HN118 provides evidence on his recruitment into the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS), detailing the lack of formal training, the psychological toll of deep undercover work, and the recruitment process including psychometric testing and a home visit to his wife.
00:28:26 Good morning everybody. Uh today's proceedings are going to be uh transmitted uh after a 10-minute delay uh save for a short period which will probably take place uh immediately um
00:28:39 probably take place uh immediately um before we resume after lunch when there will be a short private hearing. Uh those with mobile telephones may use them to report what they hear in the hearing room, but only after 10 minutes
00:28:51 hearing room, but only after 10 minutes have elapsed since the event that they're reporting. They may not be used for recording or photography. Yes. Afternoon. I do solemnly I do solemnly sincerely and truly
00:29:03 sincerely and truly sincerely and truly declare and affirm declare and affirm that the evidence I shall give that the evidence I shall give shall be the truth shall be the truth the whole truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth and nothing but the truth
00:29:14 and nothing but the truth thank you
00:29:15 thank you please stand yes
00:29:20 yes you have been granted anonymity so I will refer to you by the nominal you have been given HN118 I'm going to begin by asking you about the witness statement uh that you
00:29:33 the witness statement uh that you provided to the inquiry. It is um dated the 12th of October 2023, runs to 100 pages. The reference number
00:29:44 runs to 100 pages. The reference number is MPS074847.
00:29:48 Could you please confirm that that is true and correct to the best of your knowledge and belief? Yes, it is. We can see from the statement on the
00:29:59 We can see from the statement on the first page, you say in paragraph three, I was deployed between July 2001 and December 2007,
00:30:10 December 2007, allowing for variations in the pace of my deployment. I believe my reporting generated approximately 4,000 formal reports in that period.
00:30:24 formal reports in that period. That's correct. Yes. Yes.
00:30:26 Yes. I wonder if we could just turn to page three, please, because you state in paragraph 8 that you did not conduct uh any undercover
00:30:39 you did not conduct uh any undercover policing or or use a cover identity prior to joining the SDS. And you say to the best of my knowledge, I'd not worked in conjunction with the SDS in any
00:30:50 in conjunction with the SDS in any capacity before I joined the unit. So in before you joined the SDS, you had no experience um of undercover
00:31:02 you had no experience um of undercover work.
00:31:03 work. I hadn't done any myself. No. Um and I I wasn't aware of of the SDS. Um, I had worked on operations where undercover officers were deployed, but that would
00:31:16 officers were deployed, but that would have been in a pure crime or or a CT, a counterterrorism um, perspective, if that makes sense. And so if we turn please to uh paragraph 22 of your
00:31:27 please to uh paragraph 22 of your statement on page eight, you say towards the bottom of paragraph 22, um I did not receive anything that I
00:31:39 22, um I did not receive anything that I would describe as training while I was in the SDS prior to my deployment as a UCO. This was disappointing to say the
00:31:51 UCO. This was disappointing to say the least. Uh and so with no personal experience of uh undercover work yourself and given what you've stated there uh in relation to uh not receiving
00:32:05 there uh in relation to uh not receiving anything that you would describe as training uh prior to your uh deployments, how well um were you prepared um for
00:32:16 how well um were you prepared um for the years 2001 to 2007 living the life of an undercover officer. How prepared were you? Um I I don't think I was very prepared or I wasn't very well prepared at all
00:32:28 or I wasn't very well prepared at all quite frankly. What why did you join the SDS? Um
00:32:34 Um two reasons really. Um firstly that and by far the most important was although it must seem um in the context of what we now know if that makes sense. It had
00:32:46 we now know if that makes sense. It had a reputation of, you know, you when I actually became aware of the SDS and um had started to speak to a couple of
00:32:57 had started to speak to a couple of people, you know, it was often described as a sort of one of the crown jewels of special branch um you know it was considered a an elite unit in some regard um and was sort of the pinnacle
00:33:10 regard um and was sort of the pinnacle if you like of actually the collection um of intelligence that special branch at that time was seeking to achieve. Um that was attractive to me. Uh I had done
00:33:22 that was attractive to me. Uh I had done a lot of operational work and it was you know something that seemed that you know it seemed that that you know it would be be great to be that part of that semi-
00:33:34 be great to be that part of that semi- elite unit if that makes sense. Now if we look at and sec sorry you asked I did say two things didn't I and and secondly and I won't shy away from this um I was aware
00:33:46 won't shy away from this um I was aware that there was you know a sort of a a bonus of overtime that you could rely on per month if that um I won't say that wasn't in my mind as well um I knew that
00:34:00 wasn't in my mind as well um I knew that the job would be very demanding with regard to hours and weekends friends away um long periods away from home but
00:34:12 away um long periods away from home but I was there you know I was setting up home with my wife looking to buy a house and you know it was certainly in my mind as well that it might provide a bit more
00:34:23 as well that it might provide a bit more financial security for the three or four years going forwards.
00:34:30 Now you describe at paragraph 10 of your statements that before you joined you sat very close to the officer we're
00:34:41 sat very close to the officer we're referring to is HN3 and you were aware at the time um you say and if we can just go back to paragraph uh 10 please on page three
00:34:53 on page three that you were aware that he was going through some sort of recruitment process.
00:34:58 process. Yes, that's right.
00:35:02 Were you aware that he was going through the SDS recruitment process at the time? Not straight away, but that became apparent um a bit later on.
00:35:17 You then set out in paragraph 11 that in late 1999
00:35:22 late 1999 that you um approached another a more experienced officer uh to essentially say that you let it be known
00:35:33 essentially say that you let it be known that you were interested in joining the Harry's which is what the SDS was referred to as. Is that right? Yes. Now in paragraph 11 you say you spoke to HN1 for about an hour about the
00:35:47 spoke to HN1 for about an hour about the role and he described it as deep undercover requiring immersion in a particular activist field. What did you
00:35:58 particular activist field. What did you understand at the time HN one meant when he was saying that it required immersion in a particular activist field? So this is when you you you let it be known you're interested in
00:36:09 you let it be known you're interested in joining the Harry's and then you speak to HM1 for about an hour and he talks about immersion. So what did you understand that to be? How did he explain it to you please? Um he explained that it was a you know
00:36:23 Um he explained that it was a you know you know for want of a more elegant turn phrase that it was a sort of full nine yards. You know you would be you'd be set up with somewhere you know with a cover identity. you'd be uh presenting
00:36:34 cover identity. you'd be uh presenting yourself as someone other than your real identity. Uh that that would be supported. You'd have a I think called it you know a duff flat or bedset uh where you would live uh and you would
00:36:48 where you would live uh and you would have some supporting documentation behind that and that you would be tasked with infiltrating a group um and finding out about them to the you know the
00:37:00 out about them to the you know the greatest extent that you could in this meeting and you say it's about an hour. Is there any reference to engaging in sexual relationships whilst
00:37:11 engaging in sexual relationships whilst undercover? Did that topic arise during that discussion with HN1 for an hour? No, it didn't. Did HM1, as he's describing
00:37:23 Did HM1, as he's describing uh the role, mention the impact that it could have on your own family life? Was that mentioned during this meeting? Yes. Yes, it was.
00:37:34 Yes. Yes, it was. What did he say about it, please? Um he he said that it could you know I remember him saying he said he said a it'll it'll change you it'll change you as a person. Uh
00:37:47 as a person. Uh he said that uh you know it would put demands and and stresses on your life back home simply because of the amount of hours the fact that you would always have to be available. um that
00:38:00 um that you know you'd be probably presenting yourself as a as a single man living somewhere else in London and you people would consider you to be available. you
00:38:11 would consider you to be available. you know, they would phone at any time of day and you had to be, you know, he sort of said, you know, you need to get get used to the idea that you might be on on an evening where you were actually at
00:38:22 an evening where you were actually at your own home that the phone would probably go and you'd have to rush out into the road and maybe have a half an hour phone call with somebody. Now the way you've just described that conversation or that part of the
00:38:33 conversation or that part of the conversation is that he told you you will be presenting as a single man and then you said so you'll have to consider yourself available but the way in which you just described it appeared to be
00:38:47 you just described it appeared to be 24 hours a day seven days a week if someone contacts you you've got to be available to answer it but again can I just go back to that description of HN1
00:38:58 just go back to that description of HN1 this
00:38:59 this one hour and he says that you will be presenting as a single man. Obviously you are aware of a number of UCOs that have had inappropriate relationships and
00:39:11 have had inappropriate relationships and you are very familiar uh with that the work of the inquiry but at the time did did that ring any bells with you or did that prompt a question
00:39:22 with you or did that prompt a question from you the reference to well you're going to be presenting as a single man did that prompt you to say or ask anything? Not not really not at that time. No. Um it was it was something that certainly crossed my mind later
00:39:33 that certainly crossed my mind later once I had um been uh I was much further down the the track if that makes sense or once I had successfully gone through the selection process. Uh it was
00:39:44 the selection process. Uh it was something then that I became aware of and I suppose I then you know thought yes of course that will be a factor. Um and how do I manage that? Now you you've explained the long hours and
00:39:57 explained the long hours and anyone can understand that working for long long hours that that can put pressure on other aspects of your life, family life. But you said that he said it would change you. Okay. So again when
00:40:10 it would change you. Okay. So again when he said that not just describing long hours going to be hard work fine but when he says this is going to change you did that prompt a question from you for example what do you mean by that? How
00:40:21 example what do you mean by that? How how did it change? How was it going to change me? How did it change you? Did anything like that? Yeah, it did. Absolutely. He he I can't forgive me. I mean, I don't wish
00:40:33 I can't forgive me. I mean, I don't wish to sound mey mouthed. It's a long time ago. Um
00:40:37 ago. Um he I think he said something along the lines of the fact that, you know, it could come at a some measure of psychological cost. uh that you know other people had struggled with coming
00:40:49 other people had struggled with coming back out at the other end of their deployments and and returning to the real world. Did you turn that question on him and and ask him, well, you're you're saying that what about you? What's what happened to you? Or was that not
00:41:00 happened to you? Or was that not discussed? Not not really. I knew him relatively well um in so much as I I didn't work on the same side of the business as he did, but um I had I had been involved in jobs
00:41:13 but um I had I had been involved in jobs and operations where you know, he was running his side of that. So, we we we didn't know each other well, but I I could see that he clearly was thriving back where he was and didn't seem to be
00:41:26 back where he was and didn't seem to be having any huge issues. So, I think I took it as red that he'd made a good job of coming back both, you know, to the organization and settling in. So, after that one hour, were you quite
00:41:37 So, after that one hour, were you quite excited about the prospect or h how were you at the end of that 1 hour meeting? No, I was absolutely. I mean, I you know, he'd asked me some other questions. He'd asked me what I'd done before joining the police. Um, he he he
00:41:52 before joining the police. Um, he he he did ask me about my own sort of domestic situation, if that makes sense. I think he knew that I was married um and hadn't been married very long. Um,
00:42:03 been married very long. Um, and
00:42:03 and is this in the context of you're going to have if you are successful, you're going to have a lot of hours doing this work. Yeah. Was there any other way in which he
00:42:15 Was there any other way in which he said, "Well, there's going to be pressure on your partner at the time." No, not really. You know, he you know, he he was quite he was quite blunt about it though. He said, "Look, you know, it will it comes it comes at some level of
00:42:27 will it comes it comes at some level of cost. It will probably change you." um it wasn't quite I don't want to present it as be careful what you wish for but that was kind of there was a
00:42:38 for but that was kind of there was a little bit of that as a subtext running underneath if that makes sense and and just finally before moving on from this meeting with HN1 after that meeting what was your understanding of how it
00:42:50 what was your understanding of how it might change you in at the time if we if we asked you at the time well you know you've been met with HN1 who said well it could change you what was your understanding of what he meant by that
00:43:01 understanding of what he meant by that how would you have answered that? Um I I I think that I think that he meant and I understood it. It's a very unique role. Um you know there's very
00:43:12 unique role. Um you know there's very little um you can do in your own mind to actually know or experience like you know being a father for the first time. you can never, you know, it's going to
00:43:23 you can never, you know, it's going to be it's going to be um a huge event in your life, but it's difficult to know until you're actually um stood in those shoes, if that makes sense.
00:43:37 You used that as an example and we'll we'll come on to it in due course, but as time went by,
00:43:50 course, but as time went by, were you known as as the daddy or the father in the SDS at all in terms of your role amongst other SDS officers because of how long you'd been there for?
00:44:01 for? Right at the end. Yeah, I say right at the end. probably for the last year or so.
00:44:05 so. What was the description exactly? There was a rather odd nickname that was field daddy. Um, and if you were the field daddy, it meant that you were basically you had
00:44:17 meant that you were basically you had been serving in that undercover role for the longest period of time. So, it passed down, if that makes sense. If someone was ahead of me and they' done five years, um, they left. I was the
00:44:28 five years, um, they left. I was the most senior in terms of time served. you know, the Phil Daddy role would go down to the next, you know, man or woman in that role before and then they would adopt that and they the Phil Daddy
00:44:41 adopt that and they the Phil Daddy really
00:44:42 really it was a nickname and it just kind of it it referred to you in your role as being the sort of liaison between the shop floor a more elegant turn of phrase and
00:44:54 floor a more elegant turn of phrase and sort of management in the back office. if there were any if there were any sort of uh no gripes or representations that needed putting forward. It was a field daddy's job, you know, at one of the end
00:45:07 daddy's job, you know, at one of the end of one of the regular meetings just to seek a quick impromptu meeting with the boss and say, "Look, you know, the field feels this way or is there something we could do about that?"
00:45:18 could do about that?" Now, I I'm asking you about a time when you're just having this one-hour meeting with HN1's before you've even joined the SDS. Yes.
00:45:26 SDS. Yes. And the position of field daddy right at the end.
00:45:29 the end. Yes.
00:45:30 Yes. But before leaving that meeting with HN1.
00:45:32 HN1. Yeah.
00:45:33 Yeah. When he said it it will change you, did it change you? Yeah, 100%. Absolutely. How did it change you? Um,
00:45:42 Um, it
00:45:44 it it it it changed my outlook on life. It it just changes you, you know. It's a demand I you know I'm it's a demanding role and it's a demanding role um
00:45:56 role and it's a demanding role um psychologically which didn't sit very some of it didn't sit very easily with me and even as I say those words I am extraordinarily mindful of the
00:46:09 I am extraordinarily mindful of the damage and long hurt you know the awful situation that has happened with the deceived women who've had um you know
00:46:20 deceived women who've had um you know sexual relationships with officers who wear UCOs and I'm not for one moment comparing my own
00:46:29 own uh
00:46:30 uh discomfort or stress at that time and still to this day with that you know that is as of nothing compared to what has happened to those women but I found
00:46:43 has happened to those women but I found that it I found that the job came with a cost Um it's I'm going to press you a little more on that. So when you say at a cost in terms
00:46:54 that. So when you say at a cost in terms of how it changed you I I mean I um it's difficult to describe really um the role
00:47:06 the role essentially you when you're living as this other person you are lying with every breath that you take. Um, and you can get your
00:47:17 that you take. Um, and you can get your head around or I'm only speaking for myself. You know, I could get my head around that, the utility of that with dealing with the people
00:47:28 dealing with the people that I was tasked to infiltrate. But it's not just them, if that makes sense. You're you're lying to everybody all of the time. You're lying to the
00:47:40 all of the time. You're lying to the person who you buy a pint of milk from at the local shop who knew me obviously as Simon Wellings. Those people in my community, every time you put £5 on your gas card or something or have a a chat
00:47:52 gas card or something or have a a chat with someone, you know, you're you're basically not actually that person. You're not telling the truth. you're lying when you go home.
00:48:03 lying when you go home. Um, and speak to your wife and she says, you look a bit stressed. Are you okay? And you say, yes, I'm fine. Um, but
00:48:15 And you say, yes, I'm fine. Um, but much, you know, much further down the track, especially towards the end, I was a self-aware enough to know that things weren't right with my own sort of
00:48:26 things weren't right with my own sort of mental health. I started displaying behaviors which you know I recognized you know with the aid of Google that were you know that I
00:48:38 Google that were you know that I probably wasn't doing very well quite frankly I could give you some detail about that but
00:48:47 because we're on this this topic from what point was that right from the start or was that at a point during your deployment
00:48:58 No, it wasn't it wasn't right from the start. It was it was I think it was commulative um kind of built up. I I I certainly I certainly had it when
00:49:11 certainly had it when um
00:49:13 um you you will be aware I'm sure and I'm sure we'll cover this that I um was challenged and um thrown out of my original
00:49:24 original um target organization and then I was asked and I also sought to sort of move sideways into another emerging group group that were already up and running
00:49:35 group that were already up and running um who were much more sort summit focused. Um, as that happened, um, and especially with the change of management that happened sort of in the
00:49:46 management that happened sort of in the last year or 15 months ago, I just found myself being stretched very very thin psychologically. I I couldn't walk into a a bathroom or a
00:49:58 a a bathroom or a a bar or this room here without quickly having to calculate the number of ceiling tiles or floor tiles on the wall. I'd be doing the maths to quickly work out how many tiles there were. I
00:50:11 work out how many tiles there were. I would constantly replace sentences in my head
00:50:15 head and very I got good at this, work out whether there was an even or an odd. I know this sounds a bit crazy that I would very quickly be able to
00:50:27 that I would very quickly be able to count or try to count whether there was an odd or an um an even number of characters in that sentence and other things which I you know I didn't seem
00:50:39 things which I you know I didn't seem very natural. We we we we are dealing with a number of topics broadly. You you mentioned the the compromise which of course we will come on to in due course. But from what you've just described to
00:50:50 But from what you've just described to us about
00:50:51 us about being stretched very thin and and in terms of when I asked well when when did this really start taking effect and and you your answer was around that time of the compromise. Looking back now with
00:51:02 the compromise. Looking back now with the benefit of hindsight, is that the time that you that your deployment should have come to an end in your own mind? Looking back now, given the description you've just given,
00:51:20 yes, probably. But I was certainly part of the I don't I don't want to sound as if I'm shifting the blame or or the potential
00:51:31 shifting the blame or or the potential blame to somebody else for that. I thought really very hard after my compromise to still be out in the field and to and to continue the work. You know the the next G8 was coming up. We've been working towards that. I knew
00:51:43 We've been working towards that. I knew that, you know, there was a huge amount of requirement and pressure being put on the organization to to develop that intelligence and I wanted to keep going, but in hindsight, I probably should have
00:51:54 but in hindsight, I probably should have come off then. Um, that would have been the the better thing to do. Yes. going to take you back to that period of time before you even
00:52:05 that period of time before you even began uh deployed as an SDS UCO and you describe in it's the next paragraph in fact in your statement that where you say that
00:52:20 that where you say that it's right in the middle of this paragraph you say I believe I was told very shortly after these psychometric assessments that I was a suitable candidate for the SDS could you give us an idea of what those psychometric assessments were and appreciate the
00:52:32 assessments were and appreciate the questions I ask you about events that took place some time ago. Could you just help us with what those psychometric assessments were uh and why you think you did well in them? You you were
00:52:43 you did well in them? You you were considered suitable candidates. Um they were sort of personality testing questions. Um where uh we we we we went
00:52:55 questions. Um where uh we we we we went away from the the facility that was there or were we or perhaps to another room in that facility maybe upstairs to one of the the bedrooms and I sat with
00:53:07 one of the the bedrooms and I sat with um I don't want to say her name if I'm not meant to forgive me. Um
00:53:11 Um if you're ever in doubt about a name it's very easy just write on the piece of paper. I sat with the person who was conducting the the testing and she um you know just gave me a a watch of paper
00:53:24 you know just gave me a a watch of paper which was a bunch of questions or scenarios and you there was sort of five answers I think for each one about how you felt about it or what you thought would be the right thing to do.
00:53:36 would be the right thing to do. Some of the questions seemed quite blunt and I'm sure they weren't. I'm sure there were sort of control questions if that makes sense. But I can remember one of the questions for instance stuck in
00:53:47 of the questions for instance stuck in my mind was something along the lines of when do you feel most comfortable and the two scenarios was you know enjoying a relaxing evening having dinner with friends or the other option
00:54:00 dinner with friends or the other option was walking alone in woods at night. It's, you know, so it was at a probably the more extreme end, but it was a it was a psychological profile, I think.
00:54:12 was a psychological profile, I think. And and and it was timed. You only had, you know, you you couldn't sit there and dwell. I think there were, you know, there were 200 questions and you had I can't remember 60 minutes or something. Yeah. You you describe after all of
00:54:23 Yeah. You you describe after all of these years still remembering those questions. Well, that one. Well, how did you answer that one? Well, perhaps predictably having the evening with friends. Um let's move to in fact paragraph 13
00:54:36 let's move to in fact paragraph 13 because you describe the recruitment process that you believe you spoke to DINN53
00:54:44 DINN53 in the corridors of New Scotland Yard on at least one occasion.
00:54:52 occasion. Yes.
00:54:53 Yes. And you say that this may have been a chance meeting wii with him. Is that right?
00:54:57 right? Yes. Yeah. I I I I had worked in a in a unit, a field where he was a you know a rank or two above me um at that time. So I knew him quite well but
00:55:10 that time. So I knew him quite well but I I bumped into him literally in the corridor I think. Yeah, that's right. And he the way you describe it is he didn't say anything um particularly significant to you at that time. No. No, I don't think so. But as you
00:55:22 No. No, I don't think so. But as you described in paragraph 14, you then have the final interview for the SDS and you describe on the panel that same uh officer HN53, but also HN58 and DS Steve
00:55:36 officer HN53, but also HN58 and DS Steve Titty. Yes, please bear with me. Yes,
00:55:41 Yes, that's right. Yeah, here 1058 53 and student you've described to us and you gave an example of one of the questions you remember from the psychometric assessment but here you say you're
00:55:52 assessment but here you say you're required to address a number of scenarios
00:55:55 scenarios and
00:55:57 and they were given headings such as racial violence and one of them was sex and drugs and rock and roll and I want to ask you in relation to what you remember
00:56:08 ask you in relation to what you remember of that scenario I I think it was I I don't I I don't recall it being about sex or sexual
00:56:19 recall it being about sex or sexual relationships. I do definitely recall that the scenario they read out to me was about drugs use. You know, how would you react if you were offered these drugs um you know while you were out
00:56:31 drugs um you know while you were out with members of your target group? And the common theme of all of the scenarios was um that it sort of they escalated if
00:56:43 was um that it sort of they escalated if that makes sense. You know, if someone said to you said to me, "Oh, here's you know, I know some from the very lowest level of someone just, you know, passing a joint around a bit bit of cannabis or
00:56:54 a joint around a bit bit of cannabis or whatever." Um and you just say, "No, thank fine. I don't smoke or whatever." you know that then they'd be they would escalate and people putting more pressure on you to take drugs or um you
00:57:05 pressure on you to take drugs or um you know you don't do this you don't do that you know and and just to sort of to see how you would deal with that if that makes sense and how about you would would handle that or manage that situation. Are there any questions about
00:57:17 situation. Are there any questions about sexual relationships? You're describing, for example, in terms of drugs being put into more and more sort of pressured situations. Um, but what about specifically in relation to scenarios or
00:57:28 specifically in relation to scenarios or questions about the possibility of sexual advances towards you, how you would deal with them? I
00:57:35 I I I I don't remember that. No, I don't genuinely don't remember one of those was asked of me. Um, no, I'm pretty sure it wasn't. I I I
00:57:46 no, I'm pretty sure it wasn't. I I I absolutely have a very clear memory that one of them was perhaps the one that's racial violence. I can What do you recall of that scenario? It was
00:57:57 It was um
00:57:59 um it was uh couched in the terms I want I'm going to choose my words carefully into a certain group. um uh and you're with uh a bunch of other young men on a
00:58:10 with uh a bunch of other young men on a tube carriage on a on a train and one of them starts um racially abusing uh a woman of I don't know Indian or Pakistani heritage or dual heritage um
00:58:23 Pakistani heritage or dual heritage um and and it was basically how far would you let this situation escalate before you revealed your true identity as a as a police officer if that makes sense.
00:58:34 a police officer if that makes sense. How far how far up this sort of escalating scenario would you go before you felt you had to show out if you like? I know it's not again very elegant
00:58:45 like? I know it's not again very elegant turn of phrase but yeah this is the last interview before you became an SDS officer. Yes, this was Yeah. could you explain to us from what you
00:58:56 could you explain to us from what you can recall how you responded to that in relation to specific um scenario of racial violence when you would Absolutely. Yeah. No, definitely. Um I I
00:59:07 Absolutely. Yeah. No, definitely. Um I I think that the the group that was specified, again, I want to tread carefully, but the group that was specified that I would have been a member of on that train is a group that you would not be
00:59:20 train is a group that you would not be surprising for them to be demonstrating that behavior at all. It would be bread and butter to them. So in the very first instance, if
00:59:31 them. So in the very first instance, if it was just, you know, some derogatory racial slur that was probably completely, you know, common parliament for them to be using, I would just tolerate it, you know, and I wouldn't
00:59:44 tolerate it, you know, and I wouldn't say anything at all. But then that that that wouldn't be my answer. But then they the, you know, the board it was quite, you know, it was quite it was quite um fullon this interview board. You know, it was quite nononsense in
00:59:55 You know, it was quite nononsense in you. You come kind of you know why you're here. sit yourself down, crack on. You're going to hear a number of scenarios. Bang, bang, bang. Um, and in this particular one with racial violence, someone would say, any one of
01:00:07 violence, someone would say, any one of those three people could say, "Okay, that hasn't worked. Now he's doing this and he's trying to rifle through her shopping bag and, you know, it's still being, you know, using lots of racial
01:00:18 being, you know, using lots of racial language towards her. What do you do?" And it just escalated along there till escalated to the point where, you know, I remember I remember answering, well, I would try and calm him down. I would
01:00:30 would try and calm him down. I would say, look, you're being ridiculous. Don't's not worth it. Um, you know, leave her alone. You know, we're not here for her. We're here for, you know, these people. Um, and again, they would say, "Okay, that's fine. That hasn't
01:00:42 say, "Okay, that's fine. That hasn't worked. Now he's now he's pulling her out of the chair. you know, how far would you go before you actually went beyond the stages saying, "Stop. Don't be Darth. We're going to get
01:00:53 Don't be Darth. We're going to get arrested. Look, we're on, you know, back even then, you know, there were cameras on trains. Look, we're all on CCTV. We're you're going to get us nicked for something which is totally, you know,
01:01:05 something which is totally, you know, not why we're out today. This isn't why we're here. Leave her alone." Engineer a physical confrontation with him. Try and get his focus on you. And what you've just described
01:01:17 just described was successful in the sense that you passed this interview and reasonably swiftly afterwards. You were transferred to the SDS in April 2001.
01:01:28 to the SDS in April 2001. Yes, I think that's right. Yeah. Now, I'm going to ask and it's set out in the next paragraph your statement family life at that time. So I wonder if just to get a better picture o of that
01:01:40 just to get a better picture o of that because you explain here that you were in a long-term relationship when you first made your approach to the SDS but by the time this recruitment stage so
01:01:51 by the time this recruitment stage so this the interview that you've just described were you married at that time the interview okay you describe having a a young child again did you have a young child at the time that you were being
01:02:02 child at the time that you were being interviewed just describing yes very
01:02:07 Now, you refer again to HN53, but in this context, you say that he visited you and your wife at home. And I'd like
01:02:18 you and your wife at home. And I'd like to ask you a few questions about that. What when he arrived at your home, what what topics did he discuss with you?
01:02:31 what topics did he discuss with you? Um well, he again he um he said, you know, he basically made it clear that it was a a home visit just to sort of, you know, see what our domestic living
01:02:43 know, see what our domestic living arrangements were like. Um I'm sure he was trying to sort of gauge, you know, is this a happy house? You know, are we sort of all squared away? Um but then, you know, he sat us down or we he didn't
01:02:55 you know, he sat us down or we he didn't sit us down. We had tea, you know, we was we were talking and he he ex, you know, he sort of briefed my wife, I suppose, in about, you know, the the
01:03:06 suppose, in about, you know, the the likelihood of the the demands that would be made of me, how it would affect our home life. Um, I remember him saying, uh,
01:03:17 you know, you that, um, myself, you know, you'd have to dress differently, look differently. You didn't dip in and out of that, if that makes sense. My appearance, the way I wore my hair, you
01:03:29 appearance, the way I wore my hair, you know, I had piercings and stuff like that beforehand. And it wasn't like you've got I remember him being very clear with my wife, you know, he's not going to be coming home, you know,
01:03:40 going to be coming home, you know, having a shower, brushing his hair, taking his earring out, dressing like he would normally dress when you're going about. He's going to have to stay looking like that all of the time in
01:03:52 looking like that all of the time in case we happen to bump into anybody while we were out and about in our in our real life. If that makes sense. Did he ever say words to the effect that look if you've got any concerns here's for example the office number or you can
01:04:04 for example the office number or you can if you have concerns about your husband you can you can always phone us on this number or you can contact this person. Was that that sort of thing ever said? I don't think it was then. It certainly was later. Yes.
01:04:16 was later. Yes. Did he highlight well it's very important that um this is all kept secret as well when he's addressing your your wife? Yes.
01:04:25 Yes. Were you for example sat around a kitchen table on a on a sofa together or or was he addressing you separately? Could you help us with what that particular meeting looked like? We we were we were in the living room.
01:04:36 We we were we were in the living room. So we I yeah I I suspect that my wife and I were on the sofa and he was in the armchair and you know our our child was on on the rug in front of us as I remember.
01:04:47 remember. Was anything said about pressure on the marriage or anything of that nature at all?
01:04:53 all? I mean pressure on the marriage only in only in the context that I was likely to be very busy. I think he said that they were potentially teeing me up for a um a
01:05:06 were potentially teeing me up for a um a field that was, you know, considered very high priority at the highest level at the moment and that I was going to be, you know, I was going to it was going to be pretty fullon um from the
01:05:18 going to be pretty fullon um from the get-go.
01:05:20 get-go. Was there anything at all that was said about or alluded to sexual relationships in the context of
01:05:31 sexual relationships in the context of potential approaches during your deployment? Was anything said at this time or indeed any time to to your wife about this? No, it wasn't. And and if it had been,
01:05:42 No, it wasn't. And and if it had been, you know, if it had been and that had been in any context of it's it would be tolerated
01:05:51 tolerated or even encouraged, it would have been a very short meeting. I suspect you know cuz I think um you know I think at that stage my wife would have sort of said
01:06:03 stage my wife would have sort of said let me stop you there. You know clearly my husband have taken a cup of tea back. um you know my husband and I have to have a conversation at that stage. So no
01:06:14 have a conversation at that stage. So no it it wasn't no.
01:06:20 So if HN53 had said, well, it is something that happens, if that was made clear in this meeting,
01:06:33 if that was made clear in this meeting, your evidence is that that would potentially have your your deployment would have ended before it had begun. 100%. All right. Absolutely. Both from my both from my point of view and from
01:06:44 my both from my point of view and from from hers. How long was this meeting roughly speaking?
01:06:51 speaking? I
01:06:55 I I would say about 45 minutes 45 minutes to an hour. And at the end of it, what was the what was the mood like when HM53 leaves? Was it was it upbeat and positive or
01:07:06 it was it upbeat and positive or No, it it was it was fine. No, it was fine. It was clearly going to be, you know, it was clearly going to be a a substantial commitment and we we
01:07:18 substantial commitment and we we realized
01:07:19 realized I think we both I think we had another cup of tea together and said, "Look, it is going to be tough, isn't it? It's going to be hard." Um, but h, you know, she she knew that I
01:07:30 but h, you know, she she knew that I wanted to do it. Um, you know, she was supportive of that. Um, and yeah, I think we just we probably rather naively, you know, were
01:07:41 probably rather naively, you know, were quite looking looking forward to it. Um, I mean,
01:07:45 I mean, forgive me, I'm just uh No, it's a different paragraph. If I was going to say it was um it was it was clear that although I was going to be very very busy especially in the
01:07:57 very very busy especially in the evenings and weekends, it would allow us some freedom during the day because I was clearly going to be uh a you know a single bloke and I would have a job. So
01:08:08 single bloke and I would have a job. So it probably looked like I could do the morning you know nursery run. Um you know and although that wasn't a thing then it was coming up if that makes sense. Um, and so that that seemed that
01:08:20 sense. Um, and so that that seemed that seemed quite attractive. It also, you know, but we weren't, you know, we weren't sort of looking at it through rose tinted spectacles. You know, realized there weren't going to be very many evenings at home, especially
01:08:32 very many evenings at home, especially at first when I was getting established. Um, and, you know, weekends were going to be sort of a thing of the past. But was anything said about time away from
01:08:43 was anything said about time away from home? So not just the long hours but for extended periods of time because you you refer to one occasion where in fact you're away for about 25 days
01:08:54 you're away for about 25 days consecutively I think you you say and during that period you you're out of contact w with your wife. Was anything said about that aspect of being away? Well between my wife and I or
01:09:07 Well between my wife and I or Yes. And yeah, it was. And we realized that was going to be quite tough, that was going to be quite difficult. Um, at some stage at some stage, and I can't remember
01:09:19 at some stage, and I can't remember quite when whether it was I can't remember when it was quite where, but it it became apparent there would be a communications channel, if that makes sense. If I was if I was deployed away or overseas or whatever
01:09:32 deployed away or overseas or whatever abroad, there would be a um a way that you know I would always be there would be a cover officer in the same country as me and he or she would be able to
01:09:43 as me and he or she would be able to ring my wife and say he's fine you know this 24-hour period he's fine don't worry crack on some specific way in which you've worded this which I want to ask you about. I
01:09:54 this which I want to ask you about. I wonder if you could turn to page 28 in HM118's statement. So it's paragraph 80 in your statement
01:10:06 and you just in fact what you were describing as the some advantages in relation to weekday mornings at home. Yes. Uh but then you say the downside
01:10:18 Yes. Uh but then you say the downside was I spent long periods away from home as I did not trust myself to speak with my wife when I was away. She was reliant on updates from my cover officer which tended to be quite limited.
01:10:29 tended to be quite limited. Yes.
01:10:30 Yes. What do you mean by that? You didn't trust yourself to speak with your wife when you were away. What what were you conveying there please? I just wanted a in my own head I wanted
01:10:42 I just wanted a in my own head I wanted a sort of separation of church and state if that makes sense. I I thought that it would I didn't have the sort of psychological capability to sort
01:10:53 sort of psychological capability to sort of dip in and out if that makes sense. And even if it had been um
01:11:00 um tenable to sort of break clean away from your target group for 10 minutes to have a quick phone call um and speak on, you know, do a voice call with my wife. I didn't tr I in my own head that would
01:11:12 didn't tr I in my own head that would have made me, you know, suddenly you're you're out of the Wellings persona and you're back to the being the other bloke. And I just didn't trust myself to be able to do
01:11:23 didn't trust myself to be able to do that without getting upset or just, you know, I just didn't want to do that. If I was out as Wellings, I wanted to be Wellings, if that makes sense. Um and
01:11:35 Wellings, if that makes sense. Um and and and so in in this same sentence you you say that she was reliant on updates from your cover officer. To what extent was she as far as you are aware in fact
01:11:46 was she as far as you are aware in fact updated by your cover officer or indeed anyone from the SDS? Could you just help us with that? How much contact the SDS had uh w with your wife in terms of
01:11:58 had uh w with your wife in terms of keeping her up to date particularly when you are away for extended periods of time. if if I was away, she would get a call every 24 hours. Um, and just and it would be quite short, you know, was
01:12:09 would be quite short, you know, was saying, "Yep, he's fine. Heard from him, you know, 30 or 40 times yesterday. Um, I've actually seen him. You know, I've I've actually been able to get eyes on
01:12:20 I've actually been able to get eyes on him. He looks fine. Um, you know, I'll call you tomorrow." It just
01:12:26 just that is very specific to when you were away.
01:12:29 away. Yes. You also mentioned in your statement that as far as you just described the meeting with right at the beginning with HN53, but one of the things that you did say earlier in your statement was in fact there was no
01:12:40 statement was in fact there was no ongoing contact between the managers uh and your wife whilst you're deployed. So leaving aside when you were away and just letting her know these fines have been spoken to.
01:12:52 been spoken to. Is that right? That's after that first meeting with HN53, the managers were there wasn't that ongoing contact. Yeah. I Yeah, we we spoke about this the other day actually in anticipation of
01:13:04 other day actually in anticipation of coming here. Yeah. That apart from that, she never had any contact whatsoever um with management. she used to hear from my cover. Um, and he or she would ring if I was deployed away. Um, and it
01:13:18 ring if I was deployed away. Um, and it required a cover because it wouldn't always if I was out somewhere else out in the UK. Uh, but apart from that, she Yeah, she never heard from anybody. And so if we I'm going to ask you to look at one of your authorizations. It's
01:13:30 look at one of your authorizations. It's NPS0526807.
01:13:33 It's at tab B86. in your volume three. It's page 15 of that authorization, please. Thank you.
01:13:48 We have various of your authorizations. You can see here we're subway down this particular one 9A. Can you see that heading psychological uh risks there?
01:14:00 heading psychological uh risks there? So, we're just going to expand that. And if we just start at the middle of that paragraph, it says, "Regular contact is maintained with the officer's partner to ensure that they fully understand the
01:14:11 ensure that they fully understand the support network available to them and the officer. Visits to the officer's home address take place on a number of occasions throughout the year to reinforce that provision of welfare. In
01:14:22 reinforce that provision of welfare. In addition, UCO ring has access to scheduled as well as odd ad hoc sessions with an experienced psychiatrist." Now, this form of wording is repeated a number of times in your various
01:14:33 number of times in your various authorizations, but that reference to regular contact uh with your partner and visits to your home address uh take place on a number
01:14:44 home address uh take place on a number of occasions throughout the year. Is that just wrong? Yes, I'm afraid it is. The regular contact is outside of me being deployed, you know, away in that
01:14:56 being deployed, you know, away in that context. Yes. where it says regular contact is maintained with the officers partner to ensure that they fully understand. Yeah. Yeah. Over and above what we've discussed when I was deployed
01:15:07 discussed when I was deployed internationally there was no cover whatsoever and there were certainly no further visits to the home. So leaving aside that 45minute visit by HN53
01:15:18 HN53 were there any other visits to the home address
01:15:23 address to reinforce the provision of welfare at all during all the years that you were in the SDS? No, they weren't. Did you ever see any of these authorizations? We have a number of your authorizations. Would you have seen that
01:15:34 authorizations. Would you have seen that at the time? I obviously they were in the bundle that I was um or I think they were or a thing, but no, I I didn't I I suspect it was sort
01:15:46 no, I I didn't I I suspect it was sort of put under my nose. You know, it was there was always you kind of, you know, your cover officer would say or it would become obvious that your renewal was coming up. um and have a bit of a chat
01:15:58 coming up. um and have a bit of a chat about it, but it was uh it wasn't. No, I would I think I was saying yes, good news. Your renewal's come through. Here it is. I think I had to sign it, I think. Um or signature to that rings a
01:16:11 think. Um or signature to that rings a bell. That may not be right. Forgive me. But no, not not not normally. It certainly wasn't a sort of one. It wasn't a two and throw process if that makes sense. all the a the vast majority
01:16:24 makes sense. all the a the vast majority of sort of administration and um paperwork was was done in the background and and I think that was probably quite deliberate. You know, they didn't want you to feel like a like a policeman
01:16:38 you to feel like a like a policeman carry, you know, filling out police forms and thinking about acts and sections. That wasn't, you know, that was the sort of thing that could get you into trouble. I I want to go back in fact to something that I mentioned um at
01:16:50 fact to something that I mentioned um at the beginning of your evidence. It's paragraph 22 page 8 of your statement. I wonder if we can please take this document down and go back to uh 118 statement. So I want to move on to
01:17:03 statement. So I want to move on to training the guidance that you were given before you you're deployed. And and just to be clear, because here you say at the bottom of this paragraph, I
01:17:15 say at the bottom of this paragraph, I did not receive anything that I would describe as training while I was in the SDS prior to my deployment as a UCO. This is disappointing to say the least. Now
01:17:27 Now C could you help us with what you mean by that? Was there any training at all? No, no, there was no training. None
01:17:39 No, no, there was no training. None whatsoever. The tradecraft manual. What do you remember that? The description of a manual suggests something that that's printed, but
01:17:50 printed, but all uh bound together, but what was it physically? It was
01:17:56 I'm going to speak very frankly. It was a it was a tatty sort of dogged blue binder as I you know not unlike this pink one but blue
01:18:07 not unlike this pink one but blue um sort of tossed on in the back of a filing cabinet. I found it myself rather than um being directed towards it. I remember that while I was in the back office and then began to read it, but it
01:18:21 office and then began to read it, but it was it wasn't you know when you know being described as a trade craft manual sort of suggests that it is a structured uh a structured
01:18:32 uh a structured in you know it does what it says on the tin. You know it's it's a structured series of um instructions or training material about tradecraftraft in being an undercover officer. It wasn't that at all. It was a series of anecdotes about
01:18:45 all. It was a series of anecdotes about people's experiences of being in the field and then a slightly longer
01:18:52 five six section sort of debrief if you like with lots of some dos and don'ts which are a lot of them were quite obvious quite frankly. So no one asked you to read it. You stumbled across it.
01:19:03 stumbled across it. That's correct. Yes. I'm going to ask if we could just bring up um part of that. It is MPS05275
01:19:11 597 please. So it's at your tab B6 which is in volume two and I wonder if we could just turn to pages 27 to 20 um
01:19:23 we could just turn to pages 27 to 20 um 8.
01:19:24 8. Could could I just add I mean not some qualification to my previous answer. I I wasn't directed to I I suspect I found it quite early. I think I'd only been in the back office a couple of weeks. It
01:19:35 the back office a couple of weeks. It may well be that they were going to direct me towards it at some stage. I was still very much in the early days of sort of putting the beginnings of my legend together and stuff. Now, in you
01:19:46 legend together and stuff. Now, in you comment in your statement about 5.6.3, I'm just going to go through it and then I'm going to ask you about it. So 5.6.3, while you may try to avoid any sexual encounter, there may come a time when
01:19:57 encounter, there may come a time when your lack of interest may become suspicious. In these circumstances, you can either try to introduce an appropriate male or female from your own relations or friends to meet the weareries on a few occasions or ask the
01:20:08 weareries on a few occasions or ask the office if they can find an ex SDS operative to fill such a role. Both options are fraught with difficulty and you must make your own mind up about how to proceed. If you have no other option
01:20:20 to proceed. If you have no other option but to become involved with a weary, you should try to have a fleeting disastrous relationships with individuals who are not important to your sources of information. One cannot be involved with a weary in a relationship for any period
01:20:33 a weary in a relationship for any period of time without risking serious consequences. When you first stumbled across the tradecraft manual, do you remember reading that paragraph? Yes. Yes, I do. What was your reaction when you first read it?
01:20:45 read it? Well, I was surprised. Um, I I remember speaking to someone in the office, I think almost to I was reading it. I got to that point.
01:20:58 I was reading it. I got to that point. Um
01:21:00 Um the officer was you know working away at a desk behind and I sort of turned around and sort of said hey this I presume this was written you know 30
01:21:11 presume this was written you know 30 years ago or something like that even then it wouldn't be being careful with names you demonstrating turning around speaking to another officer who are you
01:21:23 speaking to another officer who are you able to say who that other officer I
01:21:27 I forgive
01:21:43 I'm sorry to keep you waiting. Please take your time and and it may if it's easier to to write the name down on a pie.
01:21:50 a pie. No, no, no, no. I I wasn't. It's it's um if you don't know the cipher to begin with, if that makes sense. It's it's rearranged numerically rather than alphabetically, of course. So, which makes perfect sense. I'm pretty sure
01:22:01 makes perfect sense. I'm pretty sure that it was Steve Titty.
01:22:05 So, you're reading paragraph 5.6.3 that we have in front of us. You turn round to Steve Titty and you say word to the effects that presume
01:22:18 say word to the effects that presume this is something that happened 30 years ago.
01:22:21 ago. Yeah. What response did you receive from Steve Titty when you asked him that please? He
01:22:32 He he sort of he sort of said different time, different place, some that's probably not the exact words he used but some sort of answer along those lines if that makes sense. Um
01:22:43 that makes sense. Um did you say oh tell me more? Um
01:22:49 I don't think I did. Don't think I did at that point. Um, at any point did you ask anyone else say, "Well, I've read read this." And,
01:23:00 say, "Well, I've read read this." And, uh, Steve Teddy said, "Well, different time, different place." What was what's that all about? Or Well, I I I I think I took that to mean that it wasn't going on. uh that that wasn't I I
01:23:12 going on. uh that that wasn't I I certainly never felt under any expectation whatsoever that it was that it was required or desirable to to do that if that makes sense to be in a relationship with somebody else both
01:23:24 relationship with somebody else both inside your target group or outside. So did that is that the first time you started thinking about this as a possibility? Yeah, I think it probably was. Um
01:23:35 Yeah, I think it probably was. Um perhaps naively.
01:23:40 Did you just starting this thought process did you then as time went on talk to other people other your managers or other UCOs about this topic?
01:23:54 or other UCOs about this topic? Um
01:23:55 Um not not explicitly that I can remember. Um,
01:24:02 Um, I don't think I wouldn't I probably wouldn't have spoken to management about it unless I was really concerned that it was going to be expected of me and I didn't form that opinion at all.
01:24:13 didn't form that opinion at all. Now we'll come to in more detail later, but your deployments between July 2001 and December 2007. So that's those periods of years and years and years.
01:24:25 periods of years and years and years. How often did this topic arise? And when I mean what I mean by this topic is the possibility of an undercover officer uh
01:24:36 possibility of an undercover officer uh having a form of relationship with those who he is spying upon. It it it definitely came up in the context of um
01:24:50 definitely came up in the context of um something had happened with somebody's deployment or something was something was in question if that makes sense and it was when um please bear
01:25:02 sense and it was when um please bear with me was when Mike Dell came on board uh which was fairly early on actually I forgive me I think in my memory he wasn't that far behind behind me. I
01:25:14 wasn't that far behind behind me. I don't not behind me, but you know, he I hadn't been on the unit that long. I don't think maybe a year, perhaps a bit less than that. And then he came in as the new DCI and at certainly at some stage after
01:25:25 and at certainly at some stage after that
01:25:27 that in one of the regular meetings um it was addressed quite directly. I'm going to ask you about that because you you've mentioned very specifically DCID
01:25:37 DCID um he he comes in. Yeah. And what does he say about it? What does this topic what does he say in the context of sexual relationships? Yes. Yes.
01:25:46 Yes. Yes. Um it was it was a Thursday meeting I'm almost certain which meant it wasn't in our main office. It was at one of one of the flats that were maintained for this period. And
01:25:59 period. And um I'd on the sort of on the grape vine you'd heard sort of rumblings that something had you know gone a miss or ary and that there had been a been a a
01:26:10 ary and that there had been a been a a fairly significant wrinkle with someone's one of someone's deployments but there was no detail. You're talking about rumblings a slight wrinkle.
01:26:18 wrinkle. How specific can you be about what was what was said? This is before DCI Dell says something about this topic. You said that there are rumblings. What do you mean by that? I
01:26:30 rumblings. What do you mean by that? I I mean that there were sort of rumors. I say rumors, you know, there were just sort of rumors. I hate to say circulating, but people were talking. You know, those people that some a deployment had gone wrong.
01:26:42 that some a deployment had gone wrong. UCOs and managers just UCOs's just UCOs, I think. But then I wouldn't have dayto-day contact with managers if that makes sense. I you know during the week if that if that makes sense. I I
01:26:54 week if that if that makes sense. I I I'm pretty sure I received a a message from someone who was in a similar field saying on so and so's there's something going on with so and so's deployment or or former deployment. And then
01:27:07 or former deployment. And then as part of that, um, Mike Dale came out on that meeting and very much laid the law down about the this about a number
01:27:18 law down about the this about a number of things actually as I remember, but he certainly covered off sexual relationships at that meeting. Okay. But before um going into what DCIL said, you said,
01:27:29 um going into what DCIL said, you said, well, you your words so and so's deployment. Yeah. C could could you be more specific as to whose deployment? Absolutely.
01:27:41 Absolutely. It was um James Thompson's. All right. So, something was
01:27:49 being discussed amongst UCOs about something that had gone wrong in James Thompson's deployment. Yeah. I think it was me and one other, you know, he he'd heard something and he
01:28:00 you know, he he'd heard something and he of a of a sexual nature. No, I don't think it was not straight away. I think it was to do with passports.
01:28:13 So you and another officer, there was this discussion about something had happened in James Thompson's deployment to do with passports. Yes.
01:28:23 Yes. What else? I don't I don't think anything else before we had that meeting, you know, before,
01:28:29 before, you know, before Mike stood up. It was quite unusual for Mike to the structure of the meeting on a Thursday was essentially you'd all turn up um and the you know the management
01:28:41 up um and the you know the management for one of a better turn of phrase would sort of anything that needed to be discussed on a on a quick you know regular basis he would do and Mike was often quite quiet in those times he would he would let the cover officers
01:28:52 would he would let the cover officers take the lead but on this occasion it wasn't like that you know he stood up said he had something to say and then he gave us you To the best of your recollection, what
01:29:04 To the best of your recollection, what did he say? He said that there had been
01:29:11 Forgive me. I'm trying to me I'm want to remember it as well as I can. I can't remember. I don't think he named James Thompson at that time. I think he
01:29:23 James Thompson at that time. I think he said that, you know, something had gone something had gone wrong and he wanted to set some, you know, or reinforce some ground rules. I don't think he used the term ground rules, forgive me, but it was
01:29:34 ground rules, forgive me, but it was along those those lines, if that makes sense. And as part of that, he definitely mentioned sexual relationships at that time. He was quite emphatic about it. He was quite animated, which is unusual for Mike.
01:29:45 animated, which is unusual for Mike. Mike's not a sort of big, loud personality, if that makes sense. He's quite reserved normally and quite softly spoken. And he he made it very clear that he I think you know he said
01:29:58 clear that he I think you know he said look sexual relationships let me be very clear you know they are not you know they are not tolerated they are not to happen
01:30:09 happen um and if any of them are happening they stop now
01:30:15 stop now um and there were other issues addressed and I honestly can't and he I think he spoke about documentation and travel unauorized I want to focus on the sexual relationships. So the way in which you
01:30:27 relationships. So the way in which you describe this is exceptional DCI Mike Dell standing up laying down these ground rules. No sexual relationships and if they're happening now they must stop. What was the reaction in the room?
01:30:38 stop. What was the reaction in the room? Yeah. Well, we were sort of looking I there was a little bit of well more more than a little bit of because we used to sit around the edge of the room almost like in a circle if that makes sense or a sho horseshoe shape and you know
01:30:51 a sho horseshoe shape and you know people were sort of looking going gee where's what's you know what's what's going on here what's gone on um thinking you know who's who does this affect um a
01:31:02 you know who's who does this affect um a sort of certain amount of looking at each other thinking
01:31:06 did you or anyone else in the meeting ask DCI Mike Dell why who you who are you talking about what's happened did you
01:31:17 you did anyone ask I don't think they did I think afterwards when the meeting broke up you know he because he he he went into this you know he he delivered this piece of
01:31:28 you know he he delivered this piece of news if you like or these uh you know this instruction um and then we had our regular meeting you which is kind of a go you know the the covers would have spoken about bits Bob's coming up areas
01:31:40 spoken about bits Bob's coming up areas of particular requirement from the desks. The desks need this, the desks need more of this. Um, whatever, you know, please, this is, we know this is happening for those of you who it
01:31:51 happening for those of you who it affects, you know, keep your eyes and ears open for anything with regard to that. And then we would normally be asked to go around and speak about what we were doing, how busy we
01:32:02 about what we were doing, how busy we were
01:32:03 were after that meeting. Yeah.
01:32:06 Yeah. Did you
01:32:08 Did you say to your colleagues, your the other UCAs, what was that all about? What was he referring to? Pretty much exactly that. And what was could you what how did that discussion go?
01:32:19 discussion go? Well, we we we tended to we tended to break into sort of little groups of people, you know, who worked in similar fields, if that makes sense, because you the inquiry will be aware
01:32:30 because you the inquiry will be aware that there's a a very broad spectrum. What was the tone? Was it uh shock um this is very serious or was it
01:32:42 this is very serious or was it a did did people um almost joke about this as a topic? Could could you help us with this is after the meeting's finished?
01:32:49 finished? Yeah, I understand. What what was the tone please? No, I mean the way it used to work was you tended to sort of break off, go in the kitchen, get a cup of tea, and then come back in and sit down in little
01:33:00 come back in and sit down in little groups or whatever and then talk. And it was just yeah it was mainly what you know you know what's you know who knows a bit more about this whose deployment is it and and what's happened and somebody who was you know bear in mind I
01:33:13 somebody who was you know bear in mind I would have been not that I certainly you know that the I can't even no idea who the field daddy was quite frankly at that time but you know there were a lot of people well up the track further ahead than I was in terms of seniority
01:33:25 ahead than I was in terms of seniority or not seniority they were just they'd been out in the field longer than I had by a good measure and it was it was you know saying who know who knows a bit more about this then and who did I I I
01:33:37 I I I can't remember somebody spoke and said that James Thompson had been traveling I think with not
01:33:48 think with not not his official cover passport um
01:33:53 um and
01:33:55 and there was a sort of subtext I I genuinely genuinely can't remember, but there was a sort of subtext that there may have been a relationship ongoing as well. I
01:34:08 been a relationship ongoing as well. I I'm not 100% on that. Please don't hold my feet to the fire on it. I'm not 100% sure,
01:34:14 sure, but this is this is on the same day. So, this is after the meeting with um DCI Mike Dell
01:34:20 Mike Dell um lays down the ground rules. You go to separate out, for example, in the kitchen area. you're talking about this and your recollection is um it someone mentioned James Thompson travel
01:34:32 mentioned James Thompson travel traveling on a passport with the subtext being that maybe he maybe it's because he was involved in a relationship yes
01:34:42 yes at that time what knowledge did you have of James Thompson as a person was he was how close were you to him um I wasn't close to him at all I think he I think we crossed over. I'm sure
01:34:55 he I think we crossed over. I'm sure you've got the records. I we crossed over just possibly by literally a matter of weeks. Interestingly, part of the familiarization I've heard it sort of in
01:35:08 familiarization I've heard it sort of in the context of looking back at SDS work and activity. It had been suggested that part of the training you received was going out to visit the existing UCOs who
01:35:20 going out to visit the existing UCOs who were deployed. And the way that worked was you'd just be sort of um left to your own devices to contact them and sometimes people who had left SDS quite recently and you'd phone them up and
01:35:31 recently and you'd phone them up and say, "Can I come and buy you lunch?" That was kind of the way it worked. You bought them lunch and they would sit with you for a couple of hours and just give you the benefit of of their experiences when they had been deployed.
01:35:43 experiences when they had been deployed. Um and interestingly, I made a lot of inquiries. It was a very very busy time. Uh, but the only person I ever went for lunch with, well, we I don't think we got to have lunch, but it was was James
01:35:55 got to have lunch, but it was was James Thompson. He was the only person who took me up on my request, if that makes sense, to meet up and have a chat before I launched. So, the one UTO that you meet up with in
01:36:08 So, the one UTO that you meet up with in that way you've just described as James Thompson.
01:36:10 Thompson. Yes.
01:36:12 Yes. Where where did you go with James Thompson? Well, uh, I went to I don't think it was his house or cottage. Um, it was somewhere down by the seaside.
01:36:24 it was somewhere down by the seaside. Um, I think it was it might have been a it might have just been a little holiday place that he had use of or a friend or a relative did. I met him there. And this is at a time where he his
01:36:35 And this is at a time where he his deployment's coming to an end and you're Yes.
01:36:38 Yes. about to begin. Yes. So, did you ask him oh why is it come why are you stopping? I'm just joining. Why you I think he he'd done his time, hadn't he? I think he he'd done the number of years. So, he was
01:36:52 years. So, he was You described earlier your conversation with HN53
01:36:59 with HN53 saying it's going to change you. Um what's could you just help us with the sort of things that James Thompson told you? He's coming to the end of his deployment. You're just about to to start. Yeah. What advice did he give you? What experience? What did he tell
01:37:11 you? What experience? What did he tell you about? This is a meeting just the two of you lunch. Um what what did he say? He um he he was James is um an unusual
01:37:23 He um he he was James is um an unusual character. He he um he he talked about sort of trade crafty stuff which was sort of specific to to his to his role.
01:37:34 sort of specific to to his to his role. Um you know sort of veganism um and and stuff like that. We we hand on heart we didn't really hit it off. Um and and some of these you know examples
01:37:46 and and some of these you know examples and things just seemed a bit a bit off to me in in what examples he he his cover employment had been um
01:37:58 he he his cover employment had been um one which was quite showy if that makes sense. And I remember him um talking about that in a way which I
01:38:10 um talking about that in a way which I thought well that sounds like a way to draw quite a lot of attention to yourself rather than being the sort of gray man or someone who would sort of be in the background if that makes sense.
01:38:22 in the background if that makes sense. Did he ever mention to you going to France?
01:38:26 France? No.
01:38:29 Did he ever mention to you that during his deployment he was able to intercept uh a gun and black powder that was being
01:38:40 uh a gun and black powder that was being taken from France to this country to be used in a revenge attack? No. No,
01:38:45 No. No, definitely not. Did he tell you anything about or did he give any impression as to how he felt towards the activists that he had spied on during his deployment? So he's coming
01:38:56 on during his deployment? So he's coming to the end of his deployment. Did that as a topic arise? Uh what was what's the nature of the re interaction? Did he get on well with them? Was it easy? Was it difficult? Did you like them? Did you
01:39:08 difficult? Did you like them? Did you dislike them? That that sort of topic? No, not really. I don't I don't think so. It wasn't a long meeting. I mean, I we we didn't h I remember we didn't have lunch and I can't quite remember
01:39:19 lunch and I can't quite remember um if that was I can't quite remember if that was just because he said he had he sort of said I sorry I've got to I've got to be somewhere else forgive me or so you know we'll have to make this
01:39:31 so you know we'll have to make this relatively short we had tea you know a cup of tea and a biscuit and how did he come across to you was in terms of was he was he for example jovial was he burnt out what what sort
01:39:42 jovial was he burnt out what what sort of demeanor did he have at that that time? No. How did he come across to you? He he came across to me as as confident. Um
01:39:51 Um quite quite um yeah, he he certainly didn't seem burnt out or or anything along those lines. He was quite a quite a demonstrative kind of um showy
01:40:03 a quite a demonstrative kind of um showy character, I guess. Now you you're there about to start. He's at the end of his deployment. Did he give you any advice? Did he say, "Well, the one thing you should do is
01:40:14 "Well, the one thing you should do is this." Or or or did he say anything, for example, to put you off? Say, "Well, don't don't do it." Could you help us with sort of words of wisdom, practical advice he gave you? Because after all, that was the reason you met him.
01:40:25 that was the reason you met him. It was That's right. I No, I don't think he we we talked in very general terms. He he he definitely he definitely I well I say he I definitely asked him some
01:40:36 I say he I definitely asked him some questions about um traveling about putting cuz it was quite a lot of people had a a car uh a
01:40:47 quite a lot of people had a a car uh a car or a van and I remember asking him sort of questions about well what did you do with yours because obviously you're going to be driving that vehicle back to your real world
01:40:58 that vehicle back to your real world life um And you know, you know, did you park it outside your house? Did you rent a garage to hide it? Did he say anything about relationships?
01:41:09 I don't think he did. No. Did you ask him a question such as what was the best thing about your deployment? That sort of question like what's the highlight or the highlights? I don't think I asked him that specific
01:41:20 I don't think I asked him that specific question either. He he talked he he had had a cover employment which allowed him to travel quite widely I think in quite interesting and quite an interesting environment. Um he was scouting
01:41:34 environment. Um he was scouting locations as I remember and so that was you know he he sort of told a few tales about you know staying in some quite nice areas and places and being able to to travel quite widely.
01:41:48 to travel quite widely. Okay. So at this you've described a reference to James Thompson possibly having an inappropriate relationship.
01:42:00 inappropriate relationship. But by the time that DCIDell lays down the law and the conversations that followed, apart from James Thompson, do you have no other in inkling that
01:42:15 you have no other in inkling that an undercover officer had been engaged in relationships with those they were spying on? I'm not even even going back a number of
01:42:26 I'm not even even going back a number of years. Um, I remember
01:42:33 I I can't rem, forgive me if I'm getting the time timings wrong, the chronology, but I I became aware that there was a situation with a UTO who had moved down
01:42:44 situation with a UTO who had moved down to
01:42:46 to Australia or New Zealand, I think. John Dyn.
01:42:49 Dyn. John Dyn.
01:42:50 John Dyn. Yes.
01:42:50 Yes. What What What did you hear about John Dyn? I heard that he had been in a relationship.
01:43:02 he had been in a relationship. Um he had
01:43:05 Um he had extracted and actually moved. He had physically moved himself rather than saying he was going to move to that place, if that makes sense. And he, forgive me, I can't remember if he if it was Australia or New Zealand, but he was
01:43:16 was Australia or New Zealand, but he was now living there. and that somebody was looking for him. Um, and I think I remember
01:43:23 remember later there was a bit of a flap because someone was actually had traveled in an attempt to try and find him. You say the way you describe it is there
01:43:34 You say the way you describe it is there been a bit of a flap. Did you at the time before you left the SDS become aware of who the person that was looking
01:43:46 aware of who the person that was looking for him was? what her name was? Yes.
01:43:53 And who who was it? It was somebody called Helen Steel. And who told you that John Dyn had had a relationship with Helen Steel? I
01:44:05 I I can't remember. I mean, I genuinely can't remember. I I my my my feeling is that it wasn't someone from the management that it was somebody in the field told me and
01:44:19 the field told me and the person that told you that was this said to you at the time when your description the SDS were in a bit of a flap because she was looking for
01:44:32 of a flap because she was looking for John Dyn. Was it at this time or was it before or else? It was at that time I think
01:44:39 think the person that you can't recall who said this what was the demeanor the way in which they said it was it um serious and grave or was it
01:44:50 and grave or was it in some respects said as something humorous that oh this this has happened how was it described definitely wasn't humorous it was it was
01:45:01 definitely wasn't humorous it was it was a serious thing I mean a it was um yeah that it was you know someone had actually traveled halfway around the world in an attempt to find him um and
01:45:12 world in an attempt to find him um and that and that you know that I got the impression that there were a lot of wheels in motion behind that to try and manage that manage that situation. Were you involved in that?
01:45:23 Were you involved in that? No, not at all.
01:45:27 You've um you've described Helen Steel and John Dyn and James Thompson at the time that you were still in the SDS. Is there any other relationship
01:45:39 there any other relationship between a UCO and an activist that you can recall being discussed or alluded to at the time that you were an SDS officer? I again, forgive me. I'm not in my own
01:45:52 I again, forgive me. I'm not in my own mind clear of the chronology. I I I certainly became aware of um forgive me of Jim Boiling's situation, but that I
01:46:03 of Jim Boiling's situation, but that I don't think that was while I was still in SDS. I think because that was out sort of in in the news quite quickly, wasn't it? As I remember um but that I can't remember when that was. If it was
01:46:15 can't remember when that was. If it was after,
01:46:16 after, you know, 2007, then it was I had left SDS. Well, SDS has ceased to exist. What was your relationship with Jim Boiling? I again we crossed over very narrowly as
01:46:29 I again we crossed over very narrowly as I remember. I think I think that um again probably a matter of months maybe not even that. He was very much about to finish as I arrived. I I remember the um
01:46:43 finish as I arrived. I I remember the um as as the new boy or girl on the team, it was your responsibility to bring the brew kit to the meeting. So, you had to make sure that the, you know, the tea room cupboard was stocked with of tea, coffee, sugar, milk, biscuits, that type
01:46:55 coffee, sugar, milk, biscuits, that type of stuff. And I remember him being quite um quite snarky with me for not bringing the right biscuits once or something along those lines or there weren't enough L rolls as well or something. But
01:47:06 enough L rolls as well or something. But he Yeah, we we didn't speak very much. He was he was quite self-contained. He wasn't sort of But but you learned about Jim Boiling's
01:47:17 But but you learned about Jim Boiling's relationships after you left. I think after I think it came out after SDS ceased to exist, didn't it? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but focus very much on the that period of
01:47:28 focus very much on the that period of time that you're an undercover officer. Yes. Apart from John Dyn and Helen Steel, apart from James Thompson,
01:47:39 Steel, apart from James Thompson, anyone else that you can recall being discussed, alluded to in terms of relationships occurring? No, I don't think so. Did
01:47:51 Did you in the uh position that you described yourself later in your deployment as the field daddy um communicate words similar to those
01:48:02 um communicate words similar to those communicated to you by um DCI Mike Dell that relationships uh were not to be had with um activists
01:48:14 uh were not to be had with um activists upon whom people were spying on. Did you ever yourself say that to to other pe other UCOs? No, I don't think so. Um that wasn't the Phil Daddy didn't
01:48:25 Um that wasn't the Phil Daddy didn't have sort of leadership role over the other UCOs if that if that makes sense. What was you what was your reaction when you heard about John Dyn and Helen
01:48:37 when you heard about John Dyn and Helen Steel and when you heard about James Thompson in terms of sexual relationships at the time? You're at SDS UCO, you're still undercover.
01:48:48 UCO, you're still undercover. What thoughts came to mind? Well, when I first I'm I'm I think in my own mind when the Helen Steel situation first arose, I think that there was a bit of
01:48:59 bit of conversation amongst some people about, you know, was it, you know, was it genuine or not? You know, had and I thought immediately to myself, well, you don't travel halfway around the world, you know, you don't make that commitment
01:49:11 you know, you don't make that commitment to a different continent. Yeah, it seemed unlikely that you would do that for someone who had just been a friend. It just I don't know had the ring of truth if that makes sense. That so it was a topic of discussion,
01:49:23 so it was a topic of discussion, brief discussion. Yeah, I don't really think we were talking about it all the time. Far from it. But during your deployment, did you ever have a romantic or sexual
01:49:35 did you ever have a romantic or sexual relationship with any of the activists that you spied upon? No, absolutely not. We have heard evidence from um UCOs who have said that um words to the effect
01:49:48 have said that um words to the effect that it is not realistic to expect a UCO to present as a single male and be able to uh deploy into the field. Uh what's
01:50:01 to uh deploy into the field. Uh what's your reaction to that? It's more difficult to to be a single person in the field if you're a man or a woman. You know I
01:50:12 You know I uh
01:50:13 uh well you were you know notwithstand sorry do you want me to stop? Sorry I interrupt you. No no no forgive me. Um the it's um yeah it's more difficult. I can see in if you
01:50:25 it's more difficult. I can see in if you were being utterly cold-hearted about it, you can see the utility of turning up with somebody or being with someone, you know, if you took it to the nth degree of actually living with someone
01:50:36 degree of actually living with someone because it makes you a real person. You know, you're not sort of you're bound to attract a perhaps a little bit of a higher level of suspicion if you're, you know, a single bloke and you don't have
01:50:47 know, a single bloke and you don't have a girlfriend for seven years. Um, it it's just a little bit more odd, isn't it? in in its uh so I could see the as I said in a purely
01:50:59 said in a purely cold-hearted logical way I could see the utility o of it and that the flip side of that is that it's more difficult if you are consistently single and don't show any interest in you know the
01:51:12 show any interest in you know the opposite sex or indeed the same sex. Did this ever arise during your deployment and you know 2001 to the end of 2007
01:51:21 of 2007 during that all of those years? Did did this ever arise as um as a as a problem? Were you for example approached romantically or did that ever arise during that
01:51:34 or did that ever arise during that extended period of time? Yes, a couple only a couple of times. It will be apparent I'm not the best looking bloke in the world. So it didn't I didn't I didn't um I didn't attract
01:51:48 I didn't I didn't um I didn't attract and I'm not sort of being stereotypical here but I didn't attract a lot of sort of sexual attention from men or women and um but there were two specific times
01:51:59 and um but there were two specific times where it did rear its head and just had to manage it. C could we go through those two times please? What when was the first? Um, the first was when I
01:52:12 the first was when I was still out with Global Eyes and I had given
01:52:18 given somebody a lift home who lived out the same sort of way. It wasn't a core globalized person by any stretch of the imagination. I think it might have just been someone who was at a wider meeting, not steering committee meeting or
01:52:30 not steering committee meeting or anything like that. Um, it was just one of our public meetings and it would be very unusual for me to have my car, I think I must have been dropping off or picking up, I don't know, leaflets or flags or something, but I had my car up
01:52:42 flags or something, but I had my car up there and I gave her a lift home and um, have we been to the pub? Probably. I think I think that um I think that she
01:52:54 think I think that um I think that she had had a couple of drinks. I I certainly hadn't cuz I was driving. It's useful excuse not to have anything. Um, and when I dropped her off, she basically said, "Do you know, "Hey, do you want to come in?" And I sort of
01:53:06 you want to come in?" And I sort of said, and I just said, "Oh, no. I'm good. Thanks." You know, I, you know, work tomorrow. I'm going to I'm going to get on my way. And she just said, "No, come upstairs. Come on, come in." And,
01:53:18 come upstairs. Come on, come in." And, you know, and and she said something along the lines of, "We can have coffee or not have coffee or something like that." And I, you know, it was just, you know, it was just apparent that, you
01:53:30 you know, it was just apparent that, you know, there was a possibility of a, you know, a sort of one-off sexual encounter, I suppose. But what happened? I just I just managed it and said, "No, I said, you know, I sort of said, "Oh,
01:53:41 I said, you know, I sort of said, "Oh, thanks ever so much." And I that's that's really kind of you, but you know, and I just didn't go up, you know. I just said, "Look, I have got to go." Um, I think we were out of the car by then. And I just said, "Look, great to see
01:53:53 And I just said, "Look, great to see you. I don't think I'd ever I don't think I'd met her before. I think she was kind of brand new. I don't think she'd ever been to a meeting before, but And then I just said, "I must get going. Thanks ever so much." And I think I said
01:54:04 Thanks ever so much." And I think I said something like, "Please don't take it personally or anything like that." And then yeah, got in the car and drove off. So you said this this was someone new to the the group. Did you see her after
01:54:15 the the group. Did you see her after after that? No, I don't think I ever did. What about that? And this was you said during the globalized resistance period. This is what 2001 to 2004 during that period of time. What about the second
01:54:28 period of time. What about the second example?
01:54:30 example? Could you help us with what happened? Yeah, absolutely. Um, there was a before the Glenn Eagles G8. um about a year before there. This was
01:54:41 um about a year before there. This was after I'd been Yeah, just checking my thinking that it was about a year before quite often before the year before a sort of setpiece
01:54:52 the year before a sort of setpiece mobilization to you know um to to counterprotest if you like a G8 or all that goes with a G8 summit and there's lots but there there's often a sort of
01:55:03 lots but there there's often a sort of training or sort of organizing uh camp or something up locally to where the the the summit is going to be. And there was one in Scotland. I think it was called
01:55:17 one in Scotland. I think it was called Camp. No, that was the German one. Sorry.
01:55:22 Sorry. Wasn't Campinsky. That was the German one. It there was a gathering um at a house,
01:55:29 house, Tamalei or Tamul or something. I can't remember. But there was a there was one of these four or five day uh gatherings in a windswept field uh with a nice
01:55:40 in a windswept field uh with a nice house in the middle. But the most of us were just camping in the sort of field around the house. So you're there in a tent somewhere. Yeah, pretty scruffy. What what happened?
01:55:51 What what happened? Um it was it was cold. Um I know it's summer but or spring or summer. And uh we had been in meetings in the house um listening to you know workshops planning
01:56:04 listening to you know workshops planning meetings colle you know proposals for what was going to happen at the summit next year that broke up had a drink and it was kind of there was a core group of people who were clearly welcome to stay in the house. Everybody else had to
01:56:17 in the house. Everybody else had to leave and get into their tents and shelters. Some people live you know there were vans up there where people were living in their vehicles and things. Um and um I went back to my little tent. There was a couple of
01:56:28 little tent. There was a couple of people who were in kind of my affinity group or one person perhaps who was also in his tent. Um and there was a um a much younger uh female activist and
01:56:42 um a much younger uh female activist and she
01:56:42 she How old?
01:56:43 How old? Oh,
01:56:43 Oh, roughly roughly. No, sorry. I'm I didn't mean to uh 20 21 22.
01:56:50 22. How old were you at the time? I was well I was in my real age. Yes. Yes. Uh,
01:56:58 Uh, gosh, do the maths. I would have been about 35, I think. And your undercover age? About
01:57:09 About 30.
01:57:10 30. That might not be right, but the age difference is roughly right. I I interrupted you. So, you were just describing. No. And she it was it was bitterly cold. Then it started sort of sleeping. I I
01:57:21 Then it started sort of sleeping. I I think I I think I got out of my tent just to have a to have a wee. Um, you know, walk over to the fence and sort of and then and just have a wee. And she
01:57:33 and then and just have a wee. And she was just in a like a um like a bivvie bag, I think, not a tent, but a sleeping bag with some sort of waterproof cover. Um, and as I came past, she she said to
01:57:44 Um, and as I came past, she she said to me, I saw her stir and move. And I thought, "Oh, gee whiz, I've just weed about 10 feet away from your head and almost hadn't seen her." Um, and I could see the snow, the sort of sleety snow
01:57:56 see the snow, the sort of sleety snow collecting, the wind was blowing up against the side of it. And she was clearly really cold. And she kind of cracked the zip at the top of it and said, "Look," said, "Oh, hi." I said, "Hey, sorry." And she said, "No." She
01:58:08 "Hey, sorry." And she said, "No." She said, "I'm absolutely freezing. why don't I come in with you in your tent and we can and she and and she didn't say immediately and there was a bit of a turning and throwing but it was clearly
01:58:19 turning and throwing but it was clearly a situation where it could have you know I had a small tent you know it was deliberately like a you know a small twoman tent if that makes sense. Well,
01:58:30 twoman tent if that makes sense. Well, sorry.
01:58:31 sorry. You in the first example you gave, you you alluded to uh words spoken where it was clear what the person Yeah.
01:58:41 Yeah. um was um
01:58:44 um was um stating to you that um that sex was available. What was said apart from being physically in the tent together? Could could you just explain? Yeah, we had a really brief bit of I can't it
01:58:56 had a really brief bit of I can't it wasn't a brief bit of conversation but she said something along the lines of we can snuggle up or we can keep each other warm or something like that. Um I know it sounds quite odd but that's what
01:59:08 it sounds quite odd but that's what happened. And I said is I'm you know I said the you know my tent's really small. It's pretty damp um and I'm a dreadful snorer. Um I don't think that
01:59:19 dreadful snorer. Um I don't think that would be good. I had a spare um pretty cheap and cheerful festival tent in the back of my car. I used to keep lots of gear in the back of my car,
01:59:30 keep lots of gear in the back of my car, you know, sort of cooking pots and pans, ropes, bits and bobs, you know, and stuff. And if I had a spare sleeping bag or a spare shelter or a tar or bit of polyine you could use or whatever, I
01:59:42 polyine you could use or whatever, I just have all that folded up in little sort of old uh bread boxes in the back of my car. And I had one and long story short, I went and got it. We put it up. She got in there. That was that.
01:59:55 She got in there. That was that. So I don't know if that's a convenient moment to have a midm morning break. It is. We break for 15 minutes now so that the transcribers can have a rest. And as indeed can you.
02:29:03 In relation to this report here, you have described MT as being politically radical.
02:29:16 We heard evidence from MT last week. uh he says that he wouldn't describe himself as politically radical.
02:29:27 describe himself as politically radical. Would you accept that you may have been mistaken when you described him in that way?
02:29:34 way? Um I suppose it's a a subjective term. I thought he was quite radical. Um we'd obviously had some conversations, you know, since that time when I first
02:29:45 you know, since that time when I first saw him. Um, so I'm not sure I would agree with it, but
02:29:52 but he he also when it was asked whether he was an anti- capitalist, he also said, "Well, no, he he wasn't." Again, is that something that you could have been mistaken about when describing MT in
02:30:04 mistaken about when describing MT in this intelligence report that in fact actually he wasn't an anti- capitalist? Well, if he was specifically anti- capitalist, I I suppose so. Yes.
02:30:17 when it describes in your report that MT had a particular sympathy for the plight of the Palestinian people. Um MT's
02:30:29 of the Palestinian people. Um MT's evidence that was that he had a sympathy for the Palestinian people uh still does. um but he wouldn't describe it as a particular uh sympathy and at the time
02:30:41 a particular uh sympathy and at the time his uh real concern was in relation to Iraq. Again, would you accept that um maybe you were um wrong when you describe empty as having a particular
02:30:53 describe empty as having a particular sympathy for the plight of the Palestinian people? I in the conversations I had with him which were quite limited. I he spoke about Palestine quite a lot. He was certainly involved in stop the war activity as well.
02:31:13 in this uh report and you um go on. I wonder if we could just turn over the page uh please.
02:31:25 You uh provide um bank uh details uh and account numbers and sort codes. Uh and just to use this as an example um because this is the type of information
02:31:37 because this is the type of information from time to time that you that you would report. Yes. Could you help us with why you reported the bank details of a student
02:31:54 the bank details of a student because it was exactly the type of information that was being asked for by by the desk up on C squad. They were particularly they had a particular interest in getting
02:44:02 at the time of this report that we have up on screen here. So, this is the 22nd of June, 2003, MT is not a violent person. I I certainly hadn't seen him be
02:44:14 I I certainly hadn't seen him be violent. No. uh not someone who would um cause any public order concerns. No, he wouldn't have been on the top of my radar by any stretch of the
02:44:26 my radar by any stretch of the imagination. No.
02:44:27 No. I wonder if we could now take that report down. I want to ask you about a series of reports that um are dated the 15th of July. Now, you were I wonder if
02:44:38 15th of July. Now, you were I wonder if we can just put up on screen. It's MPS2786,
02:44:43 please. So this is your tab C241 which is in volume six.
02:44:52 Now a few minutes ago you were describing raw reporting. So this is the reports that you type up and then you provide them to the um uh SDS managers,
02:45:05 provide them to the um uh SDS managers, the back office and they they type these up into uh processed reports. And this is an example of a processed report.
02:45:14 report. That's right. So what we see in this document here, this is not directly a document that you have produced on a word processor, but the intelligence comes from you. Is that
02:45:25 the intelligence comes from you. Is that right?
02:45:25 right? That's right. Yeah. And this document here, would you have seen these reports in this format yourself?
02:45:32 yourself? No, never. Okay. Now, we can see here Metropolitan Police special branch intelligence report and then we we have a schedule there. We can see report number and it's
02:45:43 there. We can see report number and it's blank under there. Can you see that? Okay.
02:45:45 Okay. And then date source obtained information date information obtained from source and this one's 15th of July 03. Then the typing date in this case
02:45:56 03. Then the typing date in this case it's the same date 15th of July 2003. And then we can see the the way in which it's evaluated. But looking at that is your understanding that you provided
02:46:09 is your understanding that you provided the intelligence and we can zoom out of that please that the intelligence in this report or indeed any report that looks like this that you would have provided it on the 15th of July. It may have been typed up that day. It may have
02:46:21 have been typed up that day. It may have been typed up a later date. But would you accept that that is the date that it it should be? It normally is. Although I have seen plenty of my time that were incorrect.
02:46:32 incorrect. All right. Um but yes, that would that would that would normally be the thing. I've also seen them deliberately um uh changed a little bit to sort of
02:46:43 uh changed a little bit to sort of obfuscate for reasons of protection. Uh please say as we go through these if you think this is an example where it's been deliberately amended. Let's just look at the heading. Activist MT
02:46:54 look at the heading. Activist MT possible action concerning the visit of Ariel Chiron. The activist MT who is associated with globalized resistance has spoken of his intention of
02:47:05 has spoken of his intention of embarrassing Mr. Chiron during his visit to the UK and his protection officers by dressing up as a suicide bomber and performing some sort of protest action
02:47:17 performing some sort of protest action in the vicinity of Mr. Shiron. Okay, now just pausing there.
02:47:30 Is that still
02:47:35 still a an accurate recollection of yours? What we see in these three lines under the word intelligence? Yes, it is.
02:47:46 In your own mind, how clear are you that the person that you've identified as having spoken of his intention of embarrassing Mr. Chiron by dressing up
02:47:59 embarrassing Mr. Chiron by dressing up as a suicide bomber was MT as opposed to someone else? I'm completely sure.
02:48:15 source comment this part of the intelligence report. Would you agree that this is information provided in this instance
02:48:28 information provided in this instance from you because it's one of your reports? So when it says source comment that section would you agree with that? I I
02:48:37 I I it's somebody else's interpretation. I think and I'm I'm not sure that the date is right on this because I I'm not obviously I'm familiar with the the incident or the that there's caused this
02:48:50 incident or the that there's caused this to be written up. I thought it was a day or two before the 15th. Um, this says this plan is not endorsed by fellow activists who consider it to
02:49:01 by fellow activists who consider it to be too dangerous and could result could result in being shot by Mr. Chiron's protection officers. However, MT is apparently a determined individual who
02:49:13 apparently a determined individual who may carry out this action of his own valition. Now again in terms of source comment is that you communicating to the office that MT is apparently a
02:49:25 to the office that MT is apparently a determined individual? No. No it's not.
02:49:31 So you you didn't communicate to the office that appar he's apparently a determined individual. No, not by by certainly by this date as I remember he
02:49:42 certainly by this date as I remember he had been talked out of this plan and there was there was very little chance of him actually carrying it out and I think gz um
02:49:56 gz um and I think Mr. Chiron had was about to leave by then. Anyway, if we look at the top of the report again, the activist MT who is associated
02:50:07 again, the activist MT who is associated with globalized resistance has spoken of his intention of embarrassing Mr. Chiron.
02:50:16 So, this seems to be reporting that he has spoken of doing something in the future. Yes. And I I think this is sort of I
02:50:28 Yes. And I I think this is sort of I think this report is kind of catching up on events that I was certainly reporting by telephone. I was calling into um my cover officer when this first came
02:50:39 um my cover officer when this first came up. this
02:50:42 up. this whole scenario or whole situation.
02:50:50 Just just to be clear because you have dissociated yourself with the reference to MT is apparently a determined individual. If that didn't come from you, do you know who that information
02:51:01 you, do you know who that information came from that he's apparently a determined individual? No.
02:51:07 If it came from someone other than you, is it surprising that it's in the section headed source comment because you're the source, aren't you? I am. Yes. And yeah, it is surprising.
02:51:23 I'm going to ask if we could take that down and turn to MPS27869, please. So, this is your tab C244, which again is in volume six.
02:51:37 Now we don't need to zoom in on any of this report but can you see in the top left towards the top left there is in this one the there's a report number can you see 603 I can and so
02:51:50 I can and so in relation to that are you able to assist us with the significance of report numbers in terms of denoting a a sequence or an order or
02:52:02 of denoting a a sequence or an order or is this something that you you never had sight right of before the inquiry. I've not had sight of this now. All right. Well, again, we can see date information obtained from source 15th of July. Typing date 15th of July. Guy
02:52:15 July. Typing date 15th of July. Guy Taylor attends globalized resistance meeting and not Shaon Picket and the Groundhog Day. Your your code name, isn't it?
02:52:25 isn't it? Yes. So intelligence the globalized resistance activist guy Taylor will now not be going to the Chiron picket outside his hotel on the 15th of July but will go to the GR steering committee
02:52:37 but will go to the GR steering committee meeting instead and again we've got this source comment this will reduce the numbers of GR activists attending the Chiron picket some may attend uh but not many are now expected c can you remember
02:52:51 many are now expected c can you remember providing this this intelligence or intelligence on this this topic I can't remember it at all. No, not this particular piece. And that source comments this will reduce the numbers of GR activists
02:53:02 reduce the numbers of GR activists attending the Chiron picket. Some may attend but not many are now expected. Would that not have been from you being you would expect it to be, but quite
02:53:13 you would expect it to be, but quite often that would be the the officer who was actually the source of this report if they were putting it together and they they realized that you know they might appine their you know put down
02:53:26 might appine their you know put down their opinion in that part there sort of on your behalf I suppose but the source comment would should normally be something that had come from the source of that information. If we could please take that down and
02:53:37 If we could please take that down and move to MPS27870.
02:53:42 So this is at tab C242 again in volume six.
02:53:48 six. So the last report we were looking at the report number was 603. So this one is 604. Again the date information obtained was 15th of July. The typing date appears to be the following day on
02:53:59 date appears to be the following day on this one.
02:54:02 this one. MT attends the globalized resistance meeting and not the Chaon picket. Similar to the previous report but on MT and then intelligence MT did not attend the picket of Ariel Shiron's hotel uh
02:54:15 the picket of Ariel Shiron's hotel uh but went to the globalized resistance uh GR steering committee meeting I instead
02:54:26 was this picket of Ariel Chiron's hotel was that where the initial plan of
02:54:38 initial plan of embarrassing Mr. Chaon by dressing up as a suicide bomber and performing some sort of protest action. Was that where it was to occur? I don't think I ever learned where it
02:54:49 I don't think I ever learned where it was to occur.
02:54:53 I wonder if we could now take that down and
02:54:58 and please put up on screen MPS27871
02:55:05 at tab C243.
02:55:09 So we have the next number in the sequence for the report numbers. So now we're up to 605. Same date for the information obtained from source typing date the following
02:55:20 from source typing date the following day. This provides MT's uh personal telephone number. Yes. Yes, it does. I I suspect these reports are sort of being put in on my behalf,
02:55:32 are sort of being put in on my behalf, if that makes sense, to sort of add clarity to the the incident. As I'm sure you know, I had put in information uh about MT's possible intentions and these
02:55:44 about MT's possible intentions and these read to me as a sort of backstopping of of that. and some getting stuff on paper. We would have we would have already known MT's personal mobile
02:55:56 already known MT's personal mobile telephone number way before this. I think it's I think it's sort of padding perhaps an operational requirement or something an incident that had come to light with with information to sort of
02:56:09 light with with information to sort of bring it all together if that makes sense for the person receiving it. They would want to know his number. You you already had his number was already on the system. Yeah, absolutely. But but why looking at this report is why would it say because
02:56:21 this report is why would it say because it says this information was obtained on the 15th of July from Groundhog Day. Here here is MT's personal telephone number. That's not it's not correct from what you were saying.
02:56:32 what you were saying. No, not at all. I mean I and you know it's interesting there's a flurry of reports going that well a flurry of reports that have been generated on the 15th of the 7th. Um there were bigger fish to fry about this at that at that
02:56:44 fish to fry about this at that at that stage or there had been. So, I I think it's I think it's probably someone knowing that suddenly there'd be an uptick in interest because of this this
02:56:55 uptick in interest because of this this situation that had arisen and someone's just popping in. Oh, this this originally came from Groundhog Day. Um, so we're going to just fire in these because we kind of know that the Squad,
02:57:07 because we kind of know that the Squad, whoever's handling this situation on Cquad will have this information to hand. either that or it had never been put through, but I can't imagine that's that's the case.
02:57:18 that's the case. Could we please um take this down and move to MPS27874?
02:57:24 So at your tab C245 again in volume six.
02:57:33 So this is the next number in the sequence. Report number 606. Same date information obtained 15th of July. typing date. The following day, MT talked out of extreme action by Guy
02:57:46 talked out of extreme action by Guy Taylor.
02:57:50 You accept you provided that intelligence? Yes.
02:57:54 Yes. MT the globalized resistance activist intended to cause embarrassment to the visiting prime minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon, and his police protection during his visit to the UK. His plan involved
02:58:05 his visit to the UK. His plan involved dressing up as a suicide bomber and attempting to infiltrate Mr. Shiron's personal security cordonom MT seemed determined to carry out this stunt despite the obvious dangers. However, MT
02:58:17 despite the obvious dangers. However, MT was talked out of doing it after having a long conversation with Guy Taylor, the deacto head of GR. Taylor did not do this on his own. He was helped by
02:58:28 this on his own. He was helped by another member of GR NFD trusted by Taylor and it was their combined efforts that eventually persuaded MT not to go ahead with his planned stunt. Now
02:58:41 ahead with his planned stunt. Now are you content that this is intelligence that you provided or in any way has it been typed up incorrectly or
02:58:53 way has it been typed up incorrectly or inaccurately? No, that's about the gist of it. But um yeah, I suspect I was the other person not on my own I I have to say who had um spoken to MT at this
02:59:05 spoken to MT at this you know where this happened. So when you when you say Taylor did not do this on his own he was helped by another member of GR NFD does that stand for no further details?
02:59:16 for no further details? Yeah it does. Yes.
02:59:21 And that and I suspect it would have been put in that way to possibly protect my part to sort of hide my part in that
02:59:34 my part to sort of hide my part in that away if that makes sense. On this int on this particular intelligence report.
02:59:41 Was the other person null Douglas? No, I don't think they're referring to Noel in this, but I suspect they're referring to me, but Noel Douglas was
02:59:53 referring to me, but Noel Douglas was certainly there when when this happened.
02:59:58 So, just to be clear, he was helped by another member of GR and then NFD. That could be a reference to you. Could be.
03:00:08 Could be. Could you help us with this? If it was you, why did it not say Simon Wellings or GD Groundhog Day? Why
03:00:19 Simon Wellings or GD Groundhog Day? Why NFD?
03:00:20 NFD? I don't know. Not sure. No idea.
03:00:30 Where did you obtain this intelligence from?
03:00:34 from? Um, I was there when when this happened. Where did it happen? I'm not I cannot remember where it was. We were obviously Chiron's visit was fairly short notice
03:00:45 Chiron's visit was fairly short notice as I remember. Uh we only had two or three days um to sort of get ready for it. Um I in my mind it was he was here for perhaps
03:00:57 my mind it was he was here for perhaps three days. Um and so we we were getting ourselves together to you know to protest his visit. As part of that, we had a meeting
03:01:09 visit. As part of that, we had a meeting or we were somewhere together. I think it was a pub. Um, it's quite often a pub and we were having a meeting all together to sort of lay out or work out
03:01:21 together to sort of lay out or work out exactly what we were going to do. In my mind, this is before the big protest on the evening of the 14th. There was a process in the evening of the 14th and I think it's before then
03:01:32 the 14th and I think it's before then and we were we were getting our heads together to work out what we could do to um to to protest the visit of Chiron effectively
03:01:44 effectively who was at this meeting who I was clearly empty die null um perhaps half a dozen other people.
03:01:58 um perhaps half a dozen other people. Maybe maybe a couple more than that.
03:02:16 MT has given evidence that he knew nothing of this and wasn't even there. Do you accept that you may have been mistaken as to
03:02:28 that you may have been mistaken as to the identity of the person you're reporting about planning to dress up as a suicide bomber? No, I'm absolutely sure that it was
03:02:39 No, I'm absolutely sure that it was empty. 100% sure.
03:02:50 Were
03:02:55 did you uh watch any of Guy Taylor's evidence last week? No.
03:03:03 No. Have you read Guy Taylor's witness statement? No.
03:03:13 Now, Guy Taylor has given evidence that it wasn't MT, but it was a white male.
03:03:27 wasn't MT, but it was a white male. And the description that he gave was they didn't look all alike. There was an age difference, a race difference, a class difference,
03:03:38 class difference, everything. I mean like there is no way you can get those two mixed up. Not at all. Okay. So he said described a completely
03:03:49 So he said described a completely uh different uh person, a completely different person who was going to do this. Yes.
03:03:59 Yes. The the evidence given by him was that uh he did indeed persuade somebody not to do this, right?
03:04:06 right? That uh the stunt was uh proposed and he persuaded him not to do it. The difference between you and him is as to the identity of the person making the
03:04:17 the identity of the person making the proposal.
03:04:17 proposal. I understand. Thank you, sir.
03:04:27 Guy Taylor said that there um this individual was very excited with this uh plan
03:04:39 this uh plan but that
03:04:41 but that uh although you were there you didn't play much of a role in the conversation. Do you accept leaving aside identities? Do you accept that you didn't play much
03:04:52 Do you accept that you didn't play much of a role in the conversation of talking this individual out of the plan? No, I I don't accept that.
03:05:05 He describes you as you might have um no more than a sentence or two on this topic.
03:05:16 Do you accept that? No.
03:05:19 No. What do you say that you said to MT? What do you say you said to him? It it was a
03:05:29 it was a a five or six minute conversation I would say um
03:05:37 um away from the main group. We when MT had first mentioned this at the table, we were sat at um people were firing out all sorts of
03:05:49 people were firing out all sorts of different ideas about what was going to happen um throughout the course of Chiron being here. MT raised this idea,
03:06:00 Chiron being here. MT raised this idea, this proposed idea um at the time. Uh I was sat almost opposite him and I think guy was probably at the head of the table a bit to my left and as he said it
03:06:15 table a bit to my left and as he said it um because people were sort of it was quite boisterous kind of atmosphere and MT raised it in quite a quiet way and said I'm going to do this and I sort of looked up and met his eye and guy on the
03:06:29 looked up and met his eye and guy on the left clearly you know sort of keyed in on that as Well, people were still chatting away and there was a brief bit of conversation about you cannot do that.
03:06:41 conversation about you cannot do that. That's, you know, that's a crazy idea. Guy said something along the lines of um
03:06:51 um something along the lines of, "Let me give you some advice about your, you know, your your future health prospects," or something along those lines. You know, my young friend or I don't think those are quite the right
03:07:02 don't think those are quite the right words.
03:07:04 words. and he he stood up. MT stood up and I stood up with them and we moved to a table a little bit further away and then had the conversation with MT
03:07:19 at the end of the conversation except the the the plan was no longer to take effect. Was that your understanding
03:07:31 take effect. Was that your understanding of the plan that this had been raised in this meeting? Mhm.
03:07:36 Mhm. In the pub. Yep.
03:07:38 Yep. That the conversation about persuading him of uh not to do so and an acceptance by him that he wouldn't do that all all in one discussion over over the course
03:07:51 in one discussion over over the course of one get together, one meeting. Yes, pretty much. I I spoke to MT at some length afterwards outside where there was further conversation.
03:08:03 where there was further conversation. But yes, yes, he had in his own mind had definitely, I think, been persuaded that it was a mad idea um with all sorts of risk for obvious reasons and that it was
03:08:15 risk for obvious reasons and that it was off and that he wasn't going to do it. The conversation you had afterwards, was that in the pub or was that? No, it was outside
03:08:26 No, it was outside out outside the the pub or Yeah, on the street. He we we'd gone after we'd had this five or six minute conversation with MT which was kind of
03:08:37 conversation with MT which was kind of bit freewheeling. It moved from one place to another a little bit, but quite clearly, and this is out of, you know, I didn't know MT brilliantly well, but this is, you know, seemed very much out
03:08:49 this is, you know, seemed very much out of character for him. Um, not the sort of thing that he would normally do. Um, we had done a dressing up action, not like this, but a sort of dressing up
03:09:01 like this, but a sort of dressing up action,
03:09:03 action, I want to say back in the end of May, where we got into the um,
03:09:11 what was it the Becktail Conference in Hammersmith and you know that's kind of by the buy, but we had we had dressed up on that occasion. I say dressed up a bit like
03:09:23 occasion. I say dressed up a bit like I'm dressed now, except MT had a much better suit than me. Um, and we'd kind of bluffed our way into a conference where they were carving up Iraqi war contracts and done a very limited action
03:09:35 contracts and done a very limited action and attempted to do a banner drop which didn't quite come off and then got chased out of the hotel. Um, but no, forgive me. We kind of lost where we are
03:09:46 where we are in at the end of that conversation. Yeah, we're outside. Outside. Yes. After that conversation outside on on the same day. Yep.
03:09:57 Yep. Was it ever spoken about again between you and MT? Um
03:10:05 Um I tried to Yes. Very briefly. Could you explain when and what was discussed very briefly? Yeah of course. The
03:10:16 Yeah of course. The in my mind the next night or the next day is the very lively demo outside Downing Street. Chiron went for a private dinner at number 10 and there
03:10:30 private dinner at number 10 and there was a demo um and big student mobilization. It got quite boisterous at one stage. guy got arrested in fact and taken off to Sharon
03:10:42 arrested in fact and taken off to Sharon Cross police station I think from memory. Um and after I had passed this information in which I had got from MT or about what had happened I as soon as
03:10:54 or about what had happened I as soon as I had kind of broken clear I telephoned it in clearly to my office that this was the proposal. Um, and in the course of the conversation I'd had outside the pub
03:11:06 the conversation I'd had outside the pub with MT, he had gone so far as to describe what he had begun to put together.
03:11:13 together. Um, and I'd obviously I had passed that in. Um, as we parted part of the conversation, and it's only part of the conversation, he had said I'm going to
03:11:24 conversation, he had said I'm going to get rid of it. I'm going to, you know, pull it apart and throw it away. Um, I had passed that information obviously into the desk um or into the desk via by I think it
03:11:37 um or into the desk via by I think it was Steve Beiels I think. Um, and the message had come back down. Can you be absolutely sure that he's got rid
03:11:49 you be absolutely sure that he's got rid of it? And I basically had to say no, I can't. I haven't seen it. I haven't had eyes on it myself. I only know how he has described it to me. Um, and they said, "Well, you're going
03:12:00 Um, and they said, "Well, you're going to have to get in contact with him again if you can and to absolutely confirm it." Um, I had attempted to call MT I think later that night. I think I
03:12:11 I think later that night. I think I tried again in the morning. He didn't pick up. It's the 14th. We were getting ready for the big demo. I did not get a chance to speak to
03:12:22 did not get a chance to speak to 14th of July. Yeah, I think so. Um, I didn't get a chance. It got very lively, as you're probably aware, in at in White Hall that
03:12:33 probably aware, in at in White Hall that evening. MT wasn't really with us. We did a We did a, you know, a demo. We tried to take the road. Guy got arrested. There was quite a lot of disorder, barriers going over. I got
03:12:45 disorder, barriers going over. I got bashed by a police horse. Um, various things going on. that MT had come to that as he normally did with his sort of student cohort and I didn't get a chance
03:12:56 student cohort and I didn't get a chance to speak to him at that time and I'm pretty sure the next time we communicated was just before the steering committee meeting which seems strange that we had that scheduled for then but I'm sure there was a steering
03:13:07 then but I'm sure there was a steering committee meeting the next day the next evening that is when I spoke to him we had a very brief conversation and I said the thing that we were talking about or words to that effect
03:13:19 words to that effect has that definitely gone. He said yes. I then passed that back in afterwards. So would that have been about the 15th of July?
03:13:28 of July? Yeah, it would have been the 15th. the reports that we've just looked at and according to the reports that the the source date is the 15th of July
03:13:42 the source date is the 15th of July do not provide any description of the vest as as you've described what you've just explained but if we I wonder if we can just turn to it's MPS28780
03:13:56 to it's MPS28780 please which is your tab C251 one in volume six it is this is the 4th of August the inquiry have dated this as
03:14:09 August the inquiry have dated this as being the 4th of August 2003 and we can see intelligence globalized resistance MT this intelligence is source sensitive possibly known only to
03:14:21 source sensitive possibly known only to the subject the source and one other must be treated accordingly and we can see note for SBHN9 9 RG TN24 has asked that this update be
03:14:32 9 RG TN24 has asked that this update be put in, perhaps best done by way of note for desk. And then it says, MT sits on the steering committee of the Londonbased anti- capitalist group Globalized Resistance. He recently
03:14:44 Globalized Resistance. He recently hatched a plan with the intention of embarrassing the protection effort surrounding Ariel Chiron. On his recent visit to London, MT planned to dress as a Palestinian martyr bomber and get
03:14:56 a Palestinian martyr bomber and get close enough to Chiron to be photographed by the media. And then this, it has now emerged that MT did go so far as to begin building props to support his disguise. He has told a
03:15:08 support his disguise. He has told a trusted activist friend that he obtained half a dozen sturdy cardboard tubes and spray painted them red in color before attaching various lengths of brightly
03:15:20 attaching various lengths of brightly colored electrical wire to link the base of the tubes. I'll just pausing there. Is this the trusted activist friend a reference to you? I think it must be. Yes. Could you could
03:15:31 I think it must be. Yes. Could you could you forgive me? Could you just say the date of this again? So inquiry understands this report is dated the 4th of August 2003. So the 4th of August. Yeah. I I mean I put in a I would have
03:15:42 Yeah. I I mean I put in a I would have put in a narrative report about the contents of that meeting before this. This is we're now jumping from the 15th of July to the 4th of August. That's what 19 days or something by my poor
03:15:54 what 19 days or something by my poor maths. That's a long time. I I definitely I can remember putting in a sort of catch up follow-up 10 paragraph
03:16:06 10 paragraph account of what had happened when I when I when we spoke to MT in the pub and really more significantly the detail that I got from speaking to him out on
03:16:17 that I got from speaking to him out on the street. This I think um
03:16:24 this I think is is me being asked. I've got a re I'm not familiar with this, but I think this is me being asked. I've got a recollection that I got called on a Monday or something and they were going
03:16:38 Monday or something and they were going to brief somebody
03:16:43 in the in the organization. And this reads to me as if someone in the office has typed it up with me on the other end of the phone. Does that description with the cardboard tube spray painted red brightly colored
03:16:55 tube spray painted red brightly colored electrical wire? Does that description though match the description that you say you were given it? I'm not the the tubes for certain. I
03:17:06 it? I'm not the the tubes for certain. I think the bright brightly colored wire I don't recognize. Um that's not what he told me. Well, he didn't give me that level of detail when we when he when I actually when we left
03:17:18 we when he when I actually when we left the meeting and we went outside. I followed him out cuz I could, you know, it was a significant thing. I had made sure I'd left at the same time as him. I
03:17:30 sure I'd left at the same time as him. I can remember having to bustle through like a a little sort of airlock door. You know, when you go into a pub sometimes and there's a tiny little room, they've had to for fire eggs or whatever. He was going out. I couldn't
03:17:42 whatever. He was going out. I couldn't kind of get in because I wanted to leave literally with him. So I ended up sort of following up the road a little bit stopping him or coming up alongside him and saying, "Gee whiz, that was that was
03:17:55 and saying, "Gee whiz, that was that was kind of mad, you know, are you okay?" And we stopped and had a talk about that. I think we sat on a wall or le against a wall or something and talked
03:18:06 against a wall or something and talked through and he seemed really um quite anxious and preoccupied perhaps understandably and I pressed him
03:18:17 perhaps understandably and I pressed him for some more detail about the thing and he I'm he had a bag with him like a grip bag and he looked down he looked down at it and something about the way he did
03:18:28 it and something about the way he did that made me think that it might he might have something in that bag if that makes sense. That was ju just to understand your evidence though is that you didn't actually see
03:18:39 though is that you didn't actually see see anything. Is is that right? You described a bag. See the prop? See the prop? No, not at all. I asked him I said to him something along the lines, have you started to do something? Have you started to put something together? And
03:18:52 started to put something together? And he said yes. And it just then all the detail just kind of spilled out of him. He talked he described what he had done. A and just going back to this um report here when it says he planned to wear
03:19:04 here when it says he planned to wear this prop under a long coat uh before leaping over any crowd control barrier and approaching Chiron by before whipping his coat open. I is that information that
03:19:16 information that you received from not in that kind of level of detail if that makes sense. When I asked him what he was going to do, he said he was going to rush towards Chiron, get as close to
03:19:27 to rush towards Chiron, get as close to him as he could, and he was going to wear it under a coat. That that was about the strength of it. I think there's a little bit of poetic license for whoever's typed this up, been
03:19:38 for whoever's typed this up, been applied.
03:19:40 applied. C can you help us with why why do you describe it as poetic license? Could you just explain because this is an intelligence report about uh MT
03:19:53 about uh MT uh and a proposal to dress up in a fake suicide vest. Do do you know why there was poetic license uh added?
03:20:04 was poetic license uh added? No, I I don't and I don't I don't think this is I'm not trying to be splitting hairs or mely mouthed about it. I don't think this is going in an intelligence report. I think this is me. I've got
03:20:15 report. I think this is me. I've got quite it's now rung a bigger bell. I'm pretty sure they rang me and said it was going to someone I don't know who two is um at the top
03:20:27 I don't know who two is um at the top sorry where it says note for SB HN9 and then there's TN24 I wonder if that's someone quite ser you know quite senior in the organization
03:20:38 know quite senior in the organization because it's now what nearly 3 weeks later
03:20:42 later and for some reason they haven't got access to my report that I put in Um, and I remember having a conversation on the phone where I kind of went through it again and I think that is the record.
03:20:54 it again and I think that is the record. This is that record of that conversation. And if we just continue on, I'm just interested in in what is accurately what you were told uh as opposed to poetic license. MT has
03:21:07 uh as opposed to poetic license. MT has also admitted that he was partially inspired by the alternative comedian that breached security at Prince William's 21st birthday party at Windsor Castle. M
03:21:16 Castle. M is does that accurately reflect what you phoned in? He Yeah, it does. But but not on this date. We're talking about way back. But yes, he mentioned that
03:21:27 yes, he mentioned that specifically MT reason that if you get so close as to embrace an heir to the throne without getting shot, then you should be able to get close to a visiting head of state.
03:21:38 get close to a visiting head of state. Again, does that reflect what you were told? It does, but probably not in quite that verbose a way, if that makes sense. I think he he kind when I spoke to him about it, all the information kind of
03:21:49 about it, all the information kind of just poured out of him. And he mentioned he mentioned the Prince William thing. I don't think he said 21st birthday party at Winter Castle. I think someone's probably looked that up and added that
03:22:00 probably looked that up and added that detail in. But he he certainly mentioned the incident because you will remember well you might not remember but there was an incident where someone dressed as Osama bin Laden in a pink tutu dress or
03:22:13 Osama bin Laden in a pink tutu dress or something had got inside Prince William's birthday party. And the the last part of that paragraph, MT was also mindful of the fact that the commissioner of police had been forced
03:22:24 commissioner of police had been forced to make a very public apology for the breach and that another similar occurrence might at least cost a top pig his job. Those last words in inverted commas.
03:22:34 commas. They are, but that's that's not what something that he would have said. I can't imagine MT using those words, if that makes sense. That's not something he would say.
03:22:47 That's not something he would say. Are you surprised to see those words then inverted composition? Yes.
03:22:53 Yes. He when we when we spoke to him, this is before we go outside. When we spoke to him in the pub and we were talking to him, he mentioned he mentioned Chiron
03:23:04 him, he mentioned he mentioned Chiron that he wanted to make him look small. Um
03:23:09 Um he was, you know, he was talking about the violence that was been inflicted by him and Blair. I think Prime Minister Tony Blair, I think he mentioned the commissioner in some way. I can't
03:23:20 commissioner in some way. I can't remember, you know, without any context around it, but I think again whoever whoever's put this together, it's kind of just added that
03:23:34 made made it up. I don't know about made it up. I think I must have I possibly mentioned the commissioner in the phone call and they I don't know possibly
03:23:47 I don't know possibly I don't really understand
03:23:51 a reference to the statement made by AXO rather than the commissioner either but it's neither him or there perhaps it's a source comment this is presumably a reference to the statement made by AXO rather than the
03:24:02 statement made by AXO rather than the commissioner. That's something you no
03:24:06 no not clear about? We no perhaps fortunately empty was talked out of this potentially suicidal endeavor by two other members of the globalized steering and I wonder if we can just
03:24:17 steering and I wonder if we can just move on to the next page please steering committee and those two just to be clear why is there reference to two people talking him out of it who who
03:24:29 people talking him out of it who who were those two I I don't know sorry could you go back yes I wonder if we can in fact maybe just show those two side by side. Thank you. So perhaps fortunately MT was talked out of this potentially suicidal
03:24:41 talked out of this potentially suicidal endeavor by two other members of the globalized steering committee. Well, I suppose that's me and Guy though null Douglas was definitely there
03:24:53 though null Douglas was definitely there too. He came along and empty has assured one of those individuals that he has now destroyed his makeshift vest. Reference to you.
03:25:04 his makeshift vest. Reference to you. Yes. and that he has no intention of resurrecting the plan should Chaon visit again I mean in the future. Why would he? But you know as in Chaon wasn't scheduled to visit again in the
03:25:15 wasn't scheduled to visit again in the future. But yes, the ends is interesting. You quite often see that when it's a a telephone thing or a a different form of communication especially with a lowerase E.
03:25:28 especially with a lowerase E. So I haven't finished this topic but I wonder if in fact is a convenient time to break.
03:25:33 to break. Indeed. And um there is going to be I think a short private session at the beginning of the resumed hearing this afternoon. Yes, there is sir. Yes.
03:25:46 Very well. We'll adjourn until 2 when we will have a short private session and then we will resume the open hearings.