Testimony from Evidence Hearings regarding their experiences and knowledge relevant to the undercover policing inquiry.
00:26:57 Good morning everybody. Today's proceedings are going to be broadcast, but after a 10-minute delay, those with mobile devices may use them to report what they are hearing in the
00:27:11 to report what they are hearing in the hearing room, but only after 10 minutes have elapsed since the event that they're reporting. They may not be used for recording or photography. May the witness be sworn, please.
00:27:23 To stand up, you could just repeat. I do solemnly. I do solemnly sincerely and truly sincerely and truly declare and affirm declare and affirm that the evidence I shall give
00:27:35 that the evidence I shall give that the evidence I shall give shall be the truth shall be the truth the whole truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth and nothing but the truth morning sir thank you good morning Mr. Grover please in time yes
00:27:50 could you tell us your full name please uh my full name is Suresh Grover Mr. Grover, you gave a signed 58page witness statement to the inquiry that was dated the 30th of April uh this
00:28:09 was dated the 30th of April uh this year. Please, could you confirm that the contents of your witness statement are true and correct to the best of your knowledge and belief? I can confirm they're true. Mr. Grover, just a signpost for you the topics I will be covering today. They
00:28:23 topics I will be covering today. They will include the formation of the subtle monitoring group, the Steven Lawrence campaign, the reporting of undercover
00:28:38 campaign, the reporting of undercover officer HN81, David Hagen. We will look at a number of his reports, mostly covering the 1998 hearings of the Lawrence Inquiry. I'll also be asking you questions about Peter Francis, your
00:28:53 you questions about Peter Francis, your experience of racism and the police more generally, and finally the impact that SDS reporting has had on you. Let me begin though by asking you about the formation of the subtle monitoring
00:29:13 the formation of the subtle monitoring group and you explain in your statement uh how this uh first came uh about at paragraph 7 on page two. Let us begin with your activism. You have indicated in your statement that
00:29:29 have indicated in your statement that you became active when you were as young as 19 years of age. Could you just tell us a bit about that? How you first became racist? Yeah, I was um racially attacked and stabbed by Skynetss uh outside a cinema. Um I wasn't conscious about racism at
00:29:44 Um I wasn't conscious about racism at that time, but it was a telling moment for me in my life. Um because before that, I didn't see myself as very different from any other student or kid of my generation. And because of the lack of response from the police on that issue, my father
00:29:56 the police on that issue, my father represented me. He was member of the community relations council in Nelson, but the perpetrator walked outside our
00:30:12 but the perpetrator walked outside our door every day. He was known to people, etc. And uh it really um drove me to look at what racism and um and the impact of uh racism on our communities. After
00:30:31 After that personal attack on you, were there any other events that u drove you to become involved in activism at that time?
00:30:41 time? There were incidents from 19 right up to when I was 21. I I moved to South in 19 7576.
00:30:44 7576. Um, and on 4th of June 1976, I was outside a cinema called uh Dominion
00:30:55 outside a cinema called uh Dominion Cinema and I saw a pool of blood. Um, we didn't have um, you know, mobile phones at the time or social media. There was a reporting on the radio that somebody had been murdered, a young
00:31:07 been murdered, a young uh, student called GDP Singh Chugger. And I saw a police officer um at the pool of blood and I went to him and I asked him what happened and he just said to me look this is Indian blood just go
00:31:22 to me look this is Indian blood just go away. And the way he said it was that if it was dirty blood and that uh inspired a lot of young people in South to set up the south youth movement and come out on the streets against racial violence
00:31:38 the streets against racial violence because Jagger's murder was not just the first one. Abdul Malik had been killed in South Hall outside a bus stop in Greenford as a result of what was known as busing in South Hall. Um and then
00:31:57 as busing in South Hall. Um and then from 76 um onwards we did a lot of cases on racial violence on the states. I got heavily involved in um the Blade Peach issue in 1979. So is this before the southern monitoring group began?
00:32:11 monitoring group began? Yeah, absolutely. Bl peach was murdered on 23rd of April 1979 and the monitoring sample monitoring group was established in 1988.
00:32:18 in 1988. Could you help us with how that group began in 1988? There were there were a number of factors that influenced us. Um the first was the murder of the bl murder of Bla Peach in South and how the police
00:32:35 Peach in South and how the police responded. I can give you the details if you ask me but it was a almost a very militaristic occupation of South uh resulting in 800 people being arrested. There was who were demonstrating peacefully in a matter of 4 hours. 345
00:32:47 peacefully in a matter of 4 hours. 345 people were charged. There were serious injuries on people. I saw uh it was raining that day. I saw a priest trying to help a woman who was arrested and trenched by police officers. Um
00:33:01 trenched by police officers. Um there was a scale of violence I hadn't seen it just just being specific you mentioned Blair Peach. Could you just tell us a little bit more who was he and how what happened to him came to your attention?
00:33:14 happened to him came to your attention? Bl peach was born in New Zealand. He was resident in UK. He taught um disabled children and people with difficult learning difficulties in eastern. He was a member of anti-Nazi
00:33:26 eastern. He was a member of anti-Nazi league. He ended up in South on 23rd of April because it was a call for a national demonstration against the national front who'd come to South [clears throat] wanted a public meeting openly calling for repatriation of
00:33:38 openly calling for repatriation of anybody who was black and brown or migrant
00:33:43 migrant um erasing South as a town and creating an English hamlet. That's how they phrased it. Um and there was widespread opposition from very very diverse communities from white, black, brown
00:33:58 communities from white, black, brown communities. South all mobilized through the Indian workers association through anti-Nazi league uh young South youth movement and other young people school I mean the whole factories came out on
00:34:11 mean the whole factories came out on strike in South uh around 2:00 the when the shift changed from 6:00 to 2, you know, etc. The National Front was supposed to be um arriving at 7:30. I think Blair had arrived in South with his friends
00:34:23 his friends um much earlier and he I I obviously never met him. I met his partner Selius
00:34:41 never met him. I met his partner Selius Stubs soon after. But Bla Peach was a he was clubbed to death or clubbed to coma at the corner of Orchard Avenue and uh Beatric beatric avenue while he was standing and um he was taken to hospital and pronounced dead. So we only learned of Blair Peach's death the morning
00:34:52 of Blair Peach's death the morning after. I learned a lot about Bla Peach after the event um because his friends
00:35:04 after the event um because his friends set up friends of Bla Peach campaign. Um I attended the inquest uh that looked into his death and the cause of death which was chaired by Sir I think it was John Burton. I'm sure
00:35:15 I think it was John Burton. I'm sure whether it was Sir John Burton or Dr. John Burton at West London. And what what really struck me was that here was a man who
00:35:24 a man who uh ended up in Southall purely to offer solidarity to people who were under siege of racial violence and they were protesting against the
00:35:36 they were protesting against the National Front who were openly calling for you know uh deportations etc or people settled here and he ends up dead and there is no serious invest
00:35:49 and there is no serious invest investigation that looks at who who's responsible for it and so there's a demand on who could blame Peach but at the inquest um what struck me was that there was a assertion by the
00:36:02 there was a assertion by the Metropolitan Police that the reason why was because he had a thin cranium it
00:36:12 was because he had a thin cranium it wasn't just the ferocity of the blow but because somehow he was responsible for having a thin cranium that outraged a lot of us and then sir John Dr. John Burton kind of out of nowhere um created this
00:36:21 this theor theory that Bla Peach may have been killed by a a left-wing activist to make him a martr. There's no evidence of it whatsoever. And that kind of that
00:36:34 it whatsoever. And that kind of that kind of assertion when somebody is dead, when somebody's been murdered um makes people think of what the state is doing and etc. and not just people
00:36:45 is doing and etc. and not just people but you did something about it because you began you started the southern monitoring group itself. Now I wonder if we could put up on screen page four
00:36:58 we could put up on screen page four paragraph 14 of your statements because in describing the purpose why the subtle monitoring group were established. You set out here to challenge racism and you make the
00:37:10 to challenge racism and you make the point that from the beginning you were also confronted with the prevalence of domestic violence against women. Now I wonder if you could just help us with
00:37:21 wonder if you could just help us with the genesis of the southern monitoring groups. It wasn't just about racism but perhaps the domestic violence issue as well is less talked about. Could you
00:37:33 well is less talked about. Could you just help us with that please? Yeah, we were we were we were embedded in the Asian and African Caribbean communities. So the issues that affected us were racism, domestic violence, issues to do with communal violence between different
00:37:48 with communal violence between different religious groups etc. So we we took them all on and made uh very strong uh representations of local authorities. So on domestic violence when we set up the south monitoring group I remember the
00:38:02 south monitoring group I remember the first 50 cases that we got out of out of which 39 were domestic violence cases and that's because there was you know there was very strong patriarch in our community and we wanted to challenge it
00:38:14 community and we wanted to challenge it as young people. uh we wanted to support women unconditionally if they wanted to leave their husband because of violence and we wanted to get up set up and support women's uh organizations who wanted to develop things autonomously in
00:38:30 wanted to develop things autonomously in a self-organized way. So the south black sisters came out of the women of the south monitoring group although they had been established in 1979 post play beaches murder u really got funding from 82 onwards and we thought I mean at at a
00:38:50 82 onwards and we thought I mean at at a very simple level so what we thought was it was not possible for us to live in a society where women were treated unequally and they were part and parcel of the struggle that that that was taking place for equality and justice
00:39:01 taking place for equality and justice and not just against racism. Um we were influenced by a lot of women, very strong women in south nationally both in terms of writing people like Sheila Rothbot and Simon de Bouvier and all that kind of stuff. So we took that as part of a vision that we had
00:39:15 part of a vision that we had in terms of influences I'm going to ask you about the influences from the USA particularly with that term monitoring. So the southern monitoring group, could
00:39:29 So the southern monitoring group, could you assist us with where that particular term came from? Well, yeah, it came from the Black Panther Party, which was actually known as the Black Panther Party of
00:39:41 as the Black Panther Party of Self-Defense in US. And there were young black activists who
00:39:52 black activists who were campaigning against racism, police brutality, and poverty. They created a 10-point program to alleviate poverty and bring people in. But the word monitoring comes from police officers. As you know, in America, you have the right to bear arms
00:40:03 right to bear arms uh constitutionally, but the origin of that is for slave owners to create arms, not for the slaves or people who were treated as slaves to arms. uh and the
00:40:17 treated as slaves to arms. uh and the Black Panther Party created this notion that everybody should be able to bear arms if they want to defend or if they're under siege. And there were a lot of hostility by police officers when black people defended themselves. And what happened was there are cases and examples of brutality taking place
00:40:30 examples of brutality taking place against black people in New York, in Chicago, in Los Angeles. and the Black Panther Party are monitoring what is
00:40:41 Panther Party are monitoring what is happening in terms of recording it and also following police officers and identifying them etc. That's where the word comes from. We were not conscious
00:40:57 word comes from. We were not conscious about data collection in the 1970s that came much later. So that's what the origin is. It's it encapsulates a focus on police and racism, specifically instituted racism, not just issues to do with violence against people, but also to hold police to account in a way that wasn't defined at
00:41:09 account in a way that wasn't defined at that time. Well, in in terms of holding the police to account and the work that was conducted by the southern monitoring group, I wonder if we could just go to page five, paragraph 18 of your
00:41:31 page five, paragraph 18 of your statement. It is impossible uh today to go through all of the work that subtle monitor and group have done over the decades. But what you have set out here is a very brief summary in this paragraph that you provided support for
00:41:45 paragraph that you provided support for over 300 families affected by the death of a loved one. And then this, we have provided trauma support for over 1,500 victims of racism over the last decade.
00:42:00 victims of racism over the last decade. Now, just in terms of that statistic, C could you translate that into sort of practically what that meant uh for you
00:42:12 practically what that meant uh for you and your your daytoday life? How did you and the subtle monitoring group provide trauma support for so many people? that um 1,500 refers to after we become the monitoring group, not South
00:42:24 the monitoring group, not South Monitoring Group. Uh so it's over a period of the inception of South Monitoring Group until I make this statement. Um so it was obvious to us
00:42:36 statement. Um so it was obvious to us that black people and brown people who suffer racism do not suffer just physically but also very emotionally. It's traumatic and the impact of racism doesn't have uh impact on just the
00:42:47 doesn't have uh impact on just the person who is um suffering racism. For example, if it's an attack on a house, it impacts the whole family. If it's an attack in school, uh it impacts other school children. Um and it and it is a
00:43:03 school children. Um and it and it is a crime that impacts on a whole community, especially when it's death or serious crime. Um, so we came up with this notion of developing a trauma therapy
00:43:17 notion of developing a trauma therapy service for victims of racism. And it was about offering professional uh needs-based, culturally based service to victims of racism, especially if they'd suffered serious offenses. uh um or were unable
00:43:39 serious offenses. uh um or were unable to navigate their life because of mental breakdowns or mental health problems or because the impact was so severe they couldn't um um you know
00:59:04 Before doing so, I want to ask you about something you've set out at paragraph 25, page 14 of your statements that you describe as the first revelation o of any police surveillance by special
00:59:17 any police surveillance by special branch. Uh, and I wonder if you could uh please in in your own words just tell us about that. in 1989. Please, what page are we saying? Sorry. Page 14.
00:59:33 I'm grateful we have the paragraph up on screen there. Okay.
00:59:42 Yeah. Yeah. Um David Rose uh who was an investigating journalist at the Guardian has contacted us about the work we were doing and we were heavily involved in supporting a
00:59:56 were heavily involved in supporting a family in in Hanslow. Um and his article covers the whole spectrum of what the family went through. I'm not going to name them but there was they had series of incidents um at the north license shop. Um
01:00:09 um at the north license shop. Um perpetrators are identified. There's lots of representation made to Houndsler Council. Um but there is also quite voriferous
01:00:24 but there is also quite voriferous campaign by the chief superintendent who doesn't believe they're victims of racism against the Hansburn South monitoring group and he he told us that he had found that um there was surve surveillance by the
01:00:38 there was surve surveillance by the special branch on the south monitoring group by a a person officer called PC Black I think PJ black and he said that the the report
01:00:52 the the report um stated that a number of counselors had given information to um him to the to the police officer to the special branch worried about the
01:01:05 the special branch worried about the influence that we had and in in in in South
01:01:10 South um and that they believed that we were a cell of the GLC labor council So this is really the first inkling that you yourself had that special branch were showing an interest in you.
01:01:24 were showing an interest in you. Absolutely. I had no other information before that. Now over the years the effects of that but also undercover reporting. I just want to turn to what you have set out at paragraph 28. It's page 15 of your
01:01:37 paragraph 28. It's page 15 of your statement. It is over the years the practical effects and we will address in due course the impact this has had o on
01:01:49 due course the impact this has had o on you but you've set out there what you've noticed before you knew for example about any undercover uh police reporting by the SDS but could you just talk us through
01:02:03 through before this was revealed to you the sort of trends that you were experiencing in the monitoring group please. Yeah, I mean local politicians have come to us and saying have said to us that because there are discussions about southern monitoring group and the monitoring
01:02:16 monitoring group and the monitoring group with police senior police officers um they are afraid to refer cases to us or or or they are afraid to get involved in those campaigns. Um we've noticed in our public meetings
01:02:27 our public meetings um non-uniformed officers uh being present um taking notes of what is being said by either myself or other members of the monitoring group. Um
01:02:40 of the monitoring group. Um there there's always information on which campaigns we are and who's at at the table speaking. Um
01:02:52 the table speaking. Um there we were told by the London Funders Group that uh there is um caution in funding us because of the reports that are going to funders about
01:03:05 reports that are going to funders about us as being anti police for example and use that in inverted commas. Um over a course of years um we've had number of robberies uh where nothing's been
01:03:17 robberies uh where nothing's been missing apart from documents at the office or in my car um at pivotal moments including during the Steven Lawrence campaign
01:03:30 Lawrence campaign um I I have not recently but during the campaigns especially when they become highprofile stopped and searched in south and other areas personally on a number of occasions and Um there are there are
01:03:44 there are comments made by serving officers as well as retired officers on how the monitoring group is perceived by senior officers.
01:03:54 officers. We are concerned with what justification was there for undercover officers to be
01:04:05 was there for undercover officers to be deployed spying on certain individuals, certain groups, and to what extent, if any, was it justified? I'd like to ask you about public disorder
01:04:19 public disorder in terms of justification. If there was a suggestion that there was some justification on undercover officers uh
01:04:31 justification on undercover officers uh keeping an eye on you in particular, the monitoring group in general because it
01:04:42 monitoring group in general because it could be uh helpful in addressing public disorder. What is your reaction to that suggestion that as a justification particularly in relation to you and your group?
01:04:55 group? Uh we've never we've never encouraged violence or public order, disorder. Um the only activity that I've been involved is really defending [snorts] people when they've been attacked or
01:05:07 people when they've been attacked or being there when um in terms of defense. I I don't think there's any shred of evidence
01:05:09 evidence um prior to the Lawrence inquiry or during the Lawrence inquiry. In fact, I think there's evidence they think that
01:05:21 think there's evidence they think that I'm more reliable making sure that there won't be public disorder. Um so I don't know where that is coming from to be honest with you. I would like to turn now to um the Steven Lawrence campaign. In doing so, I'd first like your
01:05:38 In doing so, I'd first like your response to a document I'm going to ask to be put up on screen. It is MPS0748392.
01:05:47 So, this is at your tab B12. This is a special branch note uh dated the 10th of September 1998 in relation to the Steven Lawrence uh campaign.
01:06:08 I wonder if we can turn over the page please.
01:06:11 please. Now you can see this uh special branch uh note um going into detail about the
01:06:22 uh note um going into detail about the uh campaign but I'd like to ask you in particular about some of the uh references uh in this uh document please.
01:06:36 Under introduction, you can see the first paragraph. It refers to furthermore the sense of anger and
01:06:47 furthermore the sense of anger and alienation that this issue has aroused within the black community means that the possibility of public disorder cannot be discounted. Now, I would like your view on the accuracy of the various things that are set out in this special
01:07:02 things that are set out in this special branch note. Would you accept that that is accurate? that there was a sense of anger and alienation and also that there was the possibility of public disorder as as set out here is as far as that
01:07:14 as as set out here is as far as that sentence is concerned. Would you agree with that? I think there's a lot of anger. I think there's a lot of
01:07:28 there's a lot of um suspicion that this issue of racism and police racism won't be dealt with and that's where the anger is coming from. I think people are I think what's happening is that the Lawrence case is
01:07:41 happening is that the Lawrence case is seen as a as an example or a face of a greater tragedy that's the black communities and the brown communities have suffered over decades if not centuries. So there is frustration that um we are in 1999
01:07:54 um we are in 1999 1998 and the British um British government still or the British state doesn't acknowledge that problem of racism um and it can it has
01:08:09 problem of racism um and it can it has the potential to lead to public disorder depending on what happens. Yeah. What about this suggestion that this almost acts as as a magnet for these other
01:08:20 acts as as a magnet for these other groups to come in? Because you can see the second paragraph there, the last sentence. A number of groups and individuals see this issue as a natural
01:08:31 individuals see this issue as a natural platform from which to further their own often extreme political agenda. Do you accept that there is truth in that that sentence that significant campaigns such as this this one would attract groups
01:08:42 as this this one would attract groups that maybe are taking advantage of it for their own political agenda and some of those groups being extract? I think doesn't I don't think that applies only to
01:08:55 to um certain groups that are mentioned in the inquiry. The Lawrence campaign and the Lawrence family have become a magnet during the inquiry to a large number of
01:09:07 during the inquiry to a large number of people and some people in the mainstream political parties are taking advantage. Groups are there trying to get very close to the Lawrence campaign because they have their own uh agenda or their
01:09:21 they have their own uh agenda or their own uh aims and objectives. But there's no threat of public disorder taking place or any incident or any talk publicly about
01:09:32 incident or any talk publicly about people coming out of the streets and creating a a situation which is uncontrollable. And
01:09:35 And uh if there was even a sniff of that
01:09:46 uh if there was even a sniff of that then the Lawrence family was very clear that they would have no nothing to do with violence and that we would make sure that that there would be no violence or public disorder. I want to ask about a comment that was specifically written about you. It's on the first page of this. I wonder if you
01:10:00 the first page of this. I wonder if you can just scroll down now. Can you see at the bottom under the Lawrence family group?
01:10:09 group? this is written. The LFCG has on the surface remained independent of the extremist groups. However, leading figures within the campaign are well known within left-wing organizations. Suresh Grover, who is the spokesman of
01:10:26 Suresh Grover, who is the spokesman of the campaign, has long been the de facto head of the southern monitoring group, now simply known as the monitoring group. than this. He has a checkered past involving a number of troskiest groups and a high profile amongst the
01:10:42 groups and a high profile amongst the West London Asian community. What was your reaction when you first read uh this special branch note referring to you as having a checkered past? I read it in two ways. I think it's
01:10:55 I read it in two ways. I think it's it's so shallow. It doesn't bear any resemblance to the reality. I don't know what they mean by a checkered past number of drosskis groups. I've never been member of any political party ever.
01:11:17 been member of any political party ever. Um I have uh obviously during the course of campaigns whether it's real campaign or the campaigns you mentioned met people from groups that are triss groups. Um I I um don't have an issue with talking to
01:11:29 um don't have an issue with talking to people. I've always talked to them. Um I I have uh I had don't I don't even have a problem with Trosky's groups. I have
01:11:40 a problem with Trosky's groups. I have worked with them. I I have read Trosky. It's not an issue for me. Um but I've never belonged to them. I don't know what they mean by check. The second thing that came to mind was well actually they're spying on me and I'm not getting the information. So if they have information that I've been member
01:11:52 have information that I've been member or linked to Sroski's part, but at least I should know what information they have.
01:11:54 have. Well, it doesn't stop there. Wonder if we can just turn to page three in this document. So the next paragraph goes on to say that Grover has been successful in maintaining the campaign in the
01:12:09 in maintaining the campaign in the public eye. However, he is in danger of losing some support amongst his Asian power base as many feel he has aligned himself too closely with what they perceive as an AfroCaribbean dominated campaign. And then this furthermore,
01:12:30 campaign. And then this furthermore, Grover has had to exercise restraint in his public pronouncements in order to retain his public funding. Now just pausing there. What is your reaction to reading that that you have had to tailor your
01:12:45 that you have had to tailor your activism that you have had to act in a certain way in order to retain public funding?
01:12:52 funding? I don't think I had a public profile. If you look at the newspaper, there's only one article that mentions me post Lawrence. people who have public ploy rather Lawrence is rightly and all that stuff that's coming out. I'm known amongst families but I don't have a
01:13:05 amongst families but I don't have a press public profile. In fact, a lot of people wouldn't associate the southern monitoring group or the monitoring group with the campaigns that we've led because the centrality of the families are very critical to us and it is the
01:13:19 are very critical to us and it is the families that got to know not my name or other names. Um that's the first point. The second thing is that I this idea that you pick a campaign because it's Asian, you pick a campaign [snorts] because it's Chinese, it's a Caribbean, it's it's just cloud cookie land. I've
01:13:33 it's it's just cloud cookie land. I've never acted in that way. Families come to us and they can be any race or nationality and we would support them if we have the resources and we believe
01:13:44 we have the resources and we believe that we have the capability and the and you know and the expertise to do that. So it just happened I was dealing with the Lawrenes who are from the Caribbean origin, Michael Manson who are African and Ricky which is Asian.
01:13:57 and Ricky which is Asian. The the Asian community actually supported the Lawrence campaign. They
01:14:08 supported the Lawrence campaign. They didn't see it as a different from their own experience etc. So I I just think this idea that I think there's no understanding by the UCO or whoever has written it of how family campaigns are
01:14:19 written it of how family campaigns are developed and what what what the anatomy of those campaigns are. I want to draw your attention to the rest of what is written about you in this special branch report. It says that Grover privately agrees that the
01:14:31 Grover privately agrees that the militancy that the inquiry has generated must be built on and he has promised the MFJ, the movement for justice leadership, a place on the organizing
01:14:45 leadership, a place on the organizing committee for the National Civil Rights March planned for later this year. Is that accurate that you privately at the
01:14:58 that accurate that you privately at the time agreed that the militancy that the Steven Lawrence inquiry generated must be built on?
01:15:09 be built on? No, I don't agree with that because I think there is nothing more radical than taking on the state and exposing it for its racism uh or its neglect or its uh acts of emission. Um just by saying that you're militant doesn't mean that you're more militant than the other person. Um
01:15:25 more militant than the other person. Um you would there's nothing that stops us. I mean what what what is happening is that there is the family campaign which is an amalgamation of the family the lawyers and the campaign itself working in tandem. Uh what frightens people is
01:15:48 in tandem. Uh what frightens people is that the family does not believe that it should be influenced irrationally by people by or any other irrational actions. They have the right to do that. Their purpose is to find the truth of what happened to Steven and who was responsible for it and how the state is accountable. They've gone through
01:16:05 accountable. They've gone through um since 1993 unprecedented actions to get to the inquiry. You know, they've they've they've had the lawyer asking questions from the police. [snorts] They had the commission, the ZRE chair, who
01:16:24 had the commission, the ZRE chair, who was Simon Herman sir Herman Hlay writing to the police saying uh this is such an important case. There's been other gracious murders in the area from Gi Banganger, Roland Adams and other people. Uh so you need to take this
01:16:36 people. Uh so you need to take this seriously. They've had a what I would say
01:16:40 say racist attitudes from the police about evidence coming in. uh they have had a world statesman Cornel Montala visiting that making a statement that black lives are as cheap
01:16:55 statement that black lives are as cheap in this country as in South Africa which is where the press get in get involved that's a pivotal statement that's a pivotal signpost in that campaign and then they get into the inquest the inquest decides it's not just a nonful killing because it's evidence but for the first time it says that it is
01:17:07 the first time it says that it is racially motivated and that's actually what prompted Jack Straw who's a shadow home secretary to say that he would have a public inquiry. So the road map it to
01:17:21 a public inquiry. So the road map it to the inquiry is led by the family and its supporters and his campaign. It's very important to remember that and it is the influence uh so during the inquiry sorry it's just
01:17:33 it's just I'm I'm going to be asking you firstly about how you became involved in Steven Lawrence inquiry but before I do may I just ask you about one more paragraph in this document then we'll move on uh to that subject. is in fact the next
01:17:46 that subject. is in fact the next paragraph. Thank you. It's really the tone and the way in which again your work is described because it says here his referring to you his next cause celeb is the justice for Ricky Rio
01:17:58 celeb is the justice for Ricky Rio campaign which he will promote as the racial murder of an Asian youth that has met police indifference and racism. Furthermore, it gives Grover the opportunity to win back support from his
01:18:15 opportunity to win back support from his agent con constituency. Imran Khn is the Lawrence family lawyer and a prominent member of Arthur Skarkle Socialist Labor Party. Despite approaching the inquiry with a left-wing agenda, he is unlikely to make any overtly political
01:18:29 to make any overtly political statements. And so you're described in some senses as a as as a political figure as using campaigns that the Ricky Real campaign was a a cause celebrity
01:18:45 here for you to win back support. What what's your reaction to reading the nature of your work described in this way?
01:18:52 way? I think it's racist stereotyping of me. Uh I think that um
01:19:04 Uh I think that um you know the families are contacting me. I'm not going to the families and I'm not ambulance chasing of different people of different nationalities suffering murder. The Ricky real family contacted me. I didn't contact them. Uh and there is this idea that the Asian communities would only suffer only
01:19:16 communities would only suffer only support Asian campaigns. It's just I don't know where that is coming from, but it's it's a very shallow level of
01:19:29 but it's it's a very shallow level of understanding of where the communities are for intelligence officers. And I think the I think um
01:19:39 in the real case, I didn't have to say it was racist. It was recorded as a racial attack when I before I got involved. you know, it's the his his friends who told the police that there was racial abuse by them. There was a fight and that's when Ricky went missing. So, I didn't have to invent
01:19:51 missing. So, I didn't have to invent this notion of racism. It was already recorded by the police. Um, and and and
01:20:02 recorded by the police. Um, and and and we did not work in that period. In fact, we do not now work in a period where we are insular as Asian people. I actually called myself black because I believed in the word political black. I don't
01:20:13 in the word political black. I don't know whether I need to explain that we called ourselves as a black community which meant a mixture of anybody who'd come from colonial countries and suffered racism including Irish
01:20:24 suffered racism including Irish [clears throat] people. Right? So this idea that I'm looking at myself as a monolithic Asian person and looking at
01:20:38 monolithic Asian person and looking at me as an AfroCaribbean, it's never been the um ethos of the South Monitoring Group. It's never been the ethos of anybody who's worked at the South Monitoring Group or the Monitoring Group. In fact, we would reject that kind of insular attitude that politicians may have. And we've never we've never we've never ever
01:20:57 we've never we've never ever thought of this as a political campaign for gaining support from people on a macian [snorts] basis. This has been purely to support a family because of the just injustice that they've suffered. Let's turn to the
01:21:08 that they've suffered. Let's turn to the Steven Lawrence campaign. This is um set out in detail in your statement uh beginning on page 19. Could you help us
01:21:24 beginning on page 19. Could you help us and it's referred to in paragraph 44 of your statement how you became first involved with the Lawrence family and when that was please. So this is page 19 of Mr. Rover's statement, paragraph 44.
01:21:44 Could you help us with how you first became involved? How did it all begin as far as you were concerned? I was I was visited at home by a family friend uh sorry a family relative who came to my house and
01:21:55 relative who came to my house and explained that um they needed someone who they could rely on and support the family in their quest for justice.
01:22:06 family in their quest for justice. um they'd had people supporting them but
01:22:19 um they'd had people supporting them but there had been difficulties and and they asked me what I would do and and I gave them a model that we'd worked on other campaigns which is where the family would be central at that time there was um justice for Steven Lawrence kind of public profile there wasn't a campaign established
01:22:31 established um with the family so the contact to me came from the family. I had been to the
01:22:45 came from the family. I had been to the funeral because as a matter of practice, if somebody dies from a racial violence or practice and if you know people, we just end up at a funeral and just pay our respects. But I hadn't met the family. Now, you you've just said that the family is is central to the work that you um carry out. Uh and you set
01:22:58 that you um carry out. Uh and you set this out in paragraph 50 on page 20, but I'm going to ask you to provide some more detail about your interaction with Dorene and Neville Lawrence. So, you've described how uh you were approached
01:23:15 described how uh you were approached as the inquiry got underway. Could could you just assist us with the day-to-day contact and the nature of that contact with Dorene and Neville Lawrence, please?
01:23:27 please? Uh, this is before the inquiry. It's not during the inquiry. So, Mrs. Lawrence becomes a staff member much earlier than the inquiry. It was actually after the inquest and before the inquiry. Um,
01:23:38 inquest and before the inquiry. Um, this is referring to her as a staff member of the South Monitoring Group. But to answer your question, during the inquiry and be during [snorts] the inquiry,
01:23:48 inquiry, very similar to during the private prosecution period, Daily Contact, the offices were based in South um we'
01:24:00 offices were based in South um we' already established the Steven Lawrence family campaign during the private prosecution period and I and a couple of other people met, Mrs. Lawrence and Mr. Lawrence um worked out
01:24:11 Lawrence and Mr. Lawrence um worked out what the terms would be for the campaign itself. It was it was about
01:24:23 itself. It was it was about um getting public support. Um the family didn't look the the inquiry lasted I'm sorry I may have misunderstood your question if I have you asked me what the daily contact during the inquiry period was as it under as as it started. I was at the inquiry. I think it lasted 59
01:24:34 at the inquiry. I think it lasted 59 days or 60 days in the first phase and about 10. I was there every day. I was there. I spoke to Dorina and Neville's on a daily basis. I was in the room
01:24:45 on a daily basis. I was in the room sharing with them. Uh we were we were concerned about the issues of safety. So sometimes I accompanied them to the car park. Um they there were discussions
01:24:56 park. Um they there were discussions about what the evidence was coming out.
01:25:07 about what the evidence was coming out. There were suggestions by us. uh on how more people could be get involved. Um the first couple of days there were press but not many people from the public. There were families that I knew. The Menson family were there, the Ricky family were there and other families were there. So
01:25:19 were there. So you know this very clear kind of marker with the family that we would only work under their leadership under the guidance but it would be about making
01:25:34 guidance but it would be about making sure that the public were at the inquiry because it's a public inquiry. Now, earlier in your evidence, you gave us some examples, and we have many, many more examples in your statement of the
01:25:49 more examples in your statement of the various families that you've worked with over the years. But in terms of the Lawrenes
01:25:51 Lawrenes before the inquiry um began as you indicate here, you refer to Dorene becoming a staff member of the Southern Monitoring Group. And I just want to ask
01:26:06 Monitoring Group. And I just want to ask you about that in terms of how close you were with the Lawrenes. Were you particularly close with them as reflected by the fact that as you set out here, Dorene Lawrence even became a
01:26:19 out here, Dorene Lawrence even became a staff member of the Southern Monitoring Group?
01:26:22 Group? I was close to both of them. I got with both of them. They have totally different personalities. I gotten with them. I think you know I was very conscious that that lost someone in such an awful circumstances.
01:26:38 an awful circumstances. Um it at that time seemed the very long road to getting any justice done. The
01:26:50 road to getting any justice done. The issue of the public inquiry hadn't been resolved. We were still way back then and it was about supporting, caring, making sure that Dorian was able to concentrate on other things apart from just Steven. We had a we had a vacancy. It was advertised and she got the post. I didn't manage her. Somebody else managed her. But I would say I was I
01:27:04 managed her. But I would say I was I would have done anything for them. It's not a issue. There was lot of friendship. I visited them on a regular basis. Uh I actually do that with all the families I deal with is not just the lises. But the relationship became
01:27:21 lises. But the relationship became special as the inquiry went on because of the intensity and the public publicity about it. When you take on a campaign such as this one, how much of your life does it take up? How much of your time? It just gives paints a picture of how much time you spend on these cases.
01:27:34 spend on these cases. Remember, I'm not being paid for it. It's not a campaign that way. We get money to be paid. I'm working with the South Monitoring Group. Um, but they're giving me time off to do the work or if there is an agreed timetable for me to
01:27:48 there is an agreed timetable for me to work, then I get paid for it. So, it is totally on a voluntary basis. Um it takes your I mean at the inquiry level I
01:28:05 takes your I mean at the inquiry level I mean um you're there on the first you're dealing with uh it just [clears throat] takes over the whole life. Um you are there to provide emotional support. You're talking about strategy with lawyers. You're talking about bringing people in. You're responding to people's
01:28:18 people in. You're responding to people's demands. You're you I mean we had a very cordodial and professional relationship with the chair and the assessor. So if something was asked, we did it. Like for example, getting the hall when the suspects came. Um the the the public gallery was full. It was my job to
01:28:30 gallery was full. It was my job to layers with everybody who turned up who's wanted to support the family. I was
01:28:38 was [clears throat] I mean even if there hadn't been an inquiry in the periods before the inquiry because we are totally it's almost a Gandhian selfless
01:28:54 totally it's almost a Gandhian selfless model you you you just give you want to ensure that people are strong you make them strong by offering them support uh
01:29:07 them strong by offering them support uh you know that the state has huge amount of resources it has the presses on its side it has the apparatus in terms of legal resources on its side. You're applying for legal aid, you may not get legal aid. The work that was done on the law from 1993 until the inquiry was absolutely proona by the lawyers. Uh
01:29:23 absolutely proona by the lawyers. Uh they had no funding for it. So it it it is like it is um it is teamwork. It's passionate. It's commitment at a level that um you know people
01:29:38 at a level that um you know people people have people people see their own experience um through the tragedy that the Lawrenes are serving and they want things to change
01:29:50 change in relation to this the teamwork and this the support we have seen there are references firstly to the Steven Lawrence family campaign but also the Steven Lawrence family public support group. Could you just help us with the
01:30:02 group. Could you just help us with the distinction between those? How does the Ste How did the Steven Lawrence family campaign, how did that group differ from the Steven Lawrence family public support group? There's only one formalized campaign and that's the Steven Lawrence family
01:30:13 that's the Steven Lawrence family campaign. It has a family, it has the lawyers, it has people that I know or other people that the Lawrence is known like Ross House, etc. So, it's a very small group of people. It's everybody that the family trusts and you've
01:30:26 that the family trusts and you've recommended names of people who have specific uh specific expertise. So if you need trade union support, you get somebody who's very close to trade unions. If you know somebody who is good with the press, etc., you get that
01:30:46 with the press, etc., you get that person. But the the the support group is never um an official um
01:30:52 um group. It's not even known as a support group. Is known as a supporters group. What's happening is that uh at the inquiry uh lot of people are coming they want to offer their support there are fam there are justice campaigns uh already established from Ricky real
01:31:06 already established from Ricky real Michael Manson the Monvilles are here at the moment um they're all coming and they want to offer support they cannot be part of this Lawrence family campaign so another alternative informal structure has been created by me so it
01:31:20 structure has been created by me so it leers with them um there are people in the public gallery who want to offer support. They are young people who want to get involved in justice campaigns or want to become lawyers. They want to
01:31:31 want to become lawyers. They want to come to the inquiry and learn what the process is. So they are part of the stuff. Um and we get the new monitoring
01:31:42 stuff. Um and we get the new monitoring project people especially three of them you know mentioned inquiry they're in they're part of the broader group as well as the Lawrence campaign. uh and so it's it's this it's me trying to devise an informal mechanism where I'm asking
01:31:59 an informal mechanism where I'm asking for them to support the Lawrenes but I want to be respectful to them and say look you have an interest in this inquiry as well you know you cannot dictate what the Lawrenes want to do but you can actually learn you can develop
01:32:15 you can actually learn you can develop your own uh political models or social models and and that's how it's been established I I want to ask you about how things evolved because you describe I think the first day of that inquiry there were only about um I think you refer to only
01:32:30 only about um I think you refer to only about a dozen or so people attended and of course we know as the inquiry progressed more and more people attended. Could you just help us with how
01:32:40 how it evolved and your role in the numbers increasing who the people attending were? Uh we had a formal meeting with the Lawrenes about that. So uh about how we would generate support, what my role would be and and so
01:32:56 would be and and so what it once that Lawrencees agreed there would be this Steven Lawrence family campaign, I wasn't given the role of as a coordinator. It was a def facto role of
01:33:09 coordinator. It was a def facto role of coordinating the whole stuff. uh there's no there was it was there were there were number of elements that I had to uh there are number of outcomes that I had to deliver one was to generate public
01:33:22 to deliver one was to generate public support to the inquiry and to be honest we went on a soap box you know in elephant and castle there's a shopping center
01:33:29 center you who was on the soap box I was on the so the experiences London South Bank University is very close to it I went to Southbank University other people went to the universities. We managed to
01:33:40 to the universities. We managed to contact everyone that we knew from previous campaigns of people who been involved to come and and apart from that physical work there was also leafleting about the Steven Lawrence inquiry just
01:33:54 about the Steven Lawrence inquiry just just indicating what it was and what why I think it was important that was being distributed. But as the inquiry went on um you know the first day is an important I mean people don't talk about
01:34:12 important I mean people don't talk about it but it's a very crucial period as far as the public concerned and that is the Lawrence family standing up and asking Sir William McFersonen to recluse himself and that generates a huge amount
01:34:26 himself and that generates a huge amount of publicity. Obviously, he says he's up to the home secretary and he he's still there, but it showed to a large number of people that the Lawrenes were very serious about getting into the truth and they were not going to be compromising
01:34:42 they were not going to be compromising in their advocacy to get to the truth. And what happens is because the press are there and you know it's it's the first time there's a public inquiry into a death or a murder never mind a
01:34:54 a death or a murder never mind a racially motive murder. It's a unique seinal
01:34:55 seinal inquiry
01:35:00 inquiry uh and and the press are picking up on a daily basis of what is being what is coming out in evidence and it's being reported on a daily basis in in print media on television and that also generates discussion and debate etc in
01:35:16 generates discussion and debate etc in political as well as other circles. So people are gravitating to the inquiry thinking this is unusual and unique. People gravitating there. Are you in the role of a coordinator or are you or or not? How how I'm doing everything for the Steven Lawrence family campaign, motivating
01:35:30 Lawrence family campaign, motivating people, leazing with people, engaging with people, reporting back to the Lawrenes and the legal team, talking to everyone. I mean, we heard from Alex Aad yesterday, just as an example. So, what would your
01:35:41 as an example. So, what would your contact have been with him in your role as a coordinator? Could you just give us uh an idea of the level of contact?
01:35:54 uh an idea of the level of contact? I only met Alex on the first day of the inquiry. Not even the first day, maybe the first week of the inquiry. Um I didn't know anything about Alex. I had heard of movement of justice, but never worked with them. They were never
01:36:08 worked with them. They were never involved in the leadup to the inquiry with the Lawrenes or any other steps that the Lawrence family had taken through the legal team. Um I think out of the 59 days I was there maybe I spoke to him. I saw him quite often especially when there were
01:36:22 often especially when there were significant dates like the suspects being there or commissioner giving evidence or you know some the law is giving evidence but I think I must have spoken to him maybe five times not more than that.
01:36:33 than that. I want to ask you about something very specific and it's something and we will um go into what Peter Francis has uh said it in greater detail later but I
01:36:49 said it in greater detail later but I wonder if we could perhaps uh call out Peter Francis's witness statement please. It's UCPI 503612.
01:36:55 It's page 84 paragraph 509.
01:37:09 I just want to ask you about this. So this is Peter Francis saying through Lewis I received some bits of information about Dorene Lawrence which he had received from people like Surish Gro with whom [cough]
01:37:25 Gro with whom [cough] Lewis was close. There was a rumor that did not reflect well on Dorene and had the potential to be used to discredit her if true. I reported that on to HN86 verbally. I did not feel it was enough
01:37:41 verbally. I did not feel it was enough significance to write up in a report. I do not know what HN86 did with that information if anything. Okay. So firstly what it says here is that
01:37:59 firstly what it says here is that you were close uh with Lewis. So just on that when Peter Francis uh says in his statement that you were uh close with Lewis is that true? No it's not true. I've seen him uh spoken to him but I
01:38:10 I've seen him uh spoken to him but I wouldn't say I was close to anybody from movement for justice. So, the suggestion here is that Lewis received some personal information about uh Dorene Lawrence that he said he'd
01:38:26 uh Dorene Lawrence that he said he'd received from people like uh you about a rumor. What's your reaction to to that? Essentially, uh a title being uh passed on uh from you uh to Lewis and then
01:38:44 on uh from you uh to Lewis and then Peter Francis, the undercover officer, gets to hear about it. What's your reaction to reading that, please? [snorts]
01:38:44 [snorts] I mean, I
01:38:47 I mean, I I think it's scandalous that I would even speak to Louis about something very something that Dorian War did or did not do. I would never do that. I think it's scandalous. I wouldn't even think of
01:38:58 scandalous. I wouldn't even think of spreading a rumor about Mrs. Lawrence, never mind, say it to someone I wasn't close to, or even if I was close to them, I wouldn't do it. Um
01:39:09 them, I wouldn't do it. Um I think it's a drama being created which is not at the center of the inquiry. If someone were to suggest, you have just described how you are interacting,
01:39:23 just described how you are interacting, coordinating with very very many people. Um whether in fact is it not possible that um you you did um have discussions uh with Lewis and during those
01:39:37 uh with Lewis and during those discussions uh that you you did reveal some of the things that may have been mentioned to you or that you picked up in confidence. If someone were to suggest, well, maybe that's something
01:39:48 suggest, well, maybe that's something you just haven't recalled because you're dealing with so many people. Can I just give you an opportunity to respond to that?
01:39:52 that? I I look I was I'm almost very always always very cordial and always respectful to people regardless of whether I agree with them politically or not. And I I always thanked people for
01:40:04 not. And I I always thanked people for coming to the inquiry regardless of what their views were because I think people taking their time out to support the Lawrence inquiry is very important. But I would never ever uh and I haven't ever spoken or about people's personal
01:40:18 spoken or about people's personal especially the Lawrenes or any other family member uh any personal issues any rumors they may be spread to per people
01:40:30 rumors they may be spread to per people that I'm not close to. Uh I am not close to the movement for justice. I'm listening to them. I respect what they say. I'm not agreeing with them. Um,
01:40:44 say. I'm not agreeing with them. Um, and I have a totally different u ethos and philosophy and strategy at the inquiry than they do. But that doesn't mean that they shouldn't be there, that they shouldn't be engaged, they should be, etc. Not a problem for
01:40:57 they should be, etc. Not a problem for me. Uh, and I'm not dismissive of them. But I would I mean I know what this rumor is. I just find it shocking that it's been attributed to me. The reality is that that rumor has no foundation whatsoever because um
01:41:10 foundation whatsoever because um my impression of the day that Steven was killed, the family were looking for him, you know, that's what I that's what I know for certain. um
01:41:27 know for certain. um Steven Lawrence inquiry. So beginning in March 1998, so that period where you are there coordinating, supporting the
01:41:40 there coordinating, supporting the family, that year, you were reported on by an undercover SDS officer, HN81. So uh he had the undercover name David Hagen. And I wonder if we could just
01:41:56 Hagen. And I wonder if we could just turn in your statement to it's paragraph uh 98 uh on page 32 please because I'd like to ask you questions about this particular undercover officer in particular his reporting and the accuracy of that. But in terms of this UCO as you state
01:42:12 But in terms of this UCO as you state here and is this right that you have no idea whether you met him or or or not? I I I have no idea whether I met him. I I first became aware of his name through movement of justice after I spoke to
01:42:25 movement of justice after I spoke to Peter Francis with his listister you know uh some time ago and I think it was Tony God who gave me the name David Hagen but I've never I've never I I
01:42:37 Hagen but I've never I've never I I don't think I've ever I've been told by Peter Francis that I probably met him on the last day of the inquiry but I can't be certain that was it him or not. I'm going to ask you about something
01:42:52 I'm going to ask you about something that David Hagen has said in his witness statement. It's MPS 0748
01:42:57 0748 378.
01:43:05 378. It's page 39 of David Hagen's statement. We'll just wait for that document to be brought up on screen.
01:43:15 And so I want to ask you about it's his suggestion that the reporting on the Steven Lawrence campaign um that that was the focus and so the suggestion that so your group the monitoring group this idea of potentially incidental uh reporting. But
01:43:31 potentially incidental uh reporting. But if we just have a look at paragraph 121. So he says in his statement, "The Ellison uh 121, please. The Ellison review finding that describes me as a spy in the Lawrence family camp is
01:43:44 spy in the Lawrence family camp is neither accurate nor fair, particularly because it does not accurately reflect the narrative element of his report. The report states that the intelligence I provided touched on the Lawrence family campaign and that I was quote well
01:43:56 campaign and that I was quote well placaced in one of the groups that associated itself with and tried to build relationships with [laughter] both the Lawrence family and other groups during the public inquiry. That is an
01:44:07 during the public inquiry. That is an accurate description of this part of my deployment. And then he says, "It seems I did not disagree with Mr. Ellison QC's premise that I was quote a police spy in the wider Lawrence camp when perhaps I
01:44:22 the wider Lawrence camp when perhaps I should have done. I believe I was more on the edges than even that statement indicates. The crucial nuance is lost
01:44:34 indicates. The crucial nuance is lost between wider Lawrence camp and Lawrence family camp in the above finding. A number of groups pitched their metaphorical tents around the Lawrence
01:44:46 metaphorical tents around the Lawrence family for various often self-interested [laughter] reasons. The MFJ was barely tolerated by the campaign council to this inquiry [laughter] demonstrated lack of understanding of the Ellison report and the overall context of my deployment when he repeated the disputed finding in his
01:45:00 repeated the disputed finding in his opening statement. I was not a spy in the Lawrence family camp. And so in relation to uh David uh Hagen's uh reference there to uh not in fact being a uh spy in relation to the Steven
01:45:12 a uh spy in relation to the Steven Lawrence campaign uh but that he was focused on for example groups such as movement for for justice and so [laughter] any reporting that may overlap with say the family and in
01:45:26 overlap with say the family and in particular say you and the monitoring group that that the suggestion that that well that may have been incidental. What is your
01:45:34 is your reaction to the suggestion that well the reports and we will come on to the reports in which you
01:45:47 will come on to the reports in which you were mentioned. Yes, you are referred to but it's it's incidental reporting that is in effect that you were reported on in some senses but by by accident just hoovering up all the intelligence. What's your reaction to that?
01:45:58 What's your reaction to that? Hagen is not involved in the Steven Lawrence family campaign. Um, but there is a wider campaign which is not called the Steven Lawrence family campaign but it's referred to by
01:46:14 family campaign but it's referred to by people as the Lawrence campaign. Uh, and I called it the support group. I think there is a lot of there are a lot of people trying to influence through us the family. [clears throat] Um, and that's that's what's happening.
01:46:26 that's that's what's happening. There are issues to do with whether we should hold a demonstration or not um etc etc at you know we should call for condance designation in Matt commission
01:46:38 condance designation in Matt commission and things like that but he's not in the Lawrence camp but I don't know whether he came to the inquiry but the the MFJ and other groups
01:46:50 and other groups um are trying to influence me uh with uh their their uh uh actions. to and [clears throat] and um
01:47:04 to and [clears throat] and um I think that is accurate. Um but I I um yeah I think that that is absolutely accurate but it's I just want to just make it clear you know over the 59 days
01:47:15 make it clear you know over the 59 days the number of people who are coming the vast majority are very independent not associated with any groups um they are taxi drivers there are women living in the local area they are um people in
01:47:28 the local area they are um people in self-organized community groups, they are families affecting justice. The MFJ, the anti-Nazi league are only peripheral to that. Um, so
01:47:39 to that. Um, so but through the meetings that we're organizing um to report on a daily basis or through the offices that we have, there are people trying to say would you
01:47:52 there are people trying to say would you want to do that? Can we do that? This is what we think should happen etc. All right. But before turning to this the reports that uh he produced that refer to you, I just want to ask you about another document where uh he does
01:48:10 about another document where uh he does mention you and it is I wonder if we can insert your tab B35. It's MPS072126
01:48:14 please. Uh page 8 of that document.
01:48:25 So this document is um it's notes of a meeting between David Hagen uh and Mark Ellison on the 22nd of October 2013. So it is in note form but we can see on
01:48:36 it is in note form but we can see on page eight towards the bottom of the page. So me that's Mark Ellison and WT that that's uh David Hagen. So he says he asked did your presence in the
01:48:52 he asked did your presence in the movement for justice involve being in the room with the Lawrenes and David Hagen replies we never sat in a room in a small group. MFJ wanted to take over or strongly influence the campaign
01:49:06 or strongly influence the campaign trying to get close to the Lawrenes. I have a recollection of meeting with Suresh Grover and Imran Khn. Um, AO a
01:49:18 Suresh Grover and Imran Khn. Um, AO a reference to Alex Aad was trying to get close to Suresh Grover. Uh, we went to public meetings. Lawrence wanted to thank people. MFJ did not get as close as they wanted. Lawrenes were speaking to people and thanking them for support. And so here he's referring to a
01:49:30 And so here he's referring to a recollection o of a meeting uh with you in a reference to Alex Awalad trying to
01:49:42 in a reference to Alex Awalad trying to get close to you again. Would you accept that that's it's possible that uh uh this undercover officer uh was uh in a room when you did um have a meeting? Is that possible?
01:49:58 that possible? I actually remember my new details during the inquiry. I don't think I met him with Imran Khan. Could we move to page 10 in this document please? So this is a continuation of the notes of this U
01:50:09 continuation of the notes of this U meeting between David Hagen and Mark Ellison. It's page 10, paragraphs 2 and three. [snorts] So this is the question from Mark Ellison.
01:50:21 this is the question from Mark Ellison. I understand public order issues but it is a fuzzy line aspects of intelligence where covert intelligence about family isn't appropriate. He says this. David
01:50:34 isn't appropriate. He says this. David Hagen says, "Looking back, it would not be done. I was a special branch intelligence officer. Part of being an intel officer, all information is
01:50:49 intel officer, all information is valuable. Why did I report why they were going to get divorced? I was told that two options. The reason to report is that it does have public order implications. It was useful. Uh NL reference to Neville Lawrence was much more malleable.
01:51:02 more malleable. DL Dorene Lawrence was very strong, very close to Suresh Grover. MFJ were interested in that because they would then have tried to get in with Neville
01:51:13 then have tried to get in with Neville Lawrence. It was within a closed circle. I did not expect it to be reported in the public domain. And so this is a reference to David Hagen justifying why it was necessary to report that the
01:51:30 it was necessary to report that the Lawrenes were going to get divorced. And the justification that is put forward here is that the reason to report it is it does have public order implications and it was useful. Firstly, in relation to the
01:51:45 useful. Firstly, in relation to the specifics of of that that the Lawrence is uh going to get divorced, is that something uh that uh you uh discussed with uh anyone that could have included David Hagen?
01:51:59 David Hagen? Not at all. Actually, I was the last person to
01:52:02 person to realize there were problems with the family. I I didn't even know there were problems with the family. I I I don't ask personal questions. is I don't get involved with people's personal illness.
01:52:14 involved with people's personal illness. There are to do with their mental health etc. I have intervened and supported both of them u very close to both of them. I didn't have a preference one or
01:52:33 them. I didn't have a preference one or the other. Um I I got I thought I got on with but both Dorian and Neville during the inquiry and before that. Um so I I don't I you know did it have public order implications? Absolutely not. Neither of them. Neither of them.
01:52:45 Neither of them. Neither of them. They're very explicit about this. When there's even a sniff of any public disorder, that they do not want to be associated with that. They do not believe in violence. And that my role as
01:52:58 believe in violence. And that my role as a coordinator was to ensure there was no violence, there was no public disorder. And when there was issues of public disorder after the suspect came, I was asked explicitly by Neville and Darren to go down and sort it out. And I did
01:53:10 to go down and sort it out. And I did before leaving this document. I wonder if we can just go down on the same page. It's paragraphs seven and eight. So this is WT. So this is David Hagen saying, "I
01:53:24 is WT. So this is David Hagen saying, "I have a handler. I report to him. I would expect him to filter those things out. It was a climate of all intelligence being good." Then he says this, "There were wolves circling the Lawrenes, not be able to stop groups taking over the
01:53:36 be able to stop groups taking over the Lawrenes. The objective was to report to prevent public order issues. This description quite graphic that is given here about wolves circling the Lawrenes. Was there any truth in in that? What's
01:53:53 Was there any truth in in that? What's your uh reaction to that language being used to describe the Lawrenes at the time of the inquiry? Absolutely not. There's no tooth in from my recollection any wolf circling the Lawrenes.
01:54:08 Lawrenes. You know this idea that the Lawrenes are incapable of differentiating who is a friend who is not a friend is just ridiculous that I mean they need a gatekeeper and that he is there to stop the wolves circling the Lawrenes. I just find that shocking. Um
01:54:20 find that shocking. Um most of the people who came to the inquiry were very supportive of the Lawrenes
01:54:26 Lawrenes 95 98% I would say um and they wanted to influence the Lorises. I think the people who were getting nervous about the Lawrenes are the
01:54:41 nervous about the Lawrenes are the Metropolitan Police not the wolves that he described. I want to turn now to consider some of David Hagen's intelligence reports on you and I don't wonder if we can just
01:54:53 you and I don't wonder if we can just there are a number of these I wonder if we can just deal with one before the midm morning break it is sir your tab B1 it is MPS treble12
01:55:08 so if we look at the date of this report the 5th of June 199 98. What I would like you to comment on is in terms of one of the issues that we're
01:55:27 in terms of one of the issues that we're looking at is how accurate these reports were. So you can see it says that four members of the movement for justice attended the rally about 30 at the Steven Lawrence inquiry on the 2nd of June. At the rally, the spokesman for the family campaign, Suresh Su, stated
01:55:39 the family campaign, Suresh Su, stated that he had been informed that the five suspects would be appearing during the week of the 15th of June. He stated that a demonstration would be planned for that time. However, those attending the rally, led and encouraged by MFJ,
01:55:54 rally, led and encouraged by MFJ, decrieded the lack of action so far and called for a demonstration sooner. The result was that the family campaign representative agreed to hold a planning meeting on the 5th of June, invited those present to attend. So in terms of that description,
01:56:06 that description, would you accept that in terms of accuracy that's that's a fair reflection of uh what you set out as a spokesman for the family campaign? Would you say that's accurate?
01:56:18 that's accurate? Uh there's you know we had meetings um at the during the inquiry at the inquiry um in a in a different room where we
01:56:29 um in a in a different room where we reported back any new information that uh that came to us and I must have told people that the suspects were being
01:56:41 people that the suspects were being asked to come on on the week of 15th of June. Um I think the Loris family campaign and the people I were around were clear that a large number of people would be attending and if there was
01:56:54 would be attending and if there was going to be any action we needed to ensure that there's going to be peaceful action etc. So I can't tell you whether there were four or five or six members
01:57:06 there were four or five or six members of the movement for justice. Um, I don't think I think there may have been demands for a demonstration, but it's not something that the family campaign
01:57:20 not something that the family campaign had agreed or discussed. I think we were just conscious that there were going to be a large number of people coming and that needed to be in an organizing a piece of way. All right. and and this this information so refers to you um at a at a rally um
01:57:34 so refers to you um at a at a rally um stating that you had been informed that the five suspects would be appearing during the week. Presumably that information would have been available to everyone who attended the rally.
01:57:45 everyone who attended the rally. I mean the time table would have gone down. People would have known. Um there was a lot of speculation that the whether the suspects would turn up or not. So it was in the public domain that whe and the press were and the media
01:57:57 whe and the press were and the media reports were speculating whether they would come what would be said etc. So I don't know whether that's a convenient moment to have a short midm morninging break certain certainly [clears throat] um we will break for 15 minutes um to
01:58:10 um we will break for 15 minutes um to enable both you and the uh transcribers to have a rest.
02:18:36 Mr.
02:18:56 Please be quiet at the back. [cough] [clears throat] Please be quiet at the back. Thank you,
02:19:10 Please be quiet at the back. Thank you, Mr. Grover. Before the uh break, we were beginning uh to go through David Hagen's reporting on you uh and uh the
02:19:25 reporting on you uh and uh the monitoring group and the Lawrence family support group. Now I would like to turn to the next report. Sir, it's at your B2. It is MPS trebo1129. Now the last report that we were looking at was dated the 5th of June. And so you
02:19:39 at was dated the 5th of June. And so you can see uh this report dated the 12th of June is about uh what happened on the 9th of June. And so in relation to these reports, you can see how tightly packed
02:19:56 reports, you can see how tightly packed the the dates are. So it begins by in if we look at the layout of the report intelligence windmill tilter which simply tells us this is David Hagen's reporting but the title of the report is the Lawrence family support group. We have again heard at various times
02:20:10 We have again heard at various times during the inquiry that in relation to the reporting that was conducted by SDS UCOs that to some extent they were
02:20:25 UCOs that to some extent they were hoovering up as much intelligence as possible. all intelligence is good intelligence and it may be that on occasions that the reporting uh may have been peripheral but what was your reaction when you read that the title of
02:20:37 reaction when you read that the title of this report in June 1998 is the Lawrence family support group that the undercover officer David Hagen has produced an intelligence report a special branch
02:20:51 intelligence report a special branch intelligence report on that group what's your what was your reaction to
02:20:59 I don't think we called ourselves the Lawrence family support group. Uh I think people saw it as a support group for the Lawrence campaign, but it didn't have a name. I just referred to it as the Lawrence support group. Um
02:21:15 the Lawrence support group. Um but so in terms of the name that's what I think in terms of Hagen and other
02:21:28 I think in terms of Hagen and other people or other UCOs whether it's Peter Frances I think there is a there is an attempt to get to the Lawren's through this support group and they're trying to influence um or trying to get close to the family through this um wider group.
02:21:44 through this um wider group. Well, if we look at the first paragraph, we're not going to go through every line, but the first paragraph, on Tuesday, the 9th of June, the Lawrence Family Support Group held their weekly meeting in a disused shop in the Elephant and Castle Shopping Center.
02:21:57 Elephant and Castle Shopping Center. Approximately 40 people attended. Just pausing there, how easy would it be for someone to attend one of these weekly meetings, for example? Can can anyone could anyone
02:22:09 example? Can can anyone could anyone attend or how did you monitor that at the time?
02:22:11 the time? They were public meetings anybody could attend.
02:22:18 attend. So again in terms of the information that was discussed in the weekly meeting this was not a private meeting with you and the Lawrenes. This is something open to members of the public. Is that right?
02:22:31 to members of the public. Is that right? Yeah. It was reporting back on what had happened during the inquiry. Just the pivotal points. So I'd be briefed by lawyers to do that and then it'd be about uh what may be happening the week after uh what the campaign's position
02:22:43 after uh what the campaign's position was and it it was that kind of meeting was really about support group and listening to people on what they want what listen to people on what they think should be happening and an example of that is that it was known that the five suspects would be
02:22:54 known that the five suspects would be attending that inquiry. The question is what how to respond to that, how to how to act in when they arrive.
02:23:11 to act in when they arrive. Yeah, the it would be the law the five suspects are attending. This is what the campaign would like to do and hear from others what they think should be happening. I'd like to go to the end of this page, please.
02:23:25 So, at the end it says the group intend to let the five make a statement. So the group being a reference well the title Lawrence family support group the support group the group intend to let the five make a statement but if they do not give the answers they want i.e.
02:23:37 not give the answers they want i.e. confessions then anything could happen given the porcity of policing within the room disorder should be expected and then it goes on to say there's a
02:23:52 then it goes on to say there's a possible way round of having security guards instead of police. What is your uh view of the accuracy of that statement that anything could have happened and that
02:24:04 anything could have happened and that disorder should be expected? Is that a fair report? Because if this is a an undercover officer reporting back in relation to the issue of disorder. So one of the things that they are the SDS
02:24:17 one of the things that they are the SDS officers say they are looking at is well look we have to have someone on the inside to see well if there is going to be disorder then we can alert the rest of the police and measures can be um
02:24:29 of the police and measures can be um taken. So when this officer says well there aren't that many police there disorder should be expected. Is that fair for the officer to say that? Is that is that given the circumstances? It's an outrageous statement. Uh
02:24:47 It's an outrageous statement. Uh why? because there were there was never any contemplation of any disorder within the room by anyone. Um there was never even a thought there'd be disorder. We weren't clear whether the suspects would make a statement or whether answer any
02:25:02 statement or whether answer any questions. The likelihood was that they wouldn't say anything. We were very conscious of that and through the Lawrence family campaign we devised what actions would take which were peace very peaceful. For example, we decided that we would have t-shirts with Steven's
02:25:18 we would have t-shirts with Steven's um photograph on them and that when the suspects came, we would turn our backs on them. It's the kind of action that we decided within the room. But any any threat of any disorder within the room
02:25:32 threat of any disorder within the room would have lost us immense credibility with the inquiry itself which we were trying to work with. And I think it's a it's a an example of how Heagen is justifying spying
02:25:47 justifying spying um his spying of the Lawrence campaign. Uh and it's really meant for his superiors to think that he's doing good work rather than resembling any any any
02:26:00 work rather than resembling any any any real possibility taking place. I mean we the public gallery the Lawrence the Lawrence room was quite big much bigger than this the there were spaces for public gallery but the public gallery was very disciplined there were
02:26:12 was very disciplined there were reactions when officers said certain things which people didn't agree with but it was always frustration it was
02:26:24 but it was always frustration it was never anger nobody shouted at there was always
02:26:26 always u there there was obviously going to uh we had to be extra cautious, extra disciplined when the suspects came and all sorts of arrangements were being made between myself to the Lawrence
02:26:42 made between myself to the Lawrence campaign and the commander on how that would be facilitated so it would be peaceful. But to suggest that there would be disorder in the inquiry, I mean I I just totally outraged by that.
02:26:53 that. Well, let's turn to another of David Hagen's reports. It's in fact the same date. It's sir at your tab B3. It is MPS treble1134.
02:27:13 All right. And so in terms of this, so the previous report was about the weekly meeting on the 9th of June. This is about the 11th of June. And we can see it refers to 200 people attending a public meeting uh organized uh by the
02:27:30 public meeting uh organized uh by the SWP. But if we could just go to the next paragraph, can you see where it says this? All four speakers gave strong speeches calling for support of the campaign. Grover, more outspoken than on previous occasions, stressed the
02:27:41 previous occasions, stressed the importance of Monday and Tuesday when the five accused would be appearing. He was particularly angry over the treatment of Steven Lawrence's mother,
02:27:52 treatment of Steven Lawrence's mother, who had been searched that day prior to going into the inquiry. He argued that the police's incompetence was an attempt to cover cover up their systematic
02:28:03 to cover cover up their systematic racism and corruption. Uh he cited a number of examples from the inquiry proving his point. Now, in terms of the question, the factual question of the accuracy of this reporting,
02:28:17 accuracy of this reporting, would you agree that that is a fair description of what happened? Four speakers giving strong speeches and and you being angry about uh the treatment
02:28:28 you being angry about uh the treatment of uh Dorene Lawrence. Would you say in terms of that reporting that it is in terms of on a on an accuracy scale that it is at least accurate? I mean I would say there were very passionate speeches, strong speeches.
02:28:44 passionate speeches, strong speeches. There was um there was there was and I I I may have mentioned that Steven Lawrence's mother would searched and I would be angry with that. Um I think what he's done is he's my 15minute
02:28:56 what he's done is he's my 15minute speech which goes through what has been exposed at the inquiry and what's in the public domain. He's actually put three or four sentences when they're out of
02:29:11 or four sentences when they're out of context. So he's summarized the points I'm making um inaccurately. Um, so when I'm when I'm talking about
02:29:25 Um, so when I'm when I'm talking about police's incompetence, I'm talking about for example the surveillance operation on the suspects, uh, how that was mishandled, which is in the inquiry. Um, and I think when I'm talking about the cover up of the systemic racism and
02:29:36 cover up of the systemic racism and corruption, I'm not just talking about the Lawrence case, but I'm talking about other cases, including the
02:29:45 the inspector's reports within the police force who are talking about corruption, etc., etc. Now in terms of the risk to
02:29:56 etc., etc. Now in terms of the risk to public disorder, if we look at the next sentence
02:29:58 sentence o on this report, it refers to uh this. It says uh we'll come up on screen. Grover did not elaborate on plans uh for within the
02:30:14 elaborate on plans uh for within the inquiry room on Monday and then this but was keen to build the event as attendance inside the venue rather than a demonstration outside. So this appears to indicate that your focus was more on
02:30:28 to indicate that your focus was more on the attendance inside the inquiry venue rather than a a public demonstration outside. Did that reflect your general uh attitude uh at the time that you it
02:30:40 uh attitude uh at the time that you it was inside the venue that was important rather than a wider demonstration outside?
02:30:43 outside? He is not aware what the plans are for the Lawrence campaign within the room which I've described already which is
02:30:55 which I've described already which is about a peaceful um show of support for Steven's family. Um I am encouraging people to attend. Um I think it's important to hear what the suspects are saying. There is no real discussion whether there should be a demonstration outside. What I am doing at that moment
02:31:13 outside. What I am doing at that moment with with the with the inquiry is trying to persuade Sir William McFersonen to allow us to use a massive room downstairs which belong to Tesco's and I've been to the Tesco's manager saying can we use that room during the susp
02:31:30 and Mrs. Lawrence and say, you know, we expect a large number of people. We are mobilizing for a large number of people. We are absolutely clear that there' be no public disorder. But it's important for people uh who've experienced racism
02:31:48 for people uh who've experienced racism and people who want to know about racism to actually see for themselves what the evidence is within the well of the court. And I want that to be what what you're describing are practical steps that you sought to take to ensure uh attendance there. But if we turn to the last page of this report
02:32:00 turn to the last page of this report under source comment, so this is David Hagen, you you can see what is set out there in those two sentences. The
02:32:11 there in those two sentences. The general mood of those present was very angry. If similar numbers attend on Monday, there is potential for severe
02:32:23 Monday, there is potential for severe public disorder when the five appear. So what you've just described is well, let let's create some more space so that more people can participate in that inquiry.
02:32:26 inquiry. Again, would you accept though that uh the comment that is made here looking at it from a public disorder or risk of
02:32:41 it from a public disorder or risk of public disorder is a fair one? You've got a uh a very uh controversial uh inquiry into something very controversial with increasing numbers of people. Would you objectively say that that comment of David Hagen is fair in any way?
02:32:55 any way? I'm not saying he shouldn't be concerned about public disorder. Anything can happen. I understand that variable. But I think there's an assumption here that when black people come together, there don't be public disorder. That's what
02:33:12 don't be public disorder. That's what I'm objecting to. The left and the black black communities are very disciplined and very strategic in what happens. People don't just end up into violence because they think there should be violence. I think um we were conscious that we didn't want public disorder
02:33:25 that we didn't want public disorder there possibility of it but we will do everything possible um to ensure there would be no public disorder in the room or outside but there would be that threat and it
02:33:38 there would be that threat and it depending on two or three things firstly what the suspects would say and do and people may get angry about that it's the only opportunity that the law would have
02:33:49 only opportunity that the law would have to and the public would have had to hear the suspects themselves who had refused to answer any questions. Um the second thing is um how we were able to contain our own supporters
02:34:01 our own supporters um within that period and I think we were very confident through the Steven
02:34:12 were very confident through the Steven Lawrence family campaign and the people that we had mobilized including from independent left that there was not going to be any threat of violence. Um and then when I I mean but there were going to be pe you know there's bound to be people who we didn't know. We were
02:34:23 be people who we didn't know. We were encouraging people to attend. Um we want a peaceful demonstration at the inquiry. Um firstly to hear the evidence and
02:34:36 Um firstly to hear the evidence and second to gather outside as a show of support for the Lawrencees in a very peaceful way. All right. And if we move to the next uh report which is sir your tab B4 it is MPS treb 1145.
02:34:47 MPS treb 1145. So the report we were just looking at dated the 12th of June. We're moving forward uh just to the 23rd of June. We can see this is a report on movement for justice and it is the end of the second
02:35:00 justice and it is the end of the second paragraph. I just want to ask you about. So it says that MFJ movement for justice
02:35:11 So it says that MFJ movement for justice have lost faith in Suresh and the family campaign to progress the issue and see the 28th as a golden opportunity to demonstrate the effectiveness of MFJ and
02:35:23 demonstrate the effectiveness of MFJ and assist in raising its uh profile. And so the references to and we will see this increasingly in these reports references to a degree of tension between the movement for justice and the monitoring
02:35:38 movement for justice and the monitoring group and yourself. What's your reaction to reading and we will see a number of examples of this for example the way in which it's put here that MFJ have lost faith in you. Could could you
02:35:54 faith in you. Could could you I have no idea. I had no idea whether the MFJ had lost faith in me or not. Um I think
02:36:00 I think um I think there are I think there's not the issue of anger or more militancy. I think it's the issue about strategy. Um and I think what we are focusing on is the self-organization
02:36:17 is the self-organization of a family who through their own model and through their own resources and through their support want to express their anger in a meaningful way to affect change and they want to make
02:36:30 affect change and they want to make representations. the inquiry the inquiry is is is being uh reported on a daily
02:36:43 is is is being uh reported on a daily basis. So through the inquiry they're talking to the public. Um and and I think historically there's a the difference between the MFJ and campaigns that are coming from black communities and I use that word in a pluralistic way isn't about whether we are more militant or less militant. We
02:36:55 are more militant or less militant. We are both angry about state institutions who do not want to acknowledge racism in any way or do not want to acknowledge the violence that has been used on a
02:37:06 the violence that has been used on a daily basis on black communities and lack of investigation in race murders. The difference is there is an approach from some groups where they believe
02:37:20 from some groups where they believe they're the vanguard of a resistance that's taking place and us who are saying actually ordinary people can affect change and and for us the the issue of uh the issue is that anyone
02:37:42 issue of uh the issue is that anyone whether it's a mother or a brother or a sister who experiences this injustice justice has the capacity to run a campaign affect change as fearlessly and as audaciously as anybody else. um if the MFJ and I don't want to
02:38:01 else. um if the MFJ and I don't want to get digressed. I think this is as I said this is a drama going on which is being reported by the use in the undercover officer to justify his spying it. But
02:38:20 officer to justify his spying it. But actually what's happening at the inquiry is at the the center is not affected by it. What's happening at the inquiry is not affected by my conversations with the MFJ. They're not influencing the Lawrence family. That's their frustration. The reason why they're not influencing is because they I can't see the strategy they have. Not because I think they are more militant, I am less militant. The the southern monitoring
02:38:31 militant. The the southern monitoring group even when it's charity has has red lines that if we are told not to support families of sufferes, we would rather
02:38:43 families of sufferes, we would rather lose the funding. It's not an issue for me. We we are committed to that. Uh so it's about the approach. It's about
02:38:54 it's about the approach. It's about ordinary people having the effect of change. And that's why, you know, I mean, I think I've answered your question. I don't Well, and I'd like we can sort of take that report down. The reports sort of touched on discussions about what would
02:39:07 touched on discussions about what would happen when the five suspects attended. And I just want to move to the next report which serves at your tab B6. It's MPS Trevolo 1154.
02:39:23 So this is moving to the 29th of June 1998. So we've just get that up on screen. Now this is a a detailed more detailed report more lengthy report uh for we will see obvious reasons because it describes on
02:39:37 obvious reasons because it describes on that date the 29th of June 1998 between 500 and 600 protesters gathered outside Hannibal House to confront the five white youths who were
02:39:59 confront the five white youths who were due to give evidence to the inquiry that day. Now just pausing there in terms of the number of protesters that gathered outside Hannibal House that day, what influence did you have, if any, in relation to the number of protesters that attended on that date, please? Um I I would say that when I went down
02:40:14 Um I I would say that when I went down during the lunchtime to talk to people, I was able to influence a large number of them. Maybe 70 to 80% of the people attending. I think there were more than 600 people. I think they were between
02:40:28 600 people. I think they were between 800 to a,000. I mean, I'm not going to quibble about the numbers. I think people
02:40:33 people people were there because they'd seen this
02:40:35 this epic battle between a black family and the Metropolitan Police and it was being reflected within the inquiry because of
02:40:48 reflected within the inquiry because of the evidence that was taking place and I think everybody was conscious that this is not time for violence. This is actually
02:40:54 actually uh a the first opportunity over decades if not centuries to to convince a public judicial inquiry that there is the existence and
02:41:09 that there is the existence and prevalence of racism within the police force and for that to be acknowledged would be historic because it would create a sea change in how the police potentially tra change. So uh it's about being strategic and it's about uh
02:41:23 being strategic and it's about uh understanding that within the struggles against racism, the legislative process can be used as a tool to expose and change society or racism within society.
02:41:37 change society or racism within society. In terms of the number of protesters here, was that any part of a strategy that you developed or contributed to the the number on this particular day? to
02:41:48 the number on this particular day? to the day when the five suspects a show a show show of force as it were. Look, our position was we needed as large number of people to come on that day. It was very clear they that we
02:42:00 day. It was very clear they that we would be against any public disorder. To be honest with you, I only had to convince an maybe maybe 10 people about the issue of public disorder. The rest of the people were totally convinced, very disciplined. And what I w what the
02:42:12 disciplined. And what I w what the variable the variable the variable that I couldn't control as the coordinator of the campaign was how the suspects would react. I had no clue how they would
02:42:27 react. I had no clue how they would react. I didn't know whether they would come and what they would do. I didn't know that they would come out and do
02:42:40 know that they would come out and do certain things. But uh and I didn't want any violence against them. We you know you know in the anti-racist move very conscious about people suffering violence suspects and this and so I wasn't I wasn't going to allow and there wasn't there wasn't there wasn't a uh any
02:43:00 strong proposition or prevalence or thought with the people I spoke before the inquiry about the use of violence or disorder.
02:43:11 disorder. Let's turn to your role as reported in this report. So if we turn to uh page two please the top paragraph. So firstly it refers to the appearance of a strike force from the Nation of
02:43:23 of a strike force from the Nation of Islam. Pausing there those not familiar with the Nation of Islam, could you assist us with what you consider as being referred to there? A strike force from the Nation of Islam. What's that a reference to please?
02:43:37 What's that a reference to please? I don't know what a strike force is to be honest with you. To be honest, it's the first time I've read that. I do know the Nation of Islam is an organization that uh you know were developed in the
02:43:49 that uh you know were developed in the United States because of and believes in segregation politics to challenge the state um on a various levels. Um but I was told by Mr. Lawrence that the Nation
02:44:03 was told by Mr. Lawrence that the Nation of Islam had been had approached him and he was quite happy for them to come or that's the impression I got but I don't know what a strike forces. I know the Nation of Islam dressed in a particular way um you know with the glasses and
02:44:15 way um you know with the glasses and suits etc. Um but strike force sounds quite militaristic. I didn't get that impression on that day. All right. And so just to can continue on. So the appearance of a strike force
02:44:30 on. So the appearance of a strike force from the Nation of Islam who hither too had played no part in the campaign was viewed with dismay in many quarters especially amongst the Lawrence family
02:44:42 especially amongst the Lawrence family who strongly disapprove of them. It is believed that Suresh Grover, who had been unsuccessful in obtaining volunteers to steward the protest, had
02:44:56 volunteers to steward the protest, had allowed a small number of NOI, Nation of Islam members to take on the stewarding role. However, the NOI arrived in strength and were acting totally independently of Grover or anyone else.
02:45:08 independently of Grover or anyone else. So again, we're we're interested in this reporting of what was happen happening at the time by an SDS undercover officer. Would you accept that what he
02:45:19 officer. Would you accept that what he has set out here is at least accurate? It's inaccurate. In what way?
02:45:28 In what way? Um, as I said, Mr. Lawrence, I think, was in touch with the nation and he had no objection to them coming. Uh there was a very small discussion in the launch campaign where what the impact would be the nation coming and as we had said we weren't going to be excluding any individual from uh coming into into
02:45:43 any individual from uh coming into into the public gallery to support staff. We were aware that this would have uh perhaps negative reporting in the press. Um but I I think we accepted that that
02:45:57 Um but I I think we accepted that that could be dealt with. uh there was never any discussion between myself or the Nation of Islam prior to the day when they arrived whether there would be any stewards from them. That is totally wrong. That's inaccurate. It's totally
02:46:08 wrong. That's inaccurate. It's totally false. The stewarding had already been arranged prior to the day and there were people from the support group who would be stewards. We had managed to get number of stewards. We expected 150
02:46:21 number of stewards. We expected 150 people in the gallery. There was a order of who would be there. you know the family both in terms of the Lawrence and Dwayne Brooks family and all that kind of stuff the supporters um the space for press etc we all etc and and so there
02:46:34 press etc we all etc and and so there was there was never discussion between myself I don't know whether discussion between anybody else between myself and the Nation of Islam on any formal studenting I saw them on the day um I
02:46:52 studenting I saw them on the day um I didn't talk to them until the lunchtime they they actually approached me and I talked to them after lunchtime. Now if we move forward just a couple of paragraphs here. So it describes at the height of the disturbances uh the Nation of Islam contingent
02:47:04 uh the Nation of Islam contingent emerged from the inquiry building and took up a thoroughly menacing stance as if stewarding the protesters. Then when
02:47:15 if stewarding the protesters. Then when matters had calmed down, they attempted to re-enter the building only to be denied access. It was at this point that the trouble started up once more and
02:47:30 the trouble started up once more and resulted in police resorting to the use of CS gas in their efforts to restore order. So public inquiry the point has been reached that the police are deploying
02:47:42 police are deploying CS gas and I want to ask you in relation to that but from a public order perspective you were there did you witness the deployment of the CS gas is this something that you were aware of at the time
02:47:55 time I only became afterwards this so what happens is this in terms of chronology so um around 9:00 there are loads of people's is trying to get in the public
02:48:11 people's is trying to get in the public gallery is being filled by 9:30 and Alex is there with movement of justice the nation are there loads of people who want to enter are there we had anticipated that large number of people come and they wouldn't be able to get into the into the public hence my conversation with William McFersonen so what we decided was that there would be
02:48:23 what we decided was that there would be rotation of people coming after an hour or so um and I only became I'm aware of a disturbance
02:48:36 a disturbance after the inquiry started and I think it's half an hour from the time we started. Um the nation representative of the nation burst into the room. I met them. Uh they said they'd been see gas
02:48:55 them. Uh they said they'd been see gas and there were arrangements if there any disturbances take place I would I would speak to the lawyers and specifically Mr. Mansfield and he would speak to he he would indicate to Sir William Mcquson there'd be a break. That's exactly what happened. Uh so I didn't see the public
02:49:09 happened. Uh so I didn't see the public disturbance outside. I did I did see the disturbance um after the suspects leave and I play a role in that in terms of calming everything down. And if we go forward just a couple more paragraphs
02:49:23 paragraphs uh the paragraph beginning the end of the days.
02:49:28 the days. So that paragraph reads, "The end of the day's proceedings saw a group of around 50 protesters attempt to attack the five
02:49:39 50 protesters attempt to attack the five white youths as they left the hearing. A number of missiles were thrown at the youths and all five were liberally covered in spittle by the time they reached the sanctuary of the waiting ban." The accuracy question, do you accept the accuracy of what David Hagen
02:49:54 accept the accuracy of what David Hagen has set out here in his report? I think he exaggerates uh uh the attempt to attack the five white youths. I I I knew the fight youths had given their evidence and they're going
02:50:11 given their evidence and they're going to leave. So I was asked by the Lawrenes to go down as soon as possible to see what would happen and intervene if possible. When I was at the entrance of Hannibal House, um the suspects um came out spitting at people. I
02:50:23 um came out spitting at people. I remember them spitting at members of the south of Monitoring Group who were at at at the entrance. Uh then
02:50:35 at the entrance. Uh then I mean it's it's I I was quite I mean I was quite shocked about their attitude to be honest. They were they are street fighters. I'd never seen them before. They came out running, spitting, fisting etc. Yes, there were people who threw
02:50:46 etc. Yes, there were people who threw cans at them but there were barriers. They couldn't be hit. I was absolutely sure that the police there would be barriers where they would go and the
02:51:02 barriers where they would go and the barriers came from the entrance right to the van that they had which they would get in and go. There was commotion. There's no question about it. Um the only incident that took place was between myself and one of the suspects because I was in front of the in front of the
02:51:17 of the You were at the front. Uh I was at the front lorry and then I held Steven Lawrence's uh banner in front of the van with my colleague so they could see Ste didn't want them to run away from Steven's
02:51:28 want them to run away from Steven's face. So I had Steven's banner in front of the lorry and basically that was the only incident that took place and the discussions between myself and the commander was
02:51:39 between myself and the commander was actually nothing seriously had happened. I spoke to the commander who was in charge that time. Um, he intervened to if anything would happen and
02:51:54 if anything would happen and it finished. I mean, the suspects took about I'd say 2 and 1/2 minutes to leave.
02:51:58 leave. What would you reply to this? If someone were to suggest that well you have described the first day of the inquiry only about a dozen people there the efforts that you have made to sort of
02:52:11 efforts that you have made to sort of bring people in to bring this uh to more people's attention and indeed the
02:52:23 people's attention and indeed the numbers increase and increase and then meetings about what would happen when the suspects arrive and then this particular date where you get uh hundreds and hundreds of people protesting and leading leading to CS gas being used
02:52:37 being used and you just describing in one part of it you being on the front. What would you say to someone who said, "Well, maybe there is some justification in
02:52:48 maybe there is some justification in having an undercover police officer who was able to report on you and what was going on." How would you respond to that? From a public order perspective, maybe there was some justification in reporting on you and the group because look look what happened.
02:53:01 look look what happened. I mean if there's going to be public disorder, you don't need undercut officers to plan to disrupt that. You can have ordinary police officers. There's communication but myself and the commander on the day regular
02:53:17 commander on the day regular communication. I was told to have that communication. I met him prior to the inquiry. I met him on the day of the inquiry. I met him at lunchtime. I met him at the end. So if it's a public order offense, you can deal with it on a public order basis. Not an issue. You do
02:53:28 public order basis. Not an issue. You do not need undercover officers to give you that information. Yes, it I'm not saying the police should not plan for public disorder. What I'm saying is David Hagen
02:53:43 disorder. What I'm saying is David Hagen is exaggerating that threat deliberately to justify his deployment as an undercover officers. But where where he fails is he actually doesn't he's not close to us. He's trying to influence
02:53:54 close to us. He's trying to influence us. Uh I don't know whether I think I saw him on the last day of the inquiry. That's what I've been told. I've tried
02:54:08 That's what I've been told. I've tried to recollect whatever and he's trying to influence about demonstrations. I think the information that he's giving is on peripheral groups that are trying to influence me and other people in the support group like Ashra man in the
02:54:21 support group like Ashra man in the support group etc. Uh and I I have to say he he he's he I find the justification of deployment totally outrageous. This doesn't any warrant it. He he would have done I
02:54:34 warrant it. He he would have done I expect him to do research on me if he wants going to well in terms of engaging with the with the police you described on this particular day yes you were engaging with the police could you just give us
02:54:46 with the police could you just give us an impression of how often during this public inquiry during the Steven Lawrence public inquiry you were in communication with the police not undercover officers but uh the police uh who were there and visible
02:55:01 who were there and visible whenever it was necessary sir it was I I mean I act on behalf of the Steven Lawrence family campaign. So if for example [snorts] we at a at the issue of the private prosecution in Granwich, I think we were
02:55:19 prosecution in Granwich, I think we were if there was an issue of public disorder or any issue we had in terms of safety of the Lawrenes, I would speak to the police. Uh at significant moments of the inquiry, we flagged up uh which were
02:55:34 inquiry, we flagged up uh which were pivotal about information coming either from the police or um the suspects coming or when you know the met commissioner came there was contact between myself and the commanders on a
02:55:49 between myself and the commanders on a regular basis. That was that was just to make sure two or three things. firstly that we worked as a team to disrupt anything that was possible on the streets and it wouldn't be coming from us but there was never intelligence from the commander to me that there was any
02:56:00 the commander to me that there was any public disruption he never said to me I suspect this is happening and it was about ensuring that the the ethos of the inquiry as a public where the people
02:56:14 inquiry as a public where the people could attend uh would always be kept providing he was satisfied with the safety
02:56:19 safety one more sentence in report and we'll move on. It is the penultimate paragraph on this page please. It is the last sentence there that says it is fair to say. So this is David Hagen saying it is fair to say that the day events could
02:56:35 fair to say that the day events could easily have been more troublesome than they were had it not been for the controlling influence of Neville Lawrence. It is clear that the family themselves do not want any confrontation with the police other than on political grounds.
02:56:47 grounds. In terms of this, would you agree that this in fact reflected reality? So again, in terms of the accuracy here, so this particular description, would you say that that is fair from David Hagen?
02:57:03 fair from David Hagen? I I'm just trying reading this. So individual Pacific. Yeah, I I agree that the protesters were made of individuals rather than specific political groups. I I agree with that. I think large number of people were individuals. Um,
02:57:24 I agree that the organized left, especially those mentioned, didn't have leading roles in the proceedings.
02:57:32 I I I think it I think the presence of the Lawrence family and their dignity helped calm things down throughout the whole campaign. I don't think it was necessary
02:57:46 necessary for either Mr. Lawrence or you know Mrs. Lawrence to intervene to stop this
02:58:01 Lawrence to intervene to stop this disorder. I was actually downstairs. I was asked to go downstairs and I as I said apart from a handful of people there was absolutely no hunger for disorder or violence. Could we turn to the next report which serves at your tab B7? It's MPS0739462.
02:58:15 So this is a report that was typed up on the 15th of July 1998
02:58:27 the 15th of July 1998 and refers to a uh meeting at Houndslow Civic Center on the 14th of July where 150 people uh attended.
02:58:38 Can I ask you about the So we have a series of speakers. So we can see the first speaker was Mona Simpson, the mother of Joy Gardner speaking on how people should work together to save the group uh which providing support for the relatives of victims who had died at the hands of the
02:58:55 victims who had died at the hands of the police. You can see various speakers but where it refers to Neville Lawrence. So you can see the next speaker was Mr. Lawrence, father of Steven. So here it says um that he spoke for about five minutes saying how he understood the pain that Mrs. Real and Mrs. Simpson
02:59:09 pain that Mrs. Real and Mrs. Simpson were going through. He did not ask for support or give an update on the inquiry. And then this he also mentioned that he had been helped by the monitoring uh group. And so here in
02:59:26 monitoring uh group. And so here in terms of this reporting this would you agree that in terms of where the monitoring group I is placed in terms of any influence uh regarding
02:59:39 in terms of any influence uh regarding public disorder that that here you have a report that Neville Lawrence mentioning your group and saying that it had been a help again in terms of sort of the accuracy of what was said in this meeting and the fairness of the
02:59:58 meeting and the fairness of the reporting would you would you agree that in terms of this reporting that it's it is a fair reflection of what was said and the reality I think it's a fair reflection if the report sir is written in 98 is it it is the 15th the report stated the 15th of July 1998
03:00:17 15th of July 1998 the only kind of issue I have is we weren't called the monitoring group then we only called monitor group in 2000 so I don't know whether it is written in 208
03:00:21 208 we were only called the monitoring group in 2000, not in '98. We hadn't even thought of the name the monitoring group until 2000. So I think it's written after 98, not in '98.
03:00:39 after 98, not in '98. Just on on that, if we turn over the page of this report, you can see under the special branch references. And so there appears to be some aliding of the of the group. So you can see where it says the monitoring group and it says identical with southern monitoring group. And so it would appear on the face of the
03:00:50 would appear on the face of the reporting that uh they were used interchangeably. But if we go back to the previous page, the last paragraph because it refers to you giving a
03:01:06 because it refers to you giving a speech. So the next to speak was Suresh Grover. He was very viciferous on the inefficiency of the police on the Lawrence inquiry. He spoke of how Steven's friend who was with him at the time gave descriptions of the suspects yet the police failed to arrest. He claimed that police only arrested the
03:01:17 claimed that police only arrested the suspects when they learned that Nelson Mandela was visiting the Lawrence family and wanted to impress a foreign dignitary. Apparently, Mandela arrived
03:01:28 dignitary. Apparently, Mandela arrived at the Lawrenes at 8:00 p.m. one evening and the arrests occurred at 8:45 p.m.
03:01:37 and the arrests occurred at 8:45 p.m. Grover also went into the history of the suspects and their family backgrounds. He explained that the Steven Lawrence campaign had no faith in the current home office inquiry and what would come out of it as the suspect still wouldn't be convicted. He went on to say that they had insisted on the presence of
03:01:51 they had insisted on the presence of Condon at the inquiry but were made to do with his number two whom they considered ineffectual. They had not been impressed by the apology offered by police. Now in terms of [clears throat]
03:02:15 police. Now in terms of [clears throat] undercover officer reporting [snorts] uh suggestions that certain reporting are fantasy and lies, some exaggeration. Uh would you accept though again in terms of this and how you are characterized here that in this example that that is an accurate summary of of the speech that you gave. It's the sort
03:02:28 the speech that you gave. It's the sort of things the sort of messages that you were communicating and that the reporting on that is not in this instance exaggerated in any way. It's a fair reflection of what was said.
03:02:40 fair reflection of what was said. I don't think I would have said I don't have faith in the home current home office inquiry. U
03:02:48 U you know Mr. Lawrence is there and I um both of us wanted to get to the end and get an outcome that the family wanted. Um
03:03:00 outcome that the family wanted. Um I think there are things that are you know accurate there but they have some of the things which are halfbaked which are his own impressions. Um it's true that um I'm peripherous about the
03:03:15 that um I'm peripherous about the inefficiencies of the police in the Lawrence inquiry. Um and I do give examples of where they're inefficient. As I said, I've spoke about about uh
03:03:26 As I said, I've spoke about about uh um the surveillance by police officers, the lack of search at Clifford Norris's house, which had come into the inquiry and all that stuff. So, it's all factual stuff. I I'm a passionate speaker, but
03:03:39 stuff. I I'm a passionate speaker, but I'm not a speaker that is exaggerating and I'm conscious that Mr. Lawrence is speaking on behalf of the family and I'm just there to support him. We
03:03:52 just there to support him. We we've a a different topic, but we've touched on it already. It's in relation to funding. I wonder if we could turn to So it is at your tab B8. It's
03:04:03 So it is at your tab B8. It's intelligence report MPS treb191 please.
03:04:11 please. So this is a report and you can see the date of it. So we are still in July 1998.
03:04:15 1998. It's really at the bottom of the report under source comments. So this is another of David Hagen's reports. It's this. However, groups such as the Newan Monitoring Project, NMP, and Subtle Monitoring Group, SMG, may stay within
03:04:31 Monitoring Group, SMG, may stay within the campaign as they are both in receipt of council funding regarding the inquiries. There's a suggestion that you're going to be staying as a group in the Steven Lawrence uh campaign uh for funding reasons. Is that fair?
03:04:48 funding reasons. Is that fair? It's totally inaccurate and made up. uh the new home [clears throat] project had lost their funding by the time the inquiry comes. So they weren't funded. In fact, we raised money for one of their volunteers called Julie Mundy to be part of the Steven Lawrence family
03:05:06 be part of the Steven Lawrence family campaign. Um we raised it as the South and Monitoring Group. So they weren't funded whatsoever. They lost their funding. Um we we would I'm just trying to read it properly is the dwell beyond the millions that they would not be allowed to be either director.
03:05:27 It's just I don't know where he's got this from. The issue of our funding and we using it as a veto not to develop a campaign is insidious and it's just shocking. I think it's never come up before.
03:05:36 before. As I said, you know, we have never been funded uh we never applied for funding to work on the Steven Lawrence campaign. Something also that you've referred to already is that the work that you do
03:05:48 already is that the work that you do with the families is that whilst you advise them for example on strategy that they would take the lead in decision-
03:06:00 they would take the lead in decision- making. I just want to ask you about the next report which sort of touches on on that particular role. It is sir your tab B9. It is MPS treble 1212. So this is a
03:06:16 B9. It is MPS treble 1212. So this is a report from David Hagen about a meeting uh arranged by uh the Steven Lawrence family support campaign on the 20th of July 1998. But it's paragraph three in
03:06:32 July 1998. But it's paragraph three in which David Hagen has set this out. The meeting had been called largely as a result of pressure from the public activists to become more involved in the escalating campaign. However, Assad and Suresh preaged the meeting by stating
03:06:46 Suresh preaged the meeting by stating that although they would readily listen to everyone, all that could possibly emerge from the meeting would be a number of suggestions that would be presented to Neville and Dorene Lawrence. it would be the decision of the Lawrenes as to which courses of
03:06:58 the Lawrenes as to which courses of action would be pursued in furtherance of the campaign. And then this announcement left many of the audience wondering why they had bothered to attend the meeting. So again, in terms of the accuracy of what David Hagen is
03:07:10 of the accuracy of what David Hagen is reporting, would you accept that he has described the position that you were in? So listening to people's various
03:07:21 So listening to people's various suggestions uh sympathetically but ultimately um it was decisions on strategy were finally for Neville and Dorene Lawrence to make and we can see here well that left the audience a bit disappointed because um you were not
03:07:34 disappointed because um you were not saying well yes let's let's run with this particular idea you always needing to refer to them. I think most of the is a fair reflection. Yeah, the last sentence I disagree with which is most of the audience wondering why
03:07:47 is most of the audience wondering why they bother to attend. I think that's a minority of people who wanted to influence take a leading role in the Lawrence campaign. Majority of people understood that um the family campaign
03:08:05 understood that um the family campaign uh was going to be run and guided by the Lawrenes. It didn't stop other people within the public gallery making statements. For example, an initiative initiative by young people created the public gallery support group, right? Who issued statements to the press. There
03:08:17 issued statements to the press. There are some things that laws couldn't say, something the legal people couldn't say. They weren't saying anything outrageous, but they wanted to give to the press what the feeling of the public inquiry
03:08:30 what the feeling of the public inquiry was. the public at large was I was I you know for me that strategy of being inclusive of people taking ownership on this issue because they themselves have suffered it their voices too had to be heard but I what I didn't dis what I
03:08:43 heard but I what I didn't dis what I what I disagreed with was that if you are doing something in Steven Lawrence's name you can't do it without the
03:08:55 name you can't do it without the expressed consent of the Lawrence family that's that's what the disagreement is now this report goes into you can see it's quite quite a lengthy report and covers a number of topics and I just
03:09:07 covers a number of topics and I just want to ask you about some of the main significant ones. One relates to Alex Oad and I wonder if we could just turn to page two. It's the last two paragraphs on page two. So you can see
03:09:20 paragraphs on page two. So you can see at what's reported here. Having reached what he saw as the conclusion of the meeting, Assad began to administer the closing rights only to be stopped by Alex Aad MFJ who called for a vote saying that the meeting had not yet
03:09:32 saying that the meeting had not yet decided upon anything. At this point, Assad and Suresh remmonstrated with Alex for trying to override the wishes of the Lawrence family. However, the crowd
03:09:44 Lawrence family. However, the crowd quickly got behind OAD and in order to quieten things down, it was quickly agreed that a further meeting should take place on Monday the 3rd of August. So again, is that fair reporting of uh
03:10:02 So again, is that fair reporting of uh your your position in relation to uh the Lawrence family, but the references to it being overridden by Alex Aard MFJ? The tone of what's described here is the tension there. Is that a fair description? It's a meeting, a heated
03:10:15 description? It's a meeting, a heated meeting. Is that fair? What's described in that paragraph? The first paragraph. Yes, the one. Yes, the first one. Yeah, the top one. Look, um,
03:10:34 as I said, you know, these are meetings. This meeting in particular was not more than 20 20 people, maybe 30 people at the most. Um we're at the end of the inquiry really the end of the inquiry
03:10:47 inquiry really the end of the inquiry and what's being discussed is what we do as supporters to come together post the inquiry. So there's an issue about um a a social being held in South London where one of the football footballers was going to attend and
03:11:02 was going to attend and it was is actually trying to thank the supporters and you know I you know as far as I'm concerned you know Alex has a different view of how how we should move and he's entitled to his view um um and he felt always
03:11:18 his view um um and he felt always necessary to be at the center of that discussion and we were always trying to re take it back to the Lawrence family etc. So I think I I don't know whether
03:11:30 etc. So I think I I don't know whether it's a reflection that the large number of people
03:11:32 of people um were with behind Alex. I think this is a reorganized meeting after the first one just to discuss some elements you know.
03:11:43 know. Can can you see in sort of what is referred you can see the language used in the next paragraph about sort of drama but particularly in terms of an angry confrontation taking place. Is this just the
03:11:58 this just the is your evidence that this is just the rough and t tumble of a of a meeting, the angry confrontation? And whilst that's that's correct, this is not a a public order issue. No, not at all. It's a it's a disagreement between
03:12:13 disagreement between uh people who are who want to have a stake in
03:12:15 stake in um the Lawrence campaign. There's no publicist issue at all. um you know um when the left come together there's
03:12:26 when the left come together there's always a disagreement. Somebody will say the sky is blue and it's red and all that kind of stuff. That happens quite a lot in in a lot of meetings and and we are Assad and I are trying to be
03:12:39 and we are Assad and I are trying to be inclusive and say look you guys need to attend if you want to we have differences and people are trying to snatch tickets of the social from me. I thought it was bit childish. I didn't think it was a public order dispute and
03:13:01 think it was a public order dispute and I think I think as I said that it's it's not it's not I mean what in the context of the Lawrence inquiry and the spying this is a drama that is irrelevant to the central play that is taking place and it's amazing to me that the undercover officers can only this kind
03:13:15 undercover officers can only this kind of information report to his managers it has no bearing on strategy. It has no bearing on the disputes that are taking place. This is about distribution of tickets and what should happen. That's it. That's nothing.
03:13:26 it. That's nothing. This report doesn't end there. And if we if we turn to page three, it's the second paragraph on page three. We we've touched upon this topic before, but you can see here it is in the body of
03:13:40 can see here it is in the body of David Hagen's report. Both the NMP and the SMG realize that an expanding campaign can only build built with the [snorts] help of activists in other
03:13:54 [snorts] help of activists in other groups, but they cannot get the Lawrenes to realize this. Both groups are also intent on keeping themselves on side with the Lawrenes as they are both fighting with their councils for renewed funding and see the high profile of the Lawrence campaign as a major factor in
03:14:07 Lawrence campaign as a major factor in securing further funding. Suresh went on to explain that Dorene and Neville have in reality separated and that they only continued together as a front for the campaign. Dorine in fact wishes to wind
03:14:19 campaign. Dorine in fact wishes to wind the campaign up at this point and simply await the findings of the inquiry. Neville is more open to continuing but only until inquiry releases its findings. Now, you've already commented your evidence about the the funding
03:14:34 your evidence about the the funding point, but what about this reference to you explaining, and this is in the context of a meeting uh about the Lawren's uh separating? Is is that a is that a fair report of what you said? No, no, it's not a fair report. There was no need to expand the campaign at
03:14:48 was no need to expand the campaign at the end of the part one of the inquiry. We were still on to the second part which was coming much later. the idea of what happens to the campaign only the
03:15:00 what happens to the campaign only the discussions only take place at the end um of the second part of the campaign and just before the publication of the report and there's discussion within the Steven Lawrence campaign and what should
03:15:11 Steven Lawrence campaign and what should take place there's definitely discussion between man Mr. Mansfield, Imran and myself and Lawrenes on what should take place in the idea for a civil rights movement comes to um you know the
03:15:26 movement comes to um you know the Lawrenes haven't decided at that time as far as I understand to wind up the campaign
03:15:33 campaign um because we are still waiting for the second part of the inquiry and I know Mr. Lawrence wanted to take a active part in some of the proceedings that took place uh in in the second part of the staff. So I don't know where that
03:15:51 the staff. So I don't know where that he's getting at whether he's getting the dates mixed. Uh this is this is not the discussions taking place at the end of the first part of the inquiry but similar discussions take place prior to the publication of the report. Now, if we go just two, skip two paragraphs
03:16:03 we go just two, skip two paragraphs further down to some more reporting. This is very and sorry, I didn't say what he's alleging me to say that they separated.
03:16:15 alleging me to say that they separated. Just to be so clear on that when David Hagen in this report says Surish went on to explain that Dorian and Neville have in reality separated. That's it. That's that's incorrect. It's totally inaccurate. I I think there are other reports where [snorts]
03:16:26 [snorts] um which I've read which says that it is Dwayne Brooks and I think that is totally inaccurate as well. So I think I I don't know why it's being attributed to me that um I think it's totally inaccurate.
03:16:37 inaccurate. Something else that is reported that you said is in the paragraph beginning as can be seen. So in this paragraph this is what David Hagen says as can be seen. Suresh had fully calmed down by this
03:16:48 Suresh had fully calmed down by this stage and apologized to Alex for his actions. He then proceeded to give out tickets to everyone who was left, including the MFJ in privacy. He stated
03:17:02 including the MFJ in privacy. He stated that he was of the same politics as Alex and personally wanted a huge demonstration as soon as possible. He also said that there was someone very close to the Lawrence family who was an uncle Tom and as a police agent was
03:17:16 uncle Tom and as a police agent was actively advising the Lawrenes against any real action. Now there are a number of points that are packed into that uh
03:17:29 of points that are packed into that uh paragraph but but this reference in the middle to you stating that you're the same politics as Alex and you personally wanted a huge demonstration as soon as possible. Is that accurate? No.
03:17:44 No. In particular, the last sentence, he referring to you also said that there was someone very close to the Lawren's family who was an uncle Tom and as a police agent was actively advising the
03:17:59 police agent was actively advising the Lawren's against any real action. Do you know what is being referred to there at all?
03:18:02 all? You need to call David Hagen as a witness or ask him. I I can't answer that question. I mean, it's it's it's not how I speak. I know what Uncle Tom
03:18:19 not how I speak. I know what Uncle Tom means. Um, but I didn't have any suspect in the Lawrence campaign being an Uncle Tom or a police agent. Um, as I said, you know,
03:18:23 you know, there there is I mean what I was concerned about was um how the police would react to individual people within the Lawrence campaign, how they would treat Imran at the inquiry, how the Lawrenes would be
03:18:35 the inquiry, how the Lawrenes would be interviewed or cross-examining. That's the kind of thing I'm interested really working out and how they would see the South Monitoring group and how the campaign was. I'm not I I mean I wasn't
03:18:50 campaign was. I'm not I I mean I wasn't at all concerned about police intrusion into the camp and I didn't even think about it to be honest with you. I'm not uh I don't think about it now otherwise there'd be no there'd be absolutely no point in helping families
03:19:04 point in helping families um doing the campaigns that we are still doing and you just get immersed in the work and you you you don't think there are police agents etc. So for that language for me to I don't use that kind
03:19:22 language for me to I don't use that kind of language and I would in in the Steven Lawren Fountain campaign I can name all the individuals. There were disagreements about strategy but to call them police agent uh in front of somebody that I have no relationship
03:19:34 relationship uh in a public meeting is is just I don't know why he does it. I think it's it's a pity he's not giving evidence. That's one of the questions that he needs to be asked.
03:19:48 needs to be asked. Keep keeping with David Hagen's reporting, but just moving further forward in time. Um, if we could please turn up MPSO1314. So, it's your tab B13. So, this is a
03:20:02 So, it's your tab B13. So, this is a report that was typed up on the 18th of September 1998. And you can see uh Steven Lawrence inquiry stage two.
03:20:16 And in relation to uh this uh report, he says the movement for justice were disappointed with the turnout for its demonstration at the opening of stage two of the Steven Lawrence inquiry on Wednesday the 16th of September. Only
03:20:31 Wednesday the 16th of September. Only about 20 people attended. In addition to a low attendance from his own members, Suresh Grover had sown confusion by telling other parties such as privacy that he had organized meeting with the
03:20:43 that he had organized meeting with the judge the following week on the 24th of September. So this reference to you sewing confusion by telling others that
03:20:54 sewing confusion by telling others that you'd organized a meeting um there could you assist with what your understanding of that relating to what is that about please? Honestly, I don't know what it I don't remember. Um,
03:21:05 Um, Sur Grover has shown confused by any other such as that they had organized meeting with the judge the following week on 24th September 1998.
03:21:21 I don't think that is true. I don't remember organizing a meeting with Mr. William McFersonson in September 98. I don't see what the I mean we we've done
03:21:34 I mean we we've done so this is taking place at the second stage of the inquiry right yes
03:21:37 yes I don't have a meeting with sir William McFersonen um
03:21:40 um you know the south monitoring group uh is giving evidence in the second stage of the inquir at eing town hall Mr.
03:21:52 of the inquir at eing town hall Mr. Lawrence is present and we are we in our submissions include the Manson and the real family to give evidence but I don't have a meeting as I recall I wouldn't
03:22:04 have a meeting as I recall I wouldn't there would be no reason for me to have a meeting with so William McFersonen to what extent would you agree with we can see under source comments of the next paragraph this characterization of you by David
03:22:25 this characterization of you by David Hagen it appears that Grover has decided to distance himself from the MFJ in an attempt to keep in favor with Neville Lawrence. He was being urging the Lawrenes to organize a mass march and to form a civil rights movement, but to date Lawren's have refused to name the date o of the march. So this
03:22:39 date o of the march. So this characterization is you trying to keep in favor with Neville Lawrence, how would you characterize uh that description of you?
03:22:52 description of you? It's utterly wrong. Um, I, as I said, I was the campaign coordinator for the Lawrence family. I don't need to get favors from Mr. Neville Lawrence. I agreed with his proposition on how things should move. Um,
03:23:09 things should move. Um, I I don't need to distance myself from the movement for justice. There isn't I mean, I'm cordial to them. I listen to them but I don't see a strategy from them. So there's nothing
03:23:23 strategy from them. So there's nothing apart from a demonstration that needs to take place and our response is very simple. If you want to do it under the student's name, the family have to have consent. You won't have an anti-racist demonstration in MFJ, please go ahead
03:23:34 demonstration in MFJ, please go ahead and do it. I have no issue with that. So I'm not stopping them doing things, but I'm asking them to respect the Lawrence family if they're using Steven's name.
03:23:50 family if they're using Steven's name. Before we break for lunch, I want to ask you just about one entry in in another report. It is MPS treb1370 which is so your tab B14. This is moving on in 1998. So this is October 1998. The title we can see
03:24:01 October 1998. The title we can see movement for justice Lawrence inquiry. Well, what I want to ask you about is on the second page, the third paragraph there, [clears throat] it says
03:24:17 there, [clears throat] it says Mrs. Reels had asked the MFJ to attend the Southern Monitoring Group AGM on Monday the 5th of October to speak to Suresh Grover about the need for the march. Grover himself appears to have
03:24:31 march. Grover himself appears to have lost some of his interest in the real case in favor of concentrating his efforts on the Menson case. I in terms
03:24:46 efforts on the Menson case. I in terms of this description uh there the tone of it, the accuracy of it and how that affects you when reading that. Could you help us with your reaction to seeing that in a undercover officer report?
03:24:57 report? I I don't know whether Mrs. real asked the movement to attend a AGM. Um, but to insinuinate that I lost interest in real case in favor of concentrating on man's it's
03:25:09 it's contentious. I I mean I I've spent with Real family from 14th of October 97 and still I'm still working with them.
03:25:22 still I'm still working with them. They're in the gallery. So I just find I I really think that he's justifying these splits and my motives to justify his quality of
03:25:33 his quality of um gathering of [clears throat] intelligence to his managers. And I I just uh I'm just horrified that he
03:25:48 just uh I'm just horrified that he suggests that if I I you know I I I don't know whether he's doing it deliberately uh to tell his managers that he's needed and he's looking at the differences taking place. The second thing is what is the motive of saying all this unless he's saying that the
03:26:03 all this unless he's saying that the intelligence officers of the med should take advantage of the splits allegedly splits or the lack of concentration in my support for the real family. You can't have it both
03:26:16 the real family. You can't have it both ways. On one hand you say I'm trying to get the reals to give my credibility with the Asian community and then I lose it and go to the menson family. What am I doing? Creating credibility in the AfroCaribbean community, the African community, but it's just full of lies.
03:26:30 community, but it's just full of lies. So, I don't know if that is a convenient moment to break. Certainly, uh, we will resume at two.