The witness, HN104 (Carlo Saracchi), is questioned on his past relationships with women during his undercover deployment, his financial arrangements for accommodation, and his interactions with Operation Hearn officers. The session focuses on the contradictions between his testimony and the notes taken during internal police interviews, highlighting a pattern of deception and the instrumental use of women to bolster his cover.
00:15:26 Good morning everybody. Uh this morning's proceedings will be uh transmitted uh but only after a 10-minute delay uh has elapsed. Uh there is very likely to
00:15:40 has elapsed. Uh there is very likely to be a private hearing which will not be transmitted. Uh that will occur later on in the course of the morning. Those with mobile devices may use them to uh say what they have heard in the hearing room
00:15:52 what they have heard in the hearing room but only after 10 minutes as elapsed since the event that they're describing. Uh they may not be used for recording or photography. Mr. Bar.
00:16:03 Mr. Bar. Thank you sir. Uh Mr. before we move forward in the chronology there are a number of matters I just want to revisit briefly uh the first of those is the evidence
00:16:14 uh the first of those is the evidence you gave I think on Monday about HN9 let you [snorts] refresh your memory sir
00:16:25 sir visiting your wife sir uh you said in evidence that she kept that that HN9 kept attending.
00:16:38 kept that that HN9 kept attending. Can you help us with how many times HN9 attended
00:16:45 attended your home to speak to your then wife? From memory, sir, um it was definitely at least twice or three times um that
00:16:58 at least twice or three times um that that's what I can recall. um she would be better able to obviously assist, but I think it was at least two or three times because it was on the third or
00:17:10 times because it was on the third or occasion
00:17:12 occasion um that she actually said, "I've had enough of this." Can you help us with why HN9 kept
00:17:23 Can you help us with why HN9 kept attending? I I don't know. Um she seemed to think he was concerned about my welfare. Um but again she said it was just odd um
00:17:34 again she said it was just odd um because he never completely opened up to her. Um that's what was said to me from your dealings with HN9.
00:17:45 from your dealings with HN9. Yeah.
00:17:46 Yeah. Are you able to assisted with assist us as to what prompted HN9's interest in visiting your wife? Um not not really sir. We we did have
00:17:59 Um not not really sir. We we did have discussions. Um he was not my cover sergeant. Um as I say, I I knew him from previous postings. Um I just thought he was
00:18:12 postings. Um I just thought he was concerned for our our welfare. Can I move now to your witness statement 350,
00:18:24 page 99, please?
00:18:29 Paragraph paragraph 211.3
00:18:33 this is uh about the period of time when you are living with HN7 but you have formed a relationship with
00:18:44 but you have formed a relationship with Donna Mlan but you have yet to move in Mhm. with Donna Mlan. And you said in your witness statement, HN77
00:18:54 HN77 may have been aware of your relationship with Donna Mlan as it may have come up in conversation when she visited. Yes.
00:19:05 Yes. Can you help us with the basis for you saying that it might have come up in conversation? Um, all I can really contribute to that.
00:19:19 Um, all I can really contribute to that. We we would regularly talk about what we were doing, what we were up to. Um, and that and that's why I would have would have said that in my statement because I
00:19:30 have said that in my statement because I couldn't remember if I had or had not mentioned it to her. Did Donna Mlan stay the night at the flat she were sharing with HN77
00:19:42 flat she were sharing with HN77 on any occasion? No.
00:19:46 No. Are you sure about that? Um, as sure as I can be, sir. Yes. Can I can we take that down now? Can we
00:19:57 Can I can we take that down now? Can we move to the question of the financial arrangements? First of all, when you stayed at Mr. Hedley's house, uh, Mr. Hedley's evidence is that you
00:20:11 uh, Mr. Hedley's evidence is that you didn't give him any money. Is that true? I can't remember if I did or didn't. So I I don't think that was uh a part of the arrangement. I don't have any
00:20:22 the arrangement. I don't have any recollection of that. Were your He was just doing you a favor. Yeah, I think so. Um I don't remember anything about that handing over money
00:20:33 anything about that handing over money or anything like that. Were your managers aware that that was the arrangement? I can't remember, sir. Sorry. Is it something they would have asked
00:20:44 Is it something they would have asked about?
00:20:45 about? Um, I would have thought so. Yes. Were you claiming any money for accommodation during this period? I I can't remember, sir. Might you have been claiming money for
00:20:57 Might you have been claiming money for accommodation whilst not paying Mr. Hedley anything? I don't think so, sir. No. Can we move on now to Mr. Batty's
00:21:09 Can we move on now to Mr. Batty's home? We have a document um which we'll call up. It's 527068
00:21:29 page 10.
00:21:36 We expand that. Thank you. Give you a moment to look at it. [snorts]
00:21:48 Sir, it's a receipt from Mr. Batty for a deposit you've paid him, isn't it? Uh, yes.
00:21:56 Uh, yes. £490 for a month deposit. Yes.
00:22:01 Yes. We haven't got any documents to prove payment of monthly rent thereafters. But did you pay
00:22:13 But did you pay Mr. Batty £490 per month thereafter whilst you were staying at his flat?
00:22:21 his flat? Um I I I could not assist with regards to the amount. Um I I think there was an arrangement in place um through bank direct debit standing order but I can't
00:22:34 direct debit standing order but I can't can't remember for sure. Sir, can you recall whether you were paying Mr. Batty or you were paying the Corporation of London direct? I don't think I was paying the Corporation of London. That doesn't ring
00:22:45 Corporation of London. That doesn't ring a bell. Um it I think it would have been more likely that I was paying Mr. fatty. But again, as I say, can't really remember.
00:22:55 remember. Were your managers aware that you were paying £490 per month rent to Mr. Batty? Um, I think they would have been, yes,
00:23:06 Um, I think they would have been, yes, but
00:23:07 but what audit trail was there of the public money being spent in this way? I think that would have been bank statements. I I don't think there was anything else, but I think that would have been bank statements, but I as I
00:23:19 have been bank statements, but I as I say, I can't remember. Can we take that down now, please? Back to the trip to Bologna, with Donna
00:23:32 to the trip to Bologna, with Donna uh Mlan.
00:23:35 uh Mlan. What did you tell Detective Sergeant Beals about the purpose of that trip? I can't remember precisely, but it would
00:23:48 I can't remember precisely, but it would have been something to do with obviously doing the trip for legend building purposes um and such like. What I'd like to know is
00:24:00 What I'd like to know is were you fully forthrank and forthcoming with Deceptive Sergeant Beiels? No, sir.
00:24:12 Can we move now in time many years forward from your deployment to the interview with officers from operation Hearn between the 12th and 14th of
00:24:24 Hearn between the 12th and 14th of August 2013. It's volume two, sir. Tab B 107 726
00:24:34 726 931.
00:24:47 This is the first of three documents which record this meeting. Uh this is the [snorts] handwritten note made by DC Hanigan Baptiste.
00:25:01 Can we go to page eight first of all? At the bottom of page eight, there is a section entitled sexual relationships.
00:25:15 section entitled sexual relationships. And the officer has recorded never involved with anarchist women when
00:25:25 when the word has been crossed out. When marriage was going wrong, had relationships with women unconnected.
00:25:36 told wife.
00:25:38 wife. Mhm. [clears throat]
00:25:41 Is this the level of detail that you went into the subject with these officers?
00:25:49 Yes sir. Um as as I say the way this uh meeting was portrayed to me was we we need to get a overview and picture of your operation um to work out
00:26:03 picture of your operation um to work out um where there are risks for you, your family and obviously the the organization. Um
00:26:11 Um as as I say, yeah, they they just scribbled as we can see there. Did you give them names? I can't remember, sir. I'm sorry.
00:26:22 I can't remember, sir. I'm sorry. Were you referring here to Lindsay and Donna Mlan? Um, I think I think I would have been. Yes.
00:26:31 Yes. To say that they were unconnected
00:26:37 was untrue, wasn't it?
00:26:42 Again, I can't remember exactly what I said to them. Um, it it was untrue, but as I say, maybe that was misinterpreted. I I don't I don't know, sir. I can't remember this.
00:26:54 remember this. It was also untrue because
00:27:01 there were the first relationship with Donna Mlan happened on your evidence to ours before your marriage was going wrong.
00:27:14 your marriage was going wrong. Um yes sir. My my marriage was going wrong for a number of years but yes. [clears throat] Can we go to page nine near the bottom please?
00:27:27 There's a a paragraph. Thank you.
00:27:33 Mark was mentioned by Hedley. Headedley never once mentioned a relationship that Mark J had had. Judy Bashan could have been with
00:27:45 had. Judy Bashan could have been with Peter Francis told Steve Titty who said, "Oh yeah, that's Pete Bird." Yeah.
00:27:55 Yeah. Was seen at a party. Mhm.
00:27:59 Mhm. Can you help us with the basis for your telling operation Hearn that Judy Beishan could have been with Peter Francis?
00:28:10 with Peter Francis? Yes, sir. I mean obviously they were asking me um about other field officers and what I knew about uh relationships. Um as I say uh Mr. Headley uh came up um
00:28:23 Um as I say uh Mr. Headley uh came up um because of uh of Mark and uh I hadn't heard anything along those lines. Um so I I sort of passed that across to them.
00:28:34 I I sort of passed that across to them. Um the other thing relating to Peter Francis and and Judy Bishian um this would have been quite early on in my deployment. Um there was some sort of
00:28:46 deployment. Um there was some sort of conversation as used to happen regularly where we we would sort of get together in a room and we'd just be chatting and um uh that was what DS Titty said while we were talking. and I was just telling
00:28:57 we were talking. and I was just telling him who I had met um and and within the Socialist Party um and it just came out like that. [snorts]
00:29:07 [snorts] Had you seen Mr. Francis together with Judy Bishan at a party? No sir. Um we we were not deployed at the same time. What was the reference to was seen at a
00:29:21 What was the reference to was seen at a party about then? It it may be that I have been at I think possibly the same social gathering. Um that's what what I take from that. Sir
00:29:34 that's what what I take from that. Sir certainly I I never saw Mr. Francis whilst I was deployed out. Um do you know whether or not Mr. Francis had any form of sexual relationship with
00:29:46 had any form of sexual relationship with Miss Miss Bichon? I'm afraid I don't. That was the only gossip I ever and it it was gossip um that I ever heard.
00:29:57 Both Miss Bishan and Mr. Francis deny that there was any sexual relationship between them.
00:30:08 between them. Your disclosure to Operation Hearn
00:30:15 Hearn set a hair running. Miss Bichon's name appears in documents thereafter. Were you clear with Operation Hearn that this was pure gossip?
00:30:27 this was pure gossip? Yes, I believe I was. Um, as I say, it it was explained in that that I'd been to a meeting and that this had come up. They they were asking me the question. I was not volunteering any of this. Did
00:30:39 was not volunteering any of this. Did they explore with you the basis for Sergeant Titty saying, "Oh yeah, that's Pete's Bird." No,
00:30:49 No, there was scribbling and that was it. Did you discuss with Sergeant Titty what he meant by, "Oh, yeah, that's Pete's bad." No, because again at that time um
00:31:02 bad." No, because again at that time um the person he was describing um had no real influence on on what I was trying to achieve. So I I just as I say mentioned the names. It wasn't just uh
00:31:14 mentioned the names. It wasn't just uh Judy Bishian I mentioned. It would have been other full-timers that I'd met and as I say DS Titty would just come back with comments. What was Sergeant Teddy's
00:31:25 with comments. What was Sergeant Teddy's demeanor when he said to you, "Oh yeah, that's Pete's bad." He was just replying to what I had said, responding to what I'd said. There was no nothing that stood out.
00:31:38 no nothing that stood out. Did you understand him to be conveying to you that Mr. Francis had had a sexual connection with Miss Beich?
00:31:49 a sexual connection with Miss Beich? Um, yeah. From what he said that for me would have meant would have inferred something like that. Yes. And would I be understanding your evidence correctly about his demeanor
00:32:02 evidence correctly about his demeanor that he seemed entirely unconcerned about that? Matter of fact is how I would describe it. Um
00:32:12 it. Um could [snorts] we have that document taken down now please? Can we have up 738088?
00:32:28 This is the second if we move the second set of notes by the second officer about the same meetings. Could we go to page
00:32:40 the same meetings. Could we go to page 13 please?
00:32:45 Uh the section that starts saw a lot of offenses.
00:32:50 offenses. Yeah.
00:32:52 Yeah. Saw a lot of offenses. Did best to stay the right side. Witness times two GBHes reported them. What were the two GBH's
00:33:03 reported them. What were the two GBH's that you were referring to? Um well on one occasion um following I think uh it it was in East London, it
00:33:14 think uh it it was in East London, it was in the Stratford area. Um we had been out I think trying to protest um and disrupt uh the British National Party who were
00:33:25 National Party who were council elections or something like that. Um
00:33:29 that. Um following that we were in a pub in Stratford
00:33:35 Stratford um which years later I ended up uh being posted there and I I was able to identify. I think it was called the old room. It was a a very small pub. Um and
00:33:46 room. It was a a very small pub. Um and there had been some kind of altercation. Uh and I witnessed a male I think he was wearing a football shirt of some description. Um, people still smoked
00:33:57 description. Um, people still smoked back then. Uh, I witnessed one of my associates pick up a glass ashtray and swing it and strike him across the front of the face with it. Um, obviously that
00:34:08 of the face with it. Um, obviously that individual uh his face wasn't too brilliant. He went down. There was then uh how do I best describe it? A melee. There was people pushing, shoving, screaming. Um, and we we left and
00:34:21 screaming. Um, and we we left and cleared the area very quickly. Um
00:34:27 that that's definitely the one that stays with me. Um the other GBH there were assaults that I did witness, but I'm I'm not sure which one that
00:34:39 but I'm I'm not sure which one that would refer to, but certainly that that first one is the one that always sticks in my mind. What was a catalyst for that attack? I I don't know. I I as I say um
00:34:51 I I don't know. I I as I say um it just happened in front of me and it involved one of my associates. Um did it have anything to do with politics afterwards when it was discussed? Um
00:35:02 afterwards when it was discussed? Um that was one of the reasons given. Um but I I don't know when you say that was one of the reasons uh given.
00:35:13 Can you expand upon that? Um well there was obviously um a bit of a a chat afterwards where people were like um what the hell happened there? Um, and as I say, it it came out that the the male
00:35:27 I say, it it came out that the the male in the football shirt was was some kind of or had presented as some kind of right-wing type. And there had been words and discussion had between a couple of my associates and that had
00:35:39 couple of my associates and that had then resulted in in um in what took place in the ashtray being used. Was the asalent Mario? Uh, yes.
00:35:52 and a spontaneous act of violence. Yes, it it did look spontaneous to me. There there was a runup to it, but it was very quick.
00:36:03 was very quick. Had good reasons why I never took anything stronger than cannabis. Can you help us uh with your taking of cannabis? Uh how frequently did you smoke cannabis
00:36:15 Uh how frequently did you smoke cannabis whilst you were undercover? Uh very infrequently. Um, it was done if I was in [snorts] company and people offered me a puff, I would take a puff.
00:36:27 offered me a puff, I would take a puff. Um, I was not a big smoker at that time. I went into uh the undercover deployment as a non-smoker. Um, again, when we had discussed things
00:36:39 Um, again, when we had discussed things with our back office, they said that that would be acceptable. Um, but you had to have sort of reasons why other sort of stronger recreational drugs were
00:36:50 sort of stronger recreational drugs were a no. No.
00:36:54 Were your managers aware that you were taking cannabis? Um, yes. I I would have I would have let them know. Yes, definitely. Um, what what was their response? Again, um, so long as it it was not a
00:37:07 Again, um, so long as it it was not a regular habit. Um, if it was in line with with fitting in, then that was acceptable. Did they take any steps to monitor the effect on your health or well-being of
00:37:18 effect on your health or well-being of taking cannabis? No, sir.
00:37:21 No, sir. Could we go to page 17, please?
00:37:30 At the bottom of 17 is a section on sexual relationships involved. No towards end
00:37:42 towards end marriage failing two women not to do with group or operational deployment.
00:37:53 deployment. Mhm.
00:37:55 Mhm. Does it accurately record in summary terms what you told the officers? Um
00:38:02 Um I think I think so. Um I can't remember obviously exactly what I said to the officers but in in my mind at that time. Um I I did not
00:38:13 mind at that time. Um I I did not realize um that there was such a strong connection uh between the two women and the socialist party. Um, and I think that's obviously the officer has has
00:38:26 that's obviously the officer has has written it down that way, but um, yeah, I can't can't really um add more than that, I'm afraid. We know you were deployed between 2000
00:38:38 We know you were deployed between 2000 and 2006.
00:38:39 and 2006. Yes, sir.
00:38:40 Yes, sir. And your evidence to the inquiry has been that your marriage started to fail in 2002.
00:38:48 in 2002. That's not towards the end of your deployment, is it? No.
00:38:54 No. And we know from your evidence on your evidence that your relationship with Lindsay started before your marriage was failing. You
00:39:05 before your marriage was failing. You told me your marriage was okay. Yes.
00:39:08 Yes. So, this account is inaccurate in that respect.
00:39:12 respect. Uh, yes.
00:39:13 Uh, yes. Uh, there were three women, not two. Um yes, they they were asking me about people that were around my um target
00:39:25 people that were around my um target groups.
00:39:29 They were asking about sexual relationships, weren't they? Yes. Yes. Around with with women involved with my target. Well, here you're trying to say there were women who were not to do with your
00:39:40 were women who were not to do with your target group. No, because as I said, I I did not at that time consider um that there was any serious involvement for
00:39:49 for There were three women, weren't there, and you're only making a disclosure about two, aren't you? Well, I think I might have said that I I had a current partner that I'd met when
00:40:00 had a current partner that I'd met when I was deployed, but I don't think I said more than that.
00:40:08 Uh, you knew full well that Lindsay was an associate of the group that you were infiltrating uh because you met her through them, didn't you?
00:40:19 through them, didn't you? Yes, indeed. And you knew full well that Donna Mlan had connections to those uh that you were infiltrating, didn't you? Yes, indeed. You were simply lying to the Hearn
00:40:31 You were simply lying to the Hearn officers, weren't you? Minimizing [clears throat] the reality? No, sir. because uh both Lindsay and Donna Mlan when I first met them were not active members. I knew there was
00:40:42 not active members. I knew there was some sort of connection there but I as I say I didn't know that they were for one of a better word card carrying uh members.
00:40:53 members. Um they didn't attend meetings. They didn't I didn't see them on actions or things like that. So it it it didn't really come into my head and at that time um this is what I would have said
00:41:07 time um this is what I would have said my my partner um I didn't mention her she she'd never had any connection other than to know a few individuals in that world. Can we go to page 21, please?
00:41:32 At the bottom of the page, could we have the uh
00:41:39 the uh text from Thank you. Where is lived well? ways to manage approach by not being so well-groomed etc.
00:41:48 etc. Uh,
00:41:52 it goes, "People will make allegations. They don't live by our morals." Stuff I've read. I don't believe. Which morals were you referring
00:42:04 believe. Which morals were you referring to there?
00:42:06 to there? I'm sorry, sir. I've got no idea what what they're going on about there. Says morals in relation to sexual conduct. I I can't help you, sir. I've got no idea.
00:42:18 I can't help you, sir. I've got no idea. Can you help us with what the level of reaction and support was from the Socialist Party activists you were
00:42:30 the Socialist Party activists you were mingling with when you told them that your mother was dying? Um, I I would say they were incredibly kind and caring towards me.
00:42:45 kind and caring towards me. Do you wish to retract from this statement, the suggestion, any slur on the morals of the people you
00:42:56 any slur on the morals of the people you were infiltrating? Uh I I don't wish to retract it, sir, because I don't recognize this. Um I'm not sure how the officer has made
00:43:07 not sure how the officer has made it doesn't make sense to me, sir. Um, as I as I say, when when my mother died, um, these people um were incredibly kind to me and did what they could to help.
00:43:20 to me and did what they could to help. Do you cast dispersions on the morals of those you were mixing with undercover? I don't think so, sir. I think I think I I spoke about how we lived our lives, etc., and how things went about, but as
00:43:33 etc., and how things went about, but as I say, that makes no sense to me really. Can we go to page 30 please?
00:43:45 Can we have the section towards the bottom under the heading demenz?
00:43:51 The menzes question came up in a meeting CS not deployed. Mike Dell made clear you do not go anywhere
00:44:03 anywhere near that. Yep. We went through your reporting. Um, there were a number of references, weren't there, in your reporting to the Dezes
00:44:13 Dezes campaign and Socialist Party contact with the Dezes family?
00:44:24 contact with the Dezes family? Can you help us with on the face of it uh the contradiction between your reporting and Dell's instruction not to go anywhere near that?
00:44:40 All all I can uh think so say um I'm not sure when my reporting went in and I'm not sure when Mr. dealt would have said this, but as I say um or as I said
00:44:55 this, but as I say um or as I said yesterday, I reported back things that I heard. Um
00:45:00 heard. Um yeah, I don't know when when Mr. Dell said this to us if it was before or after.
00:45:06 after. Can you help us at all to locate in time when DCA DCI set out this prohibition? No, no, I'll call it soon. Sorry.
00:45:18 No, no, I'll call it soon. Sorry. Can you help us uh with the terms of the prohibition? Did he expand upon you do not go [snorts] anywhere near that?
00:45:29 not go [snorts] anywhere near that? I can't I can't exactly because this wouldn't have um been a big thing for me. Um, I think it may have been some kind of reference
00:45:40 may have been some kind of reference towards uh getting involved in any kind of justice campaign, but that that's me sort of in a bit of supposition really. I can't can't add more than that.
00:45:51 I can't can't add more than that. Can I take it that you cannot recall any reasoning given by DCIL at the time? No, no. It it I think this was said in a general meeting um when we had our sort
00:46:02 general meeting um when we had our sort of weekly team meetings. Um, I don't think it was individually said to me, but but again, sir, I'm just I'm sort of smising really. Could you go to page 34,
00:46:13 smising really. Could you go to page 34, please?
00:46:21 About a third of the way down. If we could have perhaps the the first 40% of the page up, please. Thank you. This is about violence. M I was probably
00:46:34 This is about violence. M I was probably a bit of a scaredy-cat. Never enjoyed the feeling of confrontation. Hit them until they stopped moving or run away. It used to scare me.
00:46:48 run away. It used to scare me. Can you help us with what is recorded in quotations as hit them until they stop moving or run away? Did you use that phrase to the Hearn officers?
00:47:01 use that phrase to the Hearn officers? I've got no idea. Sorry. You would expect them not to have written it down unless you did. Absolutely. But I have no no idea what that's about.
00:47:13 that's about. Did you ever witness anybody hitting someone until they stopped moving? No.
00:47:23 No. And certainly we've been through your evidence and you've not described anything of that level of severity. Mhm. Were you trying to exaggerate uh to the
00:47:34 Were you trying to exaggerate uh to the hear officers the level of physical confrontation in your deployment? I don't think so, sir. But again, um I'm
00:47:45 I don't think so, sir. But again, um I'm not sure of why that was written that way. I'm not sure what we were even obviously we would have been talking about assaults and things, but I I don't know honest answer. Did anyone talk about hitting political
00:47:57 Did anyone talk about hitting political opponents until they stop movement? I can recall. No, sir. On the face of it, this would appear to be an exaggeration entirely. Yeah.
00:48:11 Can we uh take that down, please? Can we go now to tab B 110
00:48:20 tab B 110 726
00:48:22 726 495 please?
00:48:33 Go to the next page. Thank you. This is a a document that was disclosed in the course of disciplinary proceedings. It's a record of uh interviews with operation
00:48:46 a record of uh interviews with operation hear officers a year well in the next year in 2014. Yes sir.
00:48:53 Yes sir. About 6 months later February 14. Do you recall uh meeting officers again in February 14? Vagely yes number of meetings in those
00:49:04 Vagely yes number of meetings in those years.
00:49:05 years. Uh can you help us at all? You I'm asking you this because yesterday you said that the 2013 meeting was a very cozy affair.
00:49:16 cozy affair. Can you help us with the setting for this 2014 meeting? If if this is the one that I'm thinking about, this would have taken place. Um I think it was I
00:49:27 taken place. Um I think it was I remember going to uh Putney Tube Station. Um so would have been around there could have been one of the police uh offices around there and and again uh
00:49:40 uh offices around there and and again uh this meeting was basically presented to me as uh factf finding um informal chat. There were definitely two officers present, if not three, and we were just
00:49:51 present, if not three, and we were just sat in in a sort of semicircle with me there and just just talking. Uh, regardless of the lack of formality, would you accept that you would have
00:50:03 would you accept that you would have understood this was a serious business? Um, yes, sir, of course. But at the same time, we were still and I was told we we
00:50:14 time, we were still and I was told we we just need to have a chat with you. we need you to come along and and just talk us about talk to us about your role and the deployment. Um and I I went there
00:50:25 the deployment. Um and I I went there under that and that you would need to tell the truth.
00:50:31 truth. Yeah.
00:50:34 Yeah. Can we look at some of the detail? Let's start with the first paragraph. Asked about the relationship with a woman he met in a pub. Why was the meeting about a woman you met in a pub?
00:50:47 a woman you met in a pub? I
00:50:47 I I don't know, sir. I I think they would have asked me about relationships. No, I was not in my SDS role when I had a relationship, but I used my SDS work
00:51:01 a relationship, but I used my SDS work as an excuse to go out. That's not true of any of the three sexual relationships that you've told us
00:51:14 sexual relationships that you've told us that you initiated undercover, is it? Um,
00:51:20 Um, no. I can't, as I say, reading that. No.
00:51:28 Was this a pure fabrication to operation hear or was there another woman?
00:51:37 woman? There was not another woman as you say talking about the three women. Um but I I can't really give more information than that cuz I I don't really remember. So can I take it it was a pure
00:51:49 So can I take it it was a pure fabrication on your part? Yeah, I guess we we spoke about stuff and I I just again they just did lots of scribbling of notes.
00:52:01 scribbling of notes. If we move down to the second paragraph, my marriage was pretty much dead. We grew apart. We tried counseling, but it didn't work. When things started to go
00:52:12 didn't work. When things started to go wrong with my marriage, I went out. I never took anyone back to my douff flat. Let's start with when things started to go wrong with my marriage. I went out as
00:52:24 go wrong with my marriage. I went out as we've been through. You've told us that your marriage was okay when you started the relationship with Lindsay. Were you lying to us or
00:52:36 with Lindsay. Were you lying to us or were you lying to her?
00:52:40 I didn't think I was lying to anybody, sir. But as I say, we were discussing these things. This this was something that
00:52:48 that they asked me questions about and I responded. Is it true your marriage was okay when you started to go out with Lindsay as you told us earlier this week? Oh, yeah. I think it was. In that case, it follows, doesn't it,
00:53:01 In that case, it follows, doesn't it, that what you said to her to the effect that you uh only started to go out once things went wrong with your marriage was false.
00:53:13 false. Yes.
00:53:14 Yes. And then the sentence, I never took anyone back to my douff flat. We've heard evidence that Lindsay did come back to your flat.
00:53:27 come back to your flat. Mhm.
00:53:27 Mhm. So that was a falsehood as well, wasn't it?
00:53:30 it? Um the reason for that I can't say, but yes, it was a falsehood.
00:53:38 Can we go uh if [snorts] we can zoom out? I want to look at the fourth paragraph, the the large paragraph in the middle of the page.
00:53:51 I met this girl out in the pub one night. It was a chance meeting. It was late 20045. She thought I was a cook as that was my
00:54:03 She thought I was a cook as that was my weary job. I used my SDS legend in that relationship. She knew me in my legend. I didn't deviate from my SDS role. She didn't know I was a police officer. Even
00:54:14 didn't know I was a police officer. Even my current partner didn't know I was a police officer for 6 months. It was a casual arrangement, not so much a relationship which lasted 6 to 8 months. We would phone each other, meet up, and
00:54:26 We would phone each other, meet up, and you know, it was casual. It was an escape.
00:54:34 Who is this a reference to? I think it would have been Lindsay, but the the dates don't indicate that. But
00:54:45 the the dates don't indicate that. But um
00:54:47 um the date would be out by Yeah.
00:54:50 Yeah. a good 3 years, wouldn't it, for Lindsay?
00:54:53 Lindsay? Yes, sir.
00:54:57 And uh it paints a picture again of things going wrong at the end of your deployment when the truth was on the sexual front things
00:55:08 the truth was on the sexual front things went wrong at a relatively early stage. Yes sir. Obviously I've I've said that um
00:55:18 um the dates don't fit but I I didn't well I don't know if I said those dates or not. So,
00:55:25 not. So, and if it was Lindsay you were referring to, then portraying it as a casual arrangement was seriously downplaying the relationship that you had had with
00:55:37 the relationship that you had had with Lindsay,
00:55:39 Lindsay, didn't it?
00:55:43 Um, yes.
00:55:48 Can we go to the next paragraph, please?
00:55:58 I didn't recruit the female into my group or get her involved in any way. I never introduced her to the group. I could have used her as a sap, but I
00:56:09 could have used her as a sap, but I didn't. If push came to shove, I would have used her to bolster my legend, but I didn't have to use her. I do remember her name, but I do not wish to disclose
00:56:20 her name, but I do not wish to disclose it at this time.
00:56:25 Is that is that meant to be a reference to Lindsay? Um, I can only think that it is, but I I as I say um
00:56:36 as I say um I I can't say for sure. I'm I'm sorry. Um I mean again some of the terminology um I wouldn't have even used. Um but as I say, yeah.
00:56:49 Um but as I say, yeah. Well, the truth was you had met Lindsay through your group because she was friends with them. Yes. Yes. Um however, I I really did not realize her involvement in the political
00:57:01 realize her involvement in the political side for quite for a while. You are completely misleading the Hearn officers about the reality, aren't you?
00:57:13 the reality, aren't you? I I don't I don't agree, sir. I I again this was another informal chat. I I did not you know we were talking
00:57:24 we were talking I I could have used her as a sap but I didn't. We know full well that one of the benefits of your relationship with Lindsay is it did help to bolster your cover, didn't it?
00:57:35 cover, didn't it? Absolutely. And as I say that term there I well I just have never really used that word and wouldn't use it in that kind of context.
00:57:46 kind of context. Can we go to the bottom of the page, please?
00:57:59 I did not target the girl. She was just in the pub and we started chatting. I did not use her for my SDS role. She never contacted me after the relationship finished. I had a year left
00:58:10 relationship finished. I had a year left of my operation after that. that bears no relationship to any of the three women
00:58:17 women that you've told us you've deceived. No.
00:58:19 No. Was that pure fabrication or was there another woman? Um, there was not another woman. Um, but again, I'm a little bit confused as to why that was written like that. Um, I
00:58:32 to why that was written like that. Um, I I can't remember what we spoke about on that. Um, as I say, so it's a lie, isn't it, Mr. Saraki? Well, was I would disagree that it was a
00:58:44 Well, was I would disagree that it was a line, but I don't remember. Um,
00:58:51 I did snog a lot of weary women. I had to use what was around me. Can you help us first of all that over
00:59:04 Can you help us first of all that over and above Lindsay, Donna Mlan, and your current partner, did you snog women who you met in your undercover identity?
00:59:18 who you met in your undercover identity? No, I did not. Are you sure about that? Yes, sir.
00:59:23 Yes, sir. So, can we take it that is a reference to Lindsay, Donna Mlan, and your current partner, or is it fiction?
00:59:33 fiction? Entirely, I I'd say there's a hint of fiction there. And again, you know, the officers were were making notes. I was talking. Um, that does not,
00:59:45 notes. I was talking. Um, that does not, as I say, doesn't make any sense, but yes, a fiction. Yes. a hint of fiction or a complete fabrication. Um, a fiction
00:59:57 Um, a fiction I I did obviously snog to use that word um weary women again their words but um
01:00:08 um weary women again their words but um more than that I cannot say as I say they they were taking the notes. When you say weary their their words weary women,
01:00:19 weary women, did you use the words weary women and then they wrote it down or are you saying you didn't use those? Entirely entirely possible. Yes, you would have used the words weary
01:00:30 you would have used the words weary women because that was the parliament in the SDS.
01:00:33 the SDS. One of one of the nicknames uh for our target groups was wearies. Yes. The verb use, I had to use what was
01:00:44 The verb use, I had to use what was around me. What did you mean by that? Again, sir, I I cannot remember exactly. I would take that to mean that whatever was I was coming into contact with, I
01:00:58 was I was coming into contact with, I had to try and use it to my advantage. You were using women to your advantage. Yes. I I've I've said this already.
01:01:12 Yes. I I've I've said this already. What was around me? Why are you referring to women as what was around me?
01:01:22 me? I can't say, sir. As I say, this was the conversation and the way you used to speak to each other at the time. This is in quot full full quotation marks. Can we take it that this
01:01:35 marks. Can we take it that this phrase, these two sentences taken together
01:01:40 together well illustrates your attitude to women? Um,
01:01:47 Um, yes. Um, I didn't put them in the speech marks, but yes. Can we go to the next page, please?
01:01:57 And at the the top paragraph, first of all,
01:02:03 [snorts] there were wearies who wanted relationships with me. One was an activist from Liverpool called Lindsay. She studied at Goldsmith College. She
01:02:15 She studied at Goldsmith College. She wasn't mega active. I met her when I came back from the Bradford riots. I saw her a number of times. We were flirty
01:02:27 her a number of times. We were flirty with each other. We were friendly. But nothing happened.
01:02:34 happened. Start with a tiny detail. She didn't study at Goldsmith College, did she? That was the impression I had, I'm afraid.
01:02:43 afraid. Let's move to the more important matter. We were friendly, but nothing happened. That is a bare-faced lie, isn't it?
01:02:55 That is a bare-faced lie, isn't it? Yes, sir. It's incorrect. Um, as I say, I don't recall what the conversation was with these officers. So, yes. A barefaced lie.
01:03:06 A barefaced lie. Yes, sir. [clears throat] I've said yes. Next paragraph, please.
01:03:15 Another female activist, Donna. She was We've redacted employ the employment. I don't think she was a party member. She was the other girl who took a shine to
01:03:27 was the other girl who took a shine to me. Nothing happened. Another barefaced lie. Again. Yes. Reading that. Yes, sir. Next paragraph, please.
01:03:44 Again, in full quotation marks. Socialist party Hannah cell. She had a thing for me, but I never went near it. These people flirt. They have partners.
01:03:58 These people flirt. They have partners. The morals of the wearies are not our morals. I went over the side, but I beat myself up about it every day.
01:04:11 myself up about it every day. First of all, did Hannahell have a thing for you?
01:04:18 for you? Um you you would have to ask her but as I say we got on we got on quite well. You have told operation Hearn officers that she did.
01:04:31 that she did. Was that true or not? I
01:04:35 I I don't know. Um what I will say sir as well we we talk about the quotation marks but this was a relaxed conversation with officers
01:04:47 was a relaxed conversation with officers trying to gain a picture of what we did. Um
01:04:52 Um as I say I I am very sorry for those comments if that is what I said or intimated but I I cannot remember more than that. Why did you say she had a thing for you if you don't know whether
01:05:04 thing for you if you don't know whether she had a thing for you entirely? Would have been bigging myself up, sir.
01:05:11 up, sir. But I never went near it. I wouldn't have said that. This This is my point. I wouldn't have said it like that. That's That's not the
01:05:22 said it like that. That's That's not the way I speak. What does the it refer to? Well, her, which is more the term I would have used.
01:05:32 And we see in a bit more context the comment about the morals of the wearies are not our morals. Absolutely. This is in a sexual context, isn't it? And the context of infidelity.
01:05:45 And the context of infidelity. I I couldn't say, but again, we're talking about infidelity here, but Yeah. And in your case, more than infidelity uh in misconducting yourself
01:05:57 infidelity uh in misconducting yourself as a police officer. Uh yes, I I did get, as we know, an awful lot of things wrong, sir. Yes. Can we agree that their morals were
01:06:08 Can we agree that their morals were considerably better than yours? I don't know, sir. I just talked about what I had seen um and what I'd been involved in, but yes, if if
01:06:24 Can we take that down now, please? And can we go to tab B 111 738103.
01:06:42 Uh this is another record of uh the same meeting. So I won't go over everything,
01:06:54 meeting. So I won't go over everything, but there are some points where there's a little bit more detail in this record that I want to take you to. Uh first of all, uh on paragraph three of page
01:07:07 all, uh on paragraph three of page three,
01:07:12 I lived with HN77 for about six months. My wearies thought I was shagging her. Mhm.
01:07:21 Mhm. And I'm sure her wearies thought the same of me. Then when I moved out, I said it was because it was getting too
01:07:33 said it was because it was getting too heavy.
01:07:36 heavy. The truth was you moved out from the flat with HN77 because you were moving in with Donna Mlan, weren't you?
01:07:47 Mlan, weren't you? Yes.
01:07:49 Yes. So would I be right to think that you did not say to those you were mixing with at the time that you were moving out of your flat with HN77
01:08:04 out of your flat with HN77 because your relationship with HN77 was [clears throat] getting too heavy. You would have told them that you were moving out because you were moving in
01:08:16 moving out because you were moving in with Donna Mlan. I I don't remember, sir. Um, as I say, that that's what's written there, but I I don't remember. I My mindset at that time was I was just
01:08:29 My mindset at that time was I was just being debriefed by another part of the police.
01:08:33 police. And there wouldn't have been much time for you to feain developing a relationship with HN77, would there? Because you had not long since broken Lind's heart.
01:08:44 since broken Lind's heart. No.
01:08:46 No. This is another lie to Hearn, isn't it? Um, as I say, um, these were informal conversations, so I I don't know, sir. It's another lie to Hearn, isn't it?
01:08:58 It's another lie to Hearn, isn't it? Yes, sir.
01:09:00 Yes, sir. Can we go to the seventh paragraph uh on uh this page, please? The one that begins Socialist Party. Thank you. Socialist Party Hannah. She
01:09:13 Thank you. Socialist Party Hannah. She had a thing for me, but I never went near it. These people flirt. They have partners. The morals of the wearies are not our morals. I went over the side, but I beat myself up about it every day.
01:09:26 but I beat myself up about it every day. So far, the same as the last note. It goes a bit further. They wouldn't They wouldn't give a about lying. Did you say that to the Hearn officers? I don't remember, sir. Um, it
01:09:37 I don't remember, sir. Um, it would be a strange thing to write down if you hadn't, wouldn't it? of of course, but again it I would suggest it could easily be a summary of what was said between us.
01:09:48 said between us. Did you care about lying to Operation Hearn?
01:09:53 Hearn? Yeah, of course. Yes, sir. Why did you lie to Operation Hearn?
01:10:01 I don't know, sir. Um, was it to avoid disciplinary proceedings? Well, no, because at this stage, sir, I
01:10:12 Well, no, because at this stage, sir, I was not aware that there was anything like that. We were talking about this and they were managing um told me that they were managing um stuff that had come out.
01:10:23 come out. Did you think there might be disciplinary proceedings? Yes.
01:10:28 Yes. And lying was a way to avoid them? No. Um as I say, these were informal conversations we had. So I I can't even say that everything that that is there is exactly what I said. Was it to avoid
01:10:39 is exactly what I said. Was it to avoid being held to account for your deplorable conduct? I don't think so. No. Because certainly by this stage, the reason they were talking to me was because there was
01:10:52 were talking to me was because there was documented um instances where I had had conversations with my managers etc. Your deplor your conduct had been
01:11:03 Your deplor your conduct had been deplorable, hadn't it? Yes, sir. I've said that already this week. you have. Um, so I asked the question again. Did you lie to Hearn to avoid being held to
01:11:14 lie to Hearn to avoid being held to account for your deplorable conduct? I do not believe I did. No. [snorts] If it wasn't to avoid disciplinary proceedings, if it wasn't to avoid accountability, why did you lie to her?
01:11:28 accountability, why did you lie to her? Well, as I said, this was an informal conversation. I I cannot remember. And if I had said something that gave the wrong impression, yes, I I lied. Um, but I don't recall anything
01:11:40 lied. Um, but I don't recall anything else. So,
01:11:41 else. So, are you the thought sort of man who thinks it's okay to lie repeatedly simply because a conversation is informal?
01:11:51 informal? I I just didn't put a lot of importance on it.
01:11:54 on it. That's not an answer to my question. Are you the sort of man who thinks it's okay to lie repeatedly simply because a conversation is informal? Um,
01:12:05 Um, I suppose yes would be the answer. Looking at that time, yes,
01:12:13 you are in the process of telling these lies, denigrating those whose lives you had invaded in the process, aren't you?
01:12:24 had invaded in the process, aren't you? Um
01:12:26 Um uh yes I suppose. Did you give any thought to that? Uh obviously not at the time sir. No. Can we go to the next paragraph please?
01:12:44 There was also privacy an activist since the 1960s. She was a legend activist in her mid60s. I was in Hackne at the time and she would invite me back for tea. I
01:12:56 and she would invite me back for tea. I never went but I heard from others she was up for it. What does up for it mean? Um I would suggest um sexual relations,
01:13:09 Um I would suggest um sexual relations, intimate relationships. Is there any truth in this or is it just pure fabrication? This
01:13:17 This I think would have been um what I've called gossip title with other members of my activist group.
01:13:29 Was it true then that there was some gossip to this effect or is it pure fabrication? No, no, there there was gossip. I think I think from what I can remember again
01:13:40 I think from what I can remember again um
01:13:42 um it just I don't want this to come the wrong way but it wasn't that important to me. We were having an informal discussion and they were asking me about all these different things. Why did you raise it uh with the Hearn
01:13:54 Why did you raise it uh with the Hearn officers? Um, I think I would have been asked about other uh associates, people I knew and and whatnot, but I can't remember exactly.
01:14:06 whatnot, but I can't remember exactly. Are you seeking to distract the Hearn officers
01:14:10 officers uh from questioning you further about Lindsay, Donna Mlan? No.
01:14:17 No. And your current partner? No, sir.
01:14:21 No, sir. Are you trying to reinforce the false picture you were painting that you were resisting
01:14:29 resisting sexual interest expressed in you by members of the public whilst you were undercover? No, sir. I don't think so.
01:14:40 Could we have the next paragraph, please?
01:14:47 Your spinning plates. One of the scenarios given by the back office is if you ended up back at a female activist house, what do you do? The answer, you
01:14:58 house, what do you do? The answer, you skip around it. Mhm.
01:15:01 Mhm. Now, that accords with the evidence you gave on Monday. And that is the truth, isn't it? I think so. Yes, sir. And it contrasts starkly with your
01:15:13 And it contrasts starkly with your actual behavior, doesn't it? Yes, sir.
01:15:18 Yes, sir. It's right, isn't it, that the fact you're acknowledging here to Hearn that you do in fact know what you should have done,
01:15:27 done, uh, that you were clearly lying to them when you concealed the fact that you had transgress that line repeatedly.
01:15:41 transgress that line repeatedly. Um, yes.
01:15:46 Can we now go to uh the next paragraph? It's a section that runs over the page. It's about HN67.
01:15:58 HN67. Mhm. A group of people were in the pub. Just let that Thank you. A group of people were in the pub. It was a retirement or leaving due or something.
01:16:10 retirement or leaving due or something. I think it was for Ron Gilbertson. HN67 wasn't there, but he came up in conversation with regards to true spies. I think someone I can't remember who at
01:16:22 I think someone I can't remember who at this time said HN67 was in a relationship with the weary and he'd had a child. Being junior, I took this on board. This revelation was
01:16:35 this on board. This revelation was caused for some merment and amusement. HN67
01:16:40 HN67 was not very well liked.
01:16:46 Can you help us with your recollection now? Did this conversation take place at an event for Ron Gilbertson
01:16:58 for Ron Gilbertson either retiring or leaving? Um it would have been yeah one of those I think. Um but if not uh Mr. Gilbertson, someone else from the unit.
01:17:10 Gilbertson, someone else from the unit. I want to know was it is it your election is it your recollection that it was Sergeant Gilbertson? Um, as I've said in the what they've
01:17:21 Um, as I've said in the what they've written down, I think um, a lot of time has passed, so I cannot say for sure. If it was a leaving due, would it have been the leaving due for Sergeant Gilbertson leaving the SDS?
01:17:35 Gilbertson leaving the SDS? I don't know, sir. Um it it was a due as I say
01:17:40 I say um I referred to a retirement or leaving due.
01:17:46 due. Sergeant Gilbertson left the SDS in about July 2006. Yeah.
01:17:53 Yeah. Is our understanding. Was this revelation about HN67 made in around the summer of 2006
01:18:07 made in around the summer of 2006 or was it at some other time? Um,
01:18:12 Um, I would have to accept that it might have been around that time. I cannot remember.
01:18:16 remember. And that would put it towards the end of your deployment. Yes.
01:18:24 who made the revelation about HN67 being very careful about anonymity and writing it down.
01:18:36 writing it down. I I cannot recall, sir. I'm I'm sorry. Was it a current member of the SDS or a former member of the SDS? I
01:18:48 former member of the SDS? I I don't know, sir. Do you have any recollection of
01:18:58 of who it was or who it might have been? No, sir. There was a large group of us. As I said, I've referred to Mr. Gilbertson.
01:19:09 Gilbertson. Um, but there could have been all manner of people there. Um, quite a striking recolle revelation, isn't it?
01:19:19 isn't it? Yeah.
01:19:21 Yeah. Is it really your evidence you can't remember who made it? Yeah, completely. Um, again, I think it may be a little bit of a a theme, but there was a lot of drink consumed in
01:19:33 there was a lot of drink consumed in those times and dues like this. There would have been lots of people there. So,
01:19:40 So, what was the merrynt? People were laughing. Um, if it was just in relation to that, which I think it might have been reading through there,
01:19:51 might have been reading through there, but it it was a leaving do of some sort. What was
01:19:58 What was funny and amusing about the revelation that a former undercover police officer had fathered a child with an activist?
01:20:09 had fathered a child with an activist? I I cannot recall, sir. As as I've said there, um there was merrynt and amusement. Um I think my comment there that he [clears throat] was not very
01:20:21 that he [clears throat] was not very wellliked um was the point that I I had never got along with HN67. Can you expand upon merment and
01:20:32 Can you expand upon merment and amusement for us? What form did it take? People laughing, I would imagine. jokes, banter. I I don't recall that. I recall that
01:20:43 I I don't recall that. I recall that there was a a mood of of people laughing um and chuckling for what one of a better word. Why were people laughing about this?
01:20:56 Why were people laughing about this? I don't know, sir. Was it in the context of conversations about sexually deceiving women in the course of SDS deployments? I I I don't
01:21:08 course of SDS deployments? I I I don't know, sir. I'm I'm sorry. Were there conversations about sexual activity undercover at SDS social gatherings?
01:21:22 We didn't do that many social gatherings, sir, but certainly at this one, this is something that I record. Yes. And was it, and what I'm driving at, is was this a a one-off incident or
01:21:34 at, is was this a a one-off incident or was it a subject that came up more than once?
01:21:39 once? I think it would have been a one-off, but I I cannot say for sure, sir. The reason I'm asking this question is because if it's a familiar topic of conversation,
01:21:50 conversation, the atmosphere might be different to a one-off
01:21:55 one-off revelation. I'm afraid I can't assist. This certainly was something that I remembered on a one-off occasion. If it was a one-off, what would be so funny about it?
01:22:08 funny about it? I don't know. It was funny at the time. funny that a woman had been de been deceived into sexual activity and having
01:22:19 deceived into sexual activity and having a child.
01:22:21 a child. Yes.
01:22:27 And can I take it from your evidence uh that it was generally received amongst those present as funny? Um there was laughter. It was not just
01:22:39 Um there was laughter. It was not just this that was being spoken about um but it was quite a while ago sir and I I can't really help help more than that I'm afraid.
01:22:50 I'm afraid. Can we take it as representative of at least the attitude of the SDS's rank and file
01:22:59 file to sexual activity with members of the public undercover that it was thought to be funny. Um yes managers
01:23:11 managers I can't remember who was there sir any of them sorry
01:23:15 sorry any of them in in terms of this social would any of them have thought it funny again I can't remember who was there yes possibly
01:23:29 being junior I took this on board what did you mean by I took this on board.
01:23:39 Don't think I'd have used that term. I think what I was trying to say was that I was listening to this and heard this. Being junior,
01:23:51 Being junior, if this was Sergeant Gilbertson's leaving due, you were not junior in SDS terms, were you? You were just approaching the end of your
01:24:03 just approaching the end of your deployment. I I think sir what I may have been saying there was that I was not a ranking officer. You are a detective constable. Yes sir.
01:24:20 Can you help us any further with what taking it on board as a detective constable towards the end of your deployment meant? Um as I say sir I don't think I would
01:24:31 Um as I say sir I don't think I would have used that term. Um I think it was just stuff I was listening to um which I don't know which I thought worthy of
01:24:42 I don't know which I thought worthy of noting or telling telling the team in the discussion. Could we take that down now and have from volume one tab A2
01:24:56 from volume one tab A2 723091
01:24:58 723091 please?
01:25:06 This is a document which dates from the 22nd of September 2016. Mhm.
01:25:14 Mhm. It relates to disciplinary proceedings which by that stage had been initiated. It's a statement made under caution,
01:25:25 It's a statement made under caution, isn't it?
01:25:26 isn't it? Uh yes, I believe so. And it says, "On the 4th of February 2016, I was served with a notice under regulation 15, police conduct
01:25:37 regulation 15, police conduct regulations 2015, informing me that I was subject to an investigation into allegations made that my conduct may have breached the standards of professional behavior." The notice says the allegations are that
01:25:50 The notice says the allegations are that whilst engaged in a covert role, I had intimate relationships with three females and that these took place without the knowledge of my line
01:26:03 without the knowledge of my line managers. If we go now to further down, we see that you say, "I deny the allegations."
01:26:15 And it goes on to say, "On the 14th of September, I was shown by my solicitor a document entitled Operation Hearnwritten questions for Operation Colton and a document headed disclosure schedule, Operation Colton 2. I understand these
01:26:28 Operation Colton 2. I understand these documents were provided to my solicitor by DC and we've anonymized the officer's name of Operation Hearn as disclosure to enable me to consider whether or not to provide a written response. I have been
01:26:40 provide a written response. I have been made aware that none of the females have provided statements to the investigation and that these allegations are based on a media report and a newsight television
01:26:51 a media report and a newsight television program. Other than denying the allegations, I do not intend to answer any questions regarding the matter at this time. If we could go back up to the
01:27:02 this time. If we could go back up to the paragraph above the present pain.
01:27:13 You are positively denying that you had intimate relationships with three females and that they took place
01:27:24 three females and that they took place without the knowledge of your line managers. Aren't you? Yes.
01:27:33 You did have three well intimate relationships with three females in your covert role, didn't you? Yes.
01:27:44 Yes. and on the evidence you have given to this inquiry. Your relationship with Lindsay
01:27:55 Your relationship with Lindsay started without any of your managers knowing, didn't it? Um, yes. I Yes. And your evidence is
01:28:07 Um, yes. I Yes. And your evidence is that you didn't tell any managers until you told DCIDell long after the relationship had finished.
01:28:17 finished. Uh yes. However, um there were conversations in the interim with uh my line supervisors, but I did not
01:28:29 my line supervisors, but I did not reveal any names or anything like that. Can we be clear? Did you tell any manager during the course of your sexual
01:28:40 manager during the course of your sexual relationship with Lindsay that you were in a sexual relationship with a woman undercover? No, sir. No.
01:28:51 No, sir. No. Donna Mlan, you've told us that you started that relationship without telling any managers and Yes, sir.
01:29:04 telling any managers and Yes, sir. you told Dell that you'd had a relationship. You told him it had finished, but in fact it had not.
01:29:15 not. I can't remember, sir. As I say, if you want to talk about timelines, but we did have a conversation. Yes. And you were some distance into your relationship with your current partner
01:29:27 relationship with your current partner before you raised it with managers on your account. Yes, sir.
01:29:34 Yes, sir. [snorts]
01:29:35 [snorts] There were therefore no grounds to justify you positively denying these allegations, was there? No sir. Um
01:29:48 No sir. Um I think this would have been my federation or legal advice at the time, but no. It's a false denial, isn't it?
01:29:59 It's a false denial, isn't it? Um
01:30:01 Um yes.
01:30:02 yes. However, as I say, I would have done this on advice because I think we were going to
01:30:09 going to obviously make statements further down. Uh but yes, did you
01:30:16 did you enter this false denial because you knew that the MPS were not in a position to prove the allegations at that [snorts] time?
01:30:28 time? Uh I I don't remember, sir. I I don't think so. I would have been listening uh to advice.
01:30:39 If it wasn't for that reason, why did you enter a false denial? I I can't say. As I say, I think I would
01:30:50 I I can't say. As I say, I think I would have acted on advice. Um and it it would have been taken from there.
01:30:58 The consequence of the lies that you told Operation Hearn, combined with your positive false denial of the truth in
01:31:09 positive false denial of the truth in the disciplinary process, was that you escaped being disciplined, didn't you? Um, well, no, I I I don't think so. I
01:31:20 Um, well, no, I I I don't think so. I think I'm still subject to some kind of investigation. Sir, you escaped being disciplined back in 2016, didn't you? Because you lied your
01:31:31 2016, didn't you? Because you lied your way out of it. Oh, no, sir. I I I disagree with that. Um, as I say, I had informal conversations which I had no idea were then going to be written up. Um,
01:31:44 then going to be written up. Um, and as I as I say this document that we're talking about now, I I would have signed this um because I think I would have got advice from federation or some
01:31:57 have got advice from federation or some other form of representation.
01:32:02 You knew full well what you were signing, didn't you? Well, yes, sir. And you knew it was false, didn't you? Well, again sir, my interpretation of it
01:32:14 Well, again sir, my interpretation of it and having read bits of it was that this was the start of a process that would be ongoing. Um, I think I'm borne out by that.
01:32:27 that. Well, let me come to that. The consequence of you lying your way out of trouble in 2013,
01:32:38 trouble in 2013, 2014, and 2016 was it has led to a delay in Lindsay and Donna Mlan getting the answers that they
01:32:49 Donna Mlan getting the answers that they deserve.
01:32:50 deserve. Yeah.
01:32:52 Yeah. [snorts]
01:32:53 [snorts] A delay of nine and a half years to date.
01:32:58 date. Yes.
01:33:00 Yes. And the n and a half years since this denial
01:33:06 denial waiting for this inquiry to take its course can't have been much fun for you either.
01:33:11 either. No, sir.
01:33:12 No, sir. Been hanging over your head for 9 and a half years. Yes, indeed. Yes.
01:33:19 What would it have taken for you to have made a clean breast of things in a timely fashion? I I don't know sir. Um I got obviously
01:33:32 I I don't know sir. Um I got obviously this process started um and I I've just act acted under advice um from my federation at those times. Um
01:33:43 times. Um so I I don't know sir. Can I take it from I don't know sir that there's nothing that could have been done uh that would have persuaded you uh
01:33:55 done uh that would have persuaded you uh truth truthfully to answer questions. Um m much of the advice I received sir was obviously to wait for uh this public
01:34:06 was obviously to wait for uh this public inquiry. Um, obviously I would have liked this to have happened a lot sooner, but um,
01:34:15 um, as I say, more more than that I cannot really offer. Would have been far far better if you'd told the truth. Well, I I as I say acted under advice. I
01:34:27 Well, I I as I say acted under advice. I was um engaging, but as far as I was aware, these were informal conversations. We were just talking things through. My learn friends can object to this
01:34:39 My learn friends can object to this question if they wish, but is it your evidence that your legal advisers told you to lie? No, sir. Of course not. No.
01:34:50 No, sir. Of course not. No. Sir, that was the last question that I wish to answer uh in open uh before we move to the private hearing. Might it be a convenient time to take the break in
01:35:03 a convenient time to take the break in which during which time the uh preparations can be made for the private hearing? Certainly. Uh we'll rise for 15 minutes.
01:35:16 [snorts]
02:46:15 Sir, thank you for the extra time. Mr. Saraki, you gave some evidence about talking to the psychiatrist Dr. Palmer. Yeah. Was it your understanding that
02:46:27 Yeah. Was it your understanding that there were circumstances in which Dr. Palmer might speak to your managers about what you had told him or did you
02:46:38 about what you had told him or did you understand uh the meeting with Dr. Palmer to be entirely confidential?
02:46:46 I I don't recall that sir. Um I think I may have assumed that he would anyway. um these were sort of informal appointments that we would have.
02:46:58 appointments that we would have. Did he say anything about patient confidentiality? No. Um I sorry to talk button in front of you. Certainly after my mother died,
02:47:10 of you. Certainly after my mother died, I think he did say something then because I had to attend an additional appointment with him for him to decide if I was okay or not. Um, and I think that was requested by the the back
02:47:23 that was requested by the the back office
02:47:24 office and presumably your understanding was the answer to that question was going to be relayed to the office. Uh, yes to that one. Yes. But the other ones um I I don't recall that. No.
02:47:37 ones um I I don't recall that. No. Uh, you gave some evidence about CWI contacts and you said at one point you could write down the names of two CWI
02:47:50 could write down the names of two CWI contacts.
02:47:51 contacts. Uhhuh.
02:47:52 Uhhuh. That had been involved in liaison with the Socialist Party and you your role in that. Could you write those
02:48:03 your role in that. Could you write those names down please? Um, do you mean foreign ones or people within the party that were CWI people who uh your evidence was uh were
02:48:14 people who uh your evidence was uh were instrumental in sending you to Italy? So, I'm assuming those on this side of the channel. Ah, right. So, it would have been
02:48:30 I've got another pen. Sorry.
02:48:36 Apologies. That one's just totally packed up. Thank you.
02:48:54 [snorts]
02:49:04 I have got a pen. Thanks a lot.
02:49:36 Out of an abundance of caution, I won't um utter those names just yet.
02:49:44 Can I move now to the question of some of the signatures we've got on the uh notes of interviews that I took you to this morning? Can we go first of all to
02:49:55 this morning? Can we go first of all to 721992
02:50:09 you'll see this is the typed interview notes from 2013 with Hearn. If we go to page 13,
02:50:20 that has been that 2013 document has been signed by you, hasn't it? Um,
02:50:30 Um, yeah. I mean, I'm just looking at plain text here, sir, but I can't see the signature under it, I'm afraid. As far as you can recall, did you sign this document?
02:50:42 Possibly. I I can't say more than that. So, and looking at the date, I would say that is my handwriting. So, take that down, please. Could we have up 726495?
02:50:59 Par uh if we just see what it is. This is the 2014 record. Could we go to page three, please?
02:51:08 We've seen underneath this signature block and we understand the signatures under this block to be those of your in your solicitor
02:51:19 solicitor Mr. Ingram. Yeah.
02:51:20 Yeah. And someone not you someone who is witnessing Mr. Ingram's signature. Yes.
02:51:30 Yes. Is it right you did not sign this document?
02:51:33 document? This is the one that I was shown just previously. Um, I did not recognize any of the signatures on there. No. Thank you. Can we take that down now, please?
02:51:48 Back to the question of racism, the publication of the Steven Lawrence inquiry report with its finding of
02:52:00 inquiry report with its finding of institutional racism against the Metropolitan Police Service was a seismic event, wasn't it? AB: Absolutely. Yes, sir. Presumably at the subject of conversation within
02:52:12 conversation within your circles within the police. Absolutely. Yes. And what was the reaction to those findings?
02:52:22 findings? Um,
02:52:24 Um, I think it it was mixed. Um, there were people that very very much believed that things had to change. There were others that would have voiced their
02:52:36 that would have voiced their dissatisfaction or disagreement with it. Um, these were their opinions. Um,
02:52:42 Um, where where did you sit in that debate? Um think things had to change, sir. Um why did things have to change?
02:52:53 why did things have to change? Well, because there was always, you know, we're talking well a long a long time back really, aren't we? There were different attitudes then. People spoke differently then. um even if you felt
02:53:06 differently then. um even if you felt you were not uh racist or had prejudice beliefs, there was still conversations that would take place where, you know, it would come out or it would look like that was the way. Um I I grew up as, you
02:53:21 that was the way. Um I I grew up as, you know, child of Italian immigrants. I used to get it all the time, but back then I would, and I still do, but that is just me personally cuz my age that I would look
02:53:32 personally cuz my age that I would look at the person and sort of laugh or just sort of tell them to where to go, for example, without swearing. Um, it it they were different times. So was your
02:53:43 they were different times. So was your position in about the response to the Steven Lawrence inquiry that things had to change because there had been racism in the police because everything I had read about it
02:53:55 because everything I had read about it and heard about it and I I did not read uh the the report but was that the police for lots of different reasons amongst which corruption was was a part
02:54:06 amongst which corruption was was a part of that had completely mucked up. Um, but I just attended the various sort of educational
02:54:17 educational meetings that we had to attend. Um, and as I say, I never ever believed myself to be racist. Um, and so I I was like, well, I don't do anything wrong. I don't treat people
02:54:29 do anything wrong. I don't treat people differently um because of their appearance. That doesn't quite answer my question. Sorry.
02:54:35 Sorry. You've told us where you were in the scale of responses. You were on the side of believing change was necessary. Yeah.
02:54:44 Yeah. Because of the way things had been. Yes.
02:54:46 Yes. It follows, doesn't it, from that answer that there were problems with racism within the Met? Oh, absolutely. As there were inside of the whole of society.
02:54:57 the whole of society. So your evidence to me yesterday that you didn't see any racism in the Met on reflection. Was that
02:55:10 in the Met on reflection. Was that understating the position? It it was. Yes. A mistake on my part as well, sir, cuz I thought I was talking about the unit. Um yes, of course. When I was a uniform police officer, um I I
02:55:23 I was a uniform police officer, um I I definitely came across officers that I didn't like because of what their point of view was. Um I apologize on race.
02:55:31 on race. Um on a whole raft of things, but yes, prejudices um definitely. Moving to Mr. Gilman, you gave some evidence about hearing that Mr. Gilman
02:55:43 evidence about hearing that Mr. Gilman had slapped a leaflet at Slade Green. Yeah,
02:55:47 Yeah, we do see some reference to the Slade Green instant in the document, but there is nothing specific to say that Mr. Gilman had slapped anybody.
02:55:58 Gilman had slapped anybody. Mhm.
02:55:59 Mhm. Mr. Gilman denies slapping anybody at Slade Green. Can I take it from the fact that you weren't there that you are in no position to say whether or not he actually did?
02:56:10 actually did? Uh, yeah, I'm afraid so, sir. Yes.
02:56:16 Genua, you gave some evidence that Mr. Frank Smith had thrown something that you could not identify
02:56:27 you could not identify at the Italian police in Genua. Is it right that Mr. Smith was the chief steward at the protest in Genua? I I I don't know, sir. I'm sorry. He
02:56:39 I I I don't know, sir. I'm sorry. He did he have a stewarding role? Um, I don't know. As I say, um, on the occasion that I saw him, it was at the height of what was quite unpleasant, um,
02:56:51 height of what was quite unpleasant, um, public disorder, um, engaging with the police and, um, I think, you know, there were all manner of things happening, but I I don't know. I I certainly was there
02:57:03 I I don't know. I I certainly was there with a number of full-timers, um, as I call them, from the Socialist Party. Um, yeah, I'm sorry. Was he wearing a Stewart's bib?
02:57:14 Was he wearing a Stewart's bib? No, not when I saw him. Um, it was a t-shirt which there was a lot of tear gas during the rounds that day and he had it up. It It was not mask masking up
02:57:26 had it up. It It was not mask masking up per se. It was it was to sort of I think try and fend off tear gas. Um, I can't remember what he had on underneath that if anything. You say you you were with
02:57:37 if anything. You say you you were with the Socialist Party contingent. Were you were you with as well as a Socialist Party contingent some Greek activists from Yes. from the this same political
02:57:49 from Yes. from the this same political background.
02:57:53 We are being told that Mr. Frank Smith denies ever throwing anything towards the Italian police or using any form of violence towards them. Might you be
02:58:04 violence towards them. Might you be mistaken in your identification of Mr. Smith as someone who threw things at the Italian police? Sir, I I could only recount what I saw. Um it was a very
02:58:17 Um it was a very stressful time. Um that that is what I saw.
02:58:23 Is it right that Mr. Frank Smith and others arranged a surprise birthday party for you at Tyab's restaurant in East L East London? Entirely
02:58:34 East L East London? Entirely possible. Yes.
02:58:38 How well did you know Frank Smith? Um, I got to know him quite well over the years.
02:58:47 How frequently did you see him? Um when we would be attending planning meetings um for the no platform work um
02:58:58 meetings um for the no platform work um we did not go to the same uh branch but he would occasionally turn up and obviously socials together. He you came to his flat to change his
02:59:10 He you came to his flat to change his locks.
02:59:12 locks. I I don't remember that. I thought that was someone else. Did you go to his home at any other time? I think we might have gone there for a meeting um on a couple of occasions.
02:59:26 Is it right that Mr. Smith never went to your flat? I I can't remember, sir. Sorry. You said in one of your reports um
02:59:37 You said in one of your reports um relating to his compensation payment that he was le suggested he was leading a luxurious lifestyle. The reality was he was blacklisted and had very little money. Is that right?
02:59:48 money. Is that right? I knew nothing about that, sir. Um, he he was a a builder, as far as I knew.
02:59:57 Frank Smith denies your portrayal of him as a violent man. Is it right that the truth is he wasn't a violent man? Um,
03:00:08 a violent man? Um, he's totally entitled um to put that point of view across. I was merely reporting on one thing that I saw.
03:00:20 Bradford July 2001.
03:00:25 You said that Mr. Frank Smith and Mario were both there. Like you two to think about that. We know that Mario went to prison at some point. Yeah.
03:00:35 Yeah. Is it right that Mario was in prison in July 2001? Could Could well have been. A group of us went up from London and it was a mix of
03:00:48 up from London and it was a mix of Socialist Party people with some anarchists.
03:00:53 You will recall that I asked you yesterday if you could help us with what the acronym RBF stands for. Yeah.
03:01:02 Yeah. Uh we've had uh two suggestions. One is that it is registry branch file and the other report brought forward.
03:01:16 other report brought forward. Do either of those ring any bells? Registry branch file would would make more sense to me sir because we used to refer to files etc.
03:01:28 refer to files etc. But whatever that acronym means, the context was, wasn't it? Because of a perceived threat to you as reported, they were going to be the subject of
03:01:40 they were going to be the subject of increased scrutiny by the Met. I I'm sorry, sir. I don't know.
03:01:50 Back to the question of locks. Is it right that you change the locks of Mr. Frank Smith, Dan Gilman, Steve Hedley, and Joe Batty.
03:02:03 and Joe Batty. The only one I can remember is um some friends of Mr. Gilman who lived [clears throat] in Hackne. I do not recall changing locks for anybody else.
03:02:25 Were their pink files kept by special branch?
03:02:32 branch? Were they particularly secret? The the name for the pink file or the nickname was the secret pink. Uh yes. And can you help us where in the
03:02:44 And can you help us where in the hierarchy they sat? Would an ordinary file on an individual in the IMOS registry
03:02:55 in the IMOS registry be pink? Or was a secret pink file an elevated classification? No, there there were an awful lot of pinks um um up in up in the registry.
03:03:07 pinks um um up in up in the registry. Um so yes, it generally would cover lots of different things. Um, they're the only sort of ones I can really remember to be honest.
03:03:19 Back to your Hearn transcripts of Hearn transcripts of interview. If we can have 738088
03:03:27 738088 up, please.
03:03:41 This is back to the 2013 interview. Page 28, please.
03:03:51 Near the top, there's reference to the visitors book. There was a visitor's book. I wasn't there for the commissioner's visit, but very interested in Mr. Condom's comments. Can
03:04:02 interested in Mr. Condom's comments. Can you help us with what Mr. Condom's comments were? No, sir. I'm very sorry. Um, as I say, the it had it it was still, I think,
03:04:13 the it had it it was still, I think, being signed even when I was there, but we didn't get um during my time a visit from the commissioner. Um, I I think I had a quick flick through it, but
03:04:24 had a quick flick through it, but I can't I can't remember the comment, sir. I'm sorry. Even if it wasn't in your time, what I'm I don't mind. All I'm interested in is whether you can remember what the comment was.
03:04:36 comment was. I'm sorry, sir. No. Uh, can we take that down now, please? You gave some evidence that you and your now ex-wife had socialized with some of
03:04:48 now ex-wife had socialized with some of your SDS colleagues. Yes.
03:04:51 Yes. Could you write down the names of the officers with whom you and your now ex-wife socialized?
03:05:05 It's quite short, sir, cuz it just was the one per Ah, no, my apologies.
03:05:31 Pop a question mark next to one. So it's because I I can't remember if she ever met them, but it would have been people I was close to at the time. Is that okay? Yes.
03:05:39 Yes. Or would you rather I just left them off?
03:06:04 Thank you.
03:06:36 [snorts]
03:06:50 Thank you. I think I'm right in saying that I can't after any of those uh names or or even nominals. Uh
03:07:01 can I move now to true spies?
03:07:07 who said that the true spies program was positive for the SDS and be careful about anonymity, please. It would have been um one of our um
03:07:21 It would have been um one of our um either detective inspector or DCI could have been both of them that said it. Um but I recall obviously there was some sort of get together at one of
03:07:32 was some sort of get together at one of the offices where it was discussed and that that was um that review was advanced. Can you recall hearing anything about
03:07:45 Can you recall hearing anything about how that program had come about? No sir.
03:07:50 No sir. Can you recall whether anything was being said about the role of Commander Pierce in that program coming about? Not not personally, sir. Um we
03:08:04 Not not personally, sir. Um we the first I heard about it was at at this sitdown meeting where we were told that a program was coming out um that related to the unit.
03:08:17 related to the unit. Move on to the evidence you gave today about HN67.
03:08:27 Yes sir. and the event at which uh the disclosure was made that he might have fathered a child. Was Bob Lambert present?
03:08:39 Was Bob Lambert present? No.
03:08:42 No. Was Roger Pierce there? I don't believe so. No. Um, I recall it as it was people from the unit and maybe some others outside who I didn't
03:08:54 some others outside who I didn't recognize who might have been former field officers, but I do not recall those two individuals. Why was HN67 not liked?
03:09:06 not liked? Um, that that was a personal thing for me. Um, I just, as I say, he he was never my one of my supervising officers, but the dealings I had had with him when
03:09:17 but the dealings I had had with him when I'd been assisting on other units, um, he'd just come across to me as a little bit coarse and difficult and looked down his nose at me. I don't know if it was just me or other people, but that was
03:09:28 just me or other people, but that was how I felt. When you say you don't know whether it was just you or other people, are we to understand your comment to Hearn to have been restricted to your personal view or was there a general
03:09:41 personal view or was there a general feeling that HN67 was not liked? I think it was a a personal view, but um as I say that might have been other people in the the the group that might have had
03:09:53 the the the group that might have had similar issues, but I think for me I just dropped that comment when I was chatting to them cuz I I was not a fan of his I think that's why I sort of recalled that discussion cuz I I I was
03:10:05 recalled that discussion cuz I I I was not a fan of of of him at that time or you know haven't seen him since. the names you wrote down at the start of this final session of questioning the CWI contacts in this country.
03:10:18 CWI contacts in this country. Um,
03:10:20 Um, Claire Doyle, Peter Tar. So, uh, I can for the record,
03:10:29 Mr. Saraki, those are my questions. Any re-examination? No. Um, that concludes the evidence that your given
03:10:40 concludes the evidence that your given to the inquiry. I cannot think of any reason why you should be recalled to give evidence, but it remains a faint possibility. Um, you will not learn about my conclusions until um next year.
03:10:52 about my conclusions until um next year. There are a lot of processes that have to be gone through understand before you'll be told about them. I understand that. Thank you, sir. We will now um adjourn and resume on
03:11:03 We will now um adjourn and resume on Monday at 10 a.m.