The witness, HN104 (Carlo Neri/Carlo Soracchi), is questioned regarding his role in briefing Metropolitan Police legal teams and his intelligence reporting on political activists and justice campaigns, specifically the Jean Charles de Menezes case.
00:20:21 Good afternoon everybody. Those in the back will know what I'm about to say. Uh the
00:20:28 the proceedings today are continuing to be live transmitted but only after a 10-minute delay. Those with mobile telephones may use them to report what they hear in the hearing room, but only
00:20:39 they hear in the hearing room, but only after 10 minutes of elapse since the event that they're reporting. They may not be used for recording or photography. Mr. Bar. Thank you, sir. Mr. Saraki, other than
00:20:52 Thank you, sir. Mr. Saraki, other than Lindsay,
00:20:54 Lindsay, Donna Mlan, and your current partner, did you have sex with anybody else in your undercover identity?
00:21:04 identity? No, sir.
00:21:07 No, sir. Can we move now to a meeting that we understand that you had with a barristister instructed to defend the
00:21:19 barristister instructed to defend the Metropolitan Police Service in litigation brought by Lois Austin and another against the commissioner uh in 2005.
00:21:30 uh in 2005. I'm going to show you a series of documents and then I'll ask questions uh about what happened. Could we start off
00:21:41 about what happened. Could we start off please from tab B54 with 726
00:21:46 with 726 931.
00:21:56 If we can just see what that is. That's the handwritten uh note dated the 12th of August 2013 produced by one of the officers from
00:22:07 produced by one of the officers from Operation Hearn sir who interviewed you. If we go to page five of that
00:22:19 to the second section down under the heading legally privileged material
00:22:27 reads kettling Oxford Circus Lois Austin Carlo was asked to brief the barrista from the MPS on the character
00:22:41 from the MPS on the character of Lois.
00:22:42 of Lois. Mhm.
00:22:43 Mhm. Brief description given of Lois and what would wind her up because of the
00:22:55 because of the sort of person she was or the type of person she was. Mhm.
00:22:59 Mhm. And if we take that down now, please. And if we could have from tab B108 738088
00:23:17 one page forward to see what is these are the notes of the other officer about the same meeting. If we could go to page 35 please
00:23:30 and towards the bottom there's a section access to legally privileged material kettled at Oxford circus Mayday Lois
00:23:41 kettled at Oxford circus Mayday Lois Austin sued MPS going to civil court whilst I was still out back office asked to meet and brief
00:23:52 out back office asked to meet and brief QC's number two in relation to her character. I knew she was a South London girl who could get easily wound up.
00:24:03 girl who could get easily wound up. Anything about Lois we should know. And then if we could take that down please and have 749817
00:24:14 please and have 749817 up.
00:24:23 This is an attendance note made by someone from the Directorate of Legal Services within the Metropolitan Police Service. What's particularly significant
00:24:35 Service. What's particularly significant about this is the date and the time. 17th of January 2005, 5:50 p.m. And there are initials of two people. One of the second of which
00:24:46 people. One of the second of which you'll see is clearly JB and the first one, it's not entirely clear, but something C was told to attend a certain location between 4:30 to 6:30 to meet SB
00:24:58 location between 4:30 to 6:30 to meet SB informant. told Privacy that he'd be done at 5:30. He has been waiting since 5:15. Now 5:50. No one has shown up.
00:25:09 5:15. Now 5:50. No one has shown up. Gave him Privacy's mobile number. Take that down. 749866.
00:25:26 This is um an email. It's from a barristister, John Begs. Email address gives his chambers email
00:25:38 Email address gives his chambers email address to someone we're calling lawyer one 17th of January at 10:30 p.m. Good meeting. some useful general
00:25:52 p.m. Good meeting. some useful general info about nature of beast, but nothing specific on anyone but Lois Nile and just about
00:26:04 just about privacy.
00:26:07 privacy. If we take that down now, is it right that you had a meeting with a barristister? Yes.
00:26:18 Yes. who asked you to meet. Uh that that would have I think come from my inspectors because I recall checking it with them. Um
00:26:30 checking it with them. Um I was asked to attend um to discuss um that matter asked by your managers. By my managers. Yes, sir. And what did they ask you to do?
00:26:44 And what did they ask you to do? um to go and have a chat with the Met legal team as I understood it
00:26:51 it and presumably they would have briefed you about the context. I think they did. Yes, I I think it was to do with the Oxford Street um kettling as it's called.
00:27:02 as it's called. Did they say anything to you about what it was that the commissioner's legal team wanted from you? No, not as such. I think I got the impression they wanted some sort of
00:27:14 impression they wanted some sort of background from me.
00:27:18 Are you able to tell us who had got in touch with who? By which I mean, do you know from what you were told whether the
00:27:29 know from what you were told whether the SDS had offered its services to the commissioner's legal team or whether the legal team had come to the SDS seeking assistance? I'm afraid I I don't know that, sir.
00:27:42 I'm afraid I I don't know that, sir. How long before the meeting was it when you were asked to attend?
00:27:50 Can't remember exactly. Um might have been a week, a few days. I I don't think there was a a big gap between being asked and to attend it. I
00:28:02 between being asked and to attend it. I think I might have been asked one week and the meeting was set for the following. Were you asked about events on Mayday
00:28:13 Were you asked about events on Mayday by DCIDell before you attended the meeting? Not that I can remember. No. Were you asked about Lois Austin by DCidell before the meeting?
00:28:28 I would say I would say yes because I think I was aware that when I was going to that meeting it was to discuss the Oxford Street kettling and obviously I had been
00:28:40 Street kettling and obviously I had been in the vicinity of Lois and other Socialist Party activists.
00:28:46 Had you been reporting back to your managers on the progress of the litigation? No. Came as a surprise to me to be asked to attend.
00:29:00 You said that you your impression was you were going because you'd been in the kettle because of the kettling. You'd been in the kettle. You'd been close to Lois. Was that ex was that spelt out to
00:29:11 Lois. Was that ex was that spelt out to you?
00:29:11 you? Um no. Um and again, please forgive me, but from what I can recall, um there was some kind of action against the MPS. Um
00:29:23 some kind of action against the MPS. Um I had been asked to attend um to assist with background um because I was there. I was inside that kettle basically. Um and my understanding was that it was to
00:29:35 and my understanding was that it was to do with socialist party members that had also been there of which Lois Austin was one of them. Socialist party members who who had been inside the kettle.
00:29:50 Our understanding is that the barristister you met was a man called John Begs who was at the time the most senior council in the commissioner's
00:30:01 senior council in the commissioner's team.
00:30:03 team. Yeah, I I thought it was a number two, but
00:30:07 but Mr. Begs had the benefit of a leader in the court of appeal, but not in the trial at first instance. Sorry. Yeah. Do you recall the name?
00:30:18 Do you recall the name? No, sir. Do you have any reason to doubt Do you have any reason to doubt that it was Mr. Begs? None at all. None at all. Where did you meet Mr. Begs?
00:30:29 Where did you meet Mr. Begs? It was in the vicinity of Chancery Lane. Um there were some offices there. Um my supervisors, uh I can't remember how many, but my two
00:30:42 uh I can't remember how many, but my two at least two of my supervisors were there. I think um I think Mr. Dell was present.
00:30:49 present. He might not have been present for the meeting but he facilitated uh being very careful about anonymity who if DCell was there who else from the
00:31:00 who if DCell was there who else from the SDS was there? It it would have been one of the sergeants sir but I cannot remember exactly who that would have been. Was HN53 there?
00:31:14 I don't recall HM53 being there.
00:31:19 Which are you able to tell us which of your sergeants or not? Uh, no sir, I'm afraid not. And I could have got that wrong. Um, but it was definitely more than one and I recall uh
00:31:31 definitely more than one and I recall uh the DCI being there. In addition to you, your managers and Mr. Begs, was there anybody else there?
00:31:44 Don't think so. Um, I'm afraid to say it just was not that important a meeting for me. Um, I think I viewed it as a bit of an inconvenience
00:31:55 I viewed it as a bit of an inconvenience if I'm honest. Can you help us with whether or not Detective Superintendent Alan Mitchell was at the meeting? Oh, I can't call, sir.
00:32:16 What is your recollection of how long the meeting lasted for?
00:32:25 For me, it didn't did not last that long. I don't think um I don't think I was in the actual offices or meeting for over an hour. I think it was
00:32:36 over an hour. I think it was considerably less um because I I had made it clear to uh my supervising officers that there was not very much information I could provide.
00:32:49 Did anyone take notes of the meeting? Possibly. Um I'd have thought they would have done. Um do you have any recollection? Possibly the barrista may have made some
00:33:01 Possibly the barrista may have made some scribbled notes, but um I don't I don't think any of the police officers did. Were you asked how good your access to Lois Austin was or anything to that
00:33:13 Lois Austin was or anything to that effect?
00:33:14 effect? I I think I would have been asked how I knew her.
00:33:18 knew her. Um and I would have explained that um Lois Austin was part of another branch of the Socialist Party. I knew who she was because she was well known around
00:33:29 was because she was well known around the party. I think at that point I'd probably attended the odd social function uh where she was present. Um, and I would have recounted
00:33:40 present. Um, and I would have recounted this back to them. Were you asked how good your access to the Socialist Party was? I don't recall that, but again, I I would accept that they might have asked
00:33:51 would accept that they might have asked me that, but um I don't recall that. It to me that conversation was um specifically around the kettling. They wanted to know what had happened to me
00:34:02 wanted to know what had happened to me inside of that and what I had seen. Were you asked about Lois Austin as a person?
00:34:09 person? Uh, yes. Yes. What were you asked about Lois Austin's character? I think I was asked to give a description of what I felt her character was and what sort of person she was. Um,
00:34:22 was and what sort of person she was. Um, I recall saying that she was very committed to the socialist cause um, and was a feisty person. Um, I think I may have made a joke that I was a little bit
00:34:35 have made a joke that I was a little bit nervous. um if I was ever around her. Um words to that effect. Did you say anything about her being from South London?
00:34:46 from South London? I I think I might have cuz I think that's what I believed at the time.
00:34:53 The records I showed you earlier, you told Hearn that she was easily wound up. Yeah. Again, I I don't recall using words like that. I recall that I
00:35:05 words like that. I recall that I definitely said that this was someone who struck me as being quite feisty. Um I may have even used the term fullon and that I was nervous um around this
00:35:16 that I was nervous um around this person.
00:35:17 person. Uh what was it that caused you to say she was easily wound up to the hear officers?
00:35:22 officers? I don't recall saying that. Again, this so-called interview that the hear officers have used um I I was never formally interviewed by them. that that was a very pleasant chat as far as I was
00:35:35 was a very pleasant chat as far as I was concerned sitting in a comfy chairs with them scribbling things down. Um I I don't recall saying easily wound up. If I did um by that I meant feisty
00:35:48 I did um by that I meant feisty um and a strong character. Were you asked how she might react to questions
00:35:55 questions by the barister? Yes.
00:35:56 Yes. Um
00:35:59 Um possibly. I think that could have formed part of the conversation, but I wasn't able to give him any information. Um I I did make it quite clear a number of times at that that meeting that I I
00:36:11 times at that that meeting that I I really didn't know Lois. Um I had only had that real experience and even then, you know, I hadn't spent loads of time with them in the kettle. Um I think as I
00:36:22 with them in the kettle. Um I think as I said earlier, I I was rather tired and I just just wanted to get out of there. Were you asked uh whether she was violent or not? I don't think so because I never had
00:36:33 I don't think so because I never had heard or seen anything that would have um
00:36:36 um Sorry,
00:36:37 Sorry, that's slightly different. I'm asking you whether you were asked, not whether or not she was violent, but whether you were asked about that. No, I don't think so. Were you asked whether or not she
00:36:48 Were you asked whether or not she committed criminal offenses? I don't remember, sir. Were you asked whether she had any connections to Irish Republicanism?
00:37:00 connections to Irish Republicanism? No.
00:37:01 No. No. That
00:37:02 No. That Were you asked whether her partner Nile M Holland had any connections to Irish Republicanism? No.
00:37:11 No. You've been a little firmer in those answers, a little bit more certain in those answers than your earlier answers. Does that properly reflect your level of confidence about that? Yeah, I I think so, sir. because um as
00:37:23 Yeah, I I think so, sir. because um as when we've talked about Irish Republicanism on other subjects um that that that sort of thing does stick in my mind um and I certainly I don't recall anything like that. I I think I would
00:37:35 anything like that. I I think I would have remembered. I hope I would have. Were you asked whether she had a child? No.
00:37:44 No. Were you asked anything about whether there was a child that she needed to collect?
00:37:50 collect? I don't believe so. The questions that were directed to me were what is she like? Um and I was like look I do not really know this person. This is what I have seen on the limited
00:38:02 is what I have seen on the limited occasions um I've had contact. Were you asked whether she was distressed by the confinement?
00:38:12 No sir. I don't think so. Were you asked about how she reacted to the confinement? No. As I say, it generally seemed to revolve around
00:38:23 revolve around what's this person like as far as your from what you have your experiences of them.
00:38:30 Did Mr. Begs explore with you whether Lois Austin was reing in the occasion? No, I don't recall that. No, sir.
00:38:41 No, I don't recall that. No, sir. From your recollection, did Lois Austin revel in the occasion? No. Um, no. Were you asked what she did on the day?
00:38:55 I don't think so. Um, had I been asked that, I think I would have said, well, I don't really know. We were in a large group of people and occasionally words would be passed amongst us, but had that
00:39:07 would be passed amongst us, but had that been asked, I think I would have said no.
00:39:13 Were you asked about the behavior of others inside the cordon? No.
00:39:20 No. Were you asked whether there was any violence or disorderly conduct within the cordon? No.
00:39:31 Were you asked about the behavior of others outside the cordon? I I think and and I can't remember if it was at this meeting or if it was just uh
00:39:43 was at this meeting or if it was just uh briefings that I was given that I I had said that there had been pushing and shoving. Um but then we'd been cordoned and at the end we were funded out. Um I
00:39:56 and at the end we were funded out. Um I I can't say for sure that I said this to the barrista. Um, my recollection is that this was purely what do you know? Um, and I, as I said,
00:40:09 what do you know? Um, and I, as I said, very little. Were you asked about the Socialist Party?
00:40:14 Party? No.
00:40:15 No. Were you asked about Lois Austin's role in the Socialist Party? No, I don't think so. Were you asked anything about how the claimants for the claim had been chosen?
00:40:27 claimants for the claim had been chosen? No. Were you asked which of the claimants or witnesses were socialist party members? No.
00:40:36 No. You sure about that? I'm pretty certain. Uh I think again if I had been asked about Lois, I think as I said the response I gave were this is a committed member of the Socialist
00:40:47 a committed member of the Socialist Party. Um but it really just wasn't that long a meeting. There was not a lot I could offer them. Did Mr. Begs explore with you whether
00:41:00 Did Mr. Begs explore with you whether anyone involved on the claimant side of the litigation was hiding Socialist Party membership? No.
00:41:09 No. No, I don't recall that at all. Were you asked whether you had access to a Socialist Party membership list? No.
00:41:17 No. Were you asked whether you could get access to Socialist Party membership list?
00:41:22 list? No. and I don't think I would have had access to that kind of thing. Were you asked anything about the Socialist Party's attitude to the litigation? Uh, no. As I say, the conversation was
00:41:34 Uh, no. As I say, the conversation was purely
00:41:36 purely um what what can you tell us about Lois Austin? And we chatted through and I explained I knew very little, but this had been my impressions on the occasions that I'd been in her social circle.
00:41:51 that I'd been in her social circle. Were
00:41:55 you asked anything about the inner workings of the Socialist Party? No, sir.
00:42:03 We saw from the extracts I took you to a moment ago that the the officer had written down anything else about Lois we should know. Were you asked whether there was anything else about
00:42:15 whether there was anything else about Lois that the barristister should know? I may have been, sir, but I don't recall that.
00:42:22 that. Can you
00:42:24 Can you recall whether there was anything else that you were asked about Ms. Austin? No. I mean, the the overriding thing for me was trying to get it across to them that I had very little dealings with
00:42:37 that I had very little dealings with Lois Austin and that what I had seen, as I say, that was all the information I could give them. What was Mr. Begs his reaction to what he told you?
00:42:48 he told you? Um,
00:42:51 Um, I I don't know really. He sort of thanked me and I was led out and got rid of.
00:42:56 of. What was your understanding of the value of the information that you had imparted to Mr. Begs? Um,
00:43:04 Um, I didn't really have an idea. I was a bit confused as to why I was there, sir. Um, but I had been asked to attend by my supervisors. Um, I had explained to them that I knew very little. Um,
00:43:20 obviously I was aware that there was a a civil claim ongoing. Um, and they asked me to go and speak to a barristister cuz I might have some knowledge of the plaintiff, but I knew nothing. You know,
00:43:33 plaintiff, but I knew nothing. You know, as I say, I wasn't even aware, I think, that that that was going on. What was your manager's reaction after the meeting
00:43:42 meeting to
00:43:42 to to me?
00:43:43 to me? Yes.
00:43:43 Yes. Um,
00:43:44 Um, they just saw me out. I didn't I didn't even hang about. I was literally shown out of the building. You okay? Thanks so much. And that was it. Did they speak to you about it afterwards?
00:43:55 afterwards? No. Um, by that do you mean follow in the subsequent at any other time? No, sir.
00:44:03 No, sir. I think I think if I'm honest I think they were a bit disappointed but you know you'd have to ask them that.
00:44:09 that. Disappointed in the sense that they thought you might be able to say more. I couldn't I couldn't tell them anything. There was nothing I had to say.
00:44:19 Could we have up from tab B43 MPS 526 804 please?
00:44:33 This is uh again a large composite document with lots of documents relating to RIPER authorizations.
00:44:45 authorizations. Can we go to page 54 please?
00:44:52 This is a review um dating from the 1st of March 200 and five. If we go to page 63, we'll see
00:45:05 and five. If we go to page 63, we'll see it's signed by HN53.
00:45:12 And with the date bottom right, if we could go to page 56, please.
00:45:22 The fifth bullet point down, this is a summary of the intelligence that you had gathered. Fifth bullet point reads, "UCO craggy
00:45:33 Fifth bullet point reads, "UCO craggy island has been in a position to provide background briefing to both Metropolitan Police Legal Advisors and SO2 senior management in the current
00:45:47 and SO2 senior management in the current Mayday 2001 civil case where individual activists with support from the SP organization are suing the police. You've told us about the briefing to the
00:46:01 You've told us about the briefing to the legal advisor. Yes, sir. SO2
00:46:06 SO2 senior management. In view of who you've told us was at the meeting with Mr. Begs, can I take it that the briefing to SO2 senior management was a separate
00:46:20 SO2 senior management was a separate undertaking? I I don't recall speaking to any SO2 senior management. As I say, um my DCI would have been the only person that I no recollection of being
00:46:33 person that I no recollection of being taken out to meet any other senior management from SO2. Um if I'm being um well, to be honest, um I think that was flowering up u my my deployment. So I
00:46:48 flowering up u my my deployment. So I don't know why. Do you know whether or not your managers put in any report further up the chain to explain what you were able uh to
00:47:00 to explain what you were able uh to contribute? I'm afraid I don't know. Did you provide any form of written briefing either for Mr. Begs or for SO12
00:47:13 briefing either for Mr. Begs or for SO12 senior managers or anyone else for the purposes of the litigation? No, sir. Are you sure about that? As sure as I can be. Yes. I don't believe I wrote anything down at all.
00:47:24 believe I wrote anything down at all. Do you know whether anyone else from the SDS provided any such written briefing? No. Um, as far as I was aware and am
00:47:35 No. Um, as far as I was aware and am aware now, I was the only uh member of the the then team that had been asked to go up to uh Chancery Lane to speak. Um,
00:47:46 go up to uh Chancery Lane to speak. Um, I wasn't aware that there was anybody else who was aware of it in relation to the Socialist Party. I don't know about the other groups. If we could take that document down now, please. Could we have from tab
00:47:58 please. Could we have from tab C29643049?
00:48:14 This is
00:48:17 sorry MPS04349.
00:48:32 Thank you. This is um an undated uh report
00:48:38 uh report but if we look
00:48:47 Not sure that this is the right document. Could you go over the page
00:48:57 and again?
00:49:06 Thank you. Yes. The bottom of page three.
00:49:12 Socialist Party Civil Action against Metropolitan Police. Give you a moment to read that. Thank you.
00:49:40 It's undated, but we can tell it's after the judgment in the case had uh been delivered uh at first instance. Why did you report this?
00:49:54 I could have been asked, but I don't recall ever being asked. Sir, were you at the trial? No. No, sir. Were you speaking to those who had been?
00:50:05 who had been? Um I I think this if it came from anywhere would have come from conversations in in the pub um or a social event um because obviously it would have been a topic of interest for
00:50:16 would have been a topic of interest for for people but um that's all I can I can think really. Did you give any consideration as to whether an undercover police officer should be reporting on ongoing
00:50:27 should be reporting on ongoing litigation against the Metropolitan Police Service? Uh, no I did not. Uh, what was the reaction of your managers when you reported this
00:50:38 managers when you reported this information? Um, again, I I think this probably would have been written up um as a result of just sitting down and having conversations um with debriefing
00:50:49 conversations um with debriefing conversations. Um, I I don't think there was a lot of interest. I think it would have been just scribbled down. Um, there were lots of different things that I would report on and they would just
00:51:00 would report on and they would just write it down and create reports from them.
00:51:03 them. No particular excitement, but not told not to do it. Uh, definitely not told not to do it, I don't think. But as I say, um, this would have been me saying this is what I
00:51:14 would have been me saying this is what I heard. In the bottom paragraph, the party party party hierarchy has instructed their legal representatives to prepare an appeal as they believe that there is a is still a slim chance
00:51:27 that there is a is still a slim chance of victory under the human rights act. However, nobody is holding their breath. Who is the reference to they in that
00:51:38 Who is the reference to they in that paragraph?
00:51:42 I I don't know, sir. Um, again, that that would have been talking about, I would imagine, senior leadership of the Socialist Party, but I I couldn't tell you.
00:51:52 you. Reading it, it appears that it's either a reference to the party hierarchy. Yeah.
00:51:59 Yeah. To the legal representatives, or both? Can you recall which? I'm afraid I can't. No.
00:52:09 Were you ever asked to brief lawyers in any other litigation with knowledge gained from your undercover deployment? No, sir.
00:52:20 No, sir. Were you ever specifically asked to report on any other civil or criminal case?
00:52:26 case? No, sir.
00:52:28 No, sir. Can you give me a yes no answer to this question? To your knowledge, were any of your fellow UCOs ever instructed to do so?
00:52:39 ever instructed to do so? No.
00:52:40 No. Or to meet with and brief lawyers? No.
00:52:45 No. Could we take that down now, please? Can we go to C295
00:52:55 MPS41227?
00:53:06 This is um a report uh about a day of action
00:53:12 action at Dagenham uh on the 12th of March and in particular it's about preparations uh for the counter demonstration.
00:53:27 uh for the counter demonstration. give you a moment to look at it, but I I'm going to want to know whether you were there.
00:53:36 I can't remember if I was there, sir. I I
00:53:40 I entirely entirely possible, yes, that I would have been. It looks the sort of thing that I would have attended. Are you able to help us with what happened?
00:53:49 happened? Um, nothing sticks in my mind. Um, I think
00:53:55 think by Dagenham, are we
00:53:59 was sort of referring to I know it says Dagenham but barking sort of pops up. I think there was just there were uh demonstrations. Um
00:54:12 Um it's very sketchy, sir. I don't think anything uh monumental took place. Any physical confrontation? Not that I'm aware of. No.
00:54:23 Not that I'm aware of. No. Could we take that down, please? Can we have up from C298 MPS62472?
00:54:37 There is in this document reference to Antifa activists attacking a small group of National Front activists
00:54:49 activists near London Bridge station. And what I'd like to know uh is whether you
00:55:00 whether you know anything about that. Were you an eyewitness or did you hear about it secondhand? I I was not sir. Um I would have heard about this secondhand. Can you help us with what you did hear
00:55:11 Can you help us with what you did hear about it?
00:55:12 about it? Um
00:55:14 Um we're we're talking about the bits at the bottom here, aren't we? Um it's a penultimate paragraph. Yeah. Thank you. Um I think exactly just that that
00:55:26 that that some sort of attack uh near London Bridge station was spoken about. Um I don't I was not there. Um I think that would have been most of most of it. I
00:55:37 would have been most of most of it. I think at that stage yeah it's not one I was I was in attendance at. Were you given any indication about the severity of the attack? I not that I recall. Um, again, this
00:55:50 I not that I recall. Um, again, this would have been put in by me just in case reports had been made to police um to assist with any kind of investigation. Um, but it, you know, I I was not there.
00:56:02 Um, but it, you know, I I was not there. I don't remember being there. Can we take that down now, please? Can we go to C299 MPS62703?
00:56:18 This is a report dated the 25th of July 2005.
00:56:27 I'm interested in the bottom paragraph of text, please. Mhm.
00:56:38 Give you a moment to read that.
00:56:56 So this is about the shooting of John Charles Dezes, isn't it? Yes, sir.
00:57:03 Yes, sir. What was the significance of the shooting
00:57:07 shooting of John Charles dezzes to the Metropolitan Police Service? Um, I think the reason that this would have been put in um again
00:57:20 have been put in um again doesn't get much higher profile or more tragic uh than that. And I I think there would have been a desire for any intelligence that we could pick up whilst out and deployed um to be fed in
00:57:34 whilst out and deployed um to be fed in to the the policing sort of plan as it were. Um I think at that time I can't remember the exact date but looking at that I think it was quite quite close to the actual dreadful event
00:57:48 quite close to the actual dreadful event and um
00:57:51 and um senior management would probably have put down a request for this type of thing because any information about what might or might not happen was obviously going to be of use. You've referred to the policing plan.
00:58:04 You've referred to the policing plan. Can you explain what that was? Um I I don't know as I say we would have been asked have you heard anything are people talking about um this this tragedy um
00:58:15 talking about um this this tragedy um and we would have gone out and anything we heard we fed back in. Asked by whom? I think it would have come from our back office because but again you know it was
00:58:26 office because but again you know it was dreadful. Um I think you know anything we heard we would have fed back then. I think my colleagues would have done the same really. And for what purpose did you understand
00:58:38 And for what purpose did you understand you were being asked to report anything that you heard? I mean again uh general intelligence. Um you you never know what's going to happen in future. Um so just being fed
00:58:52 happen in future. Um so just being fed in.
00:58:53 in. Was there a feeling that this uh tragedy was going to be very bad news for the Met's reputation?
00:59:03 I would say yes, of course it it was. And that uh the family's campaign to find out precisely what happened was
00:59:16 find out precisely what happened was likely to become a running saw for the Metropolitan Police Service. Um
00:59:24 Um I didn't get that impression. Um, we were being asked what what are you hearing, you know, um, out out there. Um, and as I say, on on
00:59:35 out out there. Um, and as I say, on on the back of that, if I did hear anything, I would just feed it in. Um, and they would then decide if it was noteworthy or not and worthy of a report.
00:59:45 report. Was there a view about the family's campaign?
00:59:51 campaign? No. Not as far as I know. No. Was there a feeling that the left was going to use this issue as a stick with
01:00:02 going to use this issue as a stick with which to beat the police? No, not not not that I ever heard from my supervisors. Um, as I say, I I think
01:00:13 my supervisors. Um, as I say, I I think other colleagues in other areas would have also submitted reporting like this. I I don't know. The the SP has printed leaflets relating to the police
01:00:25 leaflets relating to the police overreaction and is to run the story as its main banner in its weekly paper. What was your understanding of why the Socialist Party was doing that?
01:00:37 Party was doing that? Well, this was a a dreadful tragedy and mistake. Um and it was very very newsworthy. Um,
01:00:47 more than that, um, I don't think it was just the Socialist Party there. Obviously, it was all over the the news at the time. Activists from the Lambbeath branch have
01:00:58 Activists from the Lambbeath branch have been tasked with making contact with family members of the deceased and offering the party's assistance. What was the purpose in reporting
01:01:12 What was the purpose in reporting specifics on which branch had been tasked with contacting Jean Charles's family? Um, that would have been what I heard. Um, and that's what I would have uh
01:01:24 Um, and that's what I would have uh provided at my debriefing.
01:01:30 What was the reaction of your managers to this intelligence? I don't think there really was one. I as I say um I certainly wasn't pulled in to
01:01:41 I say um I certainly wasn't pulled in to discuss it as well. I wasn't I don't remember being pulled in to discuss it. Um I just submitted my intelligence and it got typed up.
01:01:52 it got typed up. Do you know what was done with this intelligence? No, sir.
01:02:02 We had a report earlier in your evidence about the Harry Stanley campaign. Yes, sir.
01:02:08 Yes, sir. Was your manager's reaction to your reporting on that campaign different to their reaction to your reporting on this campaign or
01:02:21 to your reporting on this campaign or not?
01:02:22 not? Not that I can recall. No. Was there any difference in what your managers wanted you to report in relation to the
01:02:34 wanted you to report in relation to the Harry Stanley campaign compared to what they wanted in relation to the Jean Charles de Manzes campaign? No sir. um to to expand um just
01:02:48 No sir. um to to expand um just referring back to Harry Stanley um it it was made clear that we'd had no interest as a unit um and that yes anecdotal reporting was accepted and
01:03:01 yes anecdotal reporting was accepted and so if I related something it might go into an intelligence report but it was a sort of
01:03:10 sort of a virtual shrug of the shoulders and okay we'll make a note But thanks very much. Um, so there did not seem to be a great deal of interest from my management.
01:03:21 management. And if we compare that with Jean Charles de Mennez, likewise, sir. Um, I think I I continue to um provide information. But as to
01:03:32 to um provide information. But as to what got um typed up into an intelligence report or not, I I don't know. In relation to justice campaigns, were you ever given any guidance as to
01:03:44 were you ever given any guidance as to what
01:03:45 what you should or should not be reporting? No.
01:03:50 No. Or what was or was not of interest? Um the the general view um was do not get involved. If you hear something and
01:04:01 get involved. If you hear something and you relate it back to us in a debrief, we will then decide. But do not get involved was generally the view. Were you told not to get involved in the
01:04:14 Were you told not to get involved in the dezzes campaign? It it it just didn't fall within other than things like this. It just did not fall within my world. Um it it I never went to any um meetings or anything like
01:04:26 went to any um meetings or anything like that to do with it. Can we take that report down now please? Can we have from tab C301 MPS62785
01:04:41 page five please?
01:04:47 This is further undated intelligence. We have the second paragraph and the comment up please.
01:05:02 Socialist Party Demenses shooting campaign. I'll let you read that. Thank you.
01:05:37 So this is further reporting in a little bit more detail about the justice campaign and about the socialist socialist parties involvement in it.
01:05:51 socialist parties involvement in it. Why was this reported? Again, this will have been conversations um that I was party to at the time. Um again, just reading through it, uh I
01:06:02 again, just reading through it, uh I don't think that this was official party meetings that this was things we were discussing at socials. Um obviously, it was incredibly uh pertinent at the time.
01:06:15 was incredibly uh pertinent at the time. Everyone was talking about what had happened. Um only reason I can think for it's I would have just uh reported that back had a
01:06:26 have just uh reported that back had a chat usual process. You can imagine what sort exclamation mark. Can you spare us using our imaginations and tell us what is meant
01:06:39 imaginations and tell us what is meant by that?
01:06:41 by that? Not really. Um, I think I might have said sue the police and they've written that down like that, but other than that, no.
01:06:54 So, back to bad news for the police. Yes. Abs. Absolutely. I mean, it wasn't a happy story. Um, so no, absolutely bad news for the police. And then the comment section
01:07:08 about the whole issue raising awkward questions for the Socialist Party and the campaign um the role of the campaign in that. Can
01:07:20 um the role of the campaign in that. Can you expand on what you were learning from your position within the Socialist Party
01:07:28 Party that led you to comment in those terms? Um well I think the initial comments regarding the connections uh I obviously did have some connection to the CWI the
01:07:41 did have some connection to the CWI the committee for the workers international uh because of the Italian stuff. Um so I would regularly uh speak with um called them full-timers from that part of the
01:07:53 them full-timers from that part of the of the socialist party. So that's where I would have picked that up. I I think there was a lot of talk at the time um because I remember this not just at meetings but when you'd be out um there
01:08:05 meetings but when you'd be out um there was a genuine fear because uh a completely innocent man had been shot to death by police in a huge mistaken identity. So there was a lot of fear
01:08:18 identity. So there was a lot of fear about well hang on a minute what what happens if you are from the Muslim community etc. Um, I think that's the context of what I was trying to get across.
01:08:28 across. If
01:08:29 If we take that down, if if we can not take the document down, if we can go to a different document in the same file, page four, please. Completely different report at the top.
01:08:41 Completely different report at the top. Uh, it uh contains information about Mario. If we could look at the first paragraph, I'll let you read that.
01:09:07 Mhm. We've heard quite a lot about Mario and his behavior. This section of the report concludes he feels that most of the membership of
01:09:18 feels that most of the membership of Antifa does not share his militant physical approach to anti-fascist work. Was he right about that?
01:09:30 Was he right about that? I think this would have been us chatting over beers in the pub. So yes, um if if that was his opinion that he stated, um I don't dispute that at that time.
01:09:43 I don't dispute that at that time. Just to be clear, don't dispute that it's factually accurate. Um well, that is what would have been said to me. Um but was he right that most of the
01:09:54 but was he right that most of the membership of Antifa did not share his militant physical approach to anti-fascist? Right. Um I I I don't know, sir. I can't really comment. I'm sorry. You sure? Despite all the time you spent
01:10:06 You sure? Despite all the time you spent with them. Um yeah, in this case, absolutely. Um I I as I say, I was there when Antifa began. Um but it was a very difficult
01:10:19 began. Um but it was a very difficult situation for me. Um because obviously there was this whole crossover between the anarchists um moving away from working within socialist party and no platform. Um, so I had to be very
01:10:32 platform. Um, so I had to be very careful about which way I went.
01:10:40 Do you have any reason to doubt that he was right about his opinion at at that time? No, sir. Can we move to paragraph three?
01:10:56 Give you a moment to read that.
01:11:14 Did you witness this attack? No, I did not. This was anecdotal. How often did you hear about opportunistic physical attacks on members of the far
01:11:27 physical attacks on members of the far right?
01:11:29 right? Um, looking back, uh, it feels fairly regular.
01:11:34 regular. Um,
01:11:36 Um, I I wouldn't want to guess, but it it did seem to be quite a regular topic of discussion. We've been through your reporting with some care. Would it be fair to say
01:11:48 some care. Would it be fair to say there's rather more of it once Antifa was formed than there had been before? Um
01:11:55 Um yes. Um certainly from what was being reported back but I as I say was not as involved at that time um with Antifa
01:12:08 as involved at that time um with Antifa because it it was a difficult situation for me to be in. Can we take that down now? And could we have from tab C302 MPS63151?
01:12:26 Page two, please.
01:12:33 Third paragraph up from the bottom. Under the Socialist Party and Stop the War demo, 24th of September, 2005. I'll let you read that. Thank you.
01:12:59 Yes, sir. I'm interested in the second half of that paragraph. However, mixed into this will be an anti-racist, anti- police message built around the fatal shooting of Jean Charles de Manzes and
01:13:13 shooting of Jean Charles de Manzes and the apparent shoot tokill policy of the Metropolitan Police toward suspect members of the Muslim Asian community. Am I understanding that right that the
01:13:25 Am I understanding that right that the campaign is uh asserting that the police have behaved in a racist manner in their shooting of Mr. Demenes. Um I I I do think there was that belief.
01:13:36 Um I I I do think there was that belief. Um this I think again would have been stuff that I'd either picked up at one of our party meetings and that had been discussed. Um and obviously that second
01:13:48 discussed. Um and obviously that second half um would have been based on that that there would have been a general discussion between members of the group. Um,
01:13:59 Um, why is criticism of
01:14:04 of a fatal
01:14:06 a fatal error
01:14:08 error by the police Mhm.
01:14:11 Mhm. being described as anti-racist, anti- police. Um, I think at the time I think I probably thought that um, as many people
01:14:24 probably thought that um, as many people did that that it revolved around race and appearance. Um, and I think that's why I might well have reported that back.
01:14:35 back. Why is it anti- police to be critical of this tragedy? Um, again, I think that might have been a figure of speech either by myself or
01:14:47 a figure of speech either by myself or whoever I was talking to. Um, was it the view that the Socialist Party was anti- police?
01:14:58 I think as I say my a lot of my reporting would indicate that there was that feeling um if not amongst everybody but quite a few people within that party. And was there a feeling that it
01:15:11 party. And was there a feeling that it was seeking to use the tragedy and the ensuing campaign for its own anti- police purposes?
01:15:23 its own anti- police purposes? Um, I I don't think that's what I was trying to say. I think I was trying to say that it was such an emotive and serious subject that the police,
01:15:35 serious subject that the police, particularly the Metropolitan Police where my reporting went into, needed to be aware of this because it it could lead to future problems. Um that that's I think why I would have
01:15:48 Um that that's I think why I would have reported this and was uh an intelligence interest in it because it was thought it could lead to future problems. I I don't know. I I would imagine maybe
01:16:00 I I don't know. I I would imagine maybe the public order desk might have wanted to know about it because obviously they would provide um estimated numbers etc uh to to the policing plan and all those
01:16:11 uh to to the policing plan and all those kinds of things. But I I can only think that's why I would have provided that. And was the fact that it was not only a fatal tragedy,
01:16:22 fatal tragedy, but also one with a racial dimension that made it all the more difficult for the Metropolitan Police? That I don't know, sir. Um I I just
01:16:35 That I don't know, sir. Um I I just reported what I heard or would read on the leaflets and literature. Was it a reason why it was all the more important to report about it? No, because again I had reported
01:16:46 No, because again I had reported previously on uh on Harry Stanley. Um but again it was um it's the best way of putting it. It was just things I heard as we've been through. There's rather
01:16:58 as we've been through. There's rather more mention of the Dezes campaign than there is of the Harry Stanley campaign. Yeah, absolutely. Is that a fair reflection of the different levels of importance attributed to the respective
01:17:11 importance attributed to the respective campaigns? I I think um with Harry Stanley um I only was ever party to that one sort of discussion chat in a pub.
01:17:24 discussion chat in a pub. this because of everything that was going on at that time and the seriousness of what had taken place was being spoken about on a regular basis uh at party meetings and you know social
01:17:36 at party meetings and you know social events. It it was everyone was talking about this. It wasn't just in um my undercover deployment. It was something that we were talking about in in my real world as well. Um it was very shocking
01:17:48 world as well. Um it was very shocking in terms of where it featured on the scale for the socialist party. Are you able to compare the Harry Stanley campaign with the Jean Charles Demenzes
01:17:59 campaign with the Jean Charles Demenzes campaign?
01:18:03 Not really, sir, because as I say, I didn't hear that much about Harry Stanley. That could have been because of the time when that happened or how much
01:18:14 the time when that happened or how much time had elapsed. Um, I was out there when all of this took place. Um, and I think it was a very scary time for everybody. Um, but obviously there were
01:18:26 everybody. Um, but obviously there were other communities that were affected by this mall and I I was just trying to provide updates as as to how people were feeling and what was being said. Could we take that down now please? Can
01:18:38 Could we take that down now please? Can we have up from tab B73748
01:18:42 418?
01:18:47 This document is entitled overview of militant anti-fascism in London and beyond since 2000 plus periodic operational reviews 2003
01:19:01 operational reviews 2003 to 2005.
01:19:05 If we look at the first page um I'll let you familiarize yourself with the document again. Uh once you
01:19:17 with the document again. Uh once you have done that, please let us know and we're going to go to page three.
01:20:30 Ready
01:20:35 now, sir. Uh we'll go to page three now, please. Can you help us uh do you know anything about the can you help us with your contribution to this document? Was did
01:20:47 contribution to this document? Was did you play any part in its production? Certainly. Uh believe I did. Um I would have been asked questions obviously around what I knew about the formation of no platform and the membership of it.
01:21:01 of no platform and the membership of it. Um obviously later on again I I was in the role uh when the change to Antifa came. So certainly the first page I
01:21:12 came. So certainly the first page I looked at I think most of that would have been from other field officers prior to me um composite reporting etc. If we look at um page three, the first
01:21:26 If we look at um page three, the first full paragraph, the one that begins the timely deployment, if we could have that expanded,
01:21:32 expanded, timely deployment of Craggy Island at the time of the formation of MP allowed him to develop good relationships with certain members of the group. As a result, much of the group's activities were frustrated and as a result of his
01:21:45 were frustrated and as a result of his deployment and the deployment of other covert resources, the group was limited in its ability to function effectively. This led to the group becoming increasingly frustrated and in time led
01:21:58 increasingly frustrated and in time led to the political divisions which resulted in the disbandment of the group following the withdrawal of socialist party activist. I do not want you to say anything uh about any other covert
01:22:10 anything uh about any other covert resources. But what I would like uh your reflections on is did your
01:22:21 did your personal activities and reporting on no platform frustrate
01:22:32 frustrate the group? It may have done. Um I I can't if I'm honest with you, sir, I can't really answer that. I was deployed. I provided
01:22:43 answer that. I was deployed. I provided intelligence where possible. Um again, I I think whoever has written this as obviously they're writing a long essay um about that that world. Um so
01:22:57 um about that that world. Um so I suppose it might be better directed to some of my managers and I I don't even know if they the desks still exist. Was there any bigging up of um your role
01:23:13 Was there any bigging up of um your role and impact? Not from me personally. I'm not suggesting that. Uh is this written up in a way that overstates your impact on the group?
01:23:24 impact on the group? You would have to ask them, sir. Um, I, as I say, um, I may well have read this at the time, but I wouldn't have paid it much heed reading it now. Um, it sort of
01:23:35 much heed reading it now. Um, it sort of feels a bit complimentary, but um, you you'd have to have that discussion with my managers really. Can we go to page four? On the top of page four
01:23:49 that Thank you. Let you read that. Thank you.
01:24:39 Sir,
01:24:42 how much contact did you have with the 635 group? Very little, sir. Um, I I would have possibly discussed this with Mario. Um,
01:24:56 possibly discussed this with Mario. Um, I think apart from earlier in my deployment when I was up in Bradford, um, I I don't think there was any other contact. Sir, did you meet Mr. Barnsley?
01:25:08 did you meet Mr. Barnsley? Uh, no.
01:25:10 Uh, no. Did he have a reputation? Uh, I think Mario may have related to me that he had a reputation. Um, reputation for what? Uh, for getting into fights.
01:25:22 Uh, for getting into fights. This document says the London group has been largely disrupted by the efforts of this officer and other sources within the group. Again, it seems to be
01:25:33 the group. Again, it seems to be claiming that your presence in the group had
01:25:38 had disrupted the efforts of London and Tifa.
01:25:42 Tifa. Mhm.
01:25:43 Mhm. Would you agree or disagree with that proposition? I
01:25:48 I I would agree to a point. And in a nutshell, how
01:25:56 how um I I prov provided reporting over that period of time uh where any information or what I thought might be intelligence uh I fed into
01:26:08 uh I fed into uh my back office who then created intelligence reports which were passed on uh to other departments within the police.
01:26:17 police. How how success sorry um how successful uh that was obviously is another question for my managers. Were there any efforts by you to disrupt the group from within by influencing its
01:26:31 the group from within by influencing its plans or directions? Uh Anif.
01:26:35 Uh Anif. Yeah. Um I just reported back to um I I as I say I think at this time um we were starting to get into the withdrawal
01:26:47 starting to get into the withdrawal phase of my operation. Um obviously I thought this was an incredibly interesting time. Um but I wasn't given the opportunity really to develop it. I just reported what I heard and then as I
01:27:00 just reported what I heard and then as I say my my role started to come to an end over period of about 12 12 to 18 months. If we could have page six, please.
01:27:11 And under the heading effectiveness, this is an operational review for the period August to December 2002.
01:27:21 2002. I'll let you read that, but I'm particularly interested in what it says about Mr. Gilman.
01:27:33 Mhm.
01:27:57 I've asked you before about Mr. Gilman and I think when I asked you your view was as far as you could remember the only instance of violence that you heard
01:28:08 only instance of violence that you heard about secondhand was slave green. Yes sir.
01:28:14 Yes sir. How can it be said that your preemptive intelligence caused the withdrawal of Dan Gilman from active participation in
01:28:25 Dan Gilman from active participation in violent disorder? I I have no answer for that I'm afraid sir. Um this has obviously been written by management or cover officers or
01:28:36 by management or cover officers or something like that. Um again I would have and did provide reporting that Mr. Gilman was involved in organizing um protests actions etc. And and I can only
01:28:50 protests actions etc. And and I can only say that I think it may have come from that. But
01:28:53 that. But it's a reality that this is rather unfair to Mr. Gilman because you'd have have to ask the person who wrote it, sir. Um I provided the intelligence. That was what I did. Your knowledge of Mr. Gilman over many
01:29:06 Your knowledge of Mr. Gilman over many years, is this unfair to Mr. Gilman? I don't really want to get into a character assassination. So, do you really want me to answer that? I do because you have Dan
01:29:17 I do because you have Dan Dan Gilman would regularly talk and plan events. There would regularly be talk about um physical confrontations with with opposition activists from the right
01:29:30 with opposition activists from the right wing and I have to say um given uh the background that I understood that he came from it was fully understandable.
01:29:41 came from it was fully understandable. However, my role was to try and prevent public disorder, even if it was imagined or didn't come to fruition in many cases. Um, that's why I was put out
01:29:52 cases. Um, that's why I was put out there.
01:29:53 there. Well, to say that it caused a withdrawal from active participation in violent disorder when you've only been able to provide one secondhand I I never wrote that incident over means that this overstates
01:30:08 incident over means that this overstates Mr. Gilman's involvement in anti-fascist activity, doesn't it? I provided regular reporting um on Mr. Gilman. How that has been interpreted,
01:30:21 Gilman. How that has been interpreted, I'm afraid, is is something I c can't really assist with and it overstates the role of your intelligence, doesn't it?
01:30:30 it? I I would say no because I feel I provided um a lot of intelligence reports or that were written up. However, again um you would need to
01:30:41 However, again um you would need to direct that towards my managers as to what they thought of me. Can we take that down now please? Can we have from tab C 306 MPS64366?
01:31:00 This is about socialist party activity within British trade unions dated the 18th of November 2005.
01:31:15 18th of November 2005. Going to give you a moment to uh read it. But my first question is going to be what was your role in either drafting or contributing to this document? Um,
01:31:26 Um, I certainly wouldn't have drafted anything like this. Um,
01:31:34 sorry, I'm just just running through the Thank you.
01:31:47 I I think sir this report would have been formulated um from a meeting uh that we would have had I can't remember if they were yearly twice yearly with uh
01:32:00 if they were yearly twice yearly with uh the relevant desk. So in this case uh it would have been the extreme leftwing desk.
01:32:07 desk. What usually happened at those is the desk officers would ask you the questions and you would just respond to them. Um and I think that that's where it would come from. they would have asked me um what I knew and what my
01:32:20 asked me um what I knew and what my opinion was.
01:32:24 And we see in the middle paragraph of the first block of text reference again to developing a socialist or communist state.
01:32:37 socialist or communist state. Yes sir.
01:32:38 Yes sir. In the long term. Yes sir. Um again part of the reason I know that this was nothing I would have contributed but I wouldn't really have used the terminology communist because
01:32:50 used the terminology communist because as I say I was alongside committed socialists and after that preamble about the socialist party it goes into a
01:33:01 about the socialist party it goes into a union by union yeah y
01:33:03 yeah y analysis of the socialist parties influence in each union starting off as you see at the bottom of that page with unison. Could we go to
01:33:14 that page with unison. Could we go to page two in the penultimate paragraph on page two?
01:33:24 This is the end of the section on unison.
01:33:39 Yes, sir. I've asked you some questions in before now touching on this subject, but can I take it from this that it's clear that the Socialist Party is not in any way
01:33:52 the Socialist Party is not in any way hiding its involvement in unison? Absolutely. Um, as I say, this is what I would have said to the desk officers. Um and they would have written this down
01:34:07 and they would have written this down and that
01:34:10 and that airing its views there were those within the union who were receptive to them. Yes.
01:34:21 And were voting them into key positions knowing who and what they were. Yes.
01:34:28 Yes. Could we go to page five please?
01:34:36 uh the conclusion and in particular could we have the first paragraph of the conclusion?
01:34:46 Let you read that.
01:35:05 So, so suggestion is here maybe a qualification on what was we've just looked at is they may not have always been fully spelling out the
01:35:16 been fully spelling out the revolutionary agenda. Is that a fair reading?
01:35:19 reading? Um yes it is sir. Um I think as I say that this would have been written by the desk officers um having taken notes from
01:35:30 desk officers um having taken notes from me and looked at other sources. But yes and is the reality though uh that the socialist party's revolutionary agenda is is not hidden. One only has to look at their website to see that
01:35:42 look at their website to see that they're seeking an end to global capitalism.
01:35:47 Could we take that uh down now please? Uh
01:35:53 Uh C312
01:35:54 C312 MPS 06
01:35:57 MPS 06 050
01:36:01 page three.
01:36:07 This is a report about Mario and Mark Barnsley. If we could look at the top paragraph, please. And I'm interested in the bottom half of that paragraph.
01:36:35 I've just read that second half of that. Yeah.
01:36:38 Yeah. Um, can I take it from the use of the word apparently? Mhm.
01:36:43 Mhm. That you weren't there? No.
01:36:46 No. And is your source of this information secondhand? Uh, yes. I I think it would have been Maria um over beers. And I'm getting an
01:36:57 Maria um over beers. And I'm getting an impression from the reporting and from your evidence that Mario, in terms of violence, was somewhat out on a limb. Is that fair by the standards of the people
01:37:08 that fair by the standards of the people you were infiltrating? Um, he had a a different political approach. Um, I found him very personable, but there was a different
01:37:20 personable, but there was a different side there. Um just put at its most simple that was he more violent than the others. Um felt that way. Yes.
01:37:32 Um felt that way. Yes. So would that be a convenient time to take the afternoon break? Certainly. Um for everyone's benefit uh we are going to finish by 4, but I don't
01:37:43 we are going to finish by 4, but I don't know precisely when and it doesn't matter precisely when. Um, and we will finish uh your evidence, it's anticipated, by lunchtime tomorrow. I hope that's a reasonably accurate
01:37:54 I hope that's a reasonably accurate forecast.
01:37:55 forecast. Yes. If anything, we're doing rather better than expected. Good. What if you need to
01:55:39 So thank you. Could we have up from tab B99 MPS0526932
01:55:46 please
01:55:52 go to the next page to identify it. This is again a further composite file with a lot of which is authorization uh documents in it. I want to go first
01:56:06 uh documents in it. I want to go first to page eight.
01:56:12 This is a box that has been completed on the 1st of September, 2006 by Detective Superintendent McKini.
01:56:24 by Detective Superintendent McKini. Uh I'll let you uh read it, but I'm specifically interested in the reference to disruption activity in the second paragraph.
01:57:10 Did you ever discuss the tactics that you would use in your deployment with Detective Superintendent McKini?
01:57:20 McKini? No, sir. Um, are you able to help us with what he means by disruption activity? Um, no sir. He he would have received that information from uh the DCI um or
01:57:33 that information from uh the DCI um or the other cover officers in the back office. Um Mr. McKini. I think during my time there, I might have seen him a few times when he came up uh to visit the back
01:57:45 when he came up uh to visit the back offices and he would have said hello, but um I never had any kind of discussion like this about my my deployment. Were you doing anything other than
01:57:57 Were you doing anything other than reporting on the intentions of the group and its activities? That's why I was out there, too. Yeah. Could we go to page 14, please?
01:58:16 Let you read again um Detective Superintendent McKin's entry for the 31st of October 2006.
01:58:28 2006. Mhm.
01:59:10 Sir, I'm interested in what it says about you suffering some emotional pressure in your domestic life at this time.
01:59:17 time. Yes, sir.
01:59:19 Yes, sir. I don't think I need any details from you. a very high level summary of what the domestic the sources of the domestic uh pressures were. If you prefer to give
01:59:32 uh pressures were. If you prefer to give this evidence in private that can be arranged but uh if you are able to give me a high level explanation of what the emotional
01:59:43 emotional pressures were um I'll keep it very brief. This was during this whole period. Um there was huge amounts of pressure on me um because I had a young
01:59:56 pressure on me um because I had a young family and I was trying to cope with withdrawal and obviously um new new relationship with someone that I wanted to be with and I was really struggling
02:00:10 to be with and I was really struggling um as as evidenced there. I I do not recall having this conversation with Mr. McKini, but I think that would have come
02:00:21 McKini, but I think that would have come from the DCI um and the DI who would have been aware. Can we move to page 19 now please?
02:00:33 Uh interested in the last two paragraphs in the bottom block that is to say the risk assessment. Give you a moment uh to read those.
02:01:11 I've read that bit. So, yes. Mr. Hedley's evidence to this inquiry is that he has no convictions. Are you do you agree with that?
02:01:22 Are you do you agree with that? Uh, to the best of your knowledge? Yes. Um, absolutely. Mr. Batty's evidence to this inquiry is that he has no convictions. Is that true? To the best of your knowledge?
02:01:34 true? To the best of your knowledge? Best of knowledge. Yes. Mr. Frank Smith has given evidence to this inquiry that he has no convictions. To the best of your knowledge, is that correct?
02:01:43 correct? Uh, yes.
02:01:47 Did Mario Mario There is material in the bundle which indicates that Mario did have convictions and had served time at her majesty's pleasure? I believe so. Yes.
02:01:58 I believe so. Yes. To the best of your knowledge, did Alfred have convictions? I don't know. I'm not sure that we ever even spoke about that, myself and and Alfred.
02:02:11 about that, myself and and Alfred. The statement all are committed activists and most have previous convictions for violence is an overstatement, isn't it? Absolutely. Um I I wouldn't have had
02:02:25 Absolutely. Um I I wouldn't have had anything to do with formulating this. I think this was them finishing my operation. So yeah, this when connected to a very real sense of personal betrayal could lead to
02:02:37 of personal betrayal could lead to serious violence against Craggy Ireland in the event of any compromise. Did you feel that there was a threat of physical violence in the event of
02:02:49 physical violence in the event of compromise? Um yes I did. Uh whether that was me just building it up in my mind or otherwise but but yes I did. Um from whom? uh well from the people that
02:03:02 from whom? uh well from the people that I spent the best part of six years alongside her.
02:03:10 Could we go over the page please?
02:03:16 The top of the next page. Uh thank you. For this reason, it is proposed to make these individuals the subject of regular RBFs within DE squad. What is an RBF?
02:03:31 RBFs within DE squad. What is an RBF? I I don't know, sir. Um, some kind of update perhaps. Certainly, Joe Batty is a senior social worker and has met with police at New
02:03:42 worker and has met with police at New Scotland Yard in the past and has actively considered applying for the IPC and the IPA. CI himself understands the need to take
02:03:53 CI himself understands the need to take additional care in East London in general and the burrows of Hackne, Waltham Stow and Brixton in particular. Y
02:04:02 Y was the risk there that you might be recognized as a police officer by Mr. Batty or that you might be at risk of physical violence from him? I think
02:04:14 physical violence from him? I think being recognized um for me personally um and obviously having to uh deal with awkward questions and what might follow
02:04:25 awkward questions and what might follow but I think for for all of us when we were withdrawing um that was the fear. Um I mean seeking to avoid people who might recognize you back in your police
02:04:37 might recognize you back in your police role is understandable. Can I ask you did you feel that you would be at any physical risk from Mr. Batty or would it just be awkward questions?
02:04:48 questions? Um
02:04:51 Um I I think I would Yes, I was I was in fear. um only because so if if for the only reason um I developed a very for me
02:05:02 only reason um I developed a very for me personally a a very close relationship with a lot of people um in that world and I was in no doubt that the betrayal because we were employed to do that um
02:05:16 because we were employed to do that um would would have a huge effect if how can I put it if it had been reversed I would have felt very angry angry um and upset. And when someone is angry,
02:05:27 um and upset. And when someone is angry, you you don't know what's going to happen.
02:05:32 happen. Can we go to page 66, please? A bigger B. Can we go to P page 90 first?
02:05:44 Uh this is um a document which we think is um from the end of 2005
02:05:56 end of 2005 by HN72.
02:06:00 I'm interested in the sixth paragraph down, the one that begins a comprehensive report. Comprehensive report on the activities
02:06:11 Comprehensive report on the activities of militant activists within trade unions prepared by UCO Kraggy Island last month has since been used to brief AXO, the Security Service, and
02:06:25 AXO, the Security Service, and ultimately the Secretary of State for the Home Office. You'll recall just before the break I took you to a report dated the month before November 2005
02:06:40 dated the month before November 2005 about the Socialist Party's activities within the trade union movement. We understand this to be a reference to that report. Are we right about that?
02:06:52 that report. Are we right about that? Um I think so. I I cannot think what else it would be referring to. Um obviously I was aware that AXO uh would have been briefed. Um as I said
02:07:04 have been briefed. Um as I said previously uh I I didn't realize that it also was disseminated to uh home office and the security service.
02:07:17 Were you given any feedback at all that this was a particularly useful document or anything like that? No sir.
02:07:28 Can we go over the page to page 91, please?
02:07:36 And if we The top of the page, collateral intrusion. It's a box that's been populated quite sparsely. says, "You craggy island has taken necessary
02:07:48 "You craggy island has taken necessary measures to avoid unnecessary intrusion into the lives of those not directly connected with the operation. Uh what measures had been taken?"
02:07:59 Uh what measures had been taken?" None that I am aware of, sir. And uh it might be said uh that you had committed very considerable collateral intrusion in the lives of those not directly connected with the operation.
02:08:11 directly connected with the operation. I would not disagree. To what extent uh were you was was the question of collateral intrusion and the measures needed to avoid it discussed with you by
02:08:23 needed to avoid it discussed with you by HN72.
02:08:27 Okay. Um at this point I I don't recall it being discussed at any point. I I think over the years
02:08:38 at any point. I I think over the years it might not have been with HN72 but yes there would have been conversations but um
02:08:45 um as I say um it's well documented how how much sort of real attention was was given to that. Was HN72 in any position to say what
02:08:57 Was HN72 in any position to say what measures you were or were not taking to avoid collateral intrusion?
02:09:05 No.
02:09:08 Can we go back to page 66, please?
02:09:13 Despite being an earlier page, we think it's a later document. I think this is April 2006.
02:09:23 I'll let you read the text,
02:09:30 but I'm interested in where there's a reference to high praise from a cabinet. High praise from cabinet ministers, which is right at the bottom.
02:09:54 I appreciate that I've asked you about this before, but I I do need to be absolutely clear. Was this high praise from cabinet ministers ever conveyed to you?
02:10:05 you? No, sir. Um, are you able to help us with which ministers? I I wish I could, but no, sir. Um what I would like to say obviously April uh 2006 I I think it was around
02:10:19 April uh 2006 I I think it was around that period that I was returning back to regular um police duties I think. Um so I no idea that this had been done.
02:10:30 I no idea that this had been done. Could we take that down now please? And can we have from tab B106 MPS722146?
02:10:42 This is an even later document. This is dated January 2007. The author is Detective Sergeant
02:10:53 Sergeant Beals. Uh it's a long report. If you familiarize yourself again with the key points on that page, if you need to see any more of it, just say. But what I
02:11:05 any more of it, just say. But what I would like to know is did you ever see or contribute to this document? I no I do not recall seeing this. I I may have contributed to it through um
02:11:18 may have contributed to it through um previous debriefs uh with both the desk and and the cover officers um but I do not recall actually seeing this document. No sir. Can we go to page six, please?
02:11:36 Under anti-war activity, could we have the first paragraph, please?
02:11:43 Says, "The Iraq war has provided activists of all kinds in the UK with a coarse celeb. Craggy Island provided important intelligence on the aims and objectives of the Socialist Party and no
02:11:55 objectives of the Socialist Party and no platform activists in relation to anti-war activity, including the attempted infiltration of the Stop the War organization by SP members. Their intention was to make STW
02:12:08 members. Their intention was to make STW a more extreme and confrontational coalition that would take a strong anti-state stance during their public events. He also provided an assessment of the likely effects of the war on his
02:12:20 of the likely effects of the war on his target groups and their subsequent tactics.
02:12:25 tactics. Right. Lois Austin was a member of the steering committee of the stop the war coalition, wasn't she? Um I I can't remember. I I'm not sure I
02:12:36 Um I I can't remember. I I'm not sure I knew that at the time. I knew that Lois Austin was a full-timer and she was an avowed member of the Socialist Party and one of its leaders.
02:12:47 leaders. Yes.
02:12:49 Yes. The Stop the War Coalition was a particularly broad church, wasn't it? Yes.
02:12:55 Yes. A very turned out very large numbers of people at its biggest demonstrations. Yes, sir.
02:13:04 Yes, sir. and an open church. Um, yes.
02:13:13 So, the phrase that the SP and NP activists were trying to attempt infiltration of
02:13:24 were trying to attempt infiltration of it.
02:13:26 it. That's a nonsense, isn't it? Um, yes, I I would agree. It doesn't really fit there. As I say, um not sure
02:13:37 really fit there. As I say, um not sure why that was written by whoever wrote this.
02:13:39 this. It was Detective Sergeant Be. Did you give Detective Sergeant Beals to understand that the Socialist Party was attempting to
02:13:50 the Socialist Party was attempting to infiltrate the Stop the War coalition? I I don't believe I did. I did provide reporting on stop the war and so socialist party uh activities but I
02:14:03 socialist party uh activities but I don't think I ever used that term infiltration. How good was Detective Sergeant Beals's understanding of stop the war? Um well he would have got information
02:14:16 Um well he would have got information from other uh officers and sources. Um so I think it would have been quite good his understanding
02:14:27 his understanding was quite big news generally at the time wasn't it? Absolutely. Yes. Can you assist us any further as to how it has come to be written up in such a sinister and misleading way?
02:14:39 sinister and misleading way? I'm I'm sorry sir I can't. Can we have page eight please? Paragraph three.
02:14:54 assessments and briefing papers drawn up by Craggy Island on matters such as militant trade union activity by SPSSWP activists, particularly with regard to
02:15:05 activists, particularly with regard to the so-called awkward squad trade unions and the fire brigades union strike informed the assessments of the public order desk, the security service during
02:15:18 order desk, the security service during their horizon scanning process and the home office. territory we've touched upon before. Yes, sir.
02:15:27 Yes, sir. Can you assist us any further with uh the phrase awkward squad trade unions? Is this one that you'd heard used in the
02:15:38 Is this one that you'd heard used in the SDS before? Um I actually think that term uh came from the mainstream media. um because I think it was a term put out at the time
02:15:50 think it was a term put out at the time regarding I think there were some uh leaders of trade unions um that had been nicknamed this by a newspaper. Um it it was not something that I used but I do
02:16:03 was not something that I used but I do recall that. Um
02:16:07 Um yeah no not anything that I would have used. Sir
02:16:14 evidence about concerns that the socialist party ultimately had a revolutionary agenda.
02:16:22 agenda. Yes.
02:16:26 During your deployment, how would you assess the revolutionary potency of the Socialist Party uh during
02:16:39 potency of the Socialist Party uh during your deployment? Um
02:16:44 Um this was small uh political party um consisting of for the most part I think uh some very committed people. Um in terms of their effectiveness I
02:16:58 Um in terms of their effectiveness I think that was limited by finances and membership. Um, that that would have really been how I described them.
02:17:10 described them. The revolution wasn't coming anytime soon, was it? Not as far as I I could see. No, sir. Did the Socialist Party do anything
02:17:22 Did the Socialist Party do anything during your deployment which threatened the safety of the state?
02:17:31 No, sir. Did it do anything which threatened the well-being of the state? Not that I saw sir.
02:17:45 Can we take that down now please?
02:17:52 On Monday, uh, I asked you a question about section 81,
02:17:59 81, subsection three of the regulation of investigatory powers act. I'll remind you of the terms of that provision. An offense for which a person has attain
02:18:12 offense for which a person has attain who has attained the age of 21 and has no previous convictions could reasonably be expected to be sentenced to imprisonment for a term of 3 years
02:18:27 imprisonment for a term of 3 years or more.
02:18:29 or more. Since I asked you that question, we've been through your deployment in some detail.
02:18:35 detail. Can you help? Did you during your deployment ever come across offending by those you were infiltrating that would have met that test?
02:18:50 Yes, I I feel I did. And been careful about anonymity. Can you explain what offending you were aware of that
02:19:01 what offending you were aware of that met that threshold? Um, I was aware of serious criminal assaults being committed. Um, which I think would have
02:19:12 committed. Um, which I think would have met the threshold, unless I'm confusing myself here, which case I apologize. Anything that you have not referred to in your evidence thus far?
02:19:23 referred to in your evidence thus far? I This is what I've referred to, sir.
02:19:30 You were sent when you made your witness statement a very large bundle of documents which had all of your reporting that we had
02:19:41 reporting that we had recovered at that stage.
02:19:47 We have a selection of that reporting in the hearing bundle. It appears to us that there is a pattern. The pattern is there was rather more reporting in the earlier years
02:20:00 reporting in the earlier years than the later years. The reporting the volume of reporting appears to tail off a little towards the end. Yes sir.
02:20:08 Yes sir. Does that accord with your understanding? Yes, I I would would agree. Um I certainly was not as productive. Can you explain why that was? Um I I
02:20:21 Can you explain why that was? Um I I think the biggest um reason for that would would have been the personal issues that I created for myself. Um and I I I ran out of steam. I can't think of
02:20:34 I I I ran out of steam. I can't think of a better way of putting it. Um I very much um was still motivated by doing the work but I I just lost just just got physically and mentally
02:20:48 just just got physically and mentally tired from it. Um that and as I say that was because of the issues that I did create for myself. Was the declining your declining productivity in terms of number of
02:20:59 productivity in terms of number of reports
02:21:01 reports ever remarked upon by your managers? No.
02:21:06 No. I don't think so. No, not not to me personally anyway. And how aware were your managers of your increasing problems and declining
02:21:19 increasing problems and declining well-being? Um I think after my uh being pulled in by DCI Dell and uh
02:21:30 being pulled in by DCI Dell and uh obviously everything coming out. I I think they were regularly checking or I was aware that there were discussions going on in the background and that people were looking at me. But it it was
02:21:42 people were looking at me. But it it was a very um
02:21:44 a very um it was a very isolated life and I think again um it was like well unless he tells us anything we just we'll just leave him alone and keep an eye on it
02:21:55 leave him alone and keep an eye on it and that that was often the feeling and and again I've I've changed my attitude towards these things over the years but at that time I I think had they approached me I would have just just
02:22:06 approached me I would have just just sort of tried to push it under the under a rug as it
02:22:12 Can we go to your witness statement 350 page 144 please?
02:22:30 Can we have p uh paragraph 310 please?
02:22:38 I'll let you read that, but I'm interested in essentially the view you express where you say, "I think MPS management should have taken me out of my deployment at the time of my mother's
02:22:52 my deployment at the time of my mother's death."
02:22:53 death." Yes, sir.
02:22:54 Yes, sir. You've told us that that was June 2002. Yes, sir. You've also just said that at the time you would have pushed things away
02:23:05 pushed things away completely. Yes, sir. So my question to you is would it have been apparent to your managers at that time that you were not mentally fit to
02:23:17 time that you were not mentally fit to continue when your own state of mind was essentially to push all these things away
02:23:25 away in 2002. Sir, yeah. Um
02:23:30 by undertaking that job uh I I learned obviously to uh live two lives and to be two people. Um
02:23:42 two people. Um I I genuinely wanted to keep going in that job for the reasons we have discussed and and because I still thought I could make a difference. Um I I just don't think the decision was
02:23:57 Um I I just don't think the decision was mine to make. Um I've only got to this in in in recent years, sir. Um I I was in no position to ask to be
02:24:09 I I was in no position to ask to be withdrawn because I didn't want to lose faith.
02:24:13 faith. And
02:24:16 And hindsight being the wonderful thing that it is, um had my managers I don't know maybe I don't want to say they didn't take an interest they did but we were very isolated
02:24:29 but we were very isolated um had they looked at it and pulled me it would have been very difficult I would have fought very hard against it and been a very angry person but on reflection it it would have been the
02:24:41 reflection it it would have been the right thing to do and when you say take me out of my deployment you mean end it yes sir yes sir coming thank you for that answer which was helpful But it didn't quite answer my question.
02:24:53 But it didn't quite answer my question. Is
02:24:54 Is what did your managers know that you were in such a bad place mentally at that time? I I did not tell them. Uh no, I recall
02:25:09 I I did not tell them. Uh no, I recall um I think I might have said being sat down um and we went through everything and being told if you are going to continue you you have to share this with your target group, you understand what
02:25:21 your target group, you understand what that means that these people will come to mean more to you um than they should. And I was like I don't care. I want to continue. Um
02:25:33 continue. Um and and that's what happened. Um, and it was okay. I was told, "We will keep an eye on you." Um, but but that's what I did. Um, and as I say, in hindsight, um,
02:25:45 did. Um, and as I say, in hindsight, um, that was a completely wrong thing for me to do. If we go over the page,
02:25:53 says I was not able to temper my emotions and feelings, but I did not realize that at the time, and it is only with hindsight that I recognize this
02:26:05 with hindsight that I recognize this now. In what ways were you unable to temper your emotions and feelings? Um
02:26:15 Um I suppose
02:26:18 I suppose the best the only way I can really describe it. I I was heartbroken at that time.
02:26:26 time. Um and that's um what I mean when I say I I couldn't temper my emotions. I I just wanted comfort. Um
02:26:36 Um and as I say, I look back and it's the worst thing to do really.
02:26:44 You say that even you did not realize that at the time. Yep.
02:26:51 Yep. Does it follow from that that your managers would not have been able to tell that
02:26:56 tell that completely? I I would not have opened up to them. Um I I fully accept that. Um they had a very difficult choice to make there and I was presenting to them
02:27:07 there and I was presenting to them saying I want to keep going. I want to keep doing this. Um and they were like, "Well, how are you going to deal with it?" And as I've said, I said I was fully prepared um to go down that road. Um as I say,
02:27:20 um to go down that road. Um as I say, hindsight um is made me realize differently now. And you've given evidence already that you would not necessarily have been fully forthcoming with the psychiatrist
02:27:32 fully forthcoming with the psychiatrist because you didn't want to lose your role.
02:27:34 role. No, sir. I I was not. I was not, sir. Which takes me to what further or different welfare support
02:27:45 support would have made a difference?
02:27:49 I I suppose the only thing for me and it was again something that I've reflected on um would have been much closer supervision from um our immediate cover
02:28:02 supervision from um our immediate cover officers. So, our sergeants um there just weren't enough of them. when I when I look back and and listen it it the ratio if you like was the wrong way
02:28:15 ratio if you like was the wrong way round. I think for a UCO um the sensible thing would have probably been to have two per officer but obviously I was not a manager but that is just a view I have formed
02:28:27 that is just a view I have formed because then you you could monitor um more effectively and I know that's not realistic to when you say closer supervision and monitor more effectively what do you
02:28:39 monitor more effectively what do you have in mind? Um I I everything um our cover officers did the very best they could, but they had to um to a large
02:28:52 could, but they had to um to a large degree leave us to it. As in I think you've heard me refer to you, you know, you're a big boy, you'll work it out type thing. And that that did go across the board. Um whereas
02:29:04 the board. Um whereas I I think they probably would have worked out far quicker um all the problems I was having um and possibly it would have been dealt with differently. But um as I say that
02:29:17 with differently. But um as I say that that's just on reflection over the years when I've looked back at that deployment and spoken to various people um health professionals and things like that.
02:29:28 professionals and things like that. Would you accept that the bottom line is so that if an officer is determined not to be forthcoming with the job?
02:29:39 not to be forthcoming with the job? Yes.
02:29:39 Yes. About state of mind. Yes, sir.
02:29:42 Yes, sir. And is not going to resist the temptation to misconduct himself. There are limits to what Yes, I would accept the police can ever do.
02:29:53 do. Yes, sir. I would accept. Can we take that down, please? mentoring. We have your witness statement up at the
02:30:04 We have your witness statement up at the 3LE50,
02:30:05 3LE50, page 145,
02:30:14 paragraph 311.
02:30:20 Mark Jenner is one of your mentors. Yes.
02:30:27 Yes. Yes.
02:30:28 Yes. What did Mr. Jenner tell you of his relationship with Allison? Nothing, sir. Um, as I said there, we went for beers once or twice, and he
02:30:41 went for beers once or twice, and he talked to me about the uh anti-fascist theme, but we we did not discuss relationships or things like that. Did he ever discuss it in the abstract?
02:30:54 Did he ever discuss it in the abstract? Sorry, I don't follow exactly. risk of sexual relationships. No. Oh, no. No, no, it did not. Um the talk we had more often it was talking about um how I would describe it, bloy
02:31:05 about um how I would describe it, bloy things, for example, football. Um I'm I'm sure
02:31:11 I'm sure the opposite sex were discussed, but not in that respect. In relation to the undercover deployment, in what respect would they have been discussed? um if you were talking about a celebrity um that you thought was
02:31:25 a celebrity um that you thought was attractive, things like that. Um but he would also, as I say, as happened with other uh field officers that I went to see, they would he would talk me through the in M in Mr. Jenner's sense, uh Mr.
02:31:40 the in M in Mr. Jenner's sense, uh Mr. Jenner's uh case, he would talk me through uh his experiences of being within the anti-fascist action scene and
02:31:51 within the anti-fascist action scene and that kind of thing. So, you know, how how it worked out when they would go out on demonstrations and actions and all that kind of thing. But I only saw him twice as I say.
02:32:02 But I only saw him twice as I say. Did you ever mention to him the sexual relationships that you had become involved in? No, sir. because this was right at the very start of my deployment. I I'm not even sure that I had uh deployed into
02:32:14 even sure that I had uh deployed into what we called the field. Um because as I say, he was being withdrawn when I when I joined the unit. When you joined the unit, how much training had you had on the question of
02:32:27 training had you had on the question of sex discrimination? Might have been to a seminar, but I wouldn't say very much more than that. How developed was your understanding of
02:32:39 How developed was your understanding of different types of sexism?
02:32:44 I was aware of what it was. I was aware um of the effect that it had. Um but I more than that I did not pay it a lot of attention. I was aware that obviously
02:32:56 attention. I was aware that obviously you had to respect the opposite sex but you know um it was not in depth sir.
02:33:07 At the SDS by weekly meetings, were there ever sexist jokes?
02:33:18 Not that I remember. No, never ever. Could have been, but again, I didn't pay it much heat to Can I take it from that answer that if there had been, you wouldn't have
02:33:29 there had been, you wouldn't have challenged it? Not Not at that time. No, sir. Was there sexist banter? Um, again in the sense of talking about
02:33:41 Um, again in the sense of talking about celebrities that you thought might be attractive and things like that. Absolutely. Um, however, there were also female officers present and you would try and respect different things around
02:33:54 try and respect different things around that obviously. Were sexist attitudes ever apparent? Not to me. No. Um, a lot of people generally stayed in RO
02:34:06 a lot of people generally stayed in RO and the um, we didn't know each other that well because we were we'd all started at different times. There were a lot of people on the unit that you you didn't know each other that that well.
02:34:19 didn't know each other that that well. Do you accept that your own conduct uh, undercover was sexist? Absolutely. by by the standards of today
02:34:30 Absolutely. by by the standards of today and through what I've learned over the years to totally um at the time I did not um understand that just to be clear by the standards of the day it was sexist wasn't it? Oh,
02:34:41 day it was sexist wasn't it? Oh, absolutely. As I say, I did not understand that.
02:34:46 Can I can we we can take the document down now.
02:34:50 down now. I move to the question of race discrimination. When you joined the unit, how much training about race discrim discrimination had you already had? Um, we would receive um race
02:35:02 Um, we would receive um race discrimination training as part of our police sort of learning packages. How much racial awareness training had you had since you joined the Met in 1992?
02:35:14 1992? Definitely at training school. Um I feel we would have definitely had a a at least a couple of more seminars during my time uh before I deployed into
02:35:25 during my time uh before I deployed into the the undercover environment. Had you had any refresher training? I'm I'm sure we did. I'm trying to place the timeline because obviously um the I
02:35:37 the timeline because obviously um the I think the I can't remember when the McFersonen report came out but I think we would have had training on the back of that
02:35:44 of that 1999.
02:35:46 1999. Yeah, definitely on the back of that sir. Yes.
02:35:52 sir. Yes. How good was your understanding of the different types of race discrimination when you joined the SDS?
02:36:02 I I think it was it was good. I I grew up in a multicultural London. Rewinding to 1992 when you joined uh the Metropolitan Police Service, was there
02:36:14 Metropolitan Police Service, was there more overt racism then than now?
02:36:20 Yes. Yeah. Totally. Yes. Did you witness racism amongst any of your uniformed colleagues? Not while I was in uniform. I do recall there was whilst still in uniform there
02:36:31 there was whilst still in uniform there was a I think a famous comment made by a a police commissioner at the time regarding street robbery um and the uh the percentages of people who were
02:36:43 uh the percentages of people who were more likely to commit that sort of crime.
02:36:46 crime. Is it your evidence that between 1992 when you joined the MPS and 1996 when you joined special branch that you saw no racism at all amongst uniformed officers? not not whilst deployed as a a
02:36:59 officers? not not whilst deployed as a a uniform officer in in the area I was in. Um, again, I the people I was with, we were a mix of people. Um, I don't I don't know if I'm
02:37:11 people. Um, I don't I don't know if I'm allowed to say it. The the I just didn't think that way, so I didn't pay attention to it. I don't think I ever saw anything overtly racist. It it may have been going on,
02:37:23 racist. It it may have been going on, um, but I I did not notice it. Was a position any different in special branch?
02:37:29 branch? I think special branch uh was probably even better because I think there was a a bigger mix of different backgrounds and heritage there.
02:37:42 When you joined the SDS in 2000 and infiltrated no platform, it's fair to say your targets were very strongly anti-racist. Uh yes. Did they have a very good
02:37:56 Uh yes. Did they have a very good understanding of race discrimination? Yes, I would I would say yes, of course. Did you learn from them? Yes, I did. Coming back now to SDS bi-weekly
02:38:08 Coming back now to SDS bi-weekly meetings without identifying any individual. Did you witness any racist jokes? No, sir. I don't recall anything like
02:38:19 No, sir. I don't recall anything like that. Again, it might have been in little groups, but the people I was friendly with, I I did not witness anything of that sort. Any racist banter?
02:38:30 Any racist banter? Um, no, sir. Any racist stereotyping? No, sir.
02:38:39 Can I move to the question of James Thompson?
02:38:43 Thompson? Yeah. uh that this inquiry has heard evidence uh that Mr. Thompson uh perpetrated a number of sexual deceits
02:38:55 deceits uh whilst he was deployed. Did you ever get a whiff of any of that? No, sir, I did not. Um again, uh myself and Mr. Thompson's uh deployments only
02:39:08 and Mr. Thompson's uh deployments only over overlapped at the start and then he he disappeared fairly quickly in into my deployment. The same can be said of Mr. Boiling with
02:39:20 The same can be said of Mr. Boiling with Yeah.
02:39:22 Yeah. the additional evidence that he went on to marry the woman we're calling Rosa.
02:39:29 Rosa. Yeah. But
02:39:30 Yeah. But did you ever hear anything at all to the effect Mr. Boiling had got himself involved sexually whilst deployed. Not at the time, sir, but subsequently
02:39:41 Not at the time, sir, but subsequently in the later 2000s when all the revelations came out, uh, yes, I did. Are you absolutely sure that you heard nothing about either Mr. Thompson's or Mr. Boiling?
02:39:52 Mr. Boiling? Absolutely. Absolutely nothing, sir. So, I'm moving on to another section. Would this be a convenient moment to
02:40:03 Would this be a convenient moment to draw stumps for the day? Certainly. I've been asked um to provide a factual uh update as to the state of publication
02:40:15 uh update as to the state of publication of evidence on our website. Tomorrow uh we are intending to publish the following statements. There will be
02:40:28 the following statements. There will be other documents following after that. Tomorrow the witness statements of stop the war Chris Ninham the fire brigades union with four exhibits Mr. Dave Smith
02:40:42 union with four exhibits Mr. Dave Smith and three exhibits. Donna Mlan and one exhibit. Alex Hodson and seven exhibits. Matt Salsbury and 12 exhibits. RTS and
02:40:54 Matt Salsbury and 12 exhibits. RTS and one exhibit. Guy Taylor and three exhibits. Robert Bambbury and 10 exhibits.
02:41:02 exhibits. GHS
02:41:03 GHS and two exhibits. Caroline Wilson and one exhibit. Martin Shaw and four exhibits. Simon Taylor and nine exhibits. Brian Healey and one exhibit.
02:41:16 exhibits. Brian Healey and one exhibit. Brendan Mei and nine exhibits. Brendan Delaney and nine exhibits. Ben Ley and 15 exhibits. GRD and 11 exhibits. Roger
02:41:28 15 exhibits. GRD and 11 exhibits. Roger Geffen and 31 exhibits. Joe Batty MT Monica and Ruth.
02:41:39 Thank you. We'll resume at 10 tomorrow.