtray in the head and then beer beer glasses and etc
02:23:40 head and then beer beer glasses and etc etc. So yeah they were they look quite nasty injuries. Yeah. Who started the violence? Uh, Waffa.
02:23:51 Um, did you ever come to know whether or not these men were in fact supporters of the National Front? Uh, later
02:24:02 Uh, later after the event, I did come to know that they weren't in fact members of the National Front. Were they in fact soldiers from the local garrison? Apparently.
02:24:13 Apparently. It was a parachute regiment. I don't know about that, but there was certainly milit local military personnel. Yeah. What happened next? Uh went out the pub, obviously exited uh
02:24:27 Uh went out the pub, obviously exited uh pronto. There was a route. I think it'd already been scouted out by local activists. So we made our way then to the center of Dober to another pub which
02:24:38 the center of Dober to another pub which wasn't far from the front in town, much larger pub where there more activists there. It was quite full of uh then necessarily a people but certainly
02:24:49 necessarily a people but certainly anti-fascist type characters. And we sat in there uh waiting for the for the off as in the march to start off. And then what happened at the off?
02:25:02 what happened at the off? Uh we went down to the front. Uh they were as you could see from the film there, they were marching along a road. The road it looked like a dual carriageway and there was a raised uh
02:25:13 carriageway and there was a raised uh bed between these two things. And I I was surprised at how far we were able to get before the local police cotton Donald realized. I mean there's a big column of BS charging through the town
02:25:26 column of BS charging through the town there and there's no sign of any police officers there. Um it was only when we actually got up to where these people were part of the march that we we caught sight of them,
02:25:37 march that we we caught sight of them, got anywhere near them. But it was quite difficult by that time because it was apparent that police reinforcements had arrived riot people and all the rest of it and tried to affect a cordon.
02:25:50 Can you lean into the mic? I'm being asked rolling back a bit. Can you help us uh with first of all
02:26:02 Can you help us uh with first of all whether the description that we've just seen in the news report is paints a fair and accurate picture and if not could you explain? Yeah, I think that's that's perfectly
02:26:13 Yeah, I think that's that's perfectly fair. Yeah, I argue with that. Does it paint a complete picture? A picture of what exactly? What happened? Well, a part of it, yes,
02:26:24 What happened? Well, a part of it, yes, but not all of it. There were scuffles outside of that. Yes. Can you help us uh with when in the course of events you come to be arrested?
02:26:34 arrested? I think we got down on the video that you saw there. We jump down onto the wall onto the side of the road that the the actual demonstration was on. Uh and
02:26:45 the actual demonstration was on. Uh and then we try to get uh into or attack the uh some of the NF activists. The police are came and it there was a bit of a scuffle as you could see there pushing
02:26:57 scuffle as you could see there pushing and and shoving. Some of the NF uh people managed to get around the the back of the the police into more open ground which was ahead of where the
02:27:09 ground which was ahead of where the march itself was marching. uh we would try to confront them then and then obviously the police dogs came along and and stopped that. It was quite spread out there. So there's probably about a
02:27:20 out there. So there's probably about a three or four of them and half a dozen plus myself and other AFA activists who were stopped through the use of police dogs and I was arrested then.
02:27:33 dogs and I was arrested then. Did you actually come into physical contact with anybody from the National Front?
02:27:37 Front? No, couldn't get near him. Couldn't get near him. did get bitten by a police dog though.
02:27:44 Uh we'll come back to the uh arrest later, but for the moment, can we go to tab C220 MPS at
02:27:57 tab C220 MPS at 40936
02:28:03 uh 16th of March uh 98. So just over a couple of weeks after the event uh report based on your
02:28:15 event uh report based on your intelligence titled anti-f fascist action. If we could have the text expanded please.
02:28:27 Uh this appears to be a report on the AFES debriefing after the demonstration. Is that right? Yes. And then if we look at paragraph two.
02:28:51 Yeah.
02:28:55 Okay. Uh and is by this stage you know I is a reference to the four soldiers being injured a reference to the incident in the pub that you were
02:29:07 incident in the pub that you were telling us about? Yes it was. So by that stage um Harold is under the impression they were soldiers. Do you know how that came about?
02:29:19 about? He was he was in contact with me um at some point. I can't remember then because he was more concerned at that stage that uh AFA got the media credit
02:29:34 stage that uh AFA got the media credit over and above the ANL. That was important. So he was keen to make sure that we made the media aware that it was AFA that was running this particular uh
02:29:45 AFA that was running this particular uh counter demonstration. So I at stage I didn't discuss with him. I think they I don't know who who told him that they were uh uh soldiers. They were just sort
02:29:57 were uh uh soldiers. They were just sort of as loyalists. I don't think he's even mentioned on the phone then. But alo after I was arrested he would have spoken to other activists on the ground who'd obviously filled him in.
02:30:08 who'd obviously filled him in. And uh why was he of the opinion that their injuries were not severe enough?
02:30:16 I don't know that's a flippant sort of remark. I think at that stage he obviously assumed that they were um they were loyalists on national front these you know talking about men who are
02:30:28 these you know talking about men who are used to extreme violence. Um you know by the sound of it they describe yes he's had a these BS have had a whack over the head with a bottle and a and an ashtray pub ashtray. That's not enough. And I
02:30:41 pub ashtray. That's not enough. And I think that's that's to put that into context. I can only assume that's what he was referring to. Was it bravado or was it because of the Irish Republican sympathies
02:30:53 Irish Republican sympathies in regards to what what the the sentiment that the injuries of the soldiers were not severe enough. I don't know. I honestly don't know why that uh
02:31:02 that uh and then it goes on to say as a result of this success AFA agreed that at future demonstrations a stewards group comprising Jamie Clive Privacy you and another will be created with the
02:31:14 another will be created with the specific aim of leading an attack on the opposition in order to create confusion. Uh how certain are you that the role of the stewards group was to be active
02:31:27 the stewards group was to be active attack?
02:31:28 attack? Uh 100% I knew that. Yeah.
02:31:33 Can we now go to the criminal proceedings at tab B50 526752.
02:31:45 We start at page five.
02:31:51 And this is the Kent County Constabularies charge sheet for you in your cover name. Can we take it that you followed uh the instruction you'd been
02:32:03 followed uh the instruction you'd been given not to break cover and were processed at all times in these proceedings as Mark Steven Cassidy? Correct.
02:32:13 Correct. And you were charged with obstruction of the highway contrary to section 137 of the highways act 1980. Correct.
02:32:21 Correct. If we could go to page four please.
02:32:29 This is a branch note made by DCI HN58 on the 2nd of March 1998 about your arrest. If we could have that expanded. Thank you.
02:32:41 Thank you. And uh I'll give you a moment to scan that. Uh but uh I am interested in the anti-penultimate paragraph. Uh that is
02:32:52 anti-penultimate paragraph. Uh that is to say the paragraph about uh the threatening phone call you received. Mhm.
02:33:07 And is it right that you received a telephone call uh at Allison's flat on Monday the 2nd of March at
02:33:18 flat on Monday the 2nd of March at approximately 3:00 in the morning? Yes.
02:33:22 Yes. And uh can you uh recall the terms of the threatening call?
02:33:30 call? Yeah, as it said as you you proy bastard the boat sounded a bit drunk and it was a voice I didn't recognize. He had a certainly had a Northern Irish accent. Um and it was just hurling a load of
02:33:42 Um and it was just hurling a load of insults. This is 3:00 in the morning. Um and I just you know I don't know where it come from but it was on my mobile phone.
02:33:50 phone. And were you in bed with Allison? I was in bed at the time. Yeah. With Allison. Yes. She heard the phone go off. And what did you say to Allison? Uh well, I'd had this Did I say to her?
02:34:03 Uh well, I'd had this Did I say to her? I just told her I'd had this call. I mean, I was just surprised she'd had heard it because the phone went off next to my ear. So, um yeah, I told her the contents of what that phone call was.
02:34:14 contents of what that phone call was. She gave evidence to the effect that you went and got um a piece of wood to jam the window closed. Did you do that? Probably. Yeah. Oh, jam the window. I wanted I wanted a weapon handy. Yeah. I
02:34:26 wanted I wanted a weapon handy. Yeah. I didn't know where this was coming from. Did you say anything to the effect that um people who conduct such attacks don't announce
02:34:35 announce announce them first words to that effect?
02:34:38 effect? Very possibly. Yeah. But I mean this was completely out of the blue this this uh phone call. So yeah, speculated on all sorts. I didn't know who it was. And the speculation recorded in this branch note
02:34:49 speculation recorded in this branch note that it might be uh connected uh to the injuries sustained by four members of the parachute regiment. Is that
02:35:00 the parachute regiment. Is that connecting it to the incident in the pub that you've described? Uh well that in that reference yes it does. But I must admit for myself I didn't think it was in connection with
02:35:12 didn't think it was in connection with that.
02:35:13 that. Well let's follow that thread. We have up now C221. It's an MPS number 40943.
02:35:30 Uh this is intelligence obtained on the 16th of March uh 1998. And if we uh have the text expanded.
02:35:44 Give you a moment to absorb that.
02:36:28 Okay. Uh, so it would appear that within your target group, the AFA, it was thought that threats may be being issued by a
02:36:39 threats may be being issued by a disaffected RSF RF member. This wasn't uh this wasn't an AFA consult. This was um Republican forum. Um, I didn't I didn't think it
02:53:55 Could
02:54:09 we have back up on the screen please? 526752.
02:54:16 Proceeding uh with this uh document. It goes on uh to deal with the threatening phone calls. Further information has come to light with regard to the phone
02:54:27 come to light with regard to the phone call he received in the early hours of Monday the 2nd of March. Apparently a number of other fellow activists in Republican forum and Republican Shinfane also received similar phone calls. Seems
02:54:39 also received similar phone calls. Seems likely that a membership list has found its way into the hands of either a disaffected member or someone opposed to their stance on Ireland. Touchy subject
02:54:50 their stance on Ireland. Touchy subject has not received any further phone calls. It is unlikely that events in do had any bearing on the phone calls, the timing being purely coincidental.
02:55:01 timing being purely coincidental. Uh
02:55:02 Uh the membership list for Republican Forum, would they have had your cover address on them? No, it was just the contact mobile contact numbers. I was all
02:55:13 contact numbers. I was all Are you sure? Wouldn't they need uh wouldn't the membership list need to have uh information for mail shops and things like that? Not not in not in my
02:55:24 things like that? Not not in not in my recollection because these were you know various groups some of the bigger organizations had group um uh obviously group addresses etc. I was there. Um I
02:55:35 group addresses etc. I was there. Um I think I was I was there with obviously the Brian Higgins campaign. So unless it I was under that address, I don't know. I can't remember what it was. But the certainly in as regards phone calls, uh
02:55:49 certainly in as regards phone calls, uh it would be my mobile phone. I'd never get out a landline. In terms of addresses though, your cover address was Allison's address, wasn't it?
02:55:57 it? It was. Yes. And uh you did not know uh what information had um been leaked to whoever it was or who
02:56:08 been leaked to whoever it was or who they was making the threats or what information they had access to? No, I didn't know the actual details of it. No, of course not. So you could not rule out that they had Allison's address?
02:56:19 Allison's address? I couldn't. Not for 100%. No. Was anything done to protect the address?
02:56:27 address? No.
02:56:28 No. Are you sure of that? Other than me being here? No. As far as I was aware, no. Did you raise that subject uh with your managers?
02:56:37 managers? No, because I was pretty confident that the address, you know, nobody gives out a personal address. Um, no. I was pretty confident that wasn't disclosed, but as
02:56:49 confident that wasn't disclosed, but as you say, I could never be 100% certain of that.
02:56:53 of that. Coming back to the question of phones, is it right that in the flat there was a phone in the bedroom? I didn't think there was. No, there was a main phone. There was only one phone and that was in the front room which was
02:57:05 and that was in the front room which was attached to the answer phone. Allison's recollection was that the call came in
02:57:11 came in to the landline on a phone in the bedroom. She took the call and handed it to you.
02:57:19 to you. Is that what happened? She may have handed a phone to me, but it would have been my mobile phone, not a landline phone. When did you first get a mobile phone?
02:57:32 When did you first get a mobile phone? Um,
02:57:33 Um, it may have been 96. It was actually Allison. I mean, I couldn't get a mobile phone at that time because in those days you had to have a lot of documentation. You had to have lived at an address for
02:57:45 You had to have lived at an address for 12 months, uh, utility bills and all the rest of it. Um and as that became a bit of an issue, she um managed to get a phone for me, obviously using her
02:57:58 phone for me, obviously using her address details, etc. Um and I just paid the the rent on that as we went along. Could we have now page three of this file?
02:58:13 Uh and this is a manuscript branch note again by HN58 and it records that on Wednesday the 17th of June T touch T touch T touch T
02:58:24 touch T touch T touch T touch T touch T touch T touch Touchy subject received notification that his case at do magistrate's court was not being proceeded with this being apparently due to the CPS not being ready and was that
02:58:35 to the CPS not being ready and was that the end of the matter? Uh yes, as regards that particular court suit, I went to court a couple of times, but yes, that was the end of the matter as far as I was concerned. Yeah. What was the other occasion?
02:58:46 What was the other occasion? The second time I went to court. No, that was part and I went initial hearing. Uh then that was bailed then for another appearance a couple of weeks later. It was the same
02:58:57 couple of weeks later. It was the same case but on two separate occasions. I understand. Thank you. Can we take that down now? uh the Good Friday Agreement
02:59:06 Agreement signed 10th of April 1998.
02:59:12 How quickly did news of that reach your ears?
02:59:16 ears? Well, it was in the news. It was it was Yeah. big news. Obviously, it took an interest in the news that appeared in the the media and Yeah. So, I'd have got it as soon as anybody else did. It was undoubtedly big news, but it was
02:59:28 It was undoubtedly big news, but it was also highly relevant to your deployment, wasn't it? Absolutely. Right. Yeah. Of course. Did you discuss that development with your managers, the Good Friday Agreement? Yes. No, I
02:59:40 the Good Friday Agreement? Yes. No, I don't think we did specifically. No, because it wouldn't have made any difference to the direction I was going in in.
02:59:47 in in. Uh could you explain that? Yeah, because when that the Good Friday Agreement when it was signed, um again, we were back to the situation we were in in 1994.
02:59:57 in 1994. uh everything was all done and everybody's happy but there was still intelligence to suggest that there were people who weren't weren't prepared to give up the struggle. So in terms of my
03:00:08 give up the struggle. So in terms of my deployment in that respect then nothing changed. So no change of direction, no change of emphasis? No. No, I don't think so. I mean I was in the d I had contacts within the
03:00:19 in the d I had contacts within the dissident Republican groups uh in London and that was enough. But remember there were still the dissident uh who were supporting Pyra. There were still people
03:00:31 supporting Pyra. There were still people who weren't in agreement with the Good Friday agreement um you know as subsequently transpired various groups on the offshoot of that. So no, in terms of relevance, absolutely no difference
03:00:42 of relevance, absolutely no difference to me at all. Not even this is a particularly important moment. Um, keep your ear to the ground on that particular part of your deployment. No, I don't remember that specifically.
03:00:54 No, I don't remember that specifically. No, you know, don't be any less vigilant or more vigilant than you already are. As simple as that. Could we go to tab C2 MPS 301069?
03:01:41 This is um back to the question of Noah. Uh information provided seemingly from you on the 14th of May 1998.
03:01:54 you on the 14th of May 1998. Uh, could we have the text up and I'll be asking you questions about the first two paragraphs. All right.
03:03:04 Okay. Yep. Fine. Um
03:03:07 Um Noah Noah's selection criteria uh for joining uh AFA and then Red Action.
03:03:18 AFA and then Red Action. What was the basis for your reporting that he was looking for the more violent and physically capable? Because that's exactly the sort of profile person that they wanted to have in the organization.
03:03:29 in the organization. H how did you know that? He told me and I I could see that for myself at that stage. That was the profile of persons that they wanted needed.
03:03:37 needed. This uh implies that Noah used to be violent.
03:03:43 violent. um says no longer gets involved with AFA's violent side. Did you ever see Noah get involved in violence? Uh not directly, but I do know he was he
03:03:54 Uh not directly, but I do know he was he was he was a very violent individual. How do you know that? Um somebody was with him at a venue that I wasn't at and he was threatening and violent towards another member in a
03:04:06 violent towards another member in a leftwing group. I can't remember the details, but it was entirely consistent with what I knew of the man. How violent? On that particular occasion, I think
03:04:17 On that particular occasion, I think punches were were thrown. He was an intimidating person. When
03:04:22 When when did this happen? Yeah. I I can't remember that. Was it by the time you made this report in May 1998? Was it ancient history or very recent? I honestly I couldn't say but that was my my image of him and what
03:04:35 but that was my my image of him and what I knew and having met him and seen and spoken to him. I mean the man had been around the scene for decades. Um and he was and he I think he was feared by a lot of people as well within the
03:04:46 lot of people as well within the organization. What I'm interested in is whether this is just an impression you formed or whether you had hard evidence that he had a violent past. Only from what other people have told me. I've never actually seen him. I
03:04:58 me. I've never actually seen him. I mean, you know, he was he was getting on a little bit, but at this stage. And what did people describe to you? Anything specific or was it just reputation? Um, it was reputational. I mean, you're
03:05:10 Um, it was reputational. I mean, you're going back into the 1970s here, so there's a long history. Uh there is talk in the second paragraph of pushing the Republican message into
03:05:24 of pushing the Republican message into anti-fascism and anti-oyalism and mixing it with a potent cocktail of violence. Is this general republicanism or Irish republicanism?
03:05:35 republicanism? I well certainly I don't recognize the word. That's not wording that I would use. Um but it my opinion is and which it was my opinion um yes the Republican
03:05:47 it was my opinion um yes the Republican message um and as we've discussed earlier with the IWCA that and anti-oyalism and it all goes into the same pot um underlined with the
03:06:00 into the same pot um underlined with the use of violence which takes us to the potent cocktail of violence. Can you help us with whether uh this is an assessment or whether you
03:06:12 uh this is an assessment or whether you actually heard uh Noah explicitly advocating and inciting violence. I definitely
03:06:24 and inciting violence. I definitely heard him um being ready to incite or not actually incite you know someone to hit somebody but he was an advocate of violent direct conflict. Um he he told me that himself
03:06:38 conflict. Um he he told me that himself although I didn't actually witness that but I heard him say that he was absolutely committed to it. Can we take that down now please? And can we have up from C238
03:06:50 can we have up from C238 MPS01098.
03:06:57 Uh this is a report dated the 21st of May 1998.
03:07:04 May 1998. Again your intelligence. It's about an anti-IRRA march on Saturday the 23rd of May 1998
03:07:13 May 1998 said to be organized by AFA. Can we just expand the content please?
03:07:22 I'll let you absorb that.
03:07:29 Okay. Yeah. So this is very specific intelligence that there is going to be an attack before this event
03:07:41 an attack before this event by AFA members on the national front in a pub involving offensive weapons. Where did you get that intelligence
03:07:52 Where did you get that intelligence from? Well, that would have come either from uh Clive himself or someone close to the leadership of the organization.
03:08:03 Carrying offensive weapons on the day of a volatile event like this would carry a risk of arrest, wouldn't it? It would.
03:08:14 It would. And is it your clear recollection that that is what was being contemplated? Yes. And under those circumstances, the information I had, yes, that's exactly
03:08:25 information I had, yes, that's exactly what it was. What happened? Uh, I don't know. I wasn't involved in if anything did happen. Um, I don't know. Clive was the main person in dealing with he was younger than some
03:08:38 in dealing with he was younger than some of the other pe the main organizers. So, he would deal with a lot of the information that came in from various strands across that organization. Um,
03:08:49 strands across that organization. Um, this is obviously divulged to me. Hence, there's there's not a lot of detail in terms of the the actual location. Um, perhaps he didn't know at the time, but he may not have just chosen not to tell
03:09:00 he may not have just chosen not to tell me. I don't know if this event actually took place or not. Um and the the reference to the CS gas sprays
03:09:13 reference to the CS gas sprays uh that coincided to an earlier report I'd said about it had been mentioned by another activist about obtaining these things. So it was relevant from that
03:09:25 things. So it was relevant from that point of view. Would you have remembered if there'd been a dramatic attack on NF members using weapons? Oh certainly if had I been there of course I would. And also I have to say
03:09:36 course I would. And also I have to say had it happened in those circumstances I would have heard of it. Yeah. So I've got one small point that I would like to deal with before lunch. It's a
03:09:47 like to deal with before lunch. It's a po It's a point um please don't take us down yet. We'll have to come off the YouTube uh feed for it will be a short point. Uh, might I invite you to make
03:09:59 point. Uh, might I invite you to make clear to those following on YouTube uh that we will not come back on stream until 2:00.
03:10:09 Um, they will uh not learn that for 9 minutes or so. uh and they will not uh start watching again until 10 p 10 10 2
03:10:21 start watching again until 10 p 10 10 2 If you agree to the proposal, um
03:10:25 um YouTube will now be taken down and we will resume YouTube at 2:00.