DCI Malcolm MacLeod testifies about his 10-month tenure managing the SDS (1986-1987). He admits to significant deficiencies in recruitment processes, welfare systems, and management oversight. MacLeod describes a selection process he himself called 'pretty piss poor,' acknowledges having no training for the role, and admits relying on officers' subjective moral judgments rather than clear guidance. He expresses discomfort with deceased children's identities and misogynistic reporting, while defending his limited supervisory capacity.
00:07:58 e e
00:08:54 good morning everybody today's proceedings are going to be live streamed those uh in the hearing room uh with electronic devices may use them to report what they have heard but only
00:09:07 report what they have heard but only after 15 minutes have elapsed since the event that they're reporting those devices may not be used for recording uh what is heard thank you
00:09:26 yes that the evidence I shall give that the evidence I shall give shall be the truth shall be the truth whole truth the whole truth and nothing and nothing but the
00:09:40 truth thank you can I ask you first to state your name please malcol McLoud thank you Mr McLoud um you should I hope
00:09:51 thank you Mr McLoud um you should I hope have in front of you a copy of a witness statement that you made to this inquiry dated the 21st of July of 2023 correct do you recall making that statement yes and are its contents true
00:10:05 statement yes and are its contents true to the best of your knowledge and belief yes thank you that that will stand as your written evidence to the inquiry what I'm going to do um today and tomorrow is ask you some questions about certain parts of it do you follow I do you were um the detective Chief Inspector of the unit known as the
00:10:17 Inspector of the unit known as the special demonstration Squad between November 1986 and September 1987 is that right yes
00:10:38 and before you took up that role you explain in your witness statement that you were on C Squad in special Branch from September 1985 which included a stint from then on the what was known as the Alternatives
00:10:49 the what was known as the Alternatives desk is that right and that included um the Alternatives desk included looking at leftwing extremism and animal rights extremism is that right that is right you were promot oted in May of 1986 to
00:11:01 you were promot oted in May of 1986 to the rank of detective Chief Inspector is that right that is right and having been promoted that's how you found yourself as detective Chief Inspector of the SDS in November 1986 is that right yes so
00:11:20 in November 1986 is that right yes so that was in essence your first role in the rank of detective Chief Inspector yes you explain in your witness
00:11:30 yes you explain in your witness statement that you were you became aware of the existence of the SDS around four years into your service in special branch and your witness statement explains that you joined special branch in
00:11:35 in 1969
00:11:36 1969 yes you described the SDS as a well-guarded secret in your witness statement so can I ask how did you become aware of it through Word of Mouth by other
00:11:59 it through Word of Mouth by other colleagues who had um who who actually were aware of the SDS and shared the information so it became common
00:12:03 common knowledge and when you say it became common knowledge do you mean it was known about by lots of people within special Branch or it became common knowledge amongst a smaller group amongst a smaller group and when you were made aware of it was it directly in
00:12:18 were made aware of it was it directly in connection with work that you were doing or was it spoken about more informally about work I was doing
00:12:32 just just in case it's not clear that there's some um something going on with the microphone it appears it's just been moved closer to you Mr moud we try again was it known about was it spoken about
00:12:43 was it known about was it spoken about informally or was it um spoken about in connection with your
00:12:50 work it would would have been connection with my
00:12:59 work and when you first learned about it what did you understand about the unit there was a covert operation which is funded by the home office um to
00:13:15 office um to obtain Intelligence on the activities of various leftwing and right-wing um
00:13:28 activists did you learn anything about how it operated day to day when you first learned about it or did you only learn about that once you were in the unit I only learned about that when they joined the
00:13:39 joined the unit can I ask you a couple of questions about the Alternatives desk in C Squad that you were on before you went to the SDS um you mentioned um in your statement I think that it included um
00:13:50 statement I think that it included um looking at groups such as London Green Peace and animal rights activism is that right that's correct so by the time you joined the SD did you have some familiarity from an intelligence
00:14:06 familiarity from an intelligence gathering perspective with the sorts of groups that it turned out the SDS were infiltrating too yes were you aware when you were on the Alternatives desk of being in receipt of intelligence from the
00:14:18 intelligence from the SDS yes and were you aware of that because you already knew about the existence of the SDS so you were able to discern that it was coming from the unit or were you told that
00:14:32 or were you told that explicitly no I knew it was coming from unit did somebody tell you that explicitly or was it because you knew what you were looking for it was it's it's what what I yes it's what I was
00:14:43 it's what what I yes it's what I was looking for if we put up on the screen an example report from your time on cquad just to to have a look at what it might have looked like please MPS 0742
00:14:54 0742 828 and it's a report dated the 27th of August 1986 so just a few months before you joined the SDS and can we focus on this cover page
00:15:11 this cover page please Mr McLoud we see on the top half of the
00:15:18 of the page a minute signed off by uh as he was then detective Chief Inspector weight who at the time was the detective Chief Inspector within the SDS do you
00:15:29 Chief Inspector within the SDS do you see that yes um and uh he has dated it the 27th of August of 1986 and then if we look at the bottom
00:15:42 1986 and then if we look at the bottom half um of that minute sheet that cover sheet we see that you signed off um a handwritten list in effect and would it be right to
00:15:58 effect and would it be right to understand that at 1 two three and four the points we see numbered on the page that's you deciding or indicating to whom the report should should be disseminated that's correct so for example at number two we see the name of a detective inspector in AR that's the animal rights National index isn't it
00:16:13 animal rights National index isn't it yes and if we look at the content of the report we would see that it's a report about animal rights uh matters so what we see here is you in receipt of intelligence from the SDS during your time on the Alternatives
00:16:26 during your time on the Alternatives desk is that is that a fair summary yes and your responsibility being to annotate it and decide to whom it will be
00:16:38 disseminated was it fairly routine to send for example animal rights reporting to Arie in your time on that desk yes did all reporting go to Arie or did you select which reports should go to
00:16:50 select which reports should go to them in the main the majority of reports went to
00:16:59 Ary could I ask you um to explain a little about Arie because I think after your time on the SDS you had a role that included line managing part of Arie didn't you that's correct could you
00:17:13 didn't you that's correct could you explain what Arie was in a couple of sentences um the animal rights
00:17:21 um National index are its origins in um s in say Essex police
00:17:34 origins in um s in say Essex police where there was um a detective Constable there who was a cator for the um intelligence in the sort of ess6
00:17:54 intelligence in the sort of ess6 Southeast area and that was information that was um fed into the into the branch at some point and I can't remember the date
00:17:57 date the home
00:18:03 the home office established the animal rights National
00:18:14 National index given the amount of um disruption that had been caused at various an um various
00:18:18 various events whether it was the um
00:18:28 um it was it was considered it was important to have an index that could be shared with other police forces throughout the country because of the growing problems and
00:18:44 because of the growing problems and menaces by posed by the um animal rights groups so yes it was uh it was financed by the Ary as I said before before it was established it was a small group in the cator office in
00:19:03 a small group in the cator office in essic I recall um when it was um when it was um decided for the home office to set this up it was set up and they had an office in Scotland Yard and the um
00:19:17 an office in Scotland Yard and the um the operation was funded by the by the home
00:19:22 home office and the intelligence that was shared on
00:19:24 shared on the um
00:19:30 the um Ary it would it would get selected
00:19:35 selected information but it didn't always give the necessarily the um the originator of the
00:19:47 the um the originator of the intelligence so in other words they're not they weren't aware it was coming from the um SDS right so they might receive intelligence that had come from an SDS officer but not be told that that's
00:20:00 officer but not be told that that's where it had come come from correct and was that routine that they were kept unaware or or did it just depend on the circumstances no it's routinely were so routinely they wouldn't be aware they
00:20:12 routinely they wouldn't be aware they wouldn't be aware where the intelligence was coming
00:20:19 from and when you describe it as an index yes do you mean by that it was a repository for storing intelligence or
00:20:31 repository for storing intelligence or something else yes so they they received intelligence from various sources and filed it yes and was that repository available for example to you to consult if you needed to
00:20:43 if you needed to yes was that repository stored in your era in Scotland Yard
00:20:54 yes in your witness statement you describ that the relationship between the SDS and Arie was excellent and you said that any information coming out of Arie fed back into the SDS and
00:21:07 out of Arie fed back into the SDS and vice versa can I ask you what you mean by that so you've explained that intelligence might go out of the SDS and to an but without them knowing the source in what way or ways did information from Anie come into the
00:21:24 SDS it would come in
00:21:34 the the cler the cler who set up the index to begin with he was transferred to scul jard so he was one of the staff there I think there was about three or four of them who um so they were
00:21:55 four of them who um so they were recipients of the intelligence that was coming from other parts of the country as well where there were various incidents of intelligence um was a it was Intelligence it was
00:22:07 um it
00:22:16 was the intelligence was can I can you just repeat the question yes of course perhaps I'll ask it in a slightly different way when you were the detective Chief Inspector of the SDS for example were you receiving intelligence from Anie in the that role
00:22:32 intelligence from Anie in the that role yes and how did that come about were you asking for it was it routinely provided to you routinely provided and in what by what method was it routinely
00:22:46 provided on people on paper but did somebody for example deliver to you every week a batch of reports from Arie or was it less organized than that can
00:23:05 or was it less organized than that can you give us an idea AR would would would send up with a minute sheet to the um to my desk and then I would um Cascade that
00:23:17 Cascade that accordingly and was that in your role as detective Chief Inspector of the SDS yes to what extent then were you informed by the work of Anie in performing your role in the SDS do you
00:23:32 think well well it was it was a vitable piece of information it was the first time that the police forces England
00:23:45 time that the police forces England Wales were able to we were able to share the intelligence with the with the rest of the police forces in the country um so yes it was an important part of our job
00:23:53 job to uh notify these um the Ary under
00:24:04 um the Ary under detective superintendent I won't ask you to use a name just in case the name is subject to a restriction but there was a detective superintendent in charge of Arie that you
00:24:17 Arie that you recall could I ask you uh changing topic slightly about um a particular um incident that you recall in your witness statement please and to assist you we'll put it on the screen it's page six paragraph 15 please
00:24:42 oh I'm sorry MPS 0748
00:24:58 808 page uh six paragraph 15 which takes up most of the
00:25:04 page thank you Mr McLoud you explain in this um paragraph contacts that you had with the SDS before you joined the SDS do you
00:25:16 SDS before you joined the SDS do you follow yes and I want to ask you about halfway down the paragraph about halfway across the page there is a sentence that begins at some point I spoke to the sdsd do you see that yes at some point I spoke to the
00:25:33 that yes at some point I spoke to the SSDI whose name I cannot recall about the issues surrounding animal rights activities I cannot recall what prompted sorry what issue prompted the discussion I telephoned him thus my contact with
00:25:49 I telephoned him thus my contact with the SDS was primarily through receipt of written intelligence although there was at least one telephone contact to ask for a meeting would have been relatively rare but I do seem to recall a meeting that I attended I
00:26:02 recall a meeting that I attended I cannot remember at what juncture during my time in the Alternatives this came about it took place in a pub but I do not remember specifically where the
00:26:13 not remember specifically where the purpose of the meeting was for me to better understand the animal rights scene those present at the meeting included Eric Docker Bob Lambert and possibly Mike chitty the uc's briefed me on the animal rights
00:26:26 on the animal rights scene I just want to ask you questions about about that meeting um you say that to ask for a meeting would have been
00:26:37 to ask for a meeting would have been relatively rare and this is the only meeting that you recall is it likely that it's the only meeting that you attended with SDS officers before you joined the
00:26:54 SDS I
00:27:11 I I I can't remember but you do recall this meeting I do and are you confident that those present included Eric Docker Bob Lambert and possibly my chitty just best my recollection when you say that the
00:27:25 recollection when you say that the undercover officers briefed you on the animal rights scene
00:27:33 do you recall for what purpose you had that
00:27:47 briefing well as I had a remit for the animal rights um activities um that was purpose of the meeting is to obtain information from them and to better understand how the
00:27:59 understand how the RNA um sort of system um could work to the beneficial um EV of the rest of the rest of the police forces so a general
00:28:12 of the police forces so a general briefing a general briefing rather than seeking specific information from them is that is that a fair summary I would have thought it was a general briefing rather than a specific
00:28:25 general briefing rather than a specific and can you recall at all what prompted you to seek a meeting with undercover officers from the SDS I think that's because there was a proliferation of um sort
00:28:45 of um activist activity and there was the was a way of just gathering information about about the about the various groups London Green Peace and so forth do you recall learning anything about how the
00:29:00 recall learning anything about how the office went about Gathering intelligence when you met with them no I
00:29:12 them no I didn't did you form any view of Robert Lambert or Mike chitty as a result of the
00:29:13 the meeting
00:29:15 meeting well there were the two sort of key undercover officers who had different areas of
00:29:25 areas of responsibility um so they they were in the best position to give me the information I
00:29:41 needed all right thank you um finally um could I just ask you briefly about what happened after you were the detective Chief Inspector of the SDS you describe in your witness statement that you were uh
00:29:50 uh promoted I think to detective superintendent in September of
00:30:01 superintendent in September of 1987 and that in effect Pro prompted you to move away from the SDS is that right yes so you were promoted on the way in and then promoted again on the way out in
00:30:07 in effect I think there was a Chief Inspector had been promoted Chief Inspector
00:30:14 Inspector before um I left C Squad
00:30:24 um I was promoted C at a later stage um
00:30:28 stage um I'm I'm trying to recall at what point I was promoted
00:30:40 recall at what point I was promoted superintendent it your witness statement suggests it was September of 1987 so shortly before you left the SDS does that sound about right that sounds right yes and then once you were
00:30:52 sounds right yes and then once you were in the detective superintendent role and had left the SDS you were in C Squad again is that right that's correct did you maintain an
00:31:05 right that's correct did you maintain an awareness of the work of the SDS in that role yes and was that similar to the awareness you'd had before you joined the SDS in terms of your day-to-day
00:31:21 work thank you CH change of topic now please to um some general questions about the management of the SDS so when you were enrolled when you first became the detective
00:31:34 when you first became the detective Chief Inspector of the SDS is right I think that you had no firsthand experience of undercover deployments of police officers is that right that's right and you were new to the day-to-day operation of the SDS although you knew
00:31:50 operation of the SDS although you knew about its existence you hadn't had any day-to-day interaction with its operation is that right that's correct when you joined um Mr Docker Eric Docker was the detective inspector of the unit wasn't he correct and he
00:32:02 of the unit wasn't he correct and he himself had never been an undercover officer and neither had you was that right
00:32:10 right correct did you know when you joined the unit that um Eric Docker had only been the detective inspector for about seven
00:32:24 months I can't remember do do you remember whether you had a feeling that he was fa new to the role or whether he seemed bedded in by the time you got there he seemed to me at the time to be fairly bedded
00:32:41 at the time to be fairly bedded in he's told the inquiry that he had no Handover from his predecessor who was detective inspector
00:32:51 Barber you describe having an informal Handover from your predecessor detective Chief Inspector weight is that right that's right yes I just want to explore a little bit of the nature the form of that
00:33:03 of the nature the form of that Handover in your witness statement you describe it as more than adequate and very helpful can you describe in what ways it was very
00:33:31 helpful well given that I was it was much a learning curve from me as anybody else because I
00:33:45 um I honestly can't remember when you were moved to the SDS to be its detective Chief Inspector you would it be fair to say you had no familiarity with what your job was going to entail dayto day yes
00:34:00 job was going to entail dayto day yes that's true and did you rely to a large extent if not entirely on detective Chief Inspector waight then to tell you what the job entailed
00:34:17 yes did he um tell you uh something about the individual officers who were deployed
00:34:25 deployed undercover yes he did yes did that form take the form of a sort of pen picture of every undercover officer yes every every single one that was deployed yes and did he for example tell you whether
00:34:37 and did he for example tell you whether any of them were having any issues that you should be aware of whether welfare issues or trouble in their deployment that sort of thing not that I remember did he give you any indication
00:34:49 remember did he give you any indication of whether he thought some officers were performing better than others for example some Stars some not so productive yes I believe he did and do you uh remember for example whether he said anything to you about about Robert Lambert at that
00:35:07 stage no what I can't remember specifically him talking
00:35:16 about Bob lber no I can't remember that the words that um Mr we used when he gave evidence to the inquiry were that Lambert had told him at a certain point that he had gotten a girl into trouble
00:35:30 that he had gotten a girl into trouble meaning that he thought Lambert thought he'd made a woman pregnant is that information that Mr we passed on to you no is it information looking back that it would have been helpful for you to
00:35:44 it would have been helpful for you to have known about as you entered into the Chief Inspector role at the SDS well certainly and had you been told what would your reaction have
00:35:59 been given the implications of it but my initial Instinct would be
00:36:11 to try to find from from Eric just the extent of this and I would have to take into account the possible repercussions it would have not just for the individual but for the
00:36:22 individual but for the operation so to answer your question I would almost certainly have raed it with a commander with the commander
00:36:36 a commander with the commander yes would you have taken any steps to speak about it with Bob Lambert do you think well I didn't have the opportunity I wasn't
00:36:44 aware uh off that um situation with this
00:36:56 female looking back to the point at which you joined the unit now in retrospect do you feel that you had sufficient experience or
00:37:09 you had sufficient experience or guidance to enable you to do the job that you were being asked to do I think it's a sufficient experience to make a decision on something like that which could impinge on the um
00:37:23 that which could impinge on the um the individual himself and the impact on
00:37:37 the individual himself and the impact on his role as an undercover officer so you don't have to be you don't have to have any particular experience common sense to tell you that something would have to be done if you have uh an officer who has
00:37:50 has aired and it's something that could impact on um on the um
00:38:02 on the operation itself it's not something that could be buried under the carpet so to answer the question um that that's something I would have followed up most certainly had I
00:38:16 known and what about more generally in terms of the day-to-day management of the SDS do you feel that when you started in your role you had enough information enough experience to know
00:38:34 know what it was what was expected of you no I didn't um it was very much a case of learning on the job and looking back do you feel that put you at any disadvantage in terms of being able to manage the unit well I
00:38:52 of being able to manage the unit well I felt I managed in my opinion I think it managed to um run the unit as efficiently as I could but I don't think I would have
00:39:05 I don't think it would have been impacted even if I knew about it um I would still have
00:39:20 sufficient no I'm not I don't think it would have impacted in your witness statement you described
00:39:27 described um being asked to serve in that role as an honor you say it it was also an honor to be thought to possess the necessary skills yes can you describe why you
00:39:43 skills yes can you describe why you viewed it as an honor to be offered the role of Chief Inspector in the SDS well it was quite a a unique group of
00:39:56 of people um who volunteered to um to serve Undercover um they were making great sacrifices in being away from their family
00:40:13 family for um for various length of time it was um they chose to do this job because out of sense of Duty I
00:40:24 job because out of sense of Duty I thought there were an admirable bunch of guys and
00:40:29 guys and girls um and to me it was it was quite an
00:40:33 an Insight having been for the best part of my career involved in general um special Branch work this was
00:40:47 general um special Branch work this was quite a different ball game all together um from day one I just and from talking to them during the weekly briefings at meetings um I just um you you do you do
00:41:02 meetings um I just um you you do you do get sense of um what sorts of characters are what and and why they're doing what they're doing it is quite a it is quite a a sacrifice for these officers so yes
00:41:16 a a sacrifice for these officers so yes it was an honor for me to actually um to have been their
00:41:28 boss is your your view about that affected at
00:41:40 view about that affected at all knowing now what for example Robert Lambert and Mike chitty were doing during their deployments for example having relationships with women multiple relationships sexual and intimate relationships does that change your view when you described them as an admirable
00:41:53 when you described them as an admirable admirable bunch and that it was an honor to manage them well certainly did yes and can you you expand in what in what ways how has it changed your reflection well it was totally unacceptable
00:42:05 unacceptable Behavior to it Point been
00:42:21 disreputable I'll come back a bit more to to that topic later
00:42:29 on briefly can I ask you about um visits from more senior managers so those in the chain above you whilst you were on the SDS and can we we'll use a document to assist you MPS
00:42:41 to assist you MPS 0728
00:42:44 0728 976 and Mr McLoud this is the annual report the SDS annual report covering the period when you
00:42:56 the period when you were in the SDS and can we turn please to page
00:43:00 14 and paragraph
00:43:11 13 the report records that on the 19th of February 1987 there was a visit from the assistant Commissioner of specialist operations Mr J A Delo CBE and the deputy assistant Commissioner of special
00:43:27 deputy assistant Commissioner of special Branch Mr CAW qpm the meeting took place at a West London safe flat and the report says it was conducted in a constructive and friendly Manner and a useful exchange of views took place concerning all aspects of the SDS
00:43:39 concerning all aspects of the SDS operation this visit was viewed by all officers as a
00:43:51 [Applause] success um do you recall the visit by those two senior officers to the SDS during your time in charge yes and were all the undercover officers present when they
00:44:09 they visited I I can't answer that um I would have thought so but there may have been absentees but I would have thought for the best part it would be the full team would the expectation have been that everybody should attend if they could
00:44:23 everybody should attend if they could yes yes and likewise what the inquiries referring to as the management team or the back office team so the detective sergeants the detective inspector and would the expect that all of you should also be for this visit yes most
00:44:40 certainly you say in your witness statement that the purpose of this visit would have been to brief the senior officers on the work of the SDS yes and to provide an opportunity for them to ask or answer
00:44:52 ask or answer questions when you say it was an opportunity for them to be briefed to what level of detail would they be have been briefed in terms of the SS's
00:45:02 the SS's work well the individual officers will give a um a summary of their areas of of responsibility
00:45:20 responsibility um and um if if they had any questions of the senior officers they would have an opportunity to put these questions to the senior
00:45:33 to put these questions to the senior officers um so the benefit this would be um two-way or both for the senior officers to get an understanding of of the role of the SDS and the type of intelligence that they're seeking to
00:45:50 intelligence that they're seeking to provide um and um and I guess the senior officers would have gained some insight at least into the workings of the of ss all right so that that would have covered would it the the broad topic
00:46:06 covered would it the the broad topic areas of deployment so for example this is might chitty he's deployed into the animal rights field yes would it have descended or do you recall whether it did descend to specific details of how the officers went about their
00:46:22 the officers went about their roles I doubt that very much that that would have would have gone into that kind of
00:46:24 kind of detail did you form an impression of whether these senior officers had an idea already when they turned up about what the SDS was doing or did it seem to be news to
00:46:36 be news to them I can't really answer that how they perceived it to be sent a very gracious note of memo afterwards
00:46:49 gracious note of memo afterwards Thanking us for the uh opportunity to
00:47:01 Thanking us for the uh opportunity to address the uh the um the meeting uh um but no apart from that there nothing else can you recall anything of the types of questions they asked if any of the
00:47:08 the officers I canot it's too too long
00:47:18 ago um you also say in your witness statement that the meeting with the senior officers demonstrated the value of the work that the undercover officers were doing
00:47:32 can you explain how it demonstrated the value of their work very difficult to quantify that
00:47:48 um I'm just sort of Hing to guess here that it would have been apprised of some of the successes that the SDS had over
00:47:57 had over the 12 months um and and how that was beneficial to the uh recipients of the SDS product uniform police and and um
00:48:15 SDS product uniform police and and um and so forth so I think the they would have
00:48:20 appreciated but it's difficult to quantify to what extent well by successes do you mean intelligence provided that was of assistance to policing more widely
00:48:38 correct all right thank you we can take that document down I want to move to ask you some questions please Mr McLoud about how you undercover officers were selected for service on the
00:49:00 service on the SDS and I think could we have up on the screen please uh Mr mccloud's witness statement MPS 07 48 808 page 10 paragraph
00:49:16 25 at the bottom of the page thank you in your witness statement Mr McLoud you described that the process for selection of undercover officers began with
00:49:21 with nominations from the detective Chief inspectors in the various special branch squads of suitable candidates to assign to the
00:49:31 to the SDS the candidate supervisors were the best people to talk to in order to gauge their
00:49:45 suitability and then you go on I'll just summarize you go on to describe that candidates put forward uh would be interviewed and if we can go thank you
00:49:56 interviewed and if we can go thank you over the page at the end of paragraph 25 you say from what I can recall of the interview
00:50:03 interview process the candidates were asked what they believ the role to entail its disadvantages and advantages the first question I want to ask you is this if the SDS was not widely known
00:50:16 widely known about how would the detective Chief inspectors from other squads be in a position to assess someone's suitability for an undercover role on the SDS
00:50:40 I think the supervising officers that this
00:50:42 information could
00:50:52 provide in particular for the roets and Visage that you should take up in the SDS and no it's difficult to see how
00:51:08 SDS and no it's difficult to see how that supervising officer could be aware of the um apart from the fact that they're Gathering informational intelligence um in the broad sense and how they might
00:51:25 um how how they might cope with the pressures of working under cover it's difficult to understand to get an idea of what the these senior officers who are
00:51:39 these senior officers who are sponsoring recommending somebody for Duty on the SDS it can only just be but
00:51:53 um just a an opinion if you like of somebody's personality
00:52:01 commitment that's about the only way they could find out but I can't see how they could contribute necessarily to the suitability of the officer other than if
00:52:17 suitability of the officer other than if the officer was there was some something in his character that would render him unsuitable so I can't see how the supervising officers in other squads are sort of
00:52:32 sort of the best people to provide that kind of it's a very much a personal
00:52:38 personal opinion but that those were the opinions that you were reliant on yes it was in terms of recommendations yeah in the era when you served in the unit yeah no I
00:52:49 when you served in the unit yeah no I can't I can't looking at it now I can't see how you could have come to that opinion it is the reality looking back that you were reliant on people to make recommendations but those people didn't
00:53:05 recommendations but those people didn't in fact have much of an idea whether the officers would turn out to be suitable well I mean yes I that has to be said yes that is true and likewise in terms of the interview process you say the
00:53:21 of the interview process you say the candidates were asked what they believed the role to entail it's disadvantages and
00:53:24 and advantages would it be likely that those coming to interview themselves had a fairly limited understanding of what the role would in fact entail because of its
00:53:36 role would in fact entail because of its nature certainly and because it was kept so secret it wouldn't have been explained to them in advance
00:53:49 right can we have a look please at paragraph 25A just further down page 11 please
00:54:06 Mr McLoud you say in your witness statement there that your role in The Selection process was chairing the selection
00:54:07 selection panel uh you can speak to the only occasion that you remember I'm not going to ask you about that officer because you'll see there are redactions in your statement but you go on to say I'm not
00:54:22 statement but you go on to say I'm not sure if Eric met with the officer's wife beforehand but I believe he would have
00:54:30 what was the purpose or what would have been the purpose as far as you're concerned of meeting with a prospective officer's spouse during the selection process I would have said it was
00:54:42 process I would have said it was imperative but why is it why was it imperative it's imperative in this much that
00:54:49 that the the families who I spouses partners
00:55:05 would have to understand the pressures are going to be placed on their husbands or Partners whatever um it's a long time four and a half years working in
00:55:17 years working in circumstances that the families would be
00:55:29 circumstances that the families would be unacquainted with and the pressures that brings on the individual officer so there is
00:55:45 um the F the families can only but have a s
00:55:48 a s of a brief understanding of what the work is going to entail it's only we get they get into the job they realize the length of times they're going to be
00:56:07 length of times they're going to be spending away from the family home um so that that is the kind of sacrifices the the offic officers had to make and and it was important the families understood that
00:56:16 that too was the um concern um such as it was to look out
00:56:29 concern um such as it was to look out for the welfare of the spouse and family members or to look out for the welfare of the undercover officer or or both well you can't you can't sort of
00:56:42 both well you can't you can't sort of monitor how a family is responding to a the lengthy absenteeism of their husbands but the be the officers themselves would be the
00:56:58 the officers themselves would have
00:57:10 um sorry the don't wor at all let me ask it this way did you consider it any part of your role to take steps to check on the welfare of the
00:57:26 steps to check on the welfare of the families of the undercover off officers under your command I didn't take it upon myself to to seek that information out were there any provisions in
00:57:44 out were there any provisions in place that the families could access or use if they did have any concerns whilst their spouse or family
00:57:55 concerns whilst their spouse or family member was deployed undercover sadly not and why do you say
00:58:04 sadly I I don't know what one could do to
00:58:06 amarate that
00:58:15 because it was was all very new to the to the officers to the families it's suppos they they adjust to the the periods that they
00:58:30 the the periods that they the undercover officers are away from home
00:58:47 um it's it's very difficult to to give an answer to that because I think it's it just more
00:58:56 complicated did you for example have any sort of open lines of communication with the spouses or families of the undercover officers so that if they were concerned when their spouse was away for a long period of time
00:59:11 time uncontable they could check in with you to see if that you knew they were safe no we
00:59:18 didn't um you explain elsewhere in your witness
00:59:20 witness statement that there was a preference for potential C recruits to be married or in a long-term relationship and you say because it keeps them anchored the support of a
00:59:37 keeps them anchored the support of a partner who understands the pressures of the job can do an enormous amount to keep the officer
00:59:44 stable to what extent did you consider that it was the stat status of being married or in a long-term relationship that was required to Anchor an officer
00:59:55 that was required to Anchor an officer as opposed to for example living with a close sibling or a
01:00:16 parent I I hadn't really given much thought to them living with a sibling or parent but for spouses Partners
01:00:24 Partners um it would be very important for them to as I supposed to is very much a a case of adapting to the change
01:00:39 the change circumstances that they I suppose accept that that's what the job entails so I'm not really sure that there's there's very much one could have
01:00:58 done every just the nature of the job but in terms of looking for recruits who were married what was it about being married that was considered to be
01:01:26 important well I think I think it it I I I do believe it it does help form if like an
01:01:27 like an anchor with their real lives and I think that probably hold a lot of
01:01:43 lot of sway when compared with perhaps a single officer who doesn't have that home life or that
01:01:51 stability if you like to keep them on the straight and narrow
01:02:05 was there any sense in which it was thought that a married officer would be less likely to enter into a sexual relationship whilst undercover well I guess I mean that was they received wisdom at the time with
01:02:19 they received wisdom at the time with the benefit of handset now I'm not so sure that that carries so much um so much weight but but at the time you thinking it would have influenced the idea that a married officer would be better than a single
01:02:39 officer was it seen to be part of The spouse's role then to help to keep the officer stable and on the straight and
01:02:50 narrow well I can't answer that because one doesn't know how individual officers manage the or family Affairs is not
01:02:58 not something we would be expected to know but were you expecting that a spouse might perform that
01:03:14 that role is that part of why you you wanted married officers yes I I I suppose it was I mean
01:03:33 it's yeah I I I think probably it does it does help to keep them together I think there is for a for a single officer um there's a risk that he may go back to his own
01:03:47 own flat or home um and there isn't anyone there to
01:03:53 there to share any anxieties she might have so a single person is as a disadvantage and may resort to alcohol
01:04:07 disadvantage and may resort to alcohol or whatever to so the is a a risk it's not to say that married men going back home wouldn't indulge in alcohol I mean that would be
01:04:18 would be ridiculous but for single men who are on their own they're more likely to be a tendency to perhaps and I think there is sence to show that there had been
01:04:31 sence to show that there had been casualties on the SDS where alcohol was a was a
01:04:45 problem could I ask you to look at something you said to operation um Hearn do you remember speaking to operation Hearn um I think you gave a witness statement back in 2012 but I want to ask you to look please at some notes that the operation Hearn officers took it's MPS
01:04:57 MPS 0726 640 page
01:05:05 3 so this is not your signed witness statement Mr mlau but it's the notes that the officers who spoke to you took before they drafted your
01:05:24 statement I can we focus in please under the just under the heading uos the first few paragraphs thank thank you right Mr McLoud they described they said this McLoud described the selection
01:05:36 said this McLoud described the selection process at the time as quote pretty piss Paul end quote he believes that there
01:05:49 Paul end quote he believes that there should have been a mental aptitude test in place prior to officers joining the SDS do you stand by orbe it that it's informal that description of the selection process at the time that you were in charge of the unit
01:06:02 well firstly um apologies for the language
01:06:05 language um yes I
01:06:07 um yes I do um I do believe there should have been some psychotic test and I think
01:06:19 been some psychotic test and I think that has since been adopted it's come in well it came in it quite a number of years ago but I can recall being and I can't remember what particular
01:06:30 particular um event it was whether it was at the Staff College at Ram solo whether it was at henden I can
01:06:41 can remember
01:06:42 remember this
01:06:44 this um whole thing
01:06:52 about aptitude test
01:07:07 I I I think it's I think and I thought at the time more could have been done to have
01:07:12 improved the
01:07:23 um the system it's always easily with a benefit of 2020 hindsight to make these comments but um that that was my thinking at the time it was
01:07:39 um I'm sure we we we could have done better than what we did basically that's what I'm saying so at the time you thought that improvements could have been made to the selection process other than the introduction of a mental aptitude test or
01:07:54 aptitude test or similar did you think there was anything else that could have been
01:08:03 approved not not I recall but I'm sure there would have there might have been and given that you noticed it at the time did you take any
01:08:17 noticed it at the time did you take any steps to for example notify senior more senior officers that you thought some changes were in order some improvements
01:08:27 no I
01:08:37 recall in your witness statement when you were asked about what you had told operation
01:08:38 operation Hearn you uh described uh this being prompted in part by what you had learned about Mike chitty and how he behaved during his
01:08:53 deployment was it your view or is it your view now that some sort of sort of aptitude test would have been sufficient to weed out a candidate like Mike
01:09:04 to weed out a candidate like Mike chitty or do you think more was required than just
01:09:18 that I I once again I think more could have been done to to read out people like
01:09:20 like chitty um
01:09:29 and what more do you think could have been done what steps whether at selection or
01:09:44 later and know I come back to the psychometric testing again um that that might have been a possible sort of ytic
01:09:51 ytic um other than that I can't I can't
01:10:10 calls I'll come back to some questions about uh my chitty's deployment later um when you were the detective Chief Inspector um of the unit the inquiry understands that three officers joined
01:10:25 understands that three officers joined the unit I'm going I'm not going to use the names of some of them all right so so I'll ask you to look at the cipher list for some of them the three officers who
01:10:30 who joined um whilst you were the detective Chief Inspector were don't say the name hn 87
01:11:10 yes right that that individual has um anonymity over their real name but deployed we know into animal rights groups yes the second I'm going to ask you about again don't say the name hn 25
01:11:34 oh yes yeah y deployed into the troops out movement and the third officer whose name I can say was John dyes recruited whilst you were the detective Chief Inspector of the SDS according to the documents the
01:11:47 SDS according to the documents the inquiry has found he joined in or around May 1987 whilst you were there right and all those uh three officers recruited
01:11:55 recruited whilst you were imp post the evidence before the inquiry indicates that two of them John dyes and hn 87 engaged
01:12:09 them John dyes and hn 87 engaged respectively in a sexual relationship a long-term relationship John dyes with Helen steel and in hn 87's case he has admitted to some sexual activity with a number of women whil deployed very short term is his
01:12:23 deployed very short term is his evidence given that two of the three officers recruited on your watch engaged in that
01:12:29 in that behavior do you think there's anything more that you could have done or ought to have
01:12:38 to have done at the selection stage to guard against that
01:12:46 happening you know with a Ben of a hset
01:12:48 hset um something should have been done but if you ask me what could have been done if the predisposed to having this kind of
01:13:02 of relationship no matter what our views and mor might be trying to identify that prior to
01:13:13 to identify that prior to engagement would have been very difficult if somebody is so minded to to stray like that it's pretty abor but I'm not really sure
01:13:26 abor but I'm not really sure there's it would be an effective way of preventing that from apart from warning them and making sure that this does not this is just totally
01:13:39 this is just totally unacceptable difficult to see how when they're living in an isolated environment with these opportunities to develop
01:13:52 opportunities to develop relationships and no matter how we regard that I'm not sure prior to engagement that we could have prevented it I think it can only
01:14:11 have prevented it I think it can only come from just reminders at the time of recruitment just to reinforce that as best you can but no it's um that's as far as I
01:14:19 far as I can as far as I can answer I'll come back to ask you some questions about later stages and whether anything could be done later on I'm going to move now please to some questions about what
01:14:33 please to some questions about what training and guidance there was in place for undercover officers who joined the unit and can we have on the screen first of all please paragraph 72 of your
01:14:46 of all please paragraph 72 of your witness statement page 30 um of MPS at 0748 808
01:14:59 at the bottom of the page paragraph
01:15:12 72 you said this Mr McLoud I was aware of a binder containing guidance for uos primarily on creating their Legend I would not say it was concerned much with how UCO should and should not behave whilst deployed
01:15:23 whilst deployed undercover um it was not known to me by the term trade crof manual it was a binder in the back office in a secure cupboard I read it within a month of
01:15:37 cupboard I read it within a month of joining the unit it was important for me to understand the uco's deployments I did not have to refer to it often if ever
01:15:41 ever again would it be correct to understand from your evidence there that this binder was not in any way considered a secret or clandestine bit of guidance it was open and acknowledged within the
01:15:55 was open and acknowledged within the unit it it was it was within the unit it was
01:15:59 was accessible and was it something to which the attention of new recruits was specifically drawn yes did you draw it to their attention or did you rely on others in the office I can't remember but I would have thought that Eric or
01:16:12 but I would have thought that Eric or one of the office staff would made sure
01:16:20 that this is information it's it's critical to their
01:16:26 employment we see see there in 72 paragraph
01:16:28 paragraph 72a that you believe the manual went back to 1968 and the Genesis of the SDS you say it came about by default people
01:16:39 you say it came about by default people just add their experiences and advice to it so does it follow that you didn't consider it to be a sort of official guidance manual but rather something that had grown up organically through the life of the unit that's right and to be based on the experiences of
01:16:55 be based on the experiences of individuals rather than a sort of court set of rules or regulations correct was there anything in it when you read it that you considered was inappropriate in terms of guidance or advice to prospective undercover
01:17:15 officers no not that I can recall if there had been do you think you would recall
01:17:19 recall it yes and do you think you would have done anything if you'd read in that binder something which you considered to be inappropriate to think so yes and what might you have done what were the options open to you of a conversation with
01:17:31 of a conversation with the with with Eric and the um we would have tried to deal with that internally in the
01:17:42 internally in the office
01:17:57 um was there any system in place for deciding who should contribute to the binder or again was that left more organic so that people could contribute if they wanted to and not if they didn't I think it was more
01:18:13 I think it was more organic from what I recall and how authoritative was this guidance considered to be by you well bear in mind I was pretty new to the unit and to the um and how it
01:18:28 to the unit and to the um and how it operated it appeared to me at the time to be sufficiently
01:18:36 adequate that answers as to its adequacy did you think or did you consider that it it should be viewed by the officers as authoritative so was it the last word in how they should act or
01:18:48 the last word in how they should act or something less formal than that well it should have
01:18:54 been you go on in your witness statement to described that the binder dealt primarily with how officers should go about building up their Legends
01:19:08 about building up their Legends yes was it also did it also contain any guidance or advice about how the officers should conduct themselves whilst they once they were in the field I don't believe it
01:19:24 did could I ask you to um look at another part of of your witness statement in terms of what guidance there was in that regard paragraph 78 please on page
01:19:36 33 thank
01:19:44 you and you were asked when giving your witness statement about something you said to operation Hearn which was that the uco's quote all knew the
01:19:51 knew the boundaries end quote and you said say this I meant that they were adults and they should know the dictates of moral and Common Sense there are certain things you do and do not do there are
01:20:05 things you do and do not do there are fundamental principles that you adhere to whatever role you are in these include moral principles decency and proerty were qualities we looked for in officers they were also police officers who had been trained within the
01:20:20 who had been trained within the Metropolitan Police Service and special Branch I did not satisfy myself in the case of every individual officer that they knew all the boundaries but felt that I could safely assume it to be
01:20:38 true if you didn't discuss the boundaries with the
01:20:47 officers how were they to identify where management considered those boundaries to be
01:21:01 well I would have thought it really should have been a
01:21:08 condition of their deployment that they should
01:21:09 should be apprised of this would you accept that that this approach to the identification of boundaries or lines relies on each
01:21:30 boundaries or lines relies on each officers subjective their own personal appreciation of of where lines and boundaries should
01:21:36 be yes so it's quite possible on this approach isn't it that you might have an officer in the SDS who thought the boundaries were in a completely different place to where you thought
01:21:50 different place to where you thought they should be I'm sure that's true did you take any steps to inform the officers of where you thought the boundaries were no unless I had reason
01:22:02 were no unless I had reason to and when you say unless you had reason to do you mean unless something came to your attention particularly
01:22:13 came to your attention particularly which prompted you to do so yeah so when these officers were recruited for example those recruited when you were the detective Chief Inspector there was no uh for example no sit down with you
01:22:29 no uh for example no sit down with you which you set out the dos and don'ts of behavior as an undercover officer no do you think looking back it might have been a good idea to have that sort
01:22:43 have been a good idea to have that sort of conversation with them well certainly and why do you think now most certainly it would have been a good idea even though it didn't occur to you at the
01:23:00 time no just a simple reason that is as I say keep coming back to this 2020
01:23:02 this 2020 hindsight
01:23:07 hindsight um had I known then what I know now yes we should have
01:23:17 done can I ask you about another part of your witness statement please paragraph 23 page 10
01:23:47 you're talking here about after your time in the SDS and you say this about your service in the SDS it gave me a better understanding of that particular aspect
01:23:59 understanding of that particular aspect of the work which now formed one part of my command in C Squad it opened my eyes to the risks associated with undercover
01:24:15 to the risks associated with undercover work such as risk of compromise and risk of a barent behavior for example with alcohol it was a salutary lesson in terms of human
01:24:22 Frailty now you give an example there of a barent behavior as being with alcohol um and we know I I'm not going to go into the detail but we know that during your time there was an officer
01:24:37 during your time there was an officer who um committed an offense of driving with excess alcohol drink Drive offense when you say that it was a salutary lesson in terms of human Frailty other than
01:24:53 Frailty other than alcohol was there anything else that led you to suggest that being the detective Chief Inspector in the SDS was a salitary lesson in terms of human Frailty no I I suppose I was I was quite
01:25:06 Frailty no I I suppose I was I was quite fortunate during my tenure on the on the squad uh
01:25:10 squad uh that there there hadn't been any other incidents that was only one that um that occurred during my uh during the time I was I was on the
01:25:21 during the time I was I was on the unit so in what sense was it a salary lesson in terms of human Frailty in that case solid reless
01:25:36 case solid reless and trying to identify if you like what what the what the root caes may have been that led this officer to drink to excess to the point of getting himself arrested so sorry I'm sorry you go it
01:25:54 arrested so sorry I'm sorry you go it was it was um it was a solitary lesson and the need to be more watchful more cognizant of their behaviors and
01:26:09 more cognizant of their behaviors and there's very often there's very little Clues given before something this happens if somebody for example has got a drink problem it may not always
01:26:25 a drink problem it may not always manifest itself in s um the most obvious ways um so I'm not sure that there's enough lot more again looking back don't think there's very much more that really I could have
01:26:37 really I could have done if you like to amarate or to prevent this sort of thing happening it is it is evidence of human fry of course it is but how how do we how do we deal
01:26:53 it is but how how do we how do we deal with that if if the officers are working remotely and and you don't have any inkling of what's happening or might happen um no I'm quite um quite relaxed a but I don't have
01:27:10 a but I don't have a I can't see how we could have prevented something from I if officers just like any other individual are subject
01:27:21 individual are subject to what you refer to as human Frailty would you agree that relying on their common sense and their subjective assessments of how to behave wasn't
01:27:33 assessments of how to behave wasn't adequate they needed more guidance than that didn't they I mean I hear what you say but I
01:27:43 say but I think going to say they're growing growing
01:27:47 growing men they should should know better they know right from wrong and you know there's only so much you can do to sort of wet Nur them but
01:28:01 you can do to sort of wet Nur them but I I don't really see how much more one could do to prevent this because as I say
01:28:05 say it's they're mature enough and old enough they should know how to behave do you accept Looking Back Now and the evidence that's before the inquiry that a number of the officers
01:28:21 inquiry that a number of the officers under your command don't appear to have been able to identify right from wrong or if they did were willing to do the wrong thing yes my S
01:28:32 when you said that being in the SDS was a salutary lesson in terms of human Frailty did you have in mind at all the topic of officers entering into sexual relationships goodness me no you
01:28:43 sexual relationships goodness me no you don't consider that to be the result of human Frailty no absolutely not do you consider that in entering into sexual
01:28:57 into sexual relationships Undercover officers exploited as it were an opportunity that was there for them to exploit
01:29:17 yes so we're about to move on to a slightly different topics I wonder although we started a little late if that's a convenient moment me certainly and we now break for a quarter of an hour to enable the
01:29:31 a quarter of an hour to enable the transcribers to have a break and you for that matter sure thank
01:29:53 you
01:47:51 e e
01:48:42 thank you uh Mr mlad I want to move on to ask you about the aspect of the officers choosing um their uh identities
01:48:54 officers choosing um their uh identities which involved the use of the identities of deceased children could we have on screen please your witness statement at page 45 paragraph
01:49:15 99 and you describ there that undercover officers would spend 6 to eight months in the back office developing their Legends they would also visit Somerset house and from time to time they might
01:49:26 house and from time to time they might visit anywhere else that they needed to go in order to find accommodation or familiarize themselves with the
01:49:34 area in the time that you were the detective Chief Inspector of the unit I've mentioned three officers recruited hn 87 John dyes and
01:49:47 hn 87 John dyes and hn2 were any checks um conducted by you or anyone in the office to your knowledge it about the families of the
01:50:00 knowledge it about the families of the deceased children whose identities were used by those officers no were you aware that those officers would be selecting for their cover identities the identities identities of deceased
01:50:15 identities identities of deceased children I discovered that when I went on the unit right so not known to you before you joined the unit but known to you once you had joined yes
01:50:33 did you ever address your mind to whether that approach adopting the identity of deceased child was legal no I didn't did you ever seek reassurance from anyone else within the unit or outside and above the unit about the
01:50:50 outside and above the unit about the legality or propriety of that approach no I didn't however I did feel uncomfortable about it at the time and can you explain what it was that made you feel
01:51:01 that made you feel uncomfortable just a very the very idea that this should this should occur you know I haven't said that this was a system that had been set up many years
01:51:12 up many years before and regardless of my particular views um it was it was the system
01:51:23 system and it was designed to provide maximum protection for the undercover officers in building up their Legend So now
01:51:35 in building up their Legend So now although I had some personal quals about it I just accepted that that was how
01:51:49 it I just accepted that that was how things were done did you ever reflect on whether it was in fact the most secure the safest way for them to select an identity
01:51:50 identity yeah were you aware of an officer who had been deployed in the 1970s in the SDS by the name of Rick
01:52:02 SDS by the name of Rick Clark yes did you know he'd been an undercover officer in the
01:52:14 SDS yes and did you know or did you hear uh information to the effect that whilst deployed he had been presented with his own death certificate in his cover identity
01:52:27 I didn't know that but I I I learned this long after I left left the police after you left the police
01:52:37 police yeah yeah he was he was working down in Canary
01:52:38 Canary Warf and
01:52:41 Warf and um he was managing a I'm not just just in case there's anything sensitive I won't ask you about what he was doing in the police at
01:52:56 what he was doing in the police at another stage but but you were no longer in the police when you leared about about that
01:53:13 no the inquiry has heard some evidence um just off the topic of a deceased CH uh child's identity for a moment but some evidence that Rick Clark was regarded as something of a lady's man does that chime with what you knew about him yes
01:53:24 was that uh something that was
01:53:36 widely I say known but was it widely in circulation it wasn't a secret it wasn't a
01:53:44 secret so you I'm just being asked if you wouldn't mind just sitting forward a little bit to assist with the microphone picking up your voice not at all y
01:53:56 all right so going back then to the selection of deceased children's identities nothing came to your attention to cause you to think that it wasn't in fact the safest and most secure way to select an identity that's
01:54:12 secure way to select an identity that's right did you consider ever simply that an officer might make up a completely fake
01:54:25 identity well that that there the only way that we're going to be able to obtain that information that identity but if they simply made made up a fake identity so you may or may not know that in the
01:54:36 know that in the 1990s the use of deceased children's identities in the early 90s was phased out by the SDS and officers used fake
01:54:47 out by the SDS and officers used fake identities rather than using a deceased child's identity is that something you considered doing whilst you were in post no and why
01:55:07 not frankly it never occurred to me it was the stat of scho and I said before whatever qu made a have about it over distasteful and
01:55:21 have about it over distasteful and shocking it might be um that's how it was that was system did you give any thought to the potential impact on the families the surviving families of the deceased children whose identities were
01:55:34 children whose identities were used I think when it when it hit the media I think it was probably then I realized just so
01:55:48 realized just so important the situation was
01:55:50 was so but when sir no it didn't occur to me at all it just went along with the status
01:56:01 School specifically did you ever think for example about what might happen in the event of an undercover officer being arrested and getting a criminal record in the name of the deceased child or
01:56:13 in the name of the deceased child or having a warrant issued for their arrest what the the impact at the time might have been on the families if the police had knocked on their door looking for their deceased relative yes but I
01:56:27 for their deceased relative yes but I understand the question but I'm not sure that occurred to me at the
01:56:35 time you refer there in paragraph 99 of your witness statement to um the officers might have visited anywhere else that they needed to go in order to find accommodation or familiarize
01:56:46 find accommodation or familiarize themselves with the area when you say the area do you mean the area into which
01:57:00 the area do you mean the area into which they were going to be deployed FL um the the geographical location I think the geographical location yes were there ever visits to your knowledge by undercover officers to the area where
01:57:11 undercover officers to the area where the deceased child whose identity they were taking where that child had been born I wasn't aware or or to places where the surviving family were residing
01:57:23 no so you were never asked to authorize or approve any such visits no no not at all I I guess it was because it was the um it had been the it had been the practice um that been established
01:57:42 practice um that been established sometime before so it never occurred to me it never occurred to you that they might make such visits do you mean yeah and to your knowledge did they in fact make any such visits the officers that
01:57:53 make any such visits the officers that were preparing to deploy whilst you were in
01:57:58 in charge I do I can't remember I I can't be
01:57:58 be sure would it have been something of note to you if they had come to you and
01:58:11 note to you if they had come to you and said I want to go to the location where the surviving family lives to check it out would you probably not probably not I would just have accepted that this is what they're doing to
01:58:21 to reinforce the um
01:58:31 um identity to what extent did you consider it necessary for officers to look into the surviving families of the deceased child in order to reinforce their Legend did that seem legitimate to you well Looking Back Now
01:58:42 legitimate to you well Looking Back Now the answer to that would be a yes but at the time that's that's how it was that's how it was it was I just clarify that
01:58:53 was I just clarify that answer what I asked you was whether you considered it necessary for the officers to look into the families of the deceased children whether that was a legitimate thing to
01:59:09 do and your answer was looking back now yes do you mean now you think it was legitimate and necessary but at the time you didn't consider it yes I think that is true and why
01:59:21 it yes I think that is true and why would it be legitimate or necessary to look into the family of the deceased child whose identity they were going to
01:59:39 use I really don't know what the reasoning behind it was where
01:59:48 was where the inquiry would go that far in terms of
01:59:55 research in the the relatives of the deceased I don't know how necessary that would have been but if it
02:00:07 would have been but if it was if it had happened it was obviously deemed at the time to be um an appropriate thing to do did you give it any thought at the time I I wouldn't have known at the
02:00:22 wouldn't have known at the time was there um ever any uh question or suggestion raised about an undercover officer having more than one cover
02:00:30 cover identity no absolutely
02:00:40 not so it was used and deployed after you had left the unit but the inquiry has evidence to suggest for example that John dines used the identity of a second deceased child is that the sort of thing that you ever became aware aare of I
02:00:55 that you ever became aware aare of I didn't become aware of that at all had you become aware of it would you have had a view on whether it was the right thing to do the wrong thing to do no I think I only became aware of that sometime
02:01:08 aware of that sometime later and do you have a view on whether it was
02:01:11 it was appropriate frankly
02:01:21 no so it wouldn't have caused you any concern necessarily if an officer under your command had sought out a second identity from a deceased child to you oh yes it would it would have CA you concern oh absolutely and why would it have cause you
02:01:34 have cause you concern I I need to be convinced of was a necessity for it so you'd want to know whether it was necessary to use it so there might be circumstances you can
02:01:46 there might be circumstances you can envisage in which it would be but you'd want to inquire into it exactly
02:02:01 thank you can we move please um to the topic of how SDS intelligence reports were written and handled within the unit and can we have up on the screen please page 60 paragraph 121 of your witness
02:02:25 statement and you said said this Mr McLoud no instructions were given to uos as to what intelligence should and should not be recorded in reports to my knowledge their understanding about what should or should not be included came from their special Branch
02:02:43 background are you able to assist as to what in their special Branch background would have assisted undercover officers to judge what was and wasn't useful intelligence or appropriate
02:03:27 intelligence you know there's no instructions given to what intelligence should and should not be recorded in reports and how were the undercover officers to judge what to include and not to include if they weren't given any guidance or
02:03:42 guidance or instructions I believe that probably was the historical practice that been sort of if you like handed down through the through the years um
02:03:56 through the years um and for that reason there was no reason to to question
02:04:06 that right but an undercover officer deployed in a long-term deployment was going to come across dayto day a large amount of information about the people with whom they were associating weren't they yes and that put them in a different position from
02:04:17 put them in a different position from when they might have been performing a desk based role within special branch do you agree
02:04:22 you agree yes so there was a choice for them to make wasn't there about what information it was useful to commit to writing and an intelligence report and what information was of no policing
02:04:39 interest well that would be that would be their judgment as to what is what is appropriate and what is not so that was left entirely to the undercover officer
02:04:52 left entirely to the undercover officer and was not the subject of guidance from you or the office no no did you ever give officers any feedback for example if they had included something in a report that you considered unhelpful or irrelevant or
02:05:05 considered unhelpful or irrelevant or inappropriate would you have raised that with
02:05:12 with them it would have done had that happened but I can't ever recall that
02:05:21 happening can we have a look at paragraph 126 please of your witness statement page
02:05:31 62 and it says this I have been asked whether I had sight of every intelligence report or only those which I signed off I made a conscious effort to read as much of the reporting as I could though I could not read all the
02:05:46 could though I could not read all the reports obviously the team would flag anything of particular significance as a priority for me it is not only useful to get an insight into
02:05:58 not only useful to get an insight into what was happening but also some sense of the effort that each UCO put into their reporting style credibility
02:06:13 their reporting style credibility Etc are you able to give any idea of the proportion of reporting that you either read completely or had flagged to you for your attention
02:06:27 no I I can't remember who in the team would flag things of particular significance to you would that be Eric Docker or also potentially the detective
02:06:44 sergeants I I would have said Eric doer would have in me did individual undercover officers ever flag to you particular intelligence that they were reporting as being of significance as far as they were
02:07:02 concerned I I I can't remember can you give any idea of the sort of things that were flagged to you as being of significance so for example was it
02:07:17 significance so for example was it examples of what was considered to be particularly important intelligence within a
02:07:23 within a field yes it would have been it would have been flagged to me was anything ever flagged to you as being an example of substandard report writing by an officer
02:07:35 writing by an officer no anything flagged you as being particularly impressive intelligence from an officer that you can
02:07:46 recall I was it for the best part of the time the
02:07:48 time the the field
02:07:50 the field officers writing reporting was of a fairly fairly high standard so I never had any any reason to
02:08:02 to question
02:08:05 the the
02:08:12 reporting can I ask you a little bit about the method by which the reports came into existence as I understand your evidence it was the individual field officers who WR wrote their own intelligence reports is that right yes
02:08:25 intelligence reports is that right yes and those reports were written and then handed in at the meetings at Safe House meetings you say in your witness statement that you did not exercise
02:08:37 statement that you did not exercise editorial control over the content of the reporting is that right correct by
02:08:50 the reporting is that right correct by which you mean correct me if I'm wrong do you mean that you didn't alter the substance of what the field officers reported yeah ever not I can recall might there might have been the but I would doubt it why would you why would I S
02:09:10 of alter the it's a field officer whose whose product is I me who's any sort of grammatical errors syntax we would alter
02:09:23 grammatical errors syntax we would alter it but no the actual the mean text of it would
02:09:24 would be
02:09:26 be unadulterated can I ask you by reference to a paragraph of your witness statement about some things you said there paragraph 128 please so page
02:09:40 63 we could just zoom in on the bottom half of the
02:09:48 page you explained there Mr McLoud that intelligence reports were typed up by one of the detective sergeants usually detective Sergeant Chris Hyde from manuscript versions submitted by uos and the DSs would add any SB special Branch
02:10:01 the DSs would add any SB special Branch registry file references needed as they went yeah is that that's correct yes and are you able to say whether the detective sergeants ever exercised any
02:10:14 detective sergeants ever exercised any editorial control when they were typing them up
02:10:24 um I don't know the answer I wouldn't
02:10:39 expect it would
02:10:49 be it might have it might have created some of the um some of the grammar but wouldn't have altered the
02:11:00 grammar but wouldn't have altered the actual main thrust of the report of the intelligence and then at paragraph
02:11:04 128a it was on the screen
02:11:16 sorry thank you at paragraph 128 a that's where you say you didn't exercise editorial control and then you go on to say this I do not know if Eric would have exercised any editorial control that seems to leave open the
02:11:29 control that seems to leave open the possibility that he might have is that what you intended to convey I would have thought he would have picked that up yeah if if there was the need to correct any of
02:11:38 any of the the grammar but the actual main tener of the report and intelligence would be
02:11:50 would be unadulterated so you wouldn't have expected Eric Docker to alter the substance of the report P
02:12:01 either no grammatical changes that would be it but I don't think the main thrust of the of the intelligence would be um
02:12:14 the of the intelligence would be um altered could we look at 128b please at the bottom of that
02:12:25 page and reads as follows Mr McLoud I have been asked to what extent if any SDS managers decided that it was not worth typing up reports they considered to be of little intelligence value as I
02:12:36 to be of little intelligence value as I have said thought would have to be given about whether an officer's report might simply be shredded as being of no relevance ultimately it was a judgment call for the managers and you go on to say that your approach was generally to trust the officer's
02:12:48 trust the officer's judgment do you recall occasion on which officers submitted reports but they were shredded because they were considered simply to be of no relevance at
02:13:14 all I think that would probably be true so there may have been reports that were submitted but never saw the light of
02:13:25 of day if if it didn't if it didn't contain adequate information intelligence if it was and I can't I can't think of a reason why you would shred it
02:13:33 um I'm I'm afraid I can't answer that I'm not sure why but you leave open the possibility that it might have happened is that is that a fair yes I have to yet because it can be certain
02:14:04 the inquiry has received evidence from some undercover officers to the effect that they reported certain information certain
02:14:15 certain details um and that doesn't appear in their written reporting and they have surmised that that might be because management removed the
02:14:27 detail do you consider that that that to be a possible
02:14:41 explanation well I've never myself altered that I can recall I've never during my time there altered any of the reports but again Eric would have seen them first and if it's grammatical error and fair
02:14:54 and if it's grammatical error and fair enough but the substance of the report I would expect to remain um
02:15:04 unchanged you refer um elsewhere in your statement to editing and sanitizing of reports can you explain what you mean by sanitizing of
02:15:18 reports well if it's considered the information is not relevant
02:15:26 you have to make a judgment whether or not it's it's worthy of
02:15:36 recording um and it might be necessary in certain circumstances to sanitize so does sanitize mean removing irrelevant information in your mind in my mind mind
02:15:50 my mind mind yes we have a look please at par paragraph
02:15:52 paragraph 129d on page
02:16:09 67 this is in a section about the dissemination of intelligence Mr McLoud and you say this in my time Intelligence on serious events was never
02:16:25 Intelligence on serious events was never withheld on the basis that disseminating such material might require an officer to go to court and give evidence thus leading to their early
02:16:31 withdrawal so does it follow from that that you would not have removed any information nor taken the decision not to disseminate
02:16:42 to disseminate it simply on the basis that it might end up going before a court
02:16:54 yeah um
02:17:27 I think the what what's in
02:17:43 there I do occation for that predicament where an officer might have to um go to court or leading to their early
02:18:15 withdrawal I I can't I can't remember the
02:18:17 the circumstances in which would have said that let let me ask perhaps in this way if a report had crossed your desk containing intelligence that caused you to think hang on a minute this officer
02:18:34 to think hang on a minute this officer might end up in court given what's being reported would you have done anything differently from usual with that intelligence or would you have signed off the report and allowed it to be disseminated in the ordinary
02:18:46 way I think we would have allowed it to go go ahead not way
02:19:02 can we look at an example report that you commented on in your witness statement please it's MPS 074
02:19:09 088 we'll come back to the substance of it but I want to ask you about the format of it please Mr McLoud if we see that it was um Eric Docker who signed
02:19:21 that it was um Eric Docker who signed the cover sheet but can I just ask if we look please at the first uh
02:19:28 first uh page and can we zoom in on paragraphs 1 and two
02:19:32 and two please as I said we'll come back to the substance of this uh Mr McLoud but we see there's a paragraph one describes events between the 6th of January 1985 and the 20th of May 46
02:19:46 January 1985 and the 20th of May 46 incur device attacks carried out by members of the AL Etc and then at the bottom of paragraph one this phrase the following information concerning the future of this campaign of economic sabotage has
02:20:03 this campaign of economic sabotage has been received from a secret and reliable source and then paragraph two begins with a set of quotation marks do we take it from the way that report is set out that the intelligence
02:20:18 report is set out that the intelligence that came from the undercover officer in this case Bob Lambert is what we see from paragraph two or would Bob Lambert also have drafted paragraph
02:20:27 one are you able to
02:20:42 say sorry sir this is your b13a sorry no I mean I I cannot say I can't be sure all right so we shouldn't take the quotation marks necessar neily as delineating between no information
02:20:57 delineating between no information directly from the undercover officer and information from elsewhere yes and then can we look please um at paragraph seven of this report which you commented on in your witness
02:21:10 statement sorry next page thank
02:21:19 you at the end of this report there's a paragraph submitting a list of all incend devic es prepared by
02:21:31 Arie and when you commented this on on this in your witness statement you seemed to be suggesting that that this was it was clear that this information was not from the undercover officer but had been
02:21:48 added by somebody with access to the the AR list yeah it would appear so yeah
02:21:59 all right thank you I'll come back to the substance of that later I'm going to ask please that we look now at um an
02:22:10 ask please that we look now at um an example of uh reporting by an undercover officer who was under your command um it's ucpi 0201 48 it's not in your uh primary bundle sir it's a report dated the 20 22nd of April of
02:22:24 22nd of April of 1987 and it's attributable to the officer Stefan
02:22:39 Scott and can we look please at paragraph uh first of all paragraphs one and two just to um orientate ourselves it appears to be a a report responding to a request from the security service
02:23:01 um identifying members of the Hackney South Branch of the Socialist Workers Party and then if we look please at paragraph
02:23:08 4 amongst the information reported by Stefan Scott was this that a female employed in a particular Department
02:23:26 a particular Department somewhere is described as 5'4 t T plump bu pretty face short Fair hair and possessing a slow Regional
02:23:37 accent the use of the descriptor pretty face do you have an observation now on whether that was an appropriate way to describe this individual
02:23:59 um it's certainly not
02:24:09 offensive it it's a subjective descriptor isn't it it depends on it's not necessarily useful to identify somebody yeah because it's entirely subjective isn't it
02:24:22 subjective isn't it yeah and would you agree that it is to some extent at least a judgment on someone's
02:24:24 someone's appearance oh it certainly that
02:24:37 yes does it trouble you at all that undercover officers were commenting on the perceived attractiveness of women in their intelligence reporting I am a bit yes um and why can you explain why um
02:25:02 to say it's misogynistic maybe went a bit far but I there's no necessity to put in a pretty face andless you're going to continue and qualify that by but no it's doesn't really add to the uh the sum total of the report that was not
02:25:21 necessary should the inquiry understand from seeing this sort of of observation included in an intelligence report that the culture of the SDS as a unit was such that these sorts of
02:25:34 unit was such that these sorts of judgments and descriptors were applied to women
02:25:41 generally I don't know whether it's applied generally but you know it's not it's it's probably a it's more of a comment on on the on the time in the 1980s
02:25:55 the time in the 1980s language like this was probably seem to be acceptable although and know in our person claim it no it's
02:26:05 no it's not so did the culture of the SDS reflect then that sort of culture you're describing I think it's true to say yes
02:26:30 was it common for SDS officers or managers in your time to comment on the attractiveness of women being reported on something wasn't in my time I can't ever
02:26:45 ever remember it making a comment like that whe whether it's intended to be complimentary or derogatory I do think say any
02:26:56 say any need did you hear others in the unit speaking of the attractiveness or otherwise of women who were being reported on even if you didn't apply those descriptors yourself I didn't um can we take that report down please
02:27:14 um can we take that report down please and look at another example I'm going to ask this through your witness statement because I can't show you the report itself page 72 paragraph 141
02:27:34 right and you were shown in the course of giving your witness statement a report in which there was a comment that a new member of the group is quote very attractive and you were asked whether
02:27:47 attractive and you were asked whether officers were encouraged to report uh such information you said this uos were encouraged to report on members appearances for
02:28:00 report on members appearances for identification purposes but this is too subjective and unnecessary even by the standards of the
02:28:16 time and you say at the bottom of that paragraph people today have got higher expectations of public bodies and the police are open to Greater public scrutiny than they were firstly do I understand your evidence there to suggest that even by the standards of the 1980s as you experienced
02:28:31 the 1980s as you experienced them commenting on the attractiveness of an individual of a woman was not necessary in special Branch intelligence reporting
02:28:41 reporting yeah and as to what you say at the bottom of that paragraph about the police being open to Greater public scrutiny it it is it your view that it's public scrutiny that that keeps the
02:28:55 public scrutiny that that keeps the police on the straight and narrow as it were with this sort of thing or is that to misunderstand your
02:29:15 evidence I think it was a fair comment you think the um high levels of secrecy around the SDS was a factor in either encouraging or permitting
02:29:26 in either encouraging or permitting officers to behave in ways that might not have been acceptable so the secrecy afforded them a cloak for behavior that in other areas of work more public areas of work might have been called out I think that a fair
02:29:48 comment you comment a bit further down in your witness statement that you find the level of intrusion in this sort of comment troubling with the benefit of hindsight at the time that you served do you want me to put it on the screen Mr McLoud yes please paragraph 142
02:30:08 please so there is nothing further I can add about the purpose of reporting personal information such as that seen in the reports referred to and then at
02:30:20 in the reports referred to and then at sub paragraph C I've been asked whether the reporting was justified I believe that we thought it was at the time however with the benefit of hindsight I find the level of intrusion intrusion troubling and you're commenting there on a series of reports including the two I've just gone through with
02:30:33 I've just gone through with you is it right that at the time this sort of reporting didn't stand out to you at
02:30:50 all well retrospectively yes it does stand out but at the time probably
02:30:59 not right thank you can we have up on screen now please paragraph 204 of your witness statement page
02:31:09 page 113 I want to ask you Mr McLoud about um Legal Professional privilege and Reporting on on matters connected to
02:31:22 that we'll have to we'll have to have that up please and over the page as well thank
02:31:42 you right we'll have to go over I'll start here Mr mlau paragraph 204 you were asked about any reporting on lpp Legal Professional privilege and you said you were aware of the
02:31:54 and you said you were aware of the concept when you were a manager through C courses which were part of police training I'm not going to ask you in fact about sub paragraph a because the redactions make it rather difficult to do so but could we have a look please over the
02:32:09 page if we take that down thank
02:32:17 you and you you gave your viewer on a report that was shown to you and then you say this at sub paragraph B I would be uncomfortable with sanctioning anything that troubled me as being legally privileged I would prefer to
02:32:28 legally privileged I would prefer to have it removed from the report if it smacked of breach of legal privilege I would have been very uneasy there would be reputational repercussions if it became
02:32:40 became known so when you were managing the unit you were confident that you were able to spot legally privileged information
02:32:51 spot legally privileged information based on your training as is that right correct do you recall ever seeing anything that troubled you as being privileged I can't remember if you had you seem to be
02:33:03 remember if you had you seem to be saying that you might have removed that information from the report is that right yes so in that sense you might have exercised some editorial control by removing information yes on something
02:33:16 removing information yes on something like that yes and so you considered am I right to to suggest you considered that it was inappropriate for officers to be
02:33:30 it was inappropriate for officers to be reporting legally privileged information absolutely you say there uh you suggest there that there would be reputational repercussions if it became known that privileged information had been reported was there anything other than the reputation of the unit that concerned you about the reporting of privileged
02:33:47 information yes it's be fundamentally wrong in fact they'll be breaking the law
02:33:59 can we take that down and look please at paragraph 205 on page on that page at the bottom thank you you say in your statement Mr McLoud that there was no policy instruction or
02:34:12 that there was no policy instruction or guidance concerning undercover officers coming into possession of Legally privileged information you would expect to have been made aware of a policy if it had existed
02:34:24 um and then you say you would have taken it up with a more senior officer if you'd seen it in a report if there was no policy instruction or guidance concerning officers coming into possession of
02:34:35 officers coming into possession of Legally privileged information did you take any steps to guide them as to the undesirability of including such information in their
02:34:50 reports well I would I would most certainly have taken up with the more senior officer that's for sure as to how undercover officers would know or if they would
02:35:03 officers would know or if they would know that it was deemed unacceptable to report that information how how would they know
02:35:07 they know that in the absence of any instruction or
02:35:21 policy I wish have was self-evident if if they're trying to report if they are reporting legal privilege information
02:35:48 um
02:50:47 e e
02:51:27 50 both minutes included thank you Mr mclab we'll carry on I've going to ask you specifically about whether or
02:51:38 to ask you specifically about whether or not uh during the safe house meetings or at any other time undercover officers ever asked to access the special Branch files of
02:51:49 files of individuals were you asked for that access by the officers if if it assists you in your witness statement you say you can't remember an officer
02:52:05 asking yeah I can't remember would it have surprised you or would it have been
02:52:15 routine it would have surprised me and does it follow from that that it wasn't routine for undercover officers to access special branch once they were best my recollection no it wasn't routin haven't said that I can't I can't be 100% S no not
02:52:29 be 100% S no not answer the answer is I'm not sure to the best of my recollection I can't recall any of these files been brought out they're
02:52:42 brought out they're classified and they do not leave the building so special brand reports would not have
02:52:52 not have been allowed into the safe
02:53:06 offes you've described um how these meetings offered an opportunity to the officers that was as were apart from their undercover lives so they were back socializing with other police officers at these
02:53:17 at these meetings what's your view looking back on how adequate they were to you how useful they were to you as a means of supervising the officers under your
02:53:34 command they were crucial and can you explain why you regarded them as crucial just a commity alone and and talking and and with colleagues talking in police
02:53:51 and with colleagues talking in police language about but a multitude of things because bear in mind they're away from their place of work they're not mixing with police officers the colleagues
02:54:06 colleagues um and it's a safety valve for them so it was a valuable very valuable sort of exercise and that's why we had two day meetings
02:54:19 and that's why we had two day meetings twice a week and from your point of view as the person who was responsible for supervising them to what extent did it permit you to fulfill a supervisory function over
02:54:39 function over them that's the only way I could that the meetings twice a week that's the only way I could have any kind of supervisory sort of would it be fair or not to say that in that Forum you were reli
02:54:52 in that Forum you were reli on the officers to be forthcoming with you about what they were doing yes it didn't provide you with much insight into what they were doing beyond what they were willing to share with you is that fair I it's a fair comment yes
02:55:10 is that fair I it's a fair comment yes did you take any steps to supervise them in a way that wasn't solely reliant on what they were willing to tell you
02:55:26 no in terms of the welfare of the undercover officers under your command to what extent did the meetings help you to take care of their welfare or monitor
02:55:38 to take care of their welfare or monitor their welfare yeah I felt quite strongly about that the welfare was well my role is as much a pastoral one as anything else and and I saw that as my opportunity just to take take
02:55:54 as my opportunity just to take take testing to see what's happening and to to get um to get a flavor of the mood um and so forth so it was it's very important and how uh well do you think
02:56:12 important and how uh well do you think looking back you were able to assess the welfare of individual officers through those
02:56:16 those meetings well looking back and again with 2020 hset um I wish it could have been done better
02:56:31 um that that was the only the only comment that make that yes I
02:56:41 mean it's a very difficult there was very difficult bunch of officers
02:56:53 because they're the the strains that they're living under in the in the the role they're
02:57:05 playing it's the only chance they have to vent any kind of feelings or any concerns and there had been there had been occasions where one toone meetings took place and these were private meetings with
02:57:20 private meetings with individuals who we have had and did have sort of concerns domestic concerns and that was treated confidentially and that remains even
02:57:36 even now so by that as I understand it you're referring to issues that officers may have been having in their real personal lives rather than in their course of their undercover deployment is that right so those you monitored in part
02:57:48 right so those you monitored in part through discussions at the meetings the weekly meetings twice weekly is that is that right if I understood correctly yeah in terms of their
02:58:00 yeah in terms of their welfare arising from their undercover deployment directly what's your view on how useful the meetings were for monitoring that well that's the only one we had we
02:58:11 well that's the only one we had we didn't have any other way of monitoring them
02:58:17 them um you refer in your witness statement I can bring it up if you like but you you refer to becoming aware that later on officers were given access to a military psychiatrist I think that happens in the 1990s well after your
02:58:30 happens in the 1990s well after your time and you commented that that would have been beneficial for the officers you managed you remember saying that yeah very much in what ways and why do you think that would have been beneficial well I think it's there
02:58:46 beneficial well I think it's there aren't too many tools open to you really when it comes to this type of thing and trying to
02:58:48 trying to get into somebody's
02:58:59 head that that was something I gained I I'm not sure whether it was brel or it was hinden or
02:59:10 whatever this psychic testing was it hadn't been universally adopted but later did become
02:59:22 adopted but later did become or a similar a similar system but second best testing came in I think after I left
02:59:26 left the after I left the police I'm not sure what year it came
02:59:36 in but what did you see as the benefit or what do you see as the benefit to undercover officers in having for example access to uh psychiatrists as they go through their deployments what what could that add that you couldn't provide
02:59:52 well just they're in a very good position to comment on the welfare the mental health of of the
02:59:59 of of the officers which is something that I couldn't do on anybody else could do so that that's what the that would be a distinct
03:00:10 distinct Advantage because mental health did feature quite prominently at various times throughout the years of the days
03:00:25 you also say in your witness statement that if there had been the opportunity for postfield counseling for your officers so after they came out of the
03:00:38 officers so after they came out of the field you say I would have jumped on it again is that for similar reasons yes and that was not available to the officers who were under your
03:00:45 command um I think that came later did it occur to you at the time that it might be useful for the officers to have access to counseling after their deployments are concluded or is that
03:00:57 deployments are concluded or is that something you've thought about with h side no I I I think sign corrected I
03:01:09 side no I I I think sign corrected I think Tony wheat introduced it the um the body body system where an experienced former um undercover officer would be assigned to
03:01:20 would be assigned to individuals to keep in touch with the first six months eight months of coming out after leaving the the unit so that
03:01:31 out after leaving the the unit so that that I think that was a good step in the
03:01:42 that I think that was a good step in the right direction and provided provided an ear for the officers and um it was something I applauded in fact advocated um but I can't remember about came in before I
03:01:53 came in before I left I'm not sure but to answer your question yes it's invaluable I will pick that back up with you if I may after the lunch break because I've got a little bit more to go on this topic and I'm not going to finish
03:02:16 it we'll resume a minute or two after two
03:02:47 e