Afternoon session examining HN69 DCI Malcolm MacLeod about his management role during Bob Lambert's deployment, intelligence about Debenham's attacks, concerns about agent provocateur issues, and the balance between operational security and preventing crime. Note: Video includes unrelated procedural hearing from 02:55:47 onwards about closing submissions process.
00:03:28 e e
00:04:04 this afternoon's proceedings are being live streamed uh those with electronic devices may use them to describe what they have heard in the hearing room um but only after 15 minutes have elapsed since the event that they're describing those devices may not be used to
00:04:23 those devices may not be used to recording thank you sir Mr McLoud just before lunch I showed you two minutes dated the 24th of August involving tm42 one in which he recorded having spoken to to Eric Docker and then one in which he recorded speaking to Commander
00:04:38 which he recorded speaking to Commander Churchill Coleman yes about information received on the face of it from Robert Lambert can I we have up on screen please now a briefing note of the same day MPS
00:04:44 day MPS 0735 381 it's your B25 sir and this is a briefing note in which uh
00:04:56 uh tn42 is recording having passed information to detective inspector gray and just before I carry on tm42 is
00:05:08 gray and just before I carry on tm42 is an individual that the inquiry has given a temporary nominal to tm42 he was an officer a special Branch officer wasn't he are you able to say did 42 please don't say the name but if
00:05:20 did 42 please don't say the name but if you look at the cipher list and and see who it who it
00:05:32 is oh yes so this is a special Branch officer not an so13 officer sir yes and he is passing in this briefing note information to or he's recording having pass it passed information to detective inspector gray so if we could have a
00:05:43 inspector gray so if we could have a look please at the first two paragraphs on the first
00:05:49 page he is recording telling detective inspector gray that information from a secret and reliable source showed that the original Target for the incendiary bombing campaign hars had been
00:06:00 bombing campaign hars had been changed there were now to be three separate
00:06:02 separate targets all unknown at the present time which Andrew Clark the prime motivating force in the plot would select and recer on Monday and Tuesday the 24th to the
00:06:14 on Monday and Tuesday the 24th to the 25th of August so that's what we saw in the minute that he recorded after speaking to Eric Docker and then the this briefing note goes on to say that special Branch surveillance had seen Clark collect a white plastic bag from
00:06:29 Clark collect a white plastic bag from an address in Grove Road B E3 on Satur day the 22nd of August 1987 and transported in an old ambulance to 43 Hillside Road Tottenham the address of Jeffrey Shephard this man is a close associate
00:06:44 Shephard this man is a close associate of Clark and is deeply involved in the plot it has subsequently been learned again from a secret and reliable source that the plastic bag in question contained the component parts for a number of incendiary devices so again
00:06:59 number of incendiary devices so again minute which is comment by Lambert on the cont ents of a bag containing component parts and can we have a look please zoom out from
00:07:11 that um I'm not going to take you through the rest um of uh that page but can we have a look please at the top of page
00:07:28 two at the note from tm42 uh says this Helen steel of lyen Road M15 is the only other principal figure to emerge in this inquiry however as intelligence shows that she is most unlikely to have anything incriminating at her address and to facilitate Source protection it
00:07:42 and to facilitate Source protection it is recommended that her premises should not be
00:07:49 not be searched I asked you this at an earlier point in the chronology but at this point do you recall Bob Lambert mentioning anything to you about Helen steel being involved in a plot to put down incendiary devices in August or September of 1987 no no definitely
00:08:05 September of 1987 no no definitely not are you able uh to assist assist as to why not searching Miss Steel's address would facilitate the protection of Robert
00:08:20 Lambert I I don't think it
00:08:24 would necessarily have protected Bob
00:08:33 no I don't
00:08:39 believe if we zoom out and have a look at the
00:08:40 at the next uh few paragraphs
00:08:51 please it says the providing intelligence Source has also been fully identified to detective inspector gray that suggests that he's been told about Bob Lambert's existence doesn't it yes servic so
00:09:03 it yes servic so yes and arrangements are in hand for a specifically selected s so13 team to search his address and detain him for an appropriate period of time as a means of supporting his
00:09:14 supporting his credibility did you have any input into what this appears to be a plan to search Lambert's cover address and detain him if needs
00:09:28 be I can't remember been around for that but I must have been but I I can't recollect unless you can give me some more information to all right we'll come to some more documents later on in the
00:09:39 to some more documents later on in the chronology but can I ask you just this at the moment before we get to those do you view it looking back as a good idea neutral bad idea to search Bob Lambert's
00:09:51 neutral bad idea to search Bob Lambert's cover address as part and parcel of this operation well I can see the benefits of it to deflate any
00:10:09 it to deflate any suspicion so far as the target group was concerned um it would in a sense
00:10:12 sense yes it would give him a degree of credibility with with the with the group with the um activist there would only be a need to
00:10:27 activist there would only be a need to deflect suspicion if he was so close to those in the plot yes that no action being taken against him would be seen as some
00:10:34 some remarkable
00:10:42 noticeable is that not right if he had nothing to do with it searching his his his premises would serve no function would it possibly not so it it must have been the case that it was understood that he was close enough that for him to escape attention might cause suspicion
00:10:55 escape attention might cause suspicion on him yes possibly yes I agree with it
00:11:04 do you have any idea why it was being suggested here that Arrangements were made for a specifically selected s so13 team to search his
00:11:18 address yes I think you asked that I think that question has been asked previously
00:11:25 um by using s13 officers
00:11:30 officers um there's a rent is to obtain
00:11:36 to obtain evidence which will result in prosecution they are they recipients of the intelligence that comes in from the STS
00:11:46 STS but I think that's where their responsibility starts and finishes it's purely in in evidence Gathering whereas the special Branch
00:12:02 Gathering whereas the special Branch officer Prof Martin gray was there as a leaz on between the branch and so13 but why would the search team need to be specifically selected for Bob Lambert's
00:12:22 address to give a a false impression that he is um Under Suspicion from the police and this way to so gain some
00:12:34 and this way to so gain some credibility but the suggestion here is isn't if I unless I've misunderstood it is not just to send in any old team from so13 but to select the team to to handpick them for want of a better
00:12:52 handpick them for want of a better phrase can you think of any reason why the team would be handpicked to go to Lambert's
00:12:59 address I I don't know why why the was they were handpicked I can certainly see why you would have Martin gray as a lead on this but why
00:13:18 um I I can't see what advantage there would be in having
00:13:25 um no I I can't quite can't I can't quite see the benefits of that as far as you were concerned were those who were going to
00:13:39 concerned were those who were going to search Bob Lambert's cover address to be let in to the fact that he was in fact an undercover officer or would they have been ignorant of
00:13:45 of that I think they were they may have been
00:13:56 were they may have been aware are you able to say one way or another no I'm not that's why I'm hesitating
00:14:04 the final paragraph on this uh page ends as in this way it was hoped that a combination of surveillance and further
00:14:14 further intelligence might identify prospective Planters of the devices in the intervening period do you recall having
00:14:25 intervening period do you recall having an expectation that Bob Lambert might be in a position to identify who would plant devices in August September
00:14:41 I think there's a reasonable likelihood that he was in a position to provide that intelligence but do you remember having any conversations with him about seeking out who that would be no I I
00:14:50 no I I no no there was no
00:14:59 conversation if we could take that down please and have up on the screen screen MPS
00:15:00 MPS 07
00:15:08 35362 this is dated two days later um it's minute 18 at the bottom
00:15:19 later um it's minute 18 at the bottom please thank you and over the page so two days later another minute from tn42 to um assistant Commander
00:15:28 operations um and at the beginning of the
00:15:29 the minute he is describing what surveillance officers have observed of Clark and Shephard do you see
00:15:48 see yes and them meeting up carrying plastic bags if we could just go over the page the top of page two of the document please um it says this it is just possible that shepher may have begun to assemble the devices at his home address however I am assured by the source
00:16:03 however I am assured by the source through acting detective Chief Inspector Docker that this man does not possess the ability to complete the job this will have to be done by Clark and therefore the two men will need to meet before completion of at least one device can be
00:16:15 device can be assumed again this is quite detailed intelligence isn't it coming from Mr Lambert that Shepherd whilst he might be imp possession of components isn't going
00:16:28 imp possession of components isn't going to be the man to put the device together yes I agree do you recall coming into receipt of this intelligence no I don't do you
00:16:41 this intelligence no I don't do you remember asking any questions of Lambert about his state of knowledge of shepher and Clark manufacturing incendiary devices no I can't remember having a conversation to that
00:16:59 effect I'll show you in a moment an intelligence report an SDS intelligence report a couple of days after this but take it from me from the moment that this intelligence about the possibility of Shepherd beginning to assemble a
00:17:10 of Shepherd beginning to assemble a device at his home address but not being considered to possess the ability to complete the job that information doesn't make its way into a written SDS intelligence report could you think of any reason why it might not frankly no I
00:17:34 can't was there any sense that this stage when things were gearing up as it were to to possibility the possibility of making arrests that that you were acting in in haste were things being done in a
00:17:39 done in a hurry or do you not remember it feeling like that I I can't remember it feeling that I knew there was a there was a
00:17:51 that I knew there was a there was a desire to to get a result as quickly as possible but other than that I can't remember if we take that minute down then and look at the intelligence report that follows it
00:18:03 the intelligence report that follows it two days later dated two days later it's MPS
00:18:05 MPS 0735 376 it's your b 27b sir um Eric Docker signs this off uh Mr McLoud rather than you um but it's
00:18:17 McLoud rather than you um but it's understood to by the inquiry to be an intelligence report in fact it appears to have Mr Parker signature at the end we'll check if that is correct the um
00:18:30 we'll check if that is correct the um minute sheet is certainly signed by Mr Docker um and we see that the S1 784 number in the margin on the left that indicates an SDS report doesn't it yes it does and so an SDS report dated the
00:18:46 it does and so an SDS report dated the 28th of August 1987 if we could focus in to begin with on paragraphs 2 and three
00:18:54 please okay so paragraph two I'll summarize reports the postponement of plans to Target herods on because live animals have been found to be kept at
00:19:05 animals have been found to be kept at the premises so we've already seen in briefing notes of minutes that that information had been reported orally that harod was no longer the target so that's now committed to writing and then paragraph
00:19:16 paragraph three
00:19:18 three uh Records this it has also transpired that Clark's girlfriend Helen steel has recently taken delivery of 200 liberated rats at her home address
00:19:31 rats at her home address Clark has therefore decided that these animals should be found safe homes before his next campaign commences and he has therefore decided that the earliest date for his next action will be Friday the 11th of September
00:19:42 be Friday the 11th of September 1987 so for the first time in this report we see reference to Friday the
00:19:57 report we see reference to Friday the 11th of September as a new date for the attacks and also reference to 200 rats being present at Helen Steel's um address
00:19:58 address do you
00:20:00 do you recall coming into possession of being made aware of this new information about the change of date to September and the rats at Helen Steel's home no I wasn't
00:20:11 rats at Helen Steel's home no I wasn't privileg all are you sure about that or is it simply that you've no recollection no I'm sure of it I I I would have remembered this so you you have no recollection of it at all no recation
00:20:29 no do you recall any discussion at all
00:20:31 all of 200 rats at Helen Steel's home address no or any number of rats at Helen ste's home address for that Master I think that was sticken to
00:20:48 mind so I you stick in your mind sorry I didn't quite catch that um so you can't assist us for example as to how the rats got to Helen Steel's
00:21:02 got to Helen Steel's home um and if it was suggested that it might might have been Bob Lambert who took them there I mean you say about that that is that is possible could we have a look at paragraph four of the report
00:21:21 please we see also in this report uh Bob Lambert
00:21:23 Lambert reporting again on Clark intending to test a new type of device contained in a Jiffy
00:21:34 Jiffy bag and then it sets out details of how Shepherd and Clark are proposing to visit the city of London to identify possible future targets uh that they will test it in a
00:21:48 targets uh that they will test it in a remote area such as eping forest and if successful there will be an incend device attack followed quickly by a jiffy bag campaign again do you recall coming into possession of being made
00:21:59 coming into possession of being made aware of intelligence of this nature no do you think you would recall it if you had I think I would have done yes do you recall any ongoing
00:22:11 yes do you recall any ongoing discussions with Robert Lambert in late August early September about the ongoing
00:22:22 August early September about the ongoing intelligence he was providing about this campaign I just can't remember
00:22:32 if we take that report down please that's the 28th of August and have a look at a briefing note from the same day again
00:22:44 day again tn42 uh responsible it's MPS 0735 377 it's your B27 a
00:22:56 sir and if we look first at paragraphs 1 and two please
00:23:10 uh what we see here Mr McLoud is tm42 recording in essence that he received the information about the postponement of an attack and the rats at Helen Steel's address the day before on the 27th of August at 16:35 hours by Mr
00:23:24 August at 16:35 hours by Mr Docker right so the information we've just looked at in an intelligence report dated the 28th of August appears first to have been reported orally and passed on by Eric Docker do you see
00:23:41 that I know what part oh you're on the top part sorry big part yes so tm42 knows at 16:35 on the 27th of August what was reported the next day in
00:23:54 what was reported the next day in writing namely that there's been a postponement of the campaign for some two weeks yes and that postponement is said to have been precipitated by the fact that Helen
00:24:08 precipitated by the fact that Helen steel is accommodating 200 rats yes no I I wasn't aware as I mentioned before on this um this is all this is all news to
00:24:29 me all right um if we have a look can we have a look please at paragraph six of this
00:24:36 report um it asserts that the component parts for four devices still unassembled are secreted at Shepherd's address where they will remain for the time
00:24:48 time being are you aware of whether that was information reported by Robert
00:25:03 Lambert there's no way of no if Robert Lambert had been coming and going from Jeff Shepherd's address during a period when there was surveillance on Jeff Shepard's address would you have expected to have been made aware of
00:25:18 that I don't think you would necessarily share that information with us and then finally paragraph seven of this document please
00:25:40 Eric Docker had stated to tm42 that the source is confident that he will remain in touch with developments and be in a position to give early warning of the rescheduled incendiary campaign do you recall any discussions with Bob Lambert to that
00:25:53 effect no I can't but I say again that Eric has had been standing in for me so I don't know where I was at that time right so you understand him being described there as acting detective
00:26:06 described there as acting detective Chief Inspector to mean that he he's standing up or stepping up in that period yes it is because um I can't remember
00:26:19 this all right if we take that down then that's a briefing note on the 28th of August and can we look please at MPS
00:26:33 August and can we look please at MPS 0735 364 b28 so this Mr McLoud is now the 4th of September so about a week later and can we look at minute 23 please the bottom half or the bottom 2/3 of the
00:26:51 page and again this is a a minute from tn42 to the commander operations and it's initialed PP is that Mr felin yes and um detect Ive Chief Inspector McLoud are you had indicated that information received from a secret and
00:27:03 information received from a secret and reliable source shows that it is still the intention of the suspects Clark and shepher to put down incendiary devices on Friday the 11th of September
00:27:17 on Friday the 11th of September 1987 details of the proposed targets remain unknown but assembly of the devices now thought to number five is expected to take place on Wednesday or Thursday 910th September 198 87 the
00:27:31 Thursday 910th September 198 87 the component parts of these devices remain hidden in three plastic bags at Shepherd's address and we are confident of receiving early warning of their removal to another location for assembly
00:27:45 removal to another location for assembly so it appears doesn't it that by the 4th of September at least you were back in harness and passing intelligence obtained by Robert Lambert to tm42 yes and the intelligence that you were passing back was that the 11th of
00:27:58 passing back was that the 11th of September was still the date but the targets remained unknown yeah and that there are now uh supposed supposedly to be five devices whereas earlier
00:28:10 be five devices whereas earlier reporting had indicated four do you recall there being an increase in the number of devices reported no I can't
00:28:21 number of devices reported no I can't remember that particular detail having been mentioned to me and having spoken to you it appears from the second paragraph graph that surveillance was reintroduced on that
00:28:34 surveillance was reintroduced on that day on the 4th of September so we see a starting again of surveill a surveillance
00:28:43 operation it does it follow from this that you must have been speaking to Bob Lambert and communicating orally with him and then passing that information on yes it looks like
00:28:52 like it if we take that down and we look there is an intelligence report the same day dated the same day but signed by Eric Docker it's MPS 0735 374 it's your b28 b
00:29:12 0735 374 it's your b28 b sir so same day as your conversation with
00:29:16 with tm42 and can we look at paragraphs 2 and three of the report please so similar information by Sunday the 6th of September Clark will have set a fresh date for the next incendiary device
00:29:29 date for the next incendiary device action he is known to favor Friday the 11th of September 1987 so slightly less certain than the information you're recorded as having passed on but the date the 11th of September still
00:29:46 features did you question Bob Lambert at all as to how he was able to say that the 11th of September was going to be the new
00:29:57 the new date I might have at the time but I can't remember no I've asked this question a number of times but it did it concern you or cause you to question at all how it was or how close Lambert had to be to know that
00:30:08 close Lambert had to be to know that sort of information well frankly never occurred to me to question it probably say should have but I
00:30:21 didn't the paragraph two goes on full details of this planned action will be reported on Monday the 7th of September that suggest doesn't it that Lambert was telling you that he would come into
00:30:33 telling you that he would come into possession of more information on that date yes it appears to be the
00:30:46 cas a paragraph three records what are described as further details concerning Clark's manufacturer of the incendiary devices used in the action against deams on the 11th of July and it goes on with the assistance of Jeff Shephard it took him two days to manufacture 10 devices
00:31:03 him two days to manufacture 10 devices whilst he may well have speeded up his technique it is anticipated that they will need a full day to make five devices the likely number this time they will all be constructed simultaneously with Shepherd being given the initial
00:31:16 with Shepherd being given the initial mundane tasks before Clark assembles the actual
00:31:18 actual devices again quite detailed intelligence there about the method the process by which Clark and Shepherd manufactured the deams
00:31:41 manufactured the deams devices did that cause you to reflect on how close Mr Lambert had been to the deams uh campaign the deon's
00:31:52 attacks frankly the answer is no um
00:32:01 I didn't see that there was a need to question up fur that was the intelligence that was coming in um and I didn't question any further to the best of my
00:32:17 recollection reflecting now looking at this
00:32:18 this report does it give you cause to question whether Mr Lambert was close to Mr Clark and M Mr shepher not just in
00:32:32 Mr Clark and M Mr shepher not just in relation to this later campaign but also in relation to the plot to put down devices in
00:32:46 deams well it didn't occur to me at that time that that was a likely um a likely outcome
00:32:56 um I I can't I can't be absolutely certain just how I regarded that at the time but clearly
00:33:12 um the degree to which he was close to Shepherd I can't say
00:33:25 um no it's very difficult at this stage after all that period of time to to recall that kind of detail um quite frankly I don't want to in any way
00:33:35 way mislead the inquiry but that's how it is I can't remember frankly The Briefing note of the same day we looked at a moment
00:33:47 day we looked at a moment ago uh which was um expressed to be based on what you had told tm42 included the assertion that five devices would be assembled on the 9th to the 10th of September of 1987
00:34:01 the 10th of September of 1987 that information hasn't made its way into this written report can you think why that would not have been
00:34:07 have been included no I
00:34:13 can't I can't think of any reason why it should be
00:34:25 excluded right let's take that down so that's an intelligence report dated the 4th of September and two days later there is a briefing note with an update from Eric Docker it's MPS
00:34:34 it's MPS 0735
00:34:36 0735 375 it's your b29
00:34:47 sir again authored by tn42 and can we focus first of all on paragraphs one and
00:34:57 two so tm42 told by Eric Docker on Sunday the 6th of September at 10:30 a.m. that information received from a secret and reliable source showed that a change of plan had occurred in
00:35:09 change of plan had occurred in preparations being made for the intended Alf incend device campaign so you'll recall the the intelligence report we just looked at suggested that Lambert would be able to provide more
00:35:22 would be able to provide more information on the 7th of September in fact he appears to have provided more information on the 6th of September at some time before 10:30 in the morning and that information is being passed
00:35:35 and that information is being passed from Docker to tm42 do you see yes uh paragraph 2 records that A A C Drugs warrant had been executed at Clark's address and that had caused him concern that that this might threaten his
00:35:51 that that this might threaten his incendiary campaign so he had decided to use Shepherd's flat 43 Hillside Road as the focal point for further necessary preparations and then could we have a look please at at paragraph three paragraphs 3 and
00:36:08 four at later today Clark is expected to visit Shepherd's address and the two men will proceed to experiment on the
00:36:17 will proceed to experiment on the ignition chemical red oxide which it is intended to use in the phase 2 devices this will probably involve the use of the fireplace at Shepherd's flat and paragraph four there was no suggestion that any work on the phase one devices would be undertaken today and it remains
00:36:31 would be undertaken today and it remains Clarks in intention to begin assembly of the proposed five devices on Wednesday the 9th of September in the
00:36:46 the 9th of September in the circumstances that part of the operation will now take place in Shepherd's flat so we've got intelligence confirming that there will be some devices manufactured on the 6th of September the new style device but that the incendiary devices will be manufactured on the 9th of September
00:37:01 manufactured on the 9th of September do you recall coming into possession of or being made aware of this update
00:37:10 no it ends up it appears committed to writing the next day um in a report which you do sign if we take this uh
00:37:30 down and we have up please MPS 0735 373 it's your b31
00:37:40 sir and so we see you signing the minute sheet there on the 7th of September and if we look at the body of the report please starting with paragraphs 2 and
00:37:55 three um what is reported is that on Saturday the 5th of September leading Al activists Andrew Clark and Jeff Shephard attended an anarchist benefit gig in n16
00:38:08 attended an anarchist benefit gig in n16 using the noisy drunken environment as a form of cover they were able to discuss plans for the continuation of an incendiary device campaign against the faur trade paragraph three uh describes the information we've just seen in the briefing
00:38:23 seen in the briefing note um that following a raid on Clark's address he's decided to switch uh manufacturer further incend devices to Shepherd's address in Hillside
00:38:36 Road and then if we have a look please at paragraph
00:38:52 4 paragraph uh four says uh this Clark uh expressed annoyance at the postponement of the action plan for Friday the 28th of August 1987 however he was confident that the cause of the delay delay the presence of 200 stolen white rats at the nearby Home of associate Helen steel would be fully
00:39:05 of associate Helen steel would be fully resolved in time to allow the action to take place on Friday the 11th of September on this basis he arranged to attend Shepherd's home address on Wednesday the 9th of September 1987 to carry out the manufacturer he indicated
00:39:17 carry out the manufacturer he indicated to shepher that he would switch the day to Thursday the 10th of September if the remaining stolen rats were not taken from Steel's address until Wednesday but he did not think this was very likely
00:39:33 he did not think this was very likely he also indicated this information or any other change of plan would be conveyed to shepher Via his pay telephone in uncoded language so do you agree what we appear to have here is Lambert party to discussions between Clark and shepher at
00:39:50 discussions between Clark and shepher at a benefit gig um on the 5th of September discussing in some detail their plans for this IID campaign again did you uh consider at the time how close Lambert must be with these primary subjects of the campaign
00:40:04 these primary subjects of the campaign when they were discussing detailed plans for an
00:40:11 attack I I I can't recall even seeing this this
00:40:21 note Looking Back Now does it cause you any concern that one of your undercover officers appears to have been party to discussions at this level of detail of a plan to put down incendiary devices just
00:40:36 plan to put down incendiary devices just a few days before those devices would be manufactured and used yes of course yes and why do you say of
00:40:54 course if you if you had information of an impendent attack I would have expected him to bring it to her attention
00:41:05 her attention earlier well he is bringing it to your attention isn't he through this the various reports oral and written that we've been through
00:41:17 yeah but in terms of how close he must have been to those intending to carry out or put into action these attacks to Clark and shepher did that cause you any concern or does it now well
00:41:33 it obviously didn't concern me
00:41:45 then and no I don't think it would have concerned me now so no concern that he's this close to what might be termed an Al cell involved in an incendiary device campaign
00:42:02 campaign well if it was only optionally had to get to get that information get that
00:42:13 intelligence it's only the way you could circumvent the the attack occur if you hadn't got that close so kind of conflicted as to whether I would have um felt any differently
00:42:31 in order for him to complete his mission so to
00:42:38 speak he would probably have required a degree of
00:42:46 latitude and would you have expected him to have had to present himself as someone willing to take part in the planning in order to get this information well that's was taken this
00:42:58 information well that's was taken this step too far I not so sure I would want to comment on
00:43:04 that would it because because I don't I simply don't know I would again expect common sense to kick in and if he was engaging orbe in his cover identity if he was engaging in planning and
00:43:16 he was engaging in planning and discussions about when the date might be and what the targets might be would that cause you concern
00:43:39 well if it if it could if it could result in disrupting the campaign
00:43:41 campaign um that would be to the
00:43:49 good it's clear isn't it from paragraph four of this report that's on the screen that there appears to be some confidence certainly as Mr Lambert is reporting in it some confidence on the
00:44:01 reporting in it some confidence on the part of Andrew Clark that the rats would be taken away from Steel's address in good time to permit his timetable for this incendiary device attack to go ahead
00:44:27 yes
00:44:46 um I don't really have a comment in that were you conscious that at the time to the best of your
00:44:53 of your recollection that taking the rats away from Helen Steel's address would help to pave the way open the door to the incendiary tax going
00:45:04 incendiary tax going ahead yes presum that was intention to to remove the rats in order for that to to be
00:45:15 to be executed do you recall whether or not you discussed with Robert Lambert him taking away the rats I never discussed it at all with anyone he his evidence to this inquiry
00:45:26 anyone he his evidence to this inquiry is that he did take away at least some of the rats he took them to Luton were you aware of that no I wasn't what is your reflection on
00:45:39 wasn't what is your reflection on whether or not that was a permissible thing for him to do given that it appears to have been a step towards the incendiary device attacks taking place but the the incendiary attacks hadn't
00:45:58 but the the incendiary attacks hadn't taken place at that time but taking away the rats was likely to open or should I say clear the path for Mr Clark to make his devices in those circumstances do you have any view on whether it was right for Mr Lambert to be involved in moving the rats
00:46:12 away well that was a a decision he obviously
00:46:13 obviously took
00:46:16 took um I I wasn't aware of it until until you brought this up um so
00:46:25 um so frankly that was the only way in
00:46:35 which the operation could have gone ahead if these rats had been
00:46:45 removed I think it probably would have occurred in any event
00:46:56 but or it would require as say here another a change of plan if
00:47:01 plan if necessary but the reality is do you accept that it appears that Mr Lambert taking the rats away helped to clear the
00:47:13 taking the rats away helped to clear the path for Mr Clark to manufacture further incendiary devices well it must have done
00:47:18 done yes can we look at paragraph five of this report
00:47:26 please uh both par page what two and three thank you
00:47:44 you and the report contains um a summary list of the component parts that are said now to be at Shepherd's home
00:47:52 address do you recall making any inquiry of Robert Lambert as to how he was able
00:48:04 of Robert Lambert as to how he was able to report this level of detail regarding the component parts held at Shepherd's address no I never had any such discussion was Bob lber
00:48:15 this bearing in mind the earlier reporting that we looked at before lunch to the effect that only Clark and Shephard would be involved in the detail of the manufacturer is it not surprising that he was able to obtain this level of detail
00:48:35 well I don't know whether it was surprising or not
00:48:40 um it would have
00:48:50 been it would have cost him to well he would have become better aware of just how advanced the attack had
00:48:59 had got but no I wasn't I wasn't aware of this but to know which component parts are at Shepherd's address he's either been in the address and seen them or
00:49:12 been in the address and seen them or he's been told by presumably Shepherd or possibly Clark hasn't he it could be either he could have been there or he could he could have told him and either way he's privy to a lot of significant
00:49:25 way he's privy to a lot of significant detail very yeah about an advanced plot to put down incend devices yes looking back over the chronology that we've been through from July until early
00:49:36 early September Lambert was able to obtain details about almost every significant aspect of this plot wasn't
00:49:51 significant aspect of this plot wasn't he the targets even though they varied over time the date even though it changed over time the types of devices who had the component part part s where the manufactur would take place even though that changed over time was it really not the case that at
00:50:11 time was it really not the case that at the time you realized that he must have been part of representing himself as part of a cell with Clark and Shepherd no it didn't occur to me I thought at the time the most important thing was to to disrupt the
00:50:23 thing was to to disrupt the operation and carry out the rest that was the the main focus I'm afraid this
00:50:34 was the the main focus I'm afraid this may surprise it may be to you but I mean that wasn't the prary forast and looking back over the evidence now does it seem likely to you
00:50:49 evidence now does it seem likely to you that Bob Lambert was part of a cell with Clark and Shephard over these months in the summer of 1987 no I can't say
00:50:59 that so it doesn't seem likely to you doesn't seem likely to me no could we have a look please at paragraph six of this
00:51:14 report it's reported here that Clark plans to purchase further items to be able to make four incendiary devices on Wednesday so we've got a change it went from 4 to 5 and now it's gone from five
00:51:32 from 4 to 5 and now it's gone from five back to four do you recall this changing of the number of devices this reduction in the number no I can't
00:51:38 recall paragraph seven of this
00:51:52 report reports that Mr Clark had arranged to attend Shepherd's address on the Sunday the 6th of September to experiment on the fireball device that's the same information that we saw in the briefing note that Mr Docker had reported on the morning of the 6th of
00:52:11 reported on the morning of the 6th of September so it was known on the morning of the 6th of September that Clark and Shepherd were to experiment with a what's referred to as a fireball device at Mr Shephard's address on the 6th of
00:52:26 September was there any plan as far as you were were aware to affect an arrest on the 6th of September when they would have been
00:52:33 have been caught in the act of making those devices
00:52:35 devices no why wait until a later date given that there was a risk they might have produced viable viable devices on the 6th of
00:52:53 September well I'm not really sure
00:53:01 why why would would we not delay
00:53:08 um I can't remember any conversation around
00:53:10 around that was there a sense that the desire was to catch them in the act of making incendiary devices of the type used in deams so as to provide an evidential
00:53:26 deams so as to provide an evidential link to the deams events that wasn't simply through Lambert's intelligence I guess that would be the
00:53:45 aim all right can we take that report down and turn to the day of the arrests of Clark and Shephard which was the 9th of September so 2 days after that
00:53:57 of September so 2 days after that intelligence report we've just looked at and can we have have a look please at MPS
00:54:07 0735 371 it's the 10th of September of 1987 and it's your b32
00:54:19 sir and this is just simply to assist you to refresh your memory Mr McLoud it's a note recording uh paragraphs one and two please
00:54:27 please that on the 9th of September 1987 at 11:30 a.m. it was reported that subject
00:54:40 11:30 a.m. it was reported that subject two had left his home and was at subject one's address so that's Andrew Clark is subject two and subject one is Jeff Shephard right so Mr Clark has gone to Jeff
00:54:48 Jeff Shepard's detective inspector gray so13 was informed and a search warrant was subsequently executed at 4:45 p.m. at
00:55:00 subsequently executed at 4:45 p.m. at Shepherd's address 43 Hillside Road the undimensioned persons who were in the process of manufacturing incendiary devices were arrested and that's Andrew Clark and Jeff Shephard what do you recall in terms of your role on the day of these
00:55:17 arrests I remember I remember being delighted that they had been arrested so were you kept informed of progress as it went along on the day
00:55:28 I was aware of his progress but not hour by hour day by day um I knew it was likely to come off but didn't know
00:55:39 didn't know when but no I can't I can't narrow it down any more than that but yes I do
00:55:49 recall do you recall whether you were in touch with Bob Lambert on the day of the arrests
00:56:04 I can't remember where I was but I was away from home and I think I heard the report
00:56:05 report on the
00:56:07 on the radio that arrest had been
00:56:16 made and I telephone the office and it was a congratulations to Bob on the arrest of these individuals so it was seen as quite a coup for but blam but wasn't it
00:56:36 blam but wasn't it indeed do you recall what his role was going to be on the day of the arrest no did you have anything to do with discussing with him or arranging what his role would be
00:56:52 no if we look at paragraph um so it's a later paragraph if I could just see the whole document on the screen uh yep so if we have a look at paragraph five
00:57:07 please in addition to warrants being executed at the addresses of uh Mr Clark and Mr Shephard warrants were also executed at lyen road which was the
00:57:19 executed at lyen road which was the address associated with Helen steel that we saw earlier and Graham Road E8 which was Bob Lambert's cover address were you aware that both of those addresses were going to be
00:57:40 searched no I wasn't did you have any involvement in a decision ultimately whether or not to search Miss Steel's address at lynen Road no I wasn't involved in that decision or a decision whether or not to search Bob Lambert's cover
00:57:54 address I on on that point I can't remember what we decided do you remember whether or not Mr Lambert knew that his cover address would be
00:58:14 searched I would imagine he he would have been aware of it can you assist us as to whether or not you discussed it with him no I hadn't discussed it with him no but others might have done and by others do you mean Eric Docker yeah you'll recall we looked at some
00:58:26 yeah you'll recall we looked at some documents from August 1987 earlier that floated the idea that Bob Lambert might also be detained might be arrested um but he wasn't do you know why not I can't remember that
00:58:42 why not I can't remember that conversation being held for him to be arrested
00:58:44 arrested um it might have been moted but
00:58:55 dismissed do you know whether the search of Bob Lambert's cover address was a complete sham as in deliberately cursory and not really carried out or whether it was a full search well I can't comment
00:59:09 was a full search well I can't comment that because I wasn't there I would just be here sa from others who carried out
00:59:26 be here sa from others who carried out the search but no I'm not aware did you hear anything about Bob Lambert having planted John player special cigarette boxes in his cover address for the search team to find
00:59:35 no would you have had a view if he had asked you whether it was a good idea bearing in mind that those were the cigarette boxes used to construct the incendiary devices you didn't ask me and if he had asked you what would your view
00:59:53 if he had asked you what would your view have been about whether it was advisable to behave in that way if I thought that was going to be used to carry out this attack I'd certainly tell him not not to do it quite unequivocally not to do it and why would you have advised
01:00:04 do it and why would you have advised that because he be conspiring to commit a criminal offense by by putting cigarette boxes in his own address if it could be shown that it was a linkage
01:00:19 could be shown that it was a linkage between that and the um previous attacks on deim so a fear that it might be used as evidence against Bob Robinson in a future prosecution it could well do it would have been a risky thing to do wouldn't it it
01:00:36 would the warrant that was obtained to search Bob Lambert's cover address did you have any knowledge of whether or not the court was told the
01:00:48 whether or not the court was told the truth as in the warrant was to conduct a search of a cover address of an undercover officer well I didn't I didn't attend the court to obtain award I don't know who carried a uh who applied for the warrant
01:01:03 um as to what we told the
01:01:12 court would it have troubled you to learn that the court wasn't
01:01:16 told the full
01:01:28 truth yes I think it would yes would you have expected the court to be told that the warrant was being sought to further the cover of an undercover officer who was providing intelligence about the
01:01:43 intelligence about the principal the principles in the plot I think I would um I'd be happy to take the the court clerk of court whoever we're applying to um to
01:01:54 um to to inform them of the of this plan which I think should take precedence the very fact that you're reporting it to the to the court shouldn't itself
01:02:08 suffice can I just ask you to look at a passage in your witness statement to assist in clarification potentially of what's there it's uh page 149 paragraph 257d
01:02:30 we touched upon this earlier in your evidence Mr McLoud um you say this sub paragraph D I do not recall seeing or hearing about a photograph of Lambert with
01:02:41 about a photograph of Lambert with Belinda Harvey in or around August or September 1987 which suggested that they may be having more than just a close relationship I find his evidence that's Lambert's evidence on this point quite
01:02:56 Lambert's evidence on this point quite strange he alleges that a special branch officer who may or may not have been detective Sergeant couch searched his cover flat in August 1987 um I note from the documents provided to me that s so13 searched his
01:03:10 provided to me that s so13 searched his flat on the 9th of September if that is the incident he was referring to then any photograph would have been found by so13 I have no reason to believe that
01:03:23 so13 I have no reason to believe that detective Sergeant couch was involved no fault of yours at all Mr McLoud but the inquiry is in possession of evidence including from Mr couch that he did in fact attend the search at Bob Lambert's cover address in September do you follow so Mr couch detective Sergeant couch was
01:03:37 so Mr couch detective Sergeant couch was present at that search right and knowing that he was present at that search um does that change your evidence at all in terms of knowledge of a photograph or any knowledge of Mr Couch's role
01:03:56 there m K's role there would been to report
01:03:59 to report back to the office
01:04:17 um normally the the DI Barber would have acted as to go between between so13 and the branch and the information fed back that way I'm I'm not quite clear what the role of Mak coach would have been let me set set out what what he says and then you can comment on it so his evidence was that by the time of
01:04:30 his evidence was that by the time of this search he was no longer serving in the SDS but he was serving in a liaison role with so13 right and he says he was contacted by Eric Docker and asked to
01:04:41 contacted by Eric Docker and asked to attend the search in a sort of welfare role for for Bob Lambert were you aware of any of
01:04:46 of any of that no I wasn't aware but it's what I would expect you would expect it doesn't surprise you yeah it doesn't because of
01:04:58 surprise you yeah it doesn't because of the C cumstances that Bob Lambert was in he was in in a very very difficult situation of course it would become a welfare concern because of the role that he's playing
01:05:10 because of the role that he's playing was playing but why would a search be difficult if Bob Lambert understood that it was a sham to bolster his
01:05:26 cover well it it would have it would have boosted his color so why would his welfare have been of particular concern if he knew
01:05:38 that it wasn't that he was being subjected to an unanticipated search at which he might be a real risk of arrest and investigation was it this was a sham and he knew it so why would he have needed a welfare officer
01:05:56 there I think I would probably make that decision myself if if if I found myself in that situation we
01:06:06 we need there would be a need for somebody to stand by given the pressure he's under in these circumstances I see no problem with that right so broader
01:06:17 problem with that right so broader pressure in terms of his deployment rather than in connection with the search
01:06:18 search itself what do you mean in connection with the search in connection with the the search itself it must have been a very stressful situation to be in to be a servant police officer committing or
01:06:35 a servant police officer committing or or observing or um being aware criminal offense is going to going to be committed so he there's much for his his own
01:06:44 own protection was there any sense in
01:06:57 which he would have been nervous because in fact it was known that he'd gotten so close to Clark and Shepherd that he was at risk of being regarded as having formed part of the
01:07:06 cell well you would have to ask ask him that can we take uh that part of your statement down now please and can I ask you about um another document MPS 07
01:07:32 38106 can we go to the first um page just so that the witness can see what it is these are notes taken by operation Hearn during a meeting they had with Eric Docker in July 2014 do you see that on the top of the first page and I want to ask you please about something that's recorded on page
01:07:47 recorded on page three it's the penultimate paragraph I think yes thank
01:07:56 you so this is what operation Hearn noted having spoken to Eric Docker all right I'll translate the her nominals for you so n10 is Lambert informed n39 which is Docker that he would ring the office when Clark and Shepherd had been in the flat a couple of hours this is
01:08:10 in the flat a couple of hours this is about the day of their arrests all right so that's Lambert telling Docker he would ring the office when Clark and shepher had been in the flat a couple of hours so that suggests that Lambert certainly as far as Docker knew
01:08:23 Lambert certainly as far as Docker knew Lambert was going to be able to warn the office when Clark and sheer had got together to manufacture the devices did did you understand that to be the situation or were you unaware of that detail I was
01:08:37 detail I was unaware and then the account recorded um from the meeting with Docker goes on this was in order to allow Clark and Shepherd sufficient time to prepare the devices teams were in place and when the call went in from Lambert to Docker he
01:08:50 call went in from Lambert to Docker he phoned George Churchill Coleman who then called the s so13 team in Docker did recall that on the day of the arrests of Clark and Shephard he had a difference
01:09:06 Clark and Shephard he had a difference of opinion with Dave Short C Squad Chief superintendent and short said something like the man's out of control you've lost
01:09:10 lost him Docker told short that Lambert would phone with the information and he did did Eric Docker tell you about what he describes as a difference of opinion with Mr short and in particular him
01:09:24 with Mr short and in particular him having said something like the man's out of control you've lost him no he didn't in fact there's this total news to me did Chief superintendent short speak to you at any point and express that
01:09:38 to you at any point and express that sentiment about Bob Lambert that you'd lost him no he didn't was there a concern amongst you or that you were aware of amongst more
01:09:50 or that you were aware of amongst more senior managers that Bob Lambert was out of control as an undercover officer at this
01:09:52 this point I hadn't had well I hadn't had conversation but did you hear any other conversation or comment to the similar
01:10:04 conversation or comment to the similar effect no I hadn't I I would have been concerned had that been a case but I hadn't heard it and concerned can you explain why how you would be concerned well I'd like to know what I
01:10:19 concerned well I'd like to know what I meant by being out of control and you've lost him and and unless you could talk to David short there's no way of knowing what it what he meant did you ever come to the view
01:10:35 meant did you ever come to the view however tentative that Bob Lambert might be an officer you'd lost control of I I didn't I didn't feel that myself I thought he was a hardworking undercover officer who produced
01:10:51 undercover officer who produced intelligence reports in a timely fashion
01:10:53 fashion um with with regard to that um and us at the time you couldn't fault
01:11:01 fault him any sense of losing control of him in terms of how close he had become to Andrew Clark and Jeff Shepard and their incendiary device
01:11:19 campaign if that had been the case I hadn't been fully apprised of the extent to
01:11:21 extent to which Bob blumber was and in order for somebody to make a statement like that it suggests that they know
01:11:39 they know more than what I knew when they say out of control of lost I I can't identify with
01:11:51 that if we take that down can I ask you this we we've looked at a series of um intelligence reports briefing notes and minutes recording intelligence provided by Bob Lambert shortly in advance of and in the aftermath of the deams attacks um which in part must mustn't
01:12:06 attacks um which in part must mustn't they have led to the arrests of Clark and
01:12:17 sheeper I'm so sorry that's all right we we've looked at a series of intelligence reports and other written records of intelligence provided by Bob Lambert yes and that intelligence LED at least in
01:12:28 and that intelligence LED at least in part didn't it to the arrests of Andrew Clark and Jeff Shepard yes indeed in large part yeah and they were then prosecuted and convicted in connection with what they were doing on the 9th of September and in connection with the
01:12:40 September and in connection with the deams incendiary devices that went off in July
01:12:49 in July y a as far as the inquiry has been able to establish at no point during those criminal
01:12:50 criminal proceedings was the involvement of Robert Lambert as an undercover officer disclosed to the defense so they
01:13:01 disclosed to the defense so they remained unaware of his part the part of an undercover officer were you ever party to discussions about whether or not his involvement should be disclosed first of all to the prosecuting authority to the
01:13:12 authority to the CPS no I hadn't been prived to any such conversation did you at the time have a view about whether or not his involvement should be disclosed at least
01:13:23 involvement should be disclosed at least in the first instance to the prosecution
01:13:36 well if it hadn't been it should have been so you would have expected the prosecutor to be told so that the prosecutor could assess whether or not it was disclosable yes and what to do with
01:13:48 it did you consider it to be part any part of your role as the detective Chief Inspector on the SDS to ensure that that happened it's this but it didn't and have you got any reflection
01:14:00 didn't and have you got any reflection any idea why it didn't happen no I can so far so long ago I can't remember to assist you just so that it's clear you
01:14:12 assist you just so that it's clear you left the SDS in the same month that the arrests occurred right so you were you weren't the detective Chief superintendent for very much longer at all after the arrests yes I Vally re
01:14:26 recate um in your witness statement you said that you didn't recall whether any consideration was given at the time to whether Bob Lambert's actions amounted to Azon
01:14:31 to Azon provocator is that is that really right that there was no consideration given to that throughout this period in the summer of
01:14:39 summer of 1987 I'm not I'm not sure I can answer that because I would have expected him to
01:14:52 be knowledgeable about the a provocator so you would have expected Bob Lambert to consider it for himself well
01:14:58 well yes
01:15:00 yes it's every C officer in the force should be aware of the provisions of the aent
01:15:18 of the aent provocator for heaven sake I mean I knew about it long before I joined the before I joined the um SDS the these these are things that should be in the a police officer's mind all the time did you not
01:15:34 officer's mind all the time did you not consider though when you had an officer like Lambert who was obviously very close to a criminal conspiracy that it was something that you might take it
01:15:45 was something that you might take it upon yourself to remind him of or to consider for your own part oh yeah well at have agree he he got peral perilously close to the center that um there
01:15:58 that um there would he
01:16:04 would he was it would have been taken a big risk and would that not have been an opportune moment for you as his boss to have a chat with him about it or to reflect on whether you needed to we hadn't got to that point
01:16:33 can I ask you about a paragraph in your witness
01:16:34 witness statement uh page 187 uh
01:16:39 187 uh paragraph
01:16:41 paragraph 328
01:16:51 C thank you
01:17:05 about a third of the way down I am certain it would be a necessary part you see I'm certain it would be a necessary part of the deployment for Bob to pretend that he thought causing economic damage to property was effective before his comrades would trust him with their
01:17:25 plans and then you go on a bit later however if as Shepherd says Bob took the lead in the discussion and physically positioned himself to do so this is perilously close to acting as an Azon provocator and Bob would have known that
01:17:39 provocator and Bob would have known that ultimately I was not present so I do not feel able to determine where the truth lies and the background to that Mr McLoud so that it's clear is that Mr Shepherd's evidence to this inquiry is that he remembers Mr Lambert being present at the outset of discussions
01:17:51 present at the outset of discussions about a plot that became a plot to put down devices in deams and that he represented that he was in favor of that sort of action right at the very beginning of
01:18:03 right at the very beginning of discussions and that's what you were responding to there oh right thank
01:18:12 you and so you can see can't you that if he did do what Mr Shephard says he did then he's likely to have been acting as an Aon
01:18:23 an Aon provocator if you to believe what Jeff shepher had to say yes and in terms of um stepping aside from Mr Shephard's evidence and looking at
01:18:34 Mr Shephard's evidence and looking at the uh the piece as it were looking back over the whole chronology of the intelligence that Bob Lambert provided do you have any reflection
01:18:47 do you have any reflection now on what he must have done to be trusted how he must have presented himself to be trusted with the information that he reported about deams after the event and about the next plot to put down incend
01:19:01 devices well clearly he he put himself at
01:19:13 Peril in in order to achieve a result perhaps he did get too close that'll be for others to decide but
01:19:25 that'll be for others to decide but you there is a point who you have to believe in their judgment I've said this before here that you know they're they're grown
01:19:43 that you know they're they're grown adults they they don't need to be wet nursed the something as important as that should be in their one of the first priorities for them to understand is the is the rule of law and importance of
01:19:59 law and importance of agent provocator and so forth so come back to the question yes there's a noce on the individual officer
01:20:15 but he was probably acting in very good faith believing that he was doing the right thing others will judge otherwise I'm
01:20:22 I'm sure um
01:20:27 sure um but I think that's as far as I would go
01:20:30 go um I would be greatly disappointed if that proved to be the case that that he acted in that
01:20:41 acted in that capacity because we put a huge amount of trust in our officers for that reason um I would be personally per ter by
01:20:54 personally per ter by that and is the reality of the way the unit was running at that time that if Lambert had done the things that he's
01:21:05 Lambert had done the things that he's alleged to have done but had chosen not to report it back to you you may have proceeded none the wiser you were reliant on him to tell you what was going on weren't you
01:21:20 yes can I just ask um about a couple of other paragraphs just to clarify some things in your witness statement concerning deams more generally and these events paragraph 250b at page 141
01:21:45 please and the in this part of your witness statement you are commenting on the liaison that you had with more senior
01:21:53 officers and you say about halfway down sub paragraph be that you would only trouble Ry I think that's Ray Parker is that right y if there was anything of real
01:22:07 real concern and one of the examples you give is the incendiary attacks on department stores what do you recall troubling Ray Parker with in connection with the incendiary attacks on department stores
01:22:32 I I was
01:22:47 here yes I would only trouble re there was anything of real concern the incident uh with the um
01:23:03 concern the incident uh with the um incendiary attacks on Department source of course that would be subject of um consideration discussed that that was a major event um but did you have concerns around the incendiary device
01:23:15 concerns around the incendiary device attacks and Bob Lambert's role at the
01:23:24 time I suppose the major of was probably at to be honest I think there was probably an element of Truth or that but I couldn't be certain and to what extent is there
01:23:36 certain and to what extent is there truth in it were you concerned about his role
01:23:47 well just that circumstantially his position within the target
01:23:56 target group might have got again peral as close to the to the borderline of Crossing that line a provocator so that that might have caused you to go and speak to Ray Parker at the
01:24:06 at the time no I seek his input I
01:24:18 didn't I'm sure I'm sure if there had been any such concern that R himself would have ra the concern how is so how how would he have known to raise it with you wouldn't you have had to raise it with him if it was a concern arising out of one of the undercover officers
01:24:35 undercover officers deployments if there was some if there was a hint that there might have been some
01:24:36 some wrongdoing um yes but there was no evidence that that was the case it's only just individual surmising that he may have been more
01:24:58 surmising that he may have been more involved in the execution of that attack so it's a question it's a question of who knew what when um I think if he acted he probably acted in very good face I just want to focus on what you said in your witness statement which is
01:25:10 said in your witness statement which is that you gave as an example of when you might trouble Ray Parker with something of concern yes the incendiary attacks on department stores did you consult Ray Parker
01:25:25 stores did you consult Ray Parker we on that subject yes we had discussed it several times I'm sure because of the nature of it and was it sorry was it
01:25:38 nature of it and was it sorry was it because you had real concern about what was going on in terms of Bob Lambert's conf no not specifically
01:25:45 no why why would you discuss it with him then if not for that reason well he was our key informant if you like who was the one with the
01:25:58 you like who was the one with the find a bigger picture so yes that was a key
01:26:00 key event it most certainly was so you discussed it with him because it was a key event but not because you had any
01:26:13 concern no I'm not going to respond to concerns
01:26:20 because unless it can be biked up by something substantive
01:26:26 I'm just asking you based on on your witness statement Mr McLoud so you say you would only trouble Rey if there was anything of real concern and then you say examples were
01:26:43 concern and then you say examples were yes and you give one example and and the incendiary attacks on department stores so I understood you to be saying there that the incendiary attacks on department stores was a subject of real concern that you might have troubled Ray
01:26:54 concern that you might have troubled Ray Parker with so I've got those words from your statement I'm just trying to understand what you meant by that perhaps it's wrongly worded
01:27:10 um as things go it was it was a major event it was a major crime
01:27:11 crime [Music]
01:27:25 [Music] um and the way it's written here it's it sounds like it's just it's because of that that I can conerns about um Bob
01:27:33 lumbert I was simply asking the question whether the concern that you might have had was connected to Bob Lambert's conduct and that might have been why you troubled Ray Parker about about that
01:27:47 troubled Ray Parker about about that event it's not a question of troubling R Parker about it it would have been part of the
01:27:53 of the um sort of discussion to have on a regular basis with the chief superintendent
01:28:09 we know we never discussed specifically whether Bob Lambert may have um crossed the line or not that wasn't discussed all right if we look further down the page please at paragraph 251
01:28:29 right you speak about Intelligence being submitted to the squad superintendent for onward dissemination or action that that being the established process and then you say this it was only in rare
01:28:40 then you say this it was only in rare circumstances that intelligence would be brought up in the Commander's weekly prayers this would only be something of such significance that it was deemed necessary to pass on SDs reporting directly to the
01:28:56 directly to the commander and example would be the deams incident
01:29:01 incident yeah we've looked at the intelligence reporting in advance of the deams incident and there there is none that the inquiry has found written down from Bob Lambert so can I ask what do you recall passing to the directly to the
01:29:18 recall passing to the directly to the commander when you say an example would be the deams
01:29:26 incident well it be other event taking place within the SDS
01:29:32 SDS um we be talking probably in general terms as far as the um oops we lost the um as far as Dev concerned it was just it was a major
01:29:50 example do you mean intelligence in the aftermath of the deams incident or was there intelligence Ence in advance that was passed directly to the
01:30:09 commander it would have been this be this this would have been shared with the
01:30:09 the commander um at
01:30:18 the sorry I'm looking here because the right
01:30:22 picture yeah it's
01:30:27 reporting
01:30:37 D yeah this is the weekly sorry I misread that
01:30:49 um that would have been on the agenda of the commander weekly meetings um
01:30:58 and clearly the dev inent would have probably been tough of the bill
01:31:18 um so there's nothing I I don't see there's anything sort of misleading here this would be something of such significance it was deemed necessary to pass it on the SDS reporting directly to the
01:31:31 commander and and clearly we had a conversation around the incident no question about that um I'm just seeking to clarify Mr mlau whether there was any conversation in advance of the deams
01:31:42 conversation in advance of the deams iids going off with the commander or whether you mean to refer to what was going on in the aftermath of the deams incidents being raised directly with the commander it was the after
01:32:00 Marth all right thank you I've got a few more questions to go on this topic but I wonder given the structure of the afternoon if now would be a convenient moment to break yes approximately how much uh longer do we have before the rule 10 exercise um I'm awful at
01:32:15 rule 10 exercise um I'm awful at estimating on the spot I would say uh no more than an hour probably less um it sounds as though you may have to be here until 5:00 or thereabouts I
01:32:28 to be here until 5:00 or thereabouts I hope that's all right it's not a problem sir thank
01:32:52 you
02:55:47 e e
02:56:47 thank you sir this short hearing was requested by the nonp police Poli non-state core participants cooperating group on behalf of all of the non-state CPS who wish to
02:56:58 of all of the non-state CPS who wish to address you on the sequence and delivery of the closing submissions in tranch two sir we understand you have indicated that you're not minded to hear oral
02:57:09 that you're not minded to hear oral closing submissions at the end of tranch 2 correct the group asked that you reconsider this decision and Grant a short oral closing however if you're not minded to Grant this preferred approach we ask
02:57:27 Grant this preferred approach we ask that you consider other alternative ways to allow the non-p police non-state CPS to respond to any written closing submissions that may be made on behalf of the state at the end of trch 2 in respect of opening and closing submissions sir by way of brief
02:57:38 submissions sir by way of brief background the approach adopted by the inquiry thus far has been simultaneous exchange of written openings and closings followed by or openings and
02:57:49 closings followed by or openings and closings this approach has worked very well in the inquiry and it has afforded cor participants an opportunity to respond to the written openings and closings with oral submissions being
02:58:03 closings with oral submissions being live streamed and therefore placed on the public record and we submit that oral statements play an important role in this
02:58:13 this inquiry not only do they enhance the ability of the public to follow and understand the issues that have been explored but they also contribute to public
02:58:21 public accountability this has been a protracted Tran which has heard evidence in two separate phases from July 2024 with parts of the live stream being suspended in order to allow for
02:58:35 suspended in order to allow for proceedings to potentially address matters covered by restriction
02:58:46 matters covered by restriction orders in that context oral closings are an integral vehicle to tie the open evidence together in a public and accessible way finally sir we hope that the oral statements have also assisted you there is concern that if the approach of oral written and oral
02:59:03 approach of oral written and oral closings is departed from at the end of Trance 2 the nonp police non-state CPS will only be able to respond to the state's written closing a long time in the future when the issues have will have moved on and when memories are less fresh essentially at the end of the
02:59:18 fresh essentially at the end of the inquiry when you will require final closing
02:59:22 closing statements this approach will inevitably lead to the duplication of work and unnecessary extra cost to the inquiry as historic evidence will need to be re-reviewed it is understood that any oral closings if granted would be
02:59:38 oral closings if granted would be strictly time limited and the intention would not be to repeat verbatim the written closing but simply to respond to the written closings from other CPS and the state this would allow oral closings to be
02:59:56 to be short as you will no doubt be aware sir a similar approach was adopted in the covid-19 inquiry and on the grenfell inquiry where both written and oral closing submissions were permitted on a modular basis during the inquiries in question oral closing submissions need
03:00:12 question oral closing submissions need not be onerous or an extra burden on the inquiry resources as they can be conducted
03:00:16 conducted remotely there already exists a proposed approach of cooperation between the inquiry and those who wish to submit written closings as to how best to
03:00:30 written closings as to how best to adhere to the rro process and there is no reason we say that this workable proposal cannot be extended in the preparation for oral closings so if you are not minded to Grant short oral closing submissions I ask you to consider alternative
03:00:46 ask you to consider alternative suggestions including first allowing for a staggered approach of the exchange of closing submissions requiring the state to serve closings before the non-state non-p police core participants or alternatively granting
03:01:00 participants or alternatively granting core participants an opportunity to file a short addendum closing to respond to anything in the written closing in terms of the proposal for a staggered exchange sir if the non-core
03:01:14 staggered exchange sir if the non-core non-state core participants are able to see the State cp's written closings in advance this will allow for written submissions we make to be be refined and focused on the issues that are in dispute again this will not only save
03:01:25 dispute again this will not only save time and cost but it's likely to be of more assistance to you sir by way of example and why this approach May assist the inquiry the Metropolitan Police Commissioner made a number of important admissions in their tranch 2 opening
03:01:40 admissions in their tranch 2 opening statement it may be that in light of the evidence heard in trch 2 that the MPS may feel that further admissions need to be made or that admissions need to be refined
03:01:48 refined the position set out in the home office TR 2 Phase 2 opening submission was that it was not possible to address the substance of this phase because of the
03:02:03 substance of this phase because of the delay in providing the evidential bundle now that the tranch 2 evidence has been explored in the fullness of time it may be that the home office will take the opportunity now to address the inquiry
03:02:16 opportunity now to address the inquiry on the evidence and it may be that they consider certain admissions need to be made understanding the position to be adopted by the state CPS will assist the non-state non non uh police core participants to focus their time and effort preparing written submissions on
03:02:30 effort preparing written submissions on the big issues in dispute that you will need to
03:02:35 need to consider as an alternative the non-state CPS request that they are afforded an opportunity to submit a short addendum closing responding to the written submissions submitted by the state
03:02:48 submissions submitted by the state CPS it may be that's such an offer is made to all CPS an addendum inevitably will involve some more time and cost to prepare which is why the preferred approach is for a short oral opening
03:02:59 short oral opening statement in any event sir all of the options canvas today we say will obviate the need to respond to the tranch 2 written closings later on in the tranch
03:03:10 written closings later on in the tranch 3 written opening statement and this is important as there will be a significant amount of material and other issues that need to be dealt with in the tranch 3 openings thank you sir for granting this
03:03:25 openings thank you sir for granting this opportunity to make these submissions um first of all may I apologize I was expecting um Miss heaven and I do not know your name the apology is mine I should have made clear from the outset sir I'm Miss Nicola on behalf of the corporation group
03:03:46 corporation group um your submission is if I've understood it correctly that um there should be uh time Limited remote oral submissions precisely yes sir that I had bound to say I had not
03:03:59 sir that I had bound to say I had not appreciated was the proposition that was being Advanced and I'm grateful to you for enlightening me
03:04:07 um I would like to hear what if there is any response to that and then retire briefly to consider with my team uh what I had not fully understood I'm grateful thank you and then I will come back in and resume
03:04:18 and resume the hearing proper Mr SC is there anything you want to say on behalf of the commissioner extremely briefly sir um just a real um emphasis that this is an inquiry not a trial or any other form of civil
03:04:30 trial or any other form of civil proceedings um although of course the work of the SS is the focus of T1 T2 and T3 it's important that all participants
03:04:44 T3 it's important that all participants including The NPS are treated equally uh and in that regard I'm not aware of any other inquiries of this nature where there is sequential disclosure of submissions and as it a response a response process uh for the most part it is we all feed into you as an inquisitorial non-adversarial process
03:04:57 inquisitorial non-adversarial process and you and your Council consider all submissions and in due course we can respond and in any event um all of the non-state parants and everyone else can respond orally in due course I don't think so you've closed the door to oral statements because they're baked into
03:05:12 statements because they're baked into the rules but you've just merely delayed them potentially from this year to some point later in time um as to the timing sir
03:05:18 sir um it's really a matter for you if your Tim taing doesn't afford opportunity to make a closing statement publicly orally for T2 then so be it but of course I'm
03:05:29 for T2 then so be it but of course I'm sure the met and everyone else will want to do so at some point later in in the line yes uh there is a a further matter that I think you want raise you not um
03:05:40 that I think you want raise you not um in relation to the submissions whether they are oral or written and I think possibly the time has now arrived at which you should do that and and um I can then adop stop the course I've indic I'm grateful so to consider these things
03:05:55 I'm grateful so to consider these things it's really seeking an extension of time for the written submissions um the deadline that was set recently is extremely tight and it came rather out of the blue as you appreciate um the Met is a slow moving beast and a lot of planning goes into our written
03:06:06 planning goes into our written submissions which I hope is I hope they are of help as a result but really there are three points I'd like to emphasize first of all the factual
03:06:17 emphasize first of all the factual evidence um will not be completed this week in T2 as you are aware there are
03:06:26 week in T2 as you are aware there are going to be closed hearings and although it's unfortunately the case that other participants will not be able to take part in those the MPS will be taking part in those and will need to address you on how they bear upon particularly
03:06:37 you on how they bear upon particularly the issue of justification and value in its closing submission um if we were going to deal with this by way of written submissions uh or early oral submissions uh before the um closed hearings which I didn't anticipate will be the case
03:06:50 be the case but were that to happen were either of those things to happen I would invite you to do it by way of um an Annex to a written submission or uh some other
03:07:01 written submission or uh some other means than um delay because I I I'm well aware that there are closed proceedings uh and that some of the um deployments that I will hear
03:07:13 of the um deployments that I will hear spoken of in the closed proceedings uh will uh
03:07:21 will uh redund the very least potentially uh to the credit of all concerned um that's not the only reason for uh closed proceeding some are to protect the uh uh well-being Health interest of uh the
03:07:32 well-being Health interest of uh the individuals concerned but I'm well aware that there are deployments as there were in TR one where I am I think I drew attention to that in the open uh uh
03:07:48 attention to that in the open uh uh report uh that where of great value and involved courage on the part of those deployed thank you sir certainly it's the nps's preference that it would deal openly compendiously with the um
03:08:08 openly compendiously with the um deployments including the closed ones so that it would factor in the balance of the closed deployments into an open submission as well in terms of its overall take on the value and justification for those deployments but I appreciate the detail of those deployments would have to be in an Annex which would be closed so so far as the t2 period generally is you're acutely aware um
03:08:26 generally is you're acutely aware um it's an acutely complex period in which you have received an immense volume of documentary and Whitten evid written evidence including the testimony from a wide range of witnesses from uos to managers to civilian Witnesses and uh families of deceased um children the
03:08:40 families of deceased um children the issues that the Met will need to address are of course comprehensive uh they include the justification and value of each of the deployments sexual
03:08:51 each of the deployments sexual relationship ships and the management of those by um the SDS and The NPS more widely deceased person's identities criminal activity by uos involvement with the criminal justice system officers welfare and of course
03:09:08 officers welfare and of course management and governance more generally and unlike other core participants the Met has to take a position on all of those issues because they are all relevant to its corporate position uh to do so will take an immense amount of time and it's fair to say our resources
03:09:23 time and it's fair to say our resources in terms of council team and solicitors are not unlimited and several of our team including myself are otherwise engaged over the forthcoming weeks in the period you have presently required us to produce our written submissions
03:09:39 us to produce our written submissions which is problematic for us perhaps most importantly though is the fact that the submissions themselves both in writing and ultimately orally are part of an iterative process which involves the met at its most senior level including
03:09:51 at its most senior level including meeting with the assistant Commissioner of special ops the Deputy Commissioner and the commissioner himself each of those servers I'm sure you understand are extremely busy and their Diaries are booked many weeks many months in some
03:10:02 booked many weeks many months in some cases in advance and scheduling meetings with them to discuss key points of the Met's um positions on the issues I need to address you on uh take some time and doesn't it isn't simply one meeting at
03:10:17 doesn't it isn't simply one meeting at the end of a council draft it's a series of discussions about the key issues and that of course is going to take some weeks I'm afraid um so really so I'm I'm asking for extra time is is that an exercise that will take place both at the end of T2 and at the end of T3 yes
03:10:33 the end of T2 and at the end of T3 yes and it needs to take place separately at the end of each well if we are to take if we are to put in any submissions on any of the positions of rising the TR it has to be considered as it was in T1 with the
03:10:45 considered as it was in T1 with the senior clients yes and bearing in mind the timing we we tend to lose senior clients along the way I'm afraid um as as you're also aware I think so really
03:10:59 as you're also aware I think so really sir I'm asking for some extra time uh to May uh rather than March uh the end of March the 16th of May is I think the date that has been canvased with your inquiry team which would give us sufficient time to take instructions from senior clients and to deal
03:11:11 from senior clients and to deal compendiously with all the issues we hope we can assist you with thank
03:11:23 hope we can assist you with thank you I'm now going to rise to think about these matters and raise something I had not previously thought of sufficiently with my
03:11:46 team
03:18:45 e e
03:19:47 setting up and conducting or hearings even
03:19:48 even remotely uh is uh a problematic and expensive exercise uh which I would only contemplate undertaking uh if it were
03:20:01 contemplate undertaking uh if it were necessary in the interest of fairness or in the interest of enabling me to get to the truth of matters I do not believe that to be the case at the
03:20:24 moment I readily understand that uh the non-state Corp participants do not wish to be put in the position of uh making written submissions uh which the commissioner's team then have time to think about and respond
03:20:32 respond to any written submissions which I propose to order uh will be made uh at
03:20:45 propose to order uh will be made uh at the time that they are to be ordered um but will be kept by the inquiry until all are released simultaneous ously M Nicolas admits that it would be helpful to the non-state cor partitioners to hear the commissioner's
03:20:59 partitioners to hear the commissioner's submissions either in writing or orally first and then respond uh this is not a trial this is
03:21:12 respond uh this is not a trial this is an inquiry and it would be of the very greatest assistance to me to have the non-state core participants written submissions put in as early as possible rather than
03:21:28 rather than later uh accordingly I do propose to set a short but reasonable time limit for them to be put in uh a further consideration is that the non-states ability to work on TR three must not be impaired by uh the
03:21:50 three must not be impaired by uh the preparation of submissions for trch two although the time frame for TR 3 has been extended significantly uh as Tres 1 and two have shown preparation for uh
03:22:05 shown preparation for uh hearings uh is a difficult demanding and timec consuming exercise and I do not wish to be confronted uh in the Early
03:22:17 wish to be confronted uh in the Early Autumn by requests for postponement or for alteration of uh time
03:22:27 frames because of the difficulty of Meeting those uh that have already been set
03:22:31 set out and I do not wish to do anything which would in relation to the preparation of TR 2 submissions uh put the preparation of TR 3 at risk submissions will be in writing uh the precise time frame has
03:22:49 writing uh the precise time frame has been um uh Deb ated uh in correspondence uh and I do not propose to set out uh
03:23:02 uh and I do not propose to set out uh now um an exact date for the putting in of submissions uh that will be uh done in writing uh should there be any difficulty or disagreement as I have indicated the non-state core participants submissions will be kept by the inquiry they will
03:23:15 will be kept by the inquiry they will not be released uh to any other parties and in particular not to the the uh Metropolitan Police Commissioners uh
03:23:28 Team I turn now to the position of the Metropolitan Police Commissioner as the openings for trash 2 showed very considerable thought has
03:23:41 showed very considerable thought has been given at senior level uh to uh what should be said on behalf of the Metropolitan Police Commissioner about
03:23:47 about the Manifest and I fear manifold uh problems that uh arose in
03:24:00 manifold uh problems that uh arose in the TR 2 period in relation to uh the SDS uh it is to the credit of the
03:24:11 SDS uh it is to the credit of the commissioner that those submissions were made in opening and I have every reason to hope that closing submissions will show the same degree of thought and realism as did the opening submission uh
03:24:18 uh I conclude that it is of great importance that the commissioner should be given sufficient time uh to put in considered submissions in relation to tr
03:24:37 2 I will invite um uh Mr Skelton to deal with uh uh the time frame for that in a
03:24:46 moment finally I say this that if contrary to expectation uh it should transpire that uh in the interests of fairness or of my need to get to the truth of matters uh it becomes apparent that it is uh
03:24:59 it becomes apparent that it is uh necessary for oral submissions on trash 2 to be uh conducted then they will be I think the chances of that occurring are very very small but I do not wish to
03:25:14 very very small but I do not wish to shut them out should it be necessary in either of those interests
03:25:22 Mr skeleton is now the time uh to um address dates or would you prefer to do that in writing the 16th of May um so which is about uh six I think or seven weeks after the time that is set
03:25:37 weeks after the time that is set presently for written submissions yes yes thank
03:25:39 yes thank you Mr ncol do you want to um address dates and times at the moment uh if you do I'm more than willing to to listen but no submissions on the date at this
03:25:55 but no submissions on the date at this juncture so we'll put them in writing if that's a meaning one yes um I I do urge those behind you however to have um regard to what I said it's very very important that the time for preparation
03:26:08 important that the time for preparation of TR three is not um put at risk by the preparation of the submissions um I I would welcome as you've seen Short written submissions um but I would welcome them as early as they can be
03:26:19 welcome them as early as they can be done jully noted thank you sir thank you thank you all I think that concludes today's um open business does it not yes
03:26:45 good e