Continuation of HN78 Trevor Morris testimony. Discusses sexual relationships with Peter Francis, allegations of racial discrimination against HN86, his role infiltrating SWP and reporting to Security Service, and being interviewed by Operation Hearn about sexual misconduct.
# Transcribed with OpenAI Whisper (medium model)
# Source: Local audio transcription (no YouTube captions available)
00:25:30 you
00:26:00 telling the security services and this is obviously going beyond incidental reporting this is for a
00:26:08 substantive reason you are communicating to them it will assist the SWP communicating with the
00:26:16 Labour party when you said that you had seen files on Members of Parliament in your evidence earlier
00:26:31 when you were an SDS officer did you see files on sitting Members of Parliament current Member of Parliament
00:26:41 As an STS officer, you don't see files. You're in the field and you just do your work in
00:26:49 the field. As a Special Branch officer, obviously I've seen files.
00:26:55 Thank you. Could we go to paragraph 20, please? It's under the heading Security. The party
00:27:06 is not overly suspicious of agent penetration. Julie Watterson has expressed the opinion
00:27:12 that SW phones are intercepted, but she believes that is the extent of, and it goes over the
00:27:18 page, the authorities monitoring of the SWP. If an individual was suspected of being an
00:27:26 agent, the party would most likely seek to exploit the situation in some way, such as
00:27:32 using its journalist contacts to expose the penetration. There's no mention there of the
00:27:42 person concerned coming to any physical harm. Is it right that you did not think that the
00:27:47 official party line would be to do any harm? Very well put. The official party line, absolutely.
00:27:54 I would say it's correct. We're not talking about an official party line, we're talking
00:27:58 about people. But yes, official party line, absolutely. Can I go now to asking you a little
00:28:09 bit about Mr Francis? Is it right that early on in Mr Francis's time in the SDS you supported
00:28:20 him and you were friendly with him? Correct. Did you, for example, visit one another's houses?
00:28:30 I'm thinking about frequency. I think I went to his house once, maybe twice, and he came to mine
00:28:45 once. And if we could have up, please, 37.139. And if we could have paragraph, these are extracts
00:29:07 from Mr Francis's witness statement of the 11th of October 2023. If we could have paragraph
00:29:14 996 up, please. Nothing about relationships with targets or how to handle them was openly
00:29:25 discussed at the weekly meetings. From my experience, the issue was discussed one to
00:29:30 one with management and amongst the field officers you were close to. The only field
00:29:35 officer deployed with me I ever discussed sexual relationships specifically with was
00:29:41 Trevor Morris, who was also one of my mentors. Do you recall discussing sexual relationships?
00:29:51 With Peter? I don't, actually. Might it have happened? It could have happened, but I don't recall it.
00:29:58 I don't think he did. But I don't recall it. There came a time later on, didn't there, when you were
00:30:08 asked to help Mr Francis. And did you attempt to do so? I did. Did that involve you having any direct
00:30:19 contact with him whilst he was in Spain? I think I spoke to him telephonically. How well equipped
00:30:30 were you to help a colleague? By which I mean, had you had any training, guidance, that sort of thing?
00:30:41 Not well. At all. Do you think it would have helped if somebody, no disrespect to you,
00:30:51 but with professional background, would have been better? It's not a disrespect at all, Mr Barr.
00:30:58 The reason why, obviously, I was in a red zone in another area when this happened. And I think they came to me as a last resort,
00:31:11 because they knew Peter was pretty close to me. And so they'd located him, I think, this is my memory is correct,
00:31:24 I spoke with him to try and grab him back, but I didn't speak to him in terms of somebody trying to give him assistance
00:31:33 in terms of his mental health or anything like that. I was just trying to say, you know, you've got to come back, my friend.
00:31:43 Did you attend a commendation ceremony in 2007 with Mr Francis? Correct, we got that for him, yes.
00:31:50 At his, and did you attend at his invitation? Correct.
00:31:57 Can I now move to the question of welling and commendations? Yes.
00:32:04 If I am understanding it correctly, you are making an allegation of racial discrimination against HN 86.
00:32:13 Yeah. Based on an assertion that he did not recommend you for a commendation, but he did recommend another officer.
00:32:23 No, incorrect. What happened is, leaving the background so you understand it, the commissioner and the home secretary
00:32:33 were meant to come to one of the safe houses to see us all, to say how well we'd done at welling.
00:32:40 On the day the home secretary couldn't come because something happened, that was Michael Heyward.
00:32:46 So the commissioner came, which was Sir Paul Condon. He came to our venue and he spoke with us all,
00:33:01 and 86 then introduced him to the individuals who'd been primarily involved in obtaining
00:33:07 and providing the intelligence and what activities should be taken, as referred to welling.
00:33:15 He then said that another officer, I won't say obviously, was the one who did it, and to be fair,
00:33:23 everybody's sat aghast because he knew that wasn't the case. I had felt nothing about that,
00:33:30 no, incorrect. I had been told, because I want to get my timings right, I had been told by Peter
00:33:37 earlier that there was a racial problem with 86, and I just pushed it aside. 86 and I had problems
00:33:48 because I had complained originally about the pay we were getting, because I said we should be
00:33:57 being paid for the hours we work, which I definitely was not. Then also we had that problem
00:34:04 regarding providing somebody to be a female officer, and we had that problem. So
00:34:11 we had a problem, I knew that, but I didn't think that it was racially orientated. Peter had told
00:34:17 me that that was the case, and then when he pointed out this other individual, I then believed Peter
00:34:24 for that to be the case. But it wasn't about commendation, there was no suggestion of
00:34:28 commendations for it. It was just to say to the commissioner, who has done what.
00:34:32 Without identifying anybody, what had Peter Francis said to you about 86 being a racial problem?
00:34:50 I'm paraphrasing, he said, I can't say 100%, and this is where we have that problem in going back.
00:34:59 But something to the extent that you don't particularly like black folk,
00:35:04 and he doesn't want to give you the credit for what's gone on.
00:35:13 But I can't say exactly what he said.
00:35:24 I just want to come back to one question I asked you right at the start of the day.
00:35:29 About the Operation Hearn interview. The scope of the interview, you were interviewed by Operation
00:35:37 Hearn officers, they were particularly interested in Mr Lambert and Mr Francis, weren't they, at the
00:35:43 time? I guess so. If it's in the report, then that must be it. It's in the interview, at the start of
00:35:51 the interview transcript. But that wasn't a contemporaneous interview, they wrote that
00:35:56 subsequently. So there's no recollection of it. But they did ask you about sexual relationships
00:36:02 as we went to? Yes, we went through that, yes, correct. And you were aware that Operation Hearn
00:36:09 was investigating sexual misconduct?
00:36:16 I don't think they actually put it as misconduct, but yes, I was worthy of looking into sexual
00:36:20 relationships, yes. Thank you. Those were all my questions, sir.
00:36:26 We will now have the usual 15 minute break to enable anyone who wants Mr Barr to ask
00:36:33 further questions under Rule 9 and there will then be an opportunity for Mr Whitham to re-examine if
00:36:40 he seeks to do so.
01:21:50 For what I hope but do not promise is the last occasion today and in this part of our hearings,
01:22:09 there must be no disclosure or publication of anything said in the hearing between three
01:22:15 o'clock and two minutes past three.
01:22:23 The commissioners visit after Welling. Can you recall how long after the Welling riot the visit was?
01:22:46 In my mind, I have it that it's not longer than two weeks. So it might be the week after.
01:22:53 In my mind, I can't give you timings.
01:43:45 I don't know.
01:44:16 I knew I shouldn't have said that that was to be the last word. This genuinely is. There is to be
01:44:33 no disclosure or publication made of anything stated in the hearing room between 3.16 and 3.18.
01:44:41 I wish all of those who have loyally remained a happy break and a good holiday if you are going to have one.
01:45:11 Thank you.