Emily Apple provides evidence regarding her history of activism, her philosophy as an anarchist, and the deep personal betrayal she felt after discovering she had been infiltrated by undercover police officers, specifically HN3.
00:30:27 Good morning everybody. Uh, today's proceedings are going to be livereamed, but with the usual 10-minute delay. Those with mobile devices may use them to report what they hear in the hearing
00:30:38 to report what they hear in the hearing room, but only after 10 minutes have elapsed since the event that they're reporting. They may not be used for recording or photography. Yes. Just repeat after me. Dism
00:30:49 Just repeat after me. Dism I do solemnly 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 and nothing but the
00:31:00 the whole truth and nothing but the truth
00:31:01 truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
00:31:03 truth do please sit down um may I make it clear we have a quarter of an hour break in the morning for the benefit of the transcribers but if at any time you feel the need for a break just say so and
00:31:14 the need for a break just say so and we'll have a break thank you yes Please, will you give us your full name? Um, Emily Alice Apple. Now, I understand that you would prefer to be addressed simply as Emily during this
00:31:26 addressed simply as Emily during this hearing. Is that right? That's right. Yes. Emily, before we begin, I understand that there is something that you wanted to say about the way that your evidence
00:31:37 to say about the way that your evidence may have come across, the way in which you may present. So, you are able to say whatever you would like on that subject. Now,
00:31:44 Now, thank you. Um, I just wanted to say I have a tendency to smile. I can laugh about talking about quite traumatic things and I didn't want that to come
00:31:56 things and I didn't want that to come across as not feeling the impact. That's my way of dealing with it and to the point that mental health professionals have told me about it as well. Um, so I
00:32:07 have told me about it as well. Um, so I kind of wanted to make that clear because that doesn't lessen the impact if I'm smiling about something. I'm also menopausal, so if I have hot plushies, I'm fine. I have a fan. But not to take anything from my appearance of getting
00:32:20 anything from my appearance of getting sort of flustered or agitated and hot because I'm just menopause. Thank you. Thankitch.
00:32:33 Well, an early [laughter] break.
00:32:37 Never mind. Well, rather than rise, I'll I'll we'll just sit here quietly while you get it get it going. I'm afraid these hitches occur.
00:33:10 For the benefit of those at the back, there's a technical hitch, hence the pause.
00:33:16 pause. I hope you can hear everything else.
00:34:02 Holding
00:35:19 Emily, you provide a witness statement running to 185 pages dated the 8th of May, 2025. Please, could you confirm that the
00:35:31 Please, could you confirm that the contents of that statement are correct to the best of your knowledge and belief? Yes. I'd like to begin please with just exploring
00:35:43 exploring your journey and what I mean by that how you have ended up being sat where you are today. You set out in at page five of your
00:35:55 You set out in at page five of your statement that at a very young age you the way you put it you were aware of uh injustice in the in the world.
00:36:06 From a young age, you were also a carer for your sister. Is that right? That's right. Yes. And just on that topic, although you're not sure whether HN3 met your sister, he
00:36:17 not sure whether HN3 met your sister, he was certainly aware of your caring aware of her. Yes. Okay.
00:36:23 Okay. Going back, you explain when you were as young as 11 that you began to learn about the suffragettes at school. And when you did learn about them, the
00:36:34 And when you did learn about them, the way in which you have phrased it is that you felt an immediate connection and fascination with their struggle. Is is that right? That's right. Yeah. There was just something
00:36:45 something about what people were and what women were prepared to do to achieve basic fundamental human rights. That just resonated me with at a really
00:36:57 That just resonated me with at a really really young age. And I think because of um growing up um with a disabled sister um I just had that profound sense of
00:37:08 um I just had that profound sense of justice and injustice and wanting to seek sort of justice in life and seeing the way that society treated my sister really sort of drilled that home to me. And I also grew up
00:37:20 that home to me. And I also grew up quite quickly because of um I wasn't expected to assume those caring responsibilities but it was something I kind of did naturally. Um and so I grew up quite quickly and yeah it read it
00:37:33 up quite quickly and yeah it read it sort of led to yeah I used to go to like our local reference library and um go through micro features and do loads of research um and read loads and loads of books and
00:37:46 um and read loads and loads of books and yeah just the sort of struggle and that sort of fundamental being prepared to fight for our rights and to fight for justice was really fundamentally important to me from an early
00:37:58 important to me from an early You've explained in your statement for example your reading included for example about the conscientious objectors during the first world war but then your research showed that well
00:38:09 but then your research showed that well there was there were still current uh struggles and with your interest in current affairs as well you became aware of campaign against the arms trade. Yeah, campaign against Arms Trade, um,
00:38:21 Yeah, campaign against Arms Trade, um, CND, sort of lot lots of different groups, um, back in the days before the internet, I sent a lot of letters to, um, different organizations asking for
00:38:32 um, different organizations asking for more information because I think, yeah, this started from a sort of historical perspective and being interested in the history and then kind of realizing the world around me was
00:38:43 world around me was um, also in need of sort of social change and justice and that there there were issues that I wanted to be involved with.
00:38:51 with. And I think you wrote to Campaign Against the Arms Trade when you were as young as 13 or 14 to find out more about the organization and today you are the media coordinator
00:39:03 and today you are the media coordinator for Campaign Against the Armstra. Yes, I am. Yes. Okay.
00:39:07 Okay. In terms of reading about these subjects that you've explained, did there come a point when you were 14 that you became
00:39:18 point when you were 14 that you became more active and by that started to join demonstrations? And I think you say that the first demonstration you went on was in 1990 against the first Gulf War.
00:39:29 in 1990 against the first Gulf War. That's right. Yeah. So, um, yeah, during the first Gulf War, I kind of really wanted to be able to go and protest. I remember talking to my mom about it and
00:39:40 remember talking to my mom about it and her saying to me, "I can't really stop you going cuz I went on my first demo when I was 14 and she'd been on one of the big CND demos." Um, then I I think one of the things you also
00:39:51 I I think one of the things you also said in your statement is that you wanted to make sure that you didn't want to risk being arrested before you were 18 because of the impact that might have.
00:39:59 have. Absolutely. I I didn't do anything that was sort of arrestable before then. But I I very much believed in the power of direct action and the people who were
00:40:11 direct action and the people who were actually prepared to sort of push those boundaries and that's where so much of the change and the rights that we take for granted were were one was through people sort of pushing those boundaries.
00:40:23 people sort of pushing those boundaries. Now we're aware as time goes on you participate increasingly in demonstrations. And I just want to we'll we'll turn to a number of those, but just because the inquiries heard
00:40:35 just because the inquiries heard particularly a lot of evidence about the demonstration at Welling in relation to the BNP uh bookshop. I think you were there during Could you just provide us briefly with your perspective
00:40:46 briefly with your perspective on that day and again how that influenced your development in activism please?
00:40:52 please? Yeah, absolutely. Um so willing I just sort of went well because you know I believe in ant fascism and opposing the BMP but I wasn't expecting anything to
00:41:05 BMP but I wasn't expecting anything to happen in Welling. Um I was um 18 or 19 at the time and I'd only sort of been to those sort of big London marches and
00:41:16 those sort of big London marches and right from the very beginning of the day there was a really different atmosphere. There were sort of mounted police um on a hill. Um it felt really tense. It felt
00:41:27 a hill. Um it felt really tense. It felt very very different. Um we walked up the road and the police blocked everyone from marching up the road. I was with an older friend who had
00:41:39 road. I was with an older friend who had a lot more experience and he was just like, "We need to move." So we climbed over a fence um and into a park at the side. And I remember because I ripped my
00:41:50 side. And I remember because I ripped my skirt on the fence getting into the park and it was the last time I wore a skirt to a demo. Um, and
00:41:59 and it was just a day of excessive police violence. Um, I remember watching the police charge repeatedly into the crowd and then when we were eventually able to
00:42:10 and then when we were eventually able to leave, we were sort of chased down the road by riot police. And one of the things that that really stands out to me is how the media
00:42:21 stands out to me is how the media represented what happened because it was not what happened on the day. It was provoked by the police. It was exasperated by the police and it was the first sort of really violent political
00:42:33 first sort of really violent political situation that that I'd been in that was violence from the police. Um, and there were things like the media reported that there were protesters running through
00:42:44 there were protesters running through gardens. And I remember really clearly in the morning, um, sort of going up to the march, it was the media that were doing that. I remember people with big cameras running through people's front gardens. Um, so it really changed both
00:42:58 gardens. Um, so it really changed both how I thought about policing on demonstrations, but also about how the media represented those protests as well.
00:43:05 well. I'd like to ask about something you've set out in your statement. I wonder if we can put up on screen, please, Emily's statement. It's UCPI 38025. It's uh if we could go to page 11 first,
00:43:18 It's uh if we could go to page 11 first, please.
00:43:22 So, the couple of things that you've set out here that I'd like to ask you about. So, in paragraph 3.1, you say, "As can be seen above, I'm clearly supportive of direct action that breaks the law, uh,
00:43:35 direct action that breaks the law, uh, and have been since my first political [clears throat] involvement." And then if we drop down to paragraph 3.2, too. Um, additionally, there are several questions about my
00:43:47 there are several questions about my leadership of groups. Um, at this stage of the inquiry, and given I am described as an anarchist, uh, a label I accept in several of the reports, it should be
00:43:58 several of the reports, it should be clear that we organize through non-hirarchical principles and through consensus decisionmaking. I am an organizer uh but I am not a leader and
00:44:09 organizer uh but I am not a leader and this is an important ideological difference. Now, at this part of your statement, you're setting out in broad terms your your philosophy and what I
00:44:21 terms your your philosophy and what I wanted to ask you is if it was [snorts] suggested to you, if someone made this as a point that well, here is someone who is saying that they're clearly
00:44:32 who is saying that they're clearly supportive of direct action that breaks the law and they are content to be referred to as an anarchist. If somebody were to say, well, um, you can't be
00:44:45 were to say, well, um, you can't be surprised that a policing response results as a result of having that philosophy. Um, I'm not surprised in a policing response. Um, that's very different to
00:44:57 response. Um, that's very different to being spied on and having my life intruded on. I've always taken part in actions where I know that there could be legal consequences and I'm prepared to face those legal consequences. that's
00:45:09 face those legal consequences. that's the framework that that we have. Um, and I'm prepared to justify what I do in court. Um, that's very different to
00:45:20 court. Um, that's very different to saying that undercover police should have been entitled to invade my life. And
00:45:29 And that in in terms of being an anarchist, I believe in direct democracy. I believe in, you know, the police use this in a pjorative way. they they use it as a shorthand for extremist. They're not
00:45:41 shorthand for extremist. They're not using it to describe a very wide ranging political philosophy. Um in terms of my ideology, I believe essentially indirect democracy. I believe that people should
00:45:54 democracy. I believe that people should have more power. That ticking a box every four years is not democracy in itself. that people should be able to make decisions
00:46:06 should be able to make decisions collectively about the world and the society that we live in for the benefit of people and planet and not in the interests of a small number of wealthy people.
00:46:18 people. Before going into details about individual undercover officers, there's just one other part of your statement I want to ask you about before we do so. I wonder if we could move please to page
00:46:30 wonder if we could move please to page 14.
00:46:32 14. It's what you have set out at paragraph 3.15 and and again it's similar to what we've just been discussing but I just want to just go through this and it's going to
00:46:43 just go through this and it's going to be into the next page as well. So I wonder if perhaps Thank you. So we can see here that you say so so yes I advocate, provoke and approve of breaking the law. Uh, I'm proud that I'm a small part of a movement that has won
00:46:56 a small part of a movement that has won our fundamental rights. And then you go on to say, uh, I'm proud that as a mother, I'm prepared to take action to protect a mother I've never met who's
00:47:07 protect a mother I've never met who's sheltering her childhmade bomb. And then the next paragraph, you say this. However, whilst I have been arrested around 76 times, only a
00:47:20 arrested around 76 times, only a fraction of these arrests led to conviction. Time and time again, I was arrested for who I am and what my beliefs are, not because of any action I undertook. It is noticeable that all the
00:47:34 undertook. It is noticeable that all the arrests that the inquiry has directed me to are what I describe as arrests. None led to conviction and the majority I have taken civil action against the police over and so in a
00:47:49 against the police over and so in a striking number 76 arrests but the point that you made is that in relation to many of those did not result in a conviction at all. No, the majority of my arrests have um
00:48:03 No, the majority of my arrests have um been around harassment and targeting. They've been because the police know who I am. Um, I don't doubt that I'm
00:48:14 I am. Um, I don't doubt that I'm annoying sometimes because I know my rights and I will argue. Um, but it's not because of the actions that that I've taken and um and absolutely I I think there is a
00:48:27 um and absolutely I I think there is a moral duty to take direct action to prevent greater crimes. We've got a country at the moment that is complicit in genocide
00:48:41 moment that is complicit in genocide that has decided that international law no longer matters. And
00:48:47 And being a small part of that movement that is willing to uphold those higher principles, those principles of international law and stuff like that is really fundamentally important to me. In
00:48:58 really fundamentally important to me. In terms of my arrests, they were arrests. All all the ones that the inquiry have asked me about were wrongful arrests and I've got no convictions for violence. I've got no
00:49:09 no convictions for violence. I've got no convictions for public order offenses. Um and if the police thought that I was this much of a threat or that I was taking illegal actions, then they should
00:49:22 taking illegal actions, then they should have arrested me for those actions and prosecuted me for those actions. But they never did that. They just made stuff up.
00:49:29 stuff up. So you are aware that many undercover officers and core participants have been asked and I will be asking you as well questions about
00:49:40 be asking you as well questions about justification for violence, public um disorder. But what you have just said is that
00:49:48 that after all of this that you have never been convicted for an offense of violence or public disorder. No, I haven't. And I haven't read anything in the disclosure that's actually accused me of public disorder
00:50:02 actually accused me of public disorder um or violence. I mean, I think the term public disorder is very problematic. It's a policing term and it's used to encompass everything from a sitdown
00:50:13 encompass everything from a sitdown protest in the road um to the race riots that we saw last summer. And when you've got a term that is that broad, it actually becomes quite meaningless because because where do you you sit
00:50:25 because because where do you you sit within that that public disorder? Um and and and the police are acting to repress any types of
00:50:36 are acting to repress any types of protests and we have a fundamental right not just to protest but to disruptive protest as well. Disruptive protest is a fundamental part of our democracy. But when we label everything as public
00:50:48 when we label everything as public disorder
00:50:49 disorder from very very very minor five people sitting in a road to race riots then yeah as I say I think it's a
00:51:00 riots then yeah as I say I think it's a meaningless term. Let's turn to the undercover officers and the first I'm going to ask you about is HN14
00:51:10 is HN14 Jim Boiling undercover name Jim Sutton. So he was deployed between June 1995 to September 2000. And is it right that as
00:51:22 September 2000. And is it right that as far as your concerned you may have come across him at in RTS, but you don't have any particular uh recollections of this
00:51:34 any particular uh recollections of this officer at all. Is that right? No, I don't. It's possible. Um but I went to RCS things as a participant rather than an organizer. And yeah, I've had no disclosure about him. The the
00:51:46 had no disclosure about him. The the only bit where boiling seems to have touched on my life is over his meeting with HN3 at Kingston Green Pair. Now, you'll remember the evidence of HN14 and
00:51:58 you'll remember the evidence of HN14 and HN3 in relation to something that happened at the Kingston Green Fair on the 3rd of June 2002. So, this is where
00:52:09 the 3rd of June 2002. So, this is where HN14 says that he's there with Rosa. He sees
00:52:15 sees HN3 and they he's moves away so that he's not seen by that particular officer. Now HN3 when he gave his evidence he said he was running a
00:52:27 evidence he said he was running a disarmed DSI store with you and the person the inquiry calling Victoria and and a couple of others. Do you actually remember that? So, it's a long time ago
00:52:39 remember that? So, it's a long time ago and it appears that HN14 um managed to move Rosone himself. I mean, I don't remember the actual incident. I remember the stalls we did at Kingston Green Fair and definitely wasn't 2002.
00:52:50 wasn't 2002. Ah, can you help us with it with when that
00:52:53 that um it was probably 200 Well, it would have been
00:53:00 have been Oh, maybe 2004 or 2005. 200. So, it was later. It was later. Um but yes, it definitely wasn't 2002. We didn't do one in 2019. Thank you.
00:53:11 Thank you. Let's move to uh HN3 under Kevin named Jason Bishop. So we know he was deployed between 1998 and 2006.
00:53:22 between 1998 and 2006. Were you able to uh hear his evidence? Yes, I was. Okay. Now, in his uh witness statement
00:53:33 Okay. Now, in his uh witness statement to the inquiry, and we needn't put it up on screen, but the reference is paragraph 218, page 76, he said this. I was no closer to Emily
00:53:46 he said this. I was no closer to Emily Apple during my deployment than I was to any other of the activists I associated with in that period. I did not consider the impact on her of discovering I was a
00:53:58 the impact on her of discovering I was a UCO at the time uh for the reasons I've already given. What was the impact on you when you first read that account by HN3 to the inquiry that it was no closer
00:54:09 HN3 to the inquiry that it was no closer to you than any other activist? What effect did that have on you reading those words, please? It made me angry. Um I I was very close to to HN3. Um, we worked together and
00:54:23 to to HN3. Um, we worked together and socialized together over a number of years. I would say he was closer to Victoria than he was to me, but we were very, very close. And it's that
00:54:34 very, very close. And it's that minimization of impact that comes across time and time again that is utterly disgusting. I mean, I wasn't surprised to read that he didn't think about the impact on me. I would have been
00:54:45 impact on me. I would have been surprised if he said he had, but that doesn't make it any less damaging or any better. Not being surprised about that. Um, but yes, we we had a very close um
00:54:58 Um, but yes, we we had a very close um friendship. He was part of um a very small affinity group that we had a small group of people that were were going and doing actions. Um
00:55:09 were going and doing actions. Um I trusted him. Um he spent time with my child, with my baby. Um yeah, we we were very we were really good friends. Now when you read that uh account by HN3
00:55:24 Now when you read that uh account by HN3 in his statement, you gave a number of examples to demonstrate in fact you were closer than he set out there. For example, you provided a photograph of
00:55:36 example, you provided a photograph of the cuddly toy, the polar bear that um he gave your uh son a and a number of pieces of evidence you put forward to show that simply wasn't the case. Now,
00:55:48 show that simply wasn't the case. Now, when he gave evidence, he said that you were friends. And this is the way he he put it. He says, "I kind of agree. We
00:55:59 he put it. He says, "I kind of agree. We were friends. We were definitely involved. we were trusted. That's probably the best description. So, you remember when he gave evidence that he accepted that there was a friendship
00:56:11 accepted that there was a friendship there and referred to you and him as trusting each other. Is is that a fair description from him? Well, yes, we well, we were good friends and
00:56:22 and um that trust for me is a fundamental part of friendships. It is part of the bond that you create with people when
00:56:34 bond that you create with people when you when you go out to protests. If you think when you when you go to protests um especially if you're like facing police violence, you end up having
00:56:45 police violence, you end up having actually very close, very emotional friendships with people because of what you've been through together. Um and and that does impact. It's not the same as,
00:56:56 that does impact. It's not the same as, oh, I've got a friend that I go to the pub with and I see every now and then. It's someone that you go through particularly intense situations with that you bond over those situations that
00:57:07 that you bond over those situations that you trust that if you're facing violence that they've got your back. Um it it's a lot more than like just being friends that that intensity of that those
00:57:19 that that intensity of that those friendships that that you build up through um being involved in stuff. in terms of the impact on you and you'll recall the way in which um HN3 um described it as understanding that of
00:57:32 um described it as understanding that of course you would feel a sense of betrayal um as anyone would because that was his role in as an undercover officer but what's your reaction to that that his saying that essentially sort of
00:57:45 his saying that essentially sort of understanding that there there would be a sense of betrayal given his his role it's still minimizing it because it's more than a sense of betrayal It it hurts what what what
00:57:57 hurts what what what they did to us, you know, and and with sort of Martin the corporate spy as well at CAT, it's it's a physical pain. Um they didn't just invade our lives. They
00:58:09 they didn't just invade our lives. They didn't just try to disrupt our movements. They invaded our family's lives. Um, you know, when I talk about my child, you know, within days of his birth, having his details
00:58:22 birth, having his details um appear on a police intelligence report, that's more than a simple betrayal. You know, that that is so intrinsically horrible and wrong and
00:58:34 intrinsically horrible and wrong and devastating. It's not like finding out your friend's just done something that might be a bit shitty or whatever. It is so
00:58:46 shitty or whatever. It is so fundamental to who we are and our politics and and the way we work, you know, that's an intrinsic part of who we are. And finding out that someone isn't
00:58:59 are. And finding out that someone isn't who not only isn't who they they say they are, but they are reporting on you. And at times like reporting exaggerations, reporting lies, misconstring things, trying to wreck our
00:59:11 misconstring things, trying to wreck our movements. Um, that's devastating. Can I deal with a is a particular point? It's in relation to the reference to use in some of the
00:59:24 the reference to use in some of the reports to being a signary on the disarm DSCI bank account. I wonder in terms of answering this question, I wonder if we can just bring up on screen. It's one of your exhibits.
00:59:35 up on screen. It's one of your exhibits. It's your exhibit 46. So, it's at your tab A47. It's UCPI 38150. So, we'll put it up on screen and you can um help explain what we're looking
00:59:47 can um help explain what we're looking at.
00:59:53 So, could you just explain what this is? What are we looking at on screen here, please? Um, so these are notes from my notebook from a disarm. Um, oh I should
01:00:06 notebook from a disarm. Um, oh I should say DICE is Defense Systems and Equipment International. It's the one of the world's largest arms fair. It takes place every two years since its beginning in 1999. We've talked about it as DICE. So if I keep saying DIY, that's
01:00:19 as DICE. So if I keep saying DIY, that's what it is. Um so this is um from a note of one of our meetings um when we were setting up a bank account and um it
01:00:32 setting up a bank account and um it shows that um HN3 and Victoria were signatures on the bank account. So to to be clear in terms of although
01:00:45 So to to be clear in terms of although you're there as secretary, you were certainly not a signary but um HN3 was. H3 was Yeah. I don't know why I'm reported as being a signary repeatedly because I wasn't I had a bad credit
01:00:56 because I wasn't I had a bad credit rating so I couldn't be. Now another of your notes. I wonder if we could uh please take that down and it's your next exhibit. It's exhibit 47 which is at UCPI 38151.
01:01:08 which is at UCPI 38151. Please uh sir this is at your tab A48.
01:01:17 So these are dicey meeting minutes. The date that we've put on that is the 30th of June 2003. And just whilst we have that
01:01:30 And just whilst we have that there I wonder if you can just again assist us with what this document is. Is this something that you produced during um a a meeting?
01:01:42 um a a meeting? Yeah, these would have been notes that I wrote um the minutes I wrote during the meeting that I'd have typed up afterwards.
01:01:52 Now, in terms of these uh notes, um we can see here if we turn over the page.
01:02:05 So just to get an idea of
01:02:11 of HN3's involvement,
01:02:15 we can see the top topic is van and then it says BM box Jason sorting out. Could you just help us with what that means please? What's that a reference to just so that we
01:02:26 that a reference to just so that we understand how HM3 featured in that group please? Yeah. So um H3 had a lot of positions of responsibility with within the organizing um groups that I
01:02:37 within the organizing um groups that I was involved in. Um generally um this bit in particular is around so a BM box like a post office box. It was like a
01:02:48 like a post office box. It was like a postal address where we could get mail sent to. Um and this shows that Bishop was the person um who was sorting it out and
01:03:01 um who was sorting it out and to to collect. So you know he was collecting post from um the BM boxes and I think it was a bank account and with this like he he said I think in his statement that that there was some kind
01:03:14 statement that that there was some kind of expectation that he would take on similar roles to um RTS which is complete rubbish. it was, you know, we didn't work like that. We didn't have like set roles and stuff like that. They were just the things that he volunteered
01:03:26 were just the things that he volunteered to do.
01:03:27 to do. But access to the bank account as signary um access to the correspondence. Yeah.
01:03:33 Yeah. And absolutely. And and also, you know, that shows how much he was trusted. Um if someone's going to be a signature on the bank account and and collect the post for an organization, they're a very trusted person.
01:03:44 trusted person. Let's take that down, please. And let's refer please now to MPS287.
01:03:50 So this is a document at your tab B27.
01:04:00 So this is one of HM3's reports and although the date doesn't appear there, the inquiry have dated this 21st of August 2003 entitled by HM3 general Bits and Bobs. I
01:04:13 entitled by HM3 general Bits and Bobs. I wonder if we can have a look at paragraph two because he says in his report uh one of the email addresses used by the DIY organizing group uh is
01:04:24 used by the DIY organizing group uh is uh disarmd dsi 2003 uh atyahoo.co.uk. Uh the password for the account is and we've put a privacy box o over it.
01:04:37 we've put a privacy box o over it. In terms of what you were just saying about
01:04:41 about what HN3 had access to, um, is this as another example demonstrating the degree to which he was trusted by the group? Yeah, absolutely. But also it shows that
01:04:53 Yeah, absolutely. But also it shows that the police had access to our organizing email address and could just get into it. And um that wasn't addressed at all
01:05:04 it. And um that wasn't addressed at all um in H3's evidence um of why he's reporting the password for the account and what the actual implications are of the police having the password for our
01:05:16 the police having the password for our email account. And you know there's a couple I don't know if we're going to come to them but there's a couple of other things around emails. There's a report that shows all of Victoria's most
01:05:27 report that shows all of Victoria's most used um email addresses that includes her family and friends. That is both grossly intrusive, but also there are fundamental questions about how he got
01:05:38 fundamental questions about how he got hold of that because that's not information he could have just got from a reporting. That's information from her computer because you can see it from the way the email addresses are set out. Um and there's some issues around um
01:05:51 and there's some issues around um computer misuse which were unfortunately weren't put to HN3 and the same with another report that gives a list of email groups that I subscribed to. And
01:06:02 email groups that I subscribed to. And again um that's not information that he got from talking to us. That's information that was got by other means.
01:06:11 Can we take that down please? I'd like to move to um another uh topic and that is Fairford coaches. So 22nd of March
01:06:22 is Fairford coaches. So 22nd of March 2003.
01:06:25 2003. Now, you will recall HM3's uh evidence that he wasn't in the country at the time when the coaches were stopped. And when he was questioned, I'm just going
01:06:38 when he was questioned, I'm just going to read just a part of what was what was put to him in in evidence and I'll ask you about that. So in evidence [snorts] it was put Emily Apple makes the point in her witness statement that the fact
01:06:50 in her witness statement that the fact that you were trusted, you were within the inner circle of knowledge, the circle of trust in relation to this plan and this type of anti-war planning shows a the extent of your infiltration and
01:07:02 a the extent of your infiltration and your key role, but also the fact that you would have been privy to information about Fairford because you were trusted with this kind of information. What do you say to that? And he then said, "No,
01:07:13 you say to that? And he then said, "No, the two don't follow." He was asked, "Why don't they follow?" And then he said this, "Because I my abstraction from the event." You remember those particular that way he phrased it, my
01:07:24 particular that way he phrased it, my abstraction from the event. Essentially, what he was saying was, "Well, yes, I may may well have been a trusted uh member of the group. I may have been close uh to uh Emily Apple, but because
01:07:37 close uh to uh Emily Apple, but because I wasn't in the country at the time, um I didn't know the details about Fairford coaches. And just in broad terms, could you just help us with your reaction to
01:07:48 you just help us with your reaction to his evidence in relation to that, please?
01:07:50 please? That was absolute rubbish. Well, why why do you say that? Why do you say
01:07:53 you say because um because we organized So the Fairford coach that got stopped, that was the third coach that we we'd organized. We organized a coach in January and we organized a coach in
01:08:05 January and we organized a coach in February. Um both of which were when H&M 3 was around. Um both actions at Fairford made headline news. Um my partner at the time was
01:08:18 news. Um my partner at the time was arrested at the first Fairford action. Um on the second one, the gates of the base got pulled down. the you know these were big events that that were talked about that he was around for. Um I've
01:08:31 about that he was around for. Um I've got notes of organizing meetings for Icy um next to Fairford coach organizing. Um there is absolutely no way that he
01:08:43 Um there is absolutely no way that he wouldn't have known about it and that we wouldn't have talked to him about it. um you know it was a very big part of our lives organizing um these protests. Well, organizing the
01:08:54 um these protests. Well, organizing the coaches for these these protests. You've just referred to your notes. I wonder if you can just bring up on screen one of your exhibits um exhibit five. This is UCPI 38154.
01:09:07 UCPI 38154. So this is your tab A7. So this is these are further notes [snorts]
01:09:13 [snorts] uh from your notebook. And again it is what you were saying about timing. Uh could you just help us just talk us through? We can see top of
01:09:24 just talk us through? We can see top of it is highlighted. What are we looking at here? What what is this? Um these are just my um general organizing and to do notes and I make
01:09:36 organizing and to do notes and I make lots of notes of things because I have ADHD which I didn't know at the time but I think that's one of the reasons I write a lot of stuff down so that I remember it. Um so this is um yeah stuff
01:09:48 remember it. Um so this is um yeah stuff around um cat plans for the dicey protests
01:09:55 protests um yeah BA's AGM and then um notes on the stuff that we were doing around the Fairfield coaches. I mean the other thing to say about fair for coaches I think it's on one of the other pages
01:10:06 think it's on one of the other pages that um you know I was emailing a lot of groups and contacting a lot of people and trying to mobilize people for for the coaches and you know and for people to book tickets. Um so you know I don't
01:10:19 to book tickets. Um so you know I don't believe for one second that we didn't talk to HN3 about it but even if we hadn't he would have been on the email lists um for it. I think it's also worth noting that organizing for the Fairford
01:10:31 noting that organizing for the Fairford coach um that got kidnapped um started well at least sometime in February because I've now found out that
01:10:42 February because I've now found out that the coaches we first advertised the coaches on the 15th of February um on the day of the big anti-war march when he was um definitely still around. Um, I was a shame it wasn't asked what he was
01:10:54 was a shame it wasn't asked what he was actually doing on February the 15th cuz I can't remember, but he may well have been with us on the big anti-war march because we were handing out dicey leaflets.
01:11:01 leaflets. So, we're looking at this do. We can see the date highlighted 29th of January 2003. I wonder if we may take that down, please. Just going to move to your next exhibit, exhibit 6. So, this is UCBI
01:11:14 exhibit, exhibit 6. So, this is UCBI 3816
01:11:16 3816 at tab A8, please.
01:11:25 And so again we can see it's anchored in a date um in January. And so your point is this
01:11:36 um in January. And so your point is this is not uh simply um a single event that happens on the 22nd of March 2003. It happens before. No, but but in addition to that, um the whole reason the coaches
01:11:49 to that, um the whole reason the coaches or one of the main reasons the coaches were turned around was because of the actions at the previous Fairford um demos. I mean, that is cited in the
01:12:00 demos. I mean, that is cited in the legal case as one of the crucial things for the intelligence was what happened on the coaches in January and February when when um Bishop was still around. And
01:12:12 when um Bishop was still around. And it's one of those things like I don't believe as I say for a second that he didn't know about them that we didn't talk to him about them but if he is saying that he had no knowledge of them
01:12:24 saying that he had no knowledge of them throughout the January throughout the February when we were going to organizing meetings when we were going to organizing meetings in pubs when we would just stayed in the pub and had a drink afterwards whereas you know heard
01:12:36 drink afterwards whereas you know heard lots of evidence about the fact that people keep talking about things in pubs we don't stop talking about politics we finish the meeting. It is a remarkable failure in SDS intelligence if for some
01:12:47 failure in SDS intelligence if for some reason he was around for those months and didn't know that the people that he was targeting were organizing the coaches that then ended up in this massive police intelligence operation
01:12:58 massive police intelligence operation and being turned around. It's not either way. It's not credible. You know, it looks incredibly bad for the SDS and their ability to actually record anything accurate about what anyone was
01:13:10 anything accurate about what anyone was doing if he didn't know, but I don't believe he didn't know um because we would have talked to him about it. Could we please take that down? I want
01:13:21 Could we please take that down? I want to move to another event. And so this is Sorry, can I just say one more thing about Fairfield before we do? um because I know that we was, you know, originally told that um Fairford was a transfer
01:13:35 told that um Fairford was a transfer issue and I'm really glad that that we're covering it because I think those and I and I know that's because um Rod Richardson was on on one of the coaches. Um but I think we've also got um
01:13:49 Um but I think we've also got um we've got HM77 who knew about the coaches. We've got a SDS report that or
01:14:00 coaches. We've got a SDS report that or a memo special branch memo that is asking if the SDS has any intelligence on on coaches and and the wombless to help with the civil action. I think
01:14:11 help with the civil action. I think there is quite a lot of evidence that the SDS
01:14:15 the SDS need, you know, the what happened with the SDS also needs to be examined in relation to Fairford because they were the same place operating at the same time and we know that there was
01:14:27 time and we know that there was awareness about it. It's beyond belief that there wasn't awareness in the SDS about it and especially given how close HM3 was to our organizing group. Um but but there
01:14:39 our organizing group. Um but but there is so much that that that is coming up and that I'm seeing all the time that that links back to Fairford. Now just because you've mentioned HN77
01:14:50 Now just because you've mentioned HN77 under Kevin name Jackie Anderson. So she was deployed between October 2000 and December 2004. Now,
01:15:02 Now, I think you've said in relation to her that you'd spent quite a lot of time at the radical Dair and Stoke Newington where where she was um deployed,
01:15:14 where where she was um deployed, but similar to, for example, HN14. It's not someone that you remember yourself. Is that right? I don't remember at all. [laughter] No, she didn't sound at all. I mean, it doesn't sound from her reporting like
01:15:26 doesn't sound from her reporting like she really did very much and um it doesn't sound like they could even exaggerate her reporting. [snorts]
01:15:32 [snorts] And again, we of course we're focused on what you
01:15:36 what you witnessed or what you you didn't witness. And what one of the things I think you say is that as far as you're concerned, she didn't turn up to any of the dicey meetings. Is is that No, I think there's one um that's
01:15:48 No, I think there's one um that's discussing a street party um in 2005. um that she
01:15:56 that she I think I might have been at that she was at but I I have no recollection of her whatsoever. Now one of the ways in which you've described her is is this and you're saying you say it appears that she was
01:16:08 saying you say it appears that she was spectacularly useless. Now can you just help us with why have you described her in that way? So this is an undercover officer that we we know spent some time in the radical dairy in Stoke Newington.
01:16:19 in the radical dairy in Stoke Newington. You have no recollection of her. She didn't turn up to, as far as you're aware, any of the dicey meetings. Why have you described her in in that sort of way in your in your statement?
01:16:30 of way in your in your statement? Well, just just from the reporting that I've seen, that hasn't had um any substance whatsoever. Um other people don't seem to have much of a memory of
01:16:43 don't seem to have much of a memory of her whatsoever. Um, she apparently gave lots of people massages, which I'm so glad that I didn't remember her and didn't have a massage from her because that is utterly gross and disgusting.
01:16:57 that is utterly gross and disgusting. Um,
01:16:59 Um, and also I've been this is subsequent to um being writing my statement, but having read some of the manager's statements, it seems to be quite a
01:17:10 statements, it seems to be quite a universally shared opinion. She and she was cuz according to those she was supposed to take over from HM3. Um and in one of the documents I got it it said that as well that she was supposed to
01:17:21 that as well that she was supposed to take over from HM3 but she didn't make any effort to infiltrate our groups or come to any meetings. Um she seemed to be there for for the social side and not
01:17:32 be there for for the social side and not doing much else. Uh you mentioned that you'd spoken to uh uh others and that they had mentioned that she had been giving massages to
01:17:43 that she had been giving massages to people.
01:17:44 people. Yeah.
01:17:44 Yeah. Are are you able to say whether you've had any conversations with any of those people since it was revealed that she was an undercover officer in terms of what effect has that
01:17:56 officer in terms of what effect has that did that have on on them if you're able? Now, I haven't spoken to anyone who actually got a massage from her, but I think it would be really good if there is anyone who could write an impact statement on that because I think that
01:18:08 statement on that because I think that is um a huge violation.
01:18:14 I was going to move um to the Groner House arrest. So, this is the Farra Air Show dinner on the 20th of July, 2004.
01:18:27 Show dinner on the 20th of July, 2004. Could you provide us with a little context to to this? And so in terms of this particular
01:18:38 this particular dinner, it's a regular uh meeting, isn't it? This dinner. Yeah. So there's I mean there's different ones. So um with Farm Show, they have I mean all all the big arms
01:18:50 they have I mean all all the big arms fairs they they have a dinner um and they're very significant events because they're often the places where the sort of networking is done with senior politicians. It's where the deals are
01:19:02 politicians. It's where the deals are made, where the lobbying is done. There's a huge revolving door between arms companies and senior politicians. There's a huge political influence um from the arms trade um onto government.
01:19:14 from the arms trade um onto government. um BA systems had more meetings um in the last few years with um senior government ministers than any other private company. So there's a huge
01:19:25 private company. So there's a huge revolving door and political influence between the arms trade and senior politicians and these dinners are the places where a lot of these things come together and that that influence um happens. Um so they're always sort of
01:19:38 um happens. Um so they're always sort of like very swanky black tie dinners um where top level arms dealers get to u mixed with top level politicians. Again as far as context is concerned you
01:19:51 Again as far as context is concerned you you've provided in fact it's a a criminant report. So, this is a criminal intelligence report, not an SDS report, but it's regarding a
01:20:02 not an SDS report, but it's regarding a protest at Groner House 2 years before the event I'm going to ask you about this. I I wonder if we could perhaps put that on screen. It is um at sir your tab
01:20:14 that on screen. It is um at sir your tab A24
01:20:17 and it's UCPI 38128. Thank you.
01:20:25 So we can see this is as I said not a an SDS report but we can see that uh from uh 2002 so we can see the date there
01:20:36 uh 2002 so we can see the date there 23rd of July 2002 at the Grove House Hotel London uh a demonstration took place by the campaign against the arms trade at the Farborra air show were holding their annual dinner at the hotel
01:20:48 holding their annual dinner at the hotel um attendance were the in attendance were the US and Israeli ambassadors numerous foreign dignitaries and the British foreign secretary, Mr. Jack Straw. Outside the hotel at the entrance
01:21:00 Straw. Outside the hotel at the entrance to the Grand Room in Park Lane, approximately 10 protesters were in place. Um, now just pausing there. In terms of these protests, we have a specific number, but we have an
01:21:11 specific number, but we have an approximate number. Sorry. There is that about this the size of it in terms of these demonstrations we hear about demonstrations. protest. Important to bear in mind the number of people is
01:21:22 bear in mind the number of people is that typical of such a protest? Yeah, I think I mean they varied. So some of the dicey ones would have been larger maybe like a couple of hundred people. The farmer ones tended to be smaller and yeah sort of 10 20 people
01:21:34 smaller and yeah sort of 10 20 people sort of maximum. Okay. So if we continue on uh two of them had a banner regarding UK arm sales to Israel. Another four handed out and this is it. This is a reference to fake
01:21:45 this is it. This is a reference to fake banknotes with blood money written on them. The group were continually warned about their behavior, particularly in relation to highway obstruction offenses. One of the group was Emily
01:21:56 offenses. One of the group was Emily Apple or although previous crimit reports um and refers to your date of birth, she was arrested after numerous warnings for highway obstruction. Um with a section 25 power of arrest being
01:22:07 with a section 25 power of arrest being exercised at the scene, uh Apple is well known to the police here at CD, having attended numerous demonstrations and being arrested at several of them. Uh you then goes to the address that you provided having read previous crimit
01:22:20 provided having read previous crimit reports on her. She is believed to be well known amongst human rights groups and it is alleged that she is part of the wombled organization who actively take part in the Mayday protests and we
01:22:32 take part in the Mayday protests and we can see the name of the officer that arrested you uh has been blacked uh out there. Now, in relation to this description here, um,
01:22:45 description here, um, as you
01:22:47 as you are arrested on a number of occasions, as you demonstrate, reports such as this one here are are circulating uh amongst the within the
01:23:00 circulating uh amongst the within the uh, Mets police. And so whenever your name comes up, the police have access to for example these reports and they they can see uh what's written about you before. But in relation to this
01:23:12 before. But in relation to this particular event, you carried out a particular um stunt using fake bank notes. Is that right? Okay. Now if we take that down, please
01:23:26 let us put up please UCPI 3812. So this is your tab A17. It's your exhibit 15, Emily. Now here we
01:23:38 It's your exhibit 15, Emily. Now here we have
01:23:40 have an email from disarm DSI 2003. Um
01:23:48 2003. Um there
01:23:51 there and this is sent after the event. So this is sent on the 1st of December 2004.
01:23:57 2004. and you're saying, "Hi, this is the email that I sent on the 9th of July that first mentioned the dolls." So, the email about the dolls is uh 9th of
01:24:09 the email about the dolls is uh 9th of July, but you've you were forwarded that email on the 1st of December. So, but if we go further down, is this the message that you sent? Yes, it is. Yes.
01:24:20 Yes, it is. Yes. Uh, hi, just putting together texts for dinner. We'll send to this list in a minute. Uh, however, just rereading their text and they're having this presentation of a sword for
01:24:32 presentation of a sword for contributions to Anglo-American aerospace cooperation, uh, what would people feel about doing a spoof on this and and maybe having some dolls with fake blood dripping off them and try and
01:24:44 fake blood dripping off them and try and present them with dead baby awards as they're trying to enter. Or is this to Macabb love, Emily, and then uh, XX? Now, in terms of this email, Is it right
01:24:56 Now, in terms of this email, Is it right that you've said that HN3 would have been one of the recipients to Oh yeah, absolutely. Yeah, he was on the um London disarm dicey group. So he he
01:25:08 um London disarm dicey group. So he he would have received that email
01:25:15 and essentially um all I'm setting out here is
01:25:21 here is that you know what we wanted to do which was a bit of um street theater which you know in terms of protests that sort of like doing spoofs you know we've heard about the cardboard tanks you know it's
01:25:33 about the cardboard tanks you know it's sort of something that we do to sort of bring attention to something very legally
01:25:38 legally So a similar type of street theater or or or stunt that was referred to in that crement report that we were looking at from a couple of
01:25:49 we were looking at from a couple of years before. Now in terms of the date and the chronology. So this is sent by you to a number of people including HN3 on the
01:26:01 number of people including HN3 on the 9th of July. [snorts]
01:26:02 [snorts] If we take that down because I want to move to the response from HN3 to his his uh managers and the SDS. So that was the 9th of July. Could we please turn up
01:26:14 9th of July. Could we please turn up MPS3526?
01:26:18 So this is at your tab B47
01:26:24 because you can see the other side here. So having received that on the 9th of July 2004, you can see in his intelligence report date information obtained from source 12th of July 2004.
01:26:38 obtained from source 12th of July 2004. This is what he sets out. So gala dinner for the Farra Air Show at the Groner House Hotel. Uh invro activists will demonstrate at the gala dinner for the Farra Air Show hosted by the Grroven
01:26:50 Farra Air Show hosted by the Grroven House Hotel on Tuesday the 20th of July. They believe the guest of honor will be Lord George Robertson, who they suspect is going to be presented with a ceremonial sword at the dinner. The
01:27:02 ceremonial sword at the dinner. The activists plan to make their own presentation to Lord Robertson, which will consist of a doll, possibly filled with fake blood to represent children killed during conflicts by the arms
01:27:13 killed during conflicts by the arms trade. There may also be other dolls and legs and arms of dolls thrown onto the point where Lord Robertson's car pulls up. Now, just pausing there. We have
01:27:26 up. Now, just pausing there. We have seen your uh email referring to uh fake uh blood and we know in due course some red perhaps food dye was used. But just
01:27:37 red perhaps food dye was used. But just in terms of uh what is set out there, could you just help us with the with the accuracy of what is set out by H3? Is that a fair reflection of of the
01:27:50 H3? Is that a fair reflection of of the plan?
01:27:51 plan? No, it's not. um certainly like filled with fake blood. I'm not quite sure how you would fill a doll with fake blood. That doesn't really make any sense
01:28:02 That doesn't really make any sense whatsoever. Um but but they they you know it was you know it was symbolic. There was you know as it says there was no hostile intent but also we we didn't
01:28:13 no hostile intent but also we we didn't intend to throw them at all. That was that was never discussed. Um, you know, and partly because, you know, like with
01:28:23 like with with the blood money, for example, like they are like little bits of paper that that you know, if you sort of throw that on the ground in front of somebody, there there's no potential for anything else to happen with a little bit of
01:28:35 else to happen with a little bit of paper. Um, but throwing sort of dismembered bits of dolls, you know, would carry more of a risk. And that wasn't something that that that we wanted to do. It was a symbolic protest.
01:28:48 wanted to do. It was a symbolic protest. Um, I had, you know, my my son was 7 months at the time. I had no intention of being involved in anything that was
01:29:00 of being involved in anything that was going to be illegal or that I could get arrested for. It was just about making the point of this is the reality of the arms trade that you're going to have this ceremonial sword but actually the
01:29:12 this ceremonial sword but actually the reality of the deals that are done inside these buildings leads to the death of children and children losing their limbs and we just wanted to make that symbolic point. Now obviously it's it's your first
01:29:24 Now obviously it's it's your first communication of it in that email that we we looked at just now you where you talk about presenting them with with these dolls. I I just want to be as far as you remember in
01:29:35 want to be as far as you remember in terms of what you communicated after that email um particularly what HN3 would have been aware of when if at all did references to throwing when when did
01:29:48 did references to throwing when when did that arise? Well, they didn't arise that you know there was never any talk about throwing them. It it was about a presentation thing. It was about being able to sort of say go sort of look you know the the
01:30:01 of say go sort of look you know the the you know this is the result of of you know the trade that that you're dealing in. It was never about
01:41:34 go to the next paragraph in this same report. So we're moving to the second page. We can see again just following that through. Once Emily
01:41:45 just following that through. Once Emily had been arrested and removed from the pen, both Jason and Victoria attempted to reach her and talk to her. This was initially denied and it looked like further disorder was likely. This was
01:41:56 further disorder was likely. This was averted due to the actions of and there's a reference to a fit officer who explained to Gold that he knew both individuals and that he would escort one of them to check on their friend. Uh
01:42:08 of them to check on their friend. Uh this incident was talked about later in the evening by both Jason and Emily whilst they waited for Emily who was in custody at West End uh Central.
01:42:20 custody at West End uh Central. Uh in relation to um at this particular point, you said that on this protest,
01:42:32 point, you said that on this protest, this was the first time that you've been on a protest uh without your child. Is that right? That's right. Yeah. and you are arrested.
01:42:43 C could you just help us with this the state you were in at this at this time, please?
01:42:50 please? Oh, well, I was worried about my child. I mean, I I'd been um taken off by then, but yeah, I mean, I was obviously um very worried about my child. I mean, I was upset that I'd been arrested yet
01:43:01 was upset that I'd been arrested yet again for not doing anything and just being targeted. I was, you know, obviously breastfeeding and expected at home and I was, yeah, extremely
01:43:14 home and I was, yeah, extremely concerned about um what was happening. Um I think it's worth mentioning um this that it was initially denied and it looked like further disorder was
01:43:26 it looked like further disorder was likely. You know, this this is the way that the the police talk about disorder yet again. and can see from the video this this disorder that's being described here is HN3 and Victoria
01:43:41 described here is HN3 and Victoria talking to the police and arguing that they wanted to come and see me to make sure my child was all right. This is the disorder that that is then being claimed in this report was an undercover police
01:43:53 in this report was an undercover police officer and a very close friend of mine telling the police that they wanted to come and talk to me to check on my child. That is not disorder. So HN3 demonstrating with the officers
01:44:06 So HN3 demonstrating with the officers there explaining that you were away from your child for example. Now you you are in custody at this point and you you receive a note. Do do you
01:44:18 and you you receive a note. Do do you remember that? We have that. You've provided it. This is your exhibit 20. I wonder if we can put that up on screen, please. This is UCPI 38126. So this is your tab A22.
01:44:32 So at the time that you received this note, do do you remember again all the questions I asked you some time ago, but do you remember being cussy and receiving this note?
01:44:43 receiving this note? Absolutely. Yes. So we can see it's on Met Police memo um notebook. Emily Apple, hire hope you're okay. We will be waiting outside for
01:44:54 okay. We will be waiting outside for you. Don't worry. See you soon. Jason spoke to privacy. They're both fine. Take care. Lots of love, Victoria Jason. Now, at the time when you read that, how did you feel reading that at the time?
01:45:06 did you feel reading that at the time? Oh, well at the time reading it, I felt relieved because um my friends and supposedly a good friend of mine had spoken
01:45:16 spoken um to my then partner and you know just the fact that my friends were looking out for me and looking out for my child um you know was a relief and I was
01:45:28 um you know was a relief and I was pleased at the time even because it it can be 50/50 whether the police allow custody notes to be sent through or not. Um, so I was pleased that they they'd allowed that note to come through.
01:45:39 allowed that note to come through. When you look up on this same document now, knowing what you know that Jason was an undercover officer again, what sort of impact does it have on you in terms of your memories? Because at the
01:45:52 terms of your memories? Because at the time, well, this was this was something you described taking comfort from, but then you look back on it. How does that affect you, please? It's very devastating. Um,
01:46:06 it's one of the things that upsets me most is the contact that HM3 had um with my baby. Um,
01:46:17 baby. Um, he
01:46:19 he was asked in evidence whether his concern for me was genuine, which I found a very strange question to be honest. And he said it was, which I don't believe. like he his whole job was
01:46:31 don't believe. like he his whole job was to appear genuine. Um I don't believe he had any concern for me or my child. He didn't consider the impact on me. He didn't consider the impact on my mental health. He had no other feelings about
01:46:43 health. He had no other feelings about what he was doing whatsoever. But somehow his concern for my child was genuine. Um and it just taints so many memories. Um,
01:46:57 so many memories. Um, it just means reframing so many things. And to think it was an undercover officer who was making these very, very personal calls that was trying to
01:47:11 personal calls that was trying to comfort me about my child. I I find deeply upsetting. I think it's absolutely horrible. Now, I want us follow this all the way through. So, we started off with your email and we're now in a position where
01:47:22 email and we're now in a position where you're in the in the police station, but then you come out of the police station. Could you please describe that? So, you come out of the police station. Uh, who is there waiting for you? Um, well, I remember that Victoria and
01:47:33 Um, well, I remember that Victoria and Jason um were definitely there. And I remember HN3 being there because I'd given up smoking when I was pregnant and breastfeeding and I was very, very stressed and I said, "Please, can
01:47:44 stressed and I said, "Please, can someone give me a cigarette?" And H3 was the person who gave me a cigarette when I got out of custody. So I remember that very very well. Um so yeah he he waited um the entire time. I think it's also
01:47:56 um the entire time. I think it's also been in one of the crims [snorts] um forward intelligence teams they they follow Victoria and HM3 from the protest to go and buy sweets and newspapers. They follow them to outside the police
01:48:09 They follow them to outside the police station. And um we have a spectacular waste of money of um public order cops monitoring and reporting on undercover cops.
01:48:21 reporting on undercover cops. Now the next um step is the criminal case or the beginning of the criminal case. I wonder if we could take this memo down please and move to UCPI 38127
01:48:36 memo down please and move to UCPI 38127 please. So this is a document at your tab A23. Emily, this is your exhibit 21. So we've now moved to the 26th of July,
01:48:51 So we've now moved to the 26th of July, a a a letter from your solicitor here. Uh and we can see that in the third paragraph, it says this. You told me
01:49:04 paragraph, it says this. You told me that you have four potential eyewitnesses and the in addition to Victoria and Privacy, we can see the first mentioned there is Jason Bishop
01:49:16 there is Jason Bishop and then this please could you provide me with their contact details as quickly as possible. Okay. So that's 26th of
01:49:27 as possible. Okay. So that's 26th of July. It is uh we can see from that you've already discussed with your solicitor potential witnesses potential eyewitnesses and Jason Bishop's name
01:49:38 eyewitnesses and Jason Bishop's name given by you. Yes. Yes. Okay. Now if we take that down so that's the 26th of July. Going to move forward in time to the 1st of October.
01:49:50 the 1st of October. And in doing so I wonder if we can put up on screen MPS3785.
01:49:56 So this is a document at your tab uh B52.
01:50:02 It's uh if we look at this is uh one of uh HN3's intelligence reports and I want to look at the paragraph three paragraphs up from the bottom of page
01:50:14 paragraphs up from the bottom of page one because you can see there um what is set out Emily's committ so committal proceedings uh takes place on the 21st of September. Uh depending on the
01:50:27 of September. Uh depending on the outcome, she will be either asking just privacy to be a witness or
01:50:35 more likely the five other members of the DSCI group who were also present at her arrest. And we can see those names include Victoria, but also Jason Bishop. Mhm.
01:50:47 Mhm. Now in relation to that, if we take that down,
01:50:52 down, so at this particular point, this is not one of those cases where, as you've described a number of times in your statements where you're arrested and then you're released and there's no case
01:51:04 then you're released and there's no case at all. This is um this is we already have committal proceedings. This report is going to be on the 21st of September. Now if we turn to uh another document
01:51:15 Now if we turn to uh another document MPS38751.
01:51:19 So this is at your tab B53. So you can see here um what is happening behind the scenes because this is special branch request for uh
01:51:32 special branch request for uh metropolitan police solicitors advice and we can see the date of that 26th of October. So request for MPS listeners advice and then what's set out here. So I want to ask you about this please and
01:51:43 I want to ask you about this please and and as we read through it we can see this is Michael Dell. So this is DCI Mike Dell. Okay. So on Tuesday the 20th of July 2004 outside the Grove House Hotel Park Lane two of a group of
01:51:56 Hotel Park Lane two of a group of anti-arms trade activists protesting their displeasure at the hotel hosting the Farra air show banquet uh were searched by police and found in possession of several toy dolls which were drenched in red dye uh to represent
01:52:09 were drenched in red dye uh to represent human blood. Police confiscated the dolls and apparently told the activists Privacy and Emily Apple that they could have them back at the end of the evening. both remmonstrated with police and after some pushing and shoving both
01:52:20 and after some pushing and shoving both were arrested. Privacy had his dolls restored to him and was charged with a section 4 public order act offense and assault on police. Uh he will appear at privacy magistrate's court. Privacy
01:52:32 privacy magistrate's court. Privacy Apple was charged with possessing articles to commit criminal damage. A plea and directions hearing has been set for the 11th of November at Suk Crown
01:52:43 for the 11th of November at Suk Crown Court. Now just pausing there the previous report that we'd seen from uh HN3. This is the committal proceedings on the 21st of September. Uh and here we
01:52:54 on the 21st of September. Uh and here we can see the case moving along uh with the next hearing in the Crown Court on the 11th of November. then goes on to say, "Amongst the group of activists was
01:53:05 say, "Amongst the group of activists was a detect detective constable, a member of the Metropolitan Police Special Branch Undercover Unit, who is engaged on a long-term intelligence gathering operation against these and associated activists. That officer was not
01:53:18 activists. That officer was not arrested. The solicister acting for both defendants has asked the officer and other activists to make statements supporting the defendants's bracket fabricated version of events that the
01:53:31 fabricated version of events that the dolls were props for use in street theater. The officer has also been told to expect to give evidence in court. Now just pausing there, one of the points
01:53:43 just pausing there, one of the points that you've made in your statement is that there was never a report by HN3 along the lines of he was being asked to
01:53:55 along the lines of he was being asked to provide fabricated evidence. I that's one of the points that you you made in your statement. Could you just help us with your reaction, the impact reading that paragraph had on you, please, when
01:54:06 that paragraph had on you, please, when you first read it? I mean th this whole section of reports actually I found one of the most surprising and shocking things in my disclosure because it was
01:54:17 things in my disclosure because it was one of those arrests that I just presumed was dropped because it was utter rubbish because we didn't do anything and we just had some dolls and there was so many inconsistencies in the way me and my friend were arrested um
01:54:28 way me and my friend were arrested um and it was just another example of targeting. Um, so this whole sort of series of emails and chains I think went up to like
01:54:40 up to like um can't remember wasn't very high up the chain. [sighs and gasps] Um, but I was the fabricated bit I found so deeply disturbing and upsetting.
01:54:55 deeply disturbing and upsetting. um
01:54:58 um that's you know we've got this situation where we've basically got senior police officers saying that I'm prepared to commit perjury that I'm prepared to pervert the course of justice and that's never been my attitude towards the
01:55:10 never been my attitude towards the courts. I've never lied in court. I have a very firm belief in justice. Um and
01:55:19 and that's been one of the drivers of my political engagement right from the beginning. and to have this claim that I was willing to fabricate my defense when
01:55:32 was willing to fabricate my defense when also there's such clear, you know, even like the video evidence from the victims, you know, is all sort so clear that it was nothing. And you know some
01:55:43 that it was nothing. And you know some of H103's previous um reporting also shows that you know there was no hostile intent that you know yes I disagree
01:55:54 intent that you know yes I disagree about sort of throwing dolls but you know he was cited into that email and I you know I found it sort of deeply upsetting and disturbing
01:56:05 upsetting and disturbing that that is the view that HN3 and senior [snorts] officers were putting on reports because these things, you know, have consequences. You know, to say that
01:56:16 have consequences. You know, to say that I'm someone that's prepared to fabricate a defense is a really really serious allegation and these things are just sort of thrown in, you know, almost in a
01:56:27 sort of thrown in, you know, almost in a kind of
01:56:29 kind of sort of non-committal kind of like, oh yes, it was a fabricated defense lang like it's
01:56:36 like it's it's absolutely apparent. Emily, we usually have a break about now 11 11:30. Is that um okay with you? That's absolutely right. So I don't know whether that is
01:56:47 So I don't know whether that is convenient. Certainly [clears throat] it is. Um if my note and recollection of HN3's evidence is correct. He denied having anything to do with the suggestion that
01:56:59 anything to do with the suggestion that the defense was fabricated. He did deny it, but he we don't have any of the reporting from from that side. And I think the question the question
01:57:10 And I think the question the question that was asked around um legal privilege I think yes that that was what was reflected in his statement and he said in his
01:57:21 his statement and he said in his statement that he was just going off the statements of Dell but I think there's still a fundamental question of whether he I think there was a follow-up
01:57:32 he I think there was a follow-up question about whether he still believed it was fabricated based on what what had been seen in the inquiry. and what he had learned subsequently that I don't think was properly addressed if I'm honest. Um,
01:57:44 Um, all all I can say is that I did not come away having heard his evidence uh thinking that he had suggested that you were going to fabricate a case. No, that that's fair enough. But I but
01:57:56 No, that that's fair enough. But I but that suggestion has come from somewhere in the reporting and we have a lot of missing reports. [laughter] Um there are a number of possibilities of which that is but one.
01:58:07 of which that is but one. We'll break for 15 minutes.
02:15:11 Mr. Ramble, Emily, we we were tracing events through all the way from that point where you first suggested the idea in that email.
02:15:23 that email. Let's turn up the next document in the chronology which is uh MPS39592.
02:15:31 This is sir your tab B55. So we're now moving to the 10th of November. So you can see from this uh document here that
02:15:43 can see from this uh document here that it is a letter from well in fact if we perhaps turn to the second page we can see it's from DCS Alan Mitchell. [snorts]
02:15:54 So, Detective Chief Superintendent Alan Mitchell sends this to Commander Allison and then states at the last paragraph on page two, uh, I can instruct the
02:16:07 page two, uh, I can instruct the undercover officer to let down his activist associates. This would involve the implementation of a once-only contingency plan, which would bring the
02:16:18 contingency plan, which would bring the intelligence operation to a close. DCIDell has therefore had an initial meeting uh with inspector names redacted and police sergeant name redacted of the
02:16:31 and police sergeant name redacted of the Westminster criminal justice unit to discuss the possibility of discontinuing both of these cases. Authority is now sought for the criminal justice unit
02:16:42 sought for the criminal justice unit manager chief inspector names redacted to approach the CPS locally to discuss the matter further. DCidell has expressed to me his gratitude for the
02:16:53 expressed to me his gratitude for the assistance he has received and he of course is prepared to explain himself at court if necessary. So, of course, you were describing before the uh break that
02:17:06 were describing before the uh break that when proceedings were discontinued, as they eventually were, your assumption was it was the nature of what happened. But in terms of could you just help us with your the impact it has on you
02:17:17 with your the impact it has on you seeing the other side, what was going on behind the scenes as you were waiting for your court case, please? I mean, I find it all quite incredulous to be honest. Um, that that this went so far
02:17:31 honest. Um, that that this went so far over something so ridiculous. Um, and
02:17:38 and you know, for for you know, something that you know was like really minor anyway. I mean, I know it wasn't in terms of it went to committ, but
02:17:49 committ, but I I mean, yeah, I I was, you know, the this actually really shocked me in my disclosure because there was just so much time and effort and senior officers
02:18:01 much time and effort and senior officers involved in discontinuing a case that should never have been bought at the first place. I should never have been arrested in the first place. Um, and
02:18:13 and I think you know like even HM3 sort of when he was giving evidence having watched the video talked about it being arbitrary and disproportionate
02:18:25 arbitrary and disproportionate um and you know that was very clear from from what happened. So then for it to go to to all these levels and have all these senior officers discussing a case
02:18:36 these senior officers discussing a case that should never have been brought claiming that I fabric was going to fabricate a defense I found incredibly disturbing. I it it really is quite
02:18:47 disturbing. I it it really is quite unbelievable to be honest. like there aren't that there are things that don't surprise me even if I find shocking that that I you know I I would
02:19:00 shocking that that I you know I I would have expected this this wasn't something that I would have expected at all over this arrest in relation to what you have described HM3's description of the uh events um
02:19:13 HM3's description of the uh events um yes of course he was not um who he said he was he was an undercover officer But do you cons having heard his evidence of what physically happened and his
02:19:24 what physically happened and his description and some of his criticism of the way in which things transpired? Would you what would you say to the suggestion that he was an undercover
02:19:35 suggestion that he was an undercover officer that was doing something that he was tasked to do and that um he he was not trying to get you into any uh trouble that uh he was
02:19:47 you into any uh trouble that uh he was trying to behave towards you uh in in a decent fashion um during his deployment. Here he he is sent to um report
02:19:58 Here he he is sent to um report intelligence and in order to do so he has to get close to the activists but people such as yourself that he does get close to um he does not try and make
02:20:11 close to um he does not try and make your life worse that he tries to do um his job in a way that doesn't negatively impact you if he can help it. What would you say to to that description of this particular officer HN?
02:20:22 particular officer HN? I would say that is a quite frankly ridiculous way to look at any of the undercover deployments. They all had an impact. They all had an impact on how we were placed. When I first got to know
02:20:35 were placed. When I first got to know HN3 was the time I started getting very personally targeted by the forward intelligence teams, when I started getting really closely followed every time I turned up to a demonstration, getting followed home, getting followed
02:20:46 getting followed home, getting followed to pubs, all these things have an impact. Um I think um um Wellings said in evidence about being traced leads to being more traced. I
02:20:58 traced leads to being more traced. I can't remember his exact wording. Um, but that that was exactly what happened. Also,
02:21:05 Also, that's fine what he said in evidence having watched the video. He would have been there at the time. He would have witnessed all of that at the time. He should have been reporting that. He
02:21:16 should have been reporting that. He should have been reporting to his um managers and his cover officers. No, nothing happened. This was an arbitrary and disproportionate placing operation. um not that there was this sort of
02:21:28 um not that there was this sort of whether or not he said it was fabricated at the time. He obviously did not say those words. He didn't report accurately what happened on the scene. Else we wouldn't have this chain of
02:21:39 wouldn't have this chain of correspondence going up the the chain of command um around dropping the case. So even by those emissions, even taking
02:21:51 even by those emissions, even taking aside the direct impact of um the avert policing, whether we should even have been targeted in the first place, even leaving that aside, just on this
02:22:02 leaving that aside, just on this particular case, if he had reported what had happened, if he had reported what his reaction was in this room when he was giving evidence at the time, then
02:22:13 was giving evidence at the time, then all of this should have been unnecessary. It should have been a case of well obviously this case should have been dropped for obvious reasons. you have uh referred to the impact um that HN3 has
02:22:27 referred to the impact um that HN3 has had on you, but when you consider [clears throat] the SDS as a whole, in your own mind, to what extent um do you feel it was the
02:22:40 to what extent um do you feel it was the managers as opposed to the undercover officers in particular in your case HN3 to in relation to what has happened in terms of where where you see the fault
02:22:52 terms of where where you see the fault laying or or who you sort of think about as responsible for putting you through what you've described. To what extent do you lay blame at the door of HN3
02:23:03 you lay blame at the door of HN3 compared to say his his managers who deployed him to spy on you? I lay the blame at all of them. They were all involved in it. Um whether that's HM3's lack of reporting. I mean,
02:23:15 that's HM3's lack of reporting. I mean, if we're talking about depends whether you're just talking about HM3. Um, I think every single one of those SDS officers has a lot to answer for in what
02:23:26 officers has a lot to answer for in what they reported, how they treated people um and and what they did. I think their managers have a huge amount to answer for um in terms of targeting, in terms
02:23:40 for um in terms of targeting, in terms of the language that they they accepted, in terms of the culture that they set, in terms of the whole operation. And you know, and it kind of feels at
02:23:53 And you know, and it kind of feels at this point in the inquiry that it's the question for the inquiry over which lot of professional liars have got the grains of truth in here because
02:24:05 the grains of truth in here because they're all contradicting each other and that's not my job to work that out. But I think there is a lot of blame at management. Management need to be held accountable for what they did. They need to be held accountable for um the
02:24:18 to be held accountable for um the relationships with women that they clearly should have known about. They need to be held accountable for the reporting on my child, for the false reporting on me, for the exaggerated reporting. Um there there's been lots of
02:24:30 reporting. Um there there's been lots of suggestions that um reports were embellished by cover officers or by management. Um I again I don't know what the truth is with that
02:24:41 don't know what the truth is with that but I think a lot of it will have come from the source material as well. It seems like a lot of people justifying their jobs and justifying their overtime. But I I think ultimately
02:24:53 overtime. But I I think ultimately the managers had the control to go no this shouldn't be happening. Um we're not going to turn a blind eye to this. We're going to do something about it. When it was put to HN3, when he was
02:25:05 When it was put to HN3, when he was giving his evidence, asked whether he could appreciate how deeply distressing this was to you, he his reply was absolutely. But then he was asked this
02:25:16 absolutely. But then he was asked this question, referring to you, do you have any regrets now about the extent of your reporting on her at this time? His reply was, I did what I was sent to
02:25:29 His reply was, I did what I was sent to do to the best of my ability. Okay. So, in terms of his evidence, acknowledging the effect that it's had on you, but again saying that as far as when asked
02:25:41 again saying that as far as when asked whether he had any regrets about the extent of the reporting, his response that he was uh sent to do, I did what I was sent to do to the best of my ability. Again, if someone um were to
02:25:54 ability. Again, if someone um were to suggest here um you didn't like the undercover tactic, but in relation to this specific officer, his evidence that he did what he was sent to do to the
02:26:07 he did what he was sent to do to the best of his ability, what's your reaction in relation to that? Would you accept that to any degree? No. Um firstly, only following orders, as we all know, is not a defense to anything. that is not good enough. Um to
02:26:22 anything. that is not good enough. Um to actually have some critical thinking about what you're doing and why you're doing it and actually maybe having the courage of some of the protesters to
02:26:35 courage of some of the protesters to take a stand and go, "No, this isn't right." Not not to keep him filling in the overtime sheets and getting paid for it. [snorts] Um
02:26:44 Um and also he hasn't he's exaggerated things. he's misreported things. Um, he's fed into this whole body of lies
02:26:56 he's fed into this whole body of lies um that has been told about me by the SDS and by other um policing units. Um, so no, I don't accept that. Um, I don't
02:27:08 so no, I don't accept that. Um, I don't accept that it was okay that he was told to come and infiltrate us. And you know, like we were infiltrate, we weren't infiltrated for what we did. We were infiltrated because of the value of the
02:27:19 infiltrated because of the value of the arms trade to the state. We were infiltrated because um DSCI was so important to the UK government that selling arms to blow up
02:27:30 government that selling arms to blow up children was more important than our democratic right to protest.
02:27:36 Before leaving the Groner House arrest and all that's happened, I wonder if we can go to the last document which takes us to proceedings being discontinued against you. If we could go to MPS39615,
02:27:51 which is your tab B-57. So this is a letter dated the 15th of November 2004 from uh Robert Sate uh detective chief
02:28:02 from uh Robert Sate uh detective chief superintendent um acting OCU commander of SO2 at the time um to the director of intelligence um DAC Yates. Now if we
02:28:15 intelligence um DAC Yates. Now if we have a look at the second page of this correspondence please. There we can see um I can instruct the
02:28:26 There we can see um I can instruct the undercover officers to let down his activists associates. This would involve the implementation of a once-off contingency plan which would bring the intelligence operation to a close. So
02:28:37 intelligence operation to a close. So wording we've seen before exactly in this correspondence. And then this DCIDell has therefore had an initial meeting with the Westminster CJU to discuss the possibility of discontinuing
02:28:48 discuss the possibility of discontinuing both of these cases. Authority has now sought for the CJU manager, chief inspector uh to approach the CPS locally to discont to discuss the matter further and then the chief inspector is content
02:28:59 and then the chief inspector is content that he can manage discontinuence comfortably. So it comes to a conclusion in that way. uh and then this reference to neither defendant is an informant of this uh branch
02:29:11 this uh branch your your comment on on reading that
02:29:17 that that's it and that is that is the end so began with your email and this is the conclusion of it please will you take that down I would like to ask you about some more of HN3's reporting oh can I just come back to one thing
02:29:29 oh can I just come back to one thing that I forgot to mention um with the video of actually what happened um because
02:29:34 because because we can't see the video. I think it's just important to mention that, you know, something else, you know, talking about like missing reporting. Um, you know, it's not mentioned that he grabs my rucks sack, you know, when the cops are trying to pull me away. Like he's
02:29:46 are trying to pull me away. Like he's involved in the whole situation and that's something from from all of like he was very very involved in things. He wasn't a bystander. He was very actively involved. And I think that's important
02:29:57 involved. And I think that's important to to note, you know, and that that thing of like he was the one that that other people were around me, but he was the one that actually sort of grabbed hold of my rucks sack and tried to prevent the police um from from pulling
02:30:08 prevent the police um from from pulling me off the stop and search.
02:30:14 Completely different example. I wonder if we can turn up MPS29123.
02:30:21 So this is at your tab B29. It's one of HN3's reports dated the 17th of September, 2003. I wonder if you can go to the third page of this document,
02:30:32 to the third page of this document, please.
02:30:41 So if we look at the last paragraph here, it says the whole concept of a secret logistics group which as tradition dictates is used to
02:30:52 which as tradition dictates is used to organize an action never properly evolved from the destroy DSI group which even went as far as having public meetings.
02:31:01 meetings. Just pausing there in relation to destroy DSI. C can you just help us with what that is a reference to because we've seen of course references to
02:31:12 we've seen of course references to disarm DSEI. What is destroy DSI? So um disarm DSI was an umbrella organization. It was a coalition group. So, one of the things that um I've
02:31:24 So, one of the things that um I've always tried to do is build a wider coalition as possible um within my organizing because I believe there is more that unites us than divides us and that we're successful when we use a
02:31:36 that we're successful when we use a diversity of tactics when we get as many people involved as possible. Um so disarmed I see was um yes this sort of umbrella organization that um reflected
02:31:48 umbrella organization that um reflected lots of different groups within the left within the peace movement within anarchist groups whereas and and and so what we did with dascese we we'd have different days for different things. So
02:31:59 different days for different things. So we'd have a day that um was sort of much more sort of peace movement focused and a day that was sort of more um just sort of direct action focused and we did that under the banner of
02:32:11 and we did that under the banner of destroy diocese. So so we had destroy dice as a sort of separate organizing group for that day of action as opposed to disarm that was this sort of coalition umbrella organization. And here the HN3 goes on to say those
02:32:23 And here the HN3 goes on to say those attending the public meetings were photographed and videoed by members of the fit team and had the desired effect of not attracting any activists of a decent caliber.
02:32:34 decent caliber. Again that that reference there. So HN3 aware of the fit teams referring to them but this
02:32:43 but this concept of fit teams putting people off public meetings. Could you just help us with that from your perspective? Yeah, as an activist. Yeah. I mean, I actually don't remember us having any public meetings for
02:32:54 us having any public meetings for Destroyed Dice, but that's beside the point. Um, in so in terms of the fit team. So, so back then, every single um public meeting we held, there would be
02:33:06 public meeting we held, there would be at least three or four officers, sometimes more, um, standing outside the venue. Whether that was a university room that we' booked, whether it was an activist meeting space, they they were
02:33:17 activist meeting space, they they were always there. And they were always there like with really I mean it was sort of through the technology that we have then now but with really sort of like long zoom lenses and it was about
02:33:30 zoom lenses and it was about intelligence gathering but it was about harassment and it was about disruption. So the very purpose and the reason why the forward intelligence teams were set up um was to harass and deter people
02:33:43 up um was to harass and deter people from taking part in protests. Um and um one of the things I'm sure we'll come on to with fit watches is, you know, that's one of the reasons why we wanted to do
02:33:57 one of the reasons why we wanted to do something about it because they were having a direct impact on our ability to organize, to gather, to meet. Um because yes, people don't want to come to a meeting if there's a load of cops
02:34:10 meeting if there's a load of cops outside. is very intimidating going into a meeting when there's a load of cops outside and there is no need for it. And it is about this harassment style policing of trying to harass people away
02:34:21 policing of trying to harass people away from protests, away from exercising their democratic rights, their article 10 and 11 rights to meet, to organize, to discuss and to protest.
02:34:32 to discuss and to protest. Something you just said about not remembering public meetings. If you just read to the rest of this particular paragraph, says the destroyed DSI meetings never functioned properly to any degree and as such Emily Apple
02:34:44 any degree and as such Emily Apple Victoria Jason Bishop Privacy Privacy agreed to meet on yet another night to fulfill the role of a secret logistics group. All private meetings which were
02:34:56 group. All private meetings which were DSEI related were by now taking place at the Royal Festival Hall. Now, on this particular point, if someone were to say, well, isn't the undercover tactic
02:35:07 say, well, isn't the undercover tactic justified here because the meetings take place in private, in secret, and the only way of obtaining
02:35:18 only way of obtaining intelligence about what a group such as this are likely to do next is to use the undercover tactic and put undercover officer into that group. What would you say to those who say that the fact that
02:35:30 say to those who say that the fact that there were secret and private logistics meetings that justified that tactic? Absolutely ridiculous. We, you know, we were forced to meet in secret because of the actions of of the police. Um, but
02:35:43 the actions of of the police. Um, but we're talking about protests um with DSCI and what we did when um even HN3 said there was no disorder when one of them um it was either Harrison or Wells talked about the worst disorder being a
02:35:55 talked about the worst disorder being a snake march. Um, we're not talking about particular ser serious things. We're talking about our democratic right to protest and to organize. That does not need to be infiltrated. It does not need
02:36:06 need to be infiltrated. It does not need to be spied on. Um, there there's no excuses for it. And even um, you know, they do have other means of surveillance. We all know they have
02:36:17 of surveillance. We all know they have other means of surveillance. They, you know, were in our phones and in our emails.
02:36:22 emails. um if they wanted to actually gather intelligence and prosecute us for something I would have defended what we were doing in courts but you know they didn't come to that it was just this
02:36:33 didn't come to that it was just this intelligence gathering operation over protesting an arms fair and not only that as I said before they were gathering this intelligence to protect
02:36:44 gathering this intelligence to protect the arms trade to make sure that our protests didn't embarrass the government it wasn't about what we were doing it was about the embarass embarrassment to the government and the value of the arms trade to the state.
02:36:55 trade to the state. When you read references to embarrassing the government or UK PLC and and that when you in the context of you personally having been reported on, what
02:37:07 personally having been reported on, what impact does that have on you in terms of the justification to prevent for example embarrassment to UK PLC and matters of that nature? Find it very sad. Um, I mean, it's kind
02:37:18 Find it very sad. Um, I mean, it's kind of what I know, but it's a strange experience. There's been a strange experience with a lot of the disclosure of
02:37:28 of having things confirmed in black and white that I know intrinsically and I know from my knowledge of policing and and and stuff like that. Um,
02:37:39 and and stuff like that. Um, but how that can be a justification um is is just ridiculous. And it says so much about the nature of the state and
02:37:51 much about the nature of the state and who the state is protecting. And it fundamentally undermines the democracy that we have in this country. And like personally my my
02:38:02 country. And like personally my my desire for actually having true democracy in this country that we can be infiltrated in that way and targeted in that way because we might cause embarrassment or
02:38:14 embarrassment or um we might upset a few arms dealers. I'd like to move now to consider some personal reporting on you and in doing so could we please turn up MPS19013.
02:38:29 So this is one of HN3's reports at your tab B17.
02:38:34 tab B17. It's a report dated the 19th of May 2003.
02:38:42 Now there are a couple of reports I want to ask you about on on this subject. You can see the last paragraph sentence states, "Matters have
02:38:53 paragraph sentence states, "Matters have not been helped by the joyous news that the privacy apple relationship will shortly bear fruit in the form of a little activist."
02:39:04 little activist." And so we have reference there to um you being pregnant. What is the impact on you reading? Firstly, the fact
02:39:17 impact on you reading? Firstly, the fact of it being reported, but secondly, the tone in which it is put in a pre professional or what should be a professional [laughter] professional stretch in it.
02:39:29 professional stretch in it. Um, yeah, I mean I mean it is disgusting. It there there are no reasons why my pregnancy should have been reported at
02:39:40 pregnancy should have been reported at all. and the tone of it that it's just vile. There's there's just no need for it. And I know that HM3 and
02:39:53 need for it. And I know that HM3 and some of the other officers I think as well have um trying to distance themselves from some of the language in these reports, but that's weird language for a cover officer to make up to be
02:40:04 for a cover officer to make up to be honest. like that that feels um you know there's been some other examples um throughout the course of evidence that that just feels like weird
02:40:16 evidence that that just feels like weird embellishments if they haven't come from the original source and it's it's just contempt like it's just showing utter contempt for me it's showing utter contempt for my pregnancy
02:40:28 contempt for my pregnancy and
02:40:29 and yeah it is just disgusting and yes in terms of professionalism M there is zero professionalism in that comment whatsoever.
02:40:40 whatsoever. And that that personal level of reporting is just so unnecessary. The supposed jokes are so unnecessary. like even if
02:40:54 unnecessary. like even if there was a point in which you said which obviously I do not agree with that they were justified to be writing these reports using that kind of language in these reports I cannot see how that could ever be
02:41:06 I cannot see how that could ever be justified or ever accepted and who ever came up with that that frame of words that why wasn't that questioned why why was anyone saying like this is not how
02:41:17 was anyone saying like this is not how to submit an intelligence report well let's stick with this report I wonder If you can just zoom back out again.
02:41:24 again. It's a different subject. If you have a look at the first paragraph, it states the palpable animosity between Emily Apple and V the person inquire calling
02:41:35 Apple and V the person inquire calling Victoria reached a peak in the runup to the DSCI open meeting on the 8th of May when it became quite apparent that neither woman could bear to be in the company of the other. The exact reason
02:41:46 company of the other. The exact reason for the fallout is still unclear, but it certainly involves privacy to some degree. Matters were not helped when Apple jetted off to join privacy in Barcelona at a time when preparations
02:41:58 Barcelona at a time when preparations for the above meeting were at their busiest. The knock-on effect of her premature departure was that the agenda and timetable for the meeting were still being formulated in the corridor some 15
02:42:09 being formulated in the corridor some 15 minutes prior to the meeting commencing. So may I ask your um reflection in terms of the accuracy of it but also the tone and the language that is um you talked
02:42:21 and the language that is um you talked about for example jetting off to Barcelona. So yeah tone and language absolutely abhorrent and unnecessary in terms of the content it's you know it's an exaggeration. Um Victoria was
02:42:34 it's an exaggeration. Um Victoria was one of my best friends. I'm still close to her. Um, you know, people have falling outs every now and then or you know, and I think at that time when I
02:42:45 know, and I think at that time when I just discovered I was pregnant, like we lived in a smoking house. I didn't want to be in a smoky house anymore, you know. So, we, you know, there were sort of some tensions around around stuff like that. Um,
02:42:56 like that. Um, but you know, what is the intelligence purpose of reporting that anyway? It's exaggerated. It's unnecessary. And there's so many reports like this where
02:43:07 there's so many reports like this where there's exaggerated tensions or disagreements um that that are amplified. Um,
02:43:18 Um, and with I don't know whether we're going to come on to them, but but with a lot of them there's you know things like source comments of like speak to me about this and there was a denial that there was any intention to use any of
02:43:33 there was any intention to use any of these supposed disagreements to disrupt our movements. But it seems very very clear
02:43:40 clear um both from the report and from other testimony that that's exactly what they were doing. They were trying to find ways of using disagreements. They wanted
02:43:52 ways of using disagreements. They wanted to divide us. They wanted to disrupt those movements. That was a fundamental part of what they were doing was trying to disrupt our movements. And this type of language is very symptomatic of that.
02:44:03 of language is very symptomatic of that. Um I'll also say in terms of this report, um you know, I mean it is all just ridiculous. um my friends knew I was um
02:44:14 ridiculous. um my friends knew I was um planning to go to Barcelona sometime in advance. The only reason I wasn't sure whether I was going to go until the last minute was um a security guard broke my finger
02:44:23 finger um a few days before I was due to leave. So I wasn't sure whether I was going because I broke my finger or the security guard broke my finger. I didn't break my finger. Um and again this thing
02:44:34 break my finger. Um and again this thing with this um the agenda and timetable for the meeting was still being formulated in the corridor. Well, it wasn't my responsibility to come up with an agenda and a timetable. We work by consensus in an hierarchical
02:44:46 We work by consensus in an hierarchical group. Everyone had responsibility for that. So,
02:44:50 that. So, um you know, some of our meetings were last minute, some of them were kind of like, oh, we need to get this meeting together cuz you know, we were very busy and that was a time that we had to get get this meeting together. But to say
02:45:02 get this meeting together. But to say that was the effect of me going to Barcelona is absolutely ridiculous and it's just made up. What if it was said that although it may look referring to animosity between you and Victoria, it
02:45:16 animosity between you and Victoria, it may look or come across as as gossip and in question the way in which it's phrased. But if it was said that well there is in fact a pleasing purpose here that you and Victoria are uh were
02:45:29 that you and Victoria are uh were significant uh people in disarm DSCI and so that if there is a falling out uh high up in in the group or amongst those
02:45:40 high up in in the group or amongst those uh who are significant and being able to organize in fact that there is a pleasing purpose in that because it it will show the strength of the group Is this a group that is is falling apart
02:45:52 this a group that is is falling apart and going to dissipate or is it a strong group? And so what would you say to that that although it comes across as gossipy that in fact yeah there is a polleing purpose here. What would you say to that?
02:46:03 that? Um well I'd say firstly it's exaggerated so that doesn't help any policing purpose to have exaggerated reports because you're basing it on exaggerated intelligence and 40 intelligence. Um,
02:46:15 intelligence and 40 intelligence. Um, I'd also say there's a there is absolutely a policing purpose. If you're reporting on it because you want to manipulate those friendships and you want to drive those wedges deeper and your policing purpose is to disrupt a
02:46:26 your policing purpose is to disrupt a group, then yes, there is a policing absolutely a policing purpose that is absolutely abhorent and shouldn't exist. Um, and I think it's also worth mentioning that um, HN3 became
02:46:40 worth mentioning that um, HN3 became very very close to Victoria who was younger than me. She was 19 at the time. Um it was 2003. So we've got very young woman who is still a teenager who is being targeted
02:46:51 still a teenager who is being targeted by this undercover officer who's then reporting on her friendships and I think trying to you know they spent a lot of time together like trying to manipulate those friendships and manipulate that friendship which is absolutely
02:47:02 friendship which is absolutely disgusting. But yes, there was a policing purpose in terms of why they're reporting on these things is because they want to drive those divisions and those wedges and disrupt our organizing.
02:47:14 those wedges and disrupt our organizing. But it doesn't mean it's a valid policing purpose. And so when we look at this report, I'm not asking you to provide um Victoria's age. But in general terms, would around
02:47:25 age. But in general terms, would around this time 2003, would she still have been a teenager then or early 20s? I think so. Um
02:47:36 think so. Um 19 or 20. Um but you know I I haven't got a good memory for you um for dates of birth but she she she was significantly younger and and significant you know I was
02:47:47 and and significant you know I was significantly younger than HN3. So HN3 was um
02:47:51 was um much much older than her. Could we please take that report down? I just want to go to another report in relation to your child. It is MPS31267.
02:48:03 And I want to ask you about what is how this report is structured. So this is at your tab B33. It's a report dated the 5th of January 2004.
02:48:16 5th of January 2004. So you can see the title Emily Apple has her baby. The environmental activist Emily Apple had her baby on the date of birth redacted. uh she has named the
02:48:27 birth redacted. uh she has named the child a boy and we can see the child the child's name is provided there and we've redacted it again it's similar to the questions I was asking you earlier but it's it's
02:48:38 was asking you earlier but it's it's really about the impact on on on this the specifics of the name date of birth and the very title of the report could you help us with the the
02:48:50 report could you help us with the the impact that it's had on you and I should also add the source comment provides not only the second name but the person uh who you gave that second name after.
02:49:02 who you gave that second name after. I I mean it's awful. Um there is no that level of attrition. I mean this this report was made um
02:49:14 this report was made um within I think it's about a week um certainly under two weeks of um my child being born. um because I was close to HM3 like he
02:49:27 um because I was close to HM3 like he knew that I'd have had my child and what child's name was and um
02:49:34 um I am so upset for my child that he has this record that he is named on my files because he happened to be born to me. It
02:49:48 because he happened to be born to me. It is deeply upsetting. It is deeply unnecessary. is deeply intrusive. Well, if we read the rest of the report, handlers comment dissemination to MPSc
02:50:00 handlers comment dissemination to MPSc Squad and MPIU for information only. Please refer to the originator where further dissemination is desired or where executive action is likely or anticipated. And then this special
02:50:12 anticipated. And then this special branch references Emily Apple and your um registry file number. And then below that, your child's name and then NT for no trace. So again, you've described to
02:50:26 no trace. So again, you've described to us how close to your child's birth this report was provided. Again, the impact on seeing your child's name in a report
02:50:39 on seeing your child's name in a report such as this with NT no trace um next to it. Again, the the impact of that, please.
02:50:46 please. I mean, it's devastating. Um it really it's you know it's it's quite difficult to describe like you're so protective of your children. Um
02:50:59 your children. Um his name should not be known to the police. He should not have a special branch reference when he's a week old. Um is just deeply upsetting. And again consequences
02:51:11 consequences um dissemination to the NPIU. when I got um subject access um data from domest what were the domestic extremist units.
02:51:22 what were the domestic extremist units. This would have been around 2012 2013 um when I got a print out of my um domestic extremist file on one of those files they had um my child's full name
02:51:35 files they had um my child's full name and date of birth. And at the time um I was less shocked thinking because I'd seen that previously because at the time when I received that disclosure
02:51:47 time when I received that disclosure that really flawed me because I thought you know it was before any of the um slightly it was before the revelations around undercover policing and
02:51:58 and I was just so angry and upset that I'd had so much surveillance and intrusion in my life But that had extended to the point where
02:52:12 my child's full name and his date of birth were being recorded on my domestic extremist files. And it's the same here. But this but but this I think must be the source of that information because it was um disseminated to the NPRU. Um
02:52:28 it was um disseminated to the NPRU. Um and yeah, it is deeply deeply upsetting. It is deeply wrong. Um, and there are no excuses for it. How would you respond to this if it was
02:52:40 How would you respond to this if it was conceded that your child's name should never have been provided in a report such as this? The tone and the language used to describe the birth of your child
02:52:51 used to describe the birth of your child should never um have been set out in the way it was. But if it was suggested that there was nevertheless a pleasing purpose in reporting this information
02:53:03 purpose in reporting this information because given your significance in being able to organize uh protests and demonstrations that uh having a a child would
02:53:16 that uh having a a child would inevitably have an effect on you as demonstrated by you referring earlier to when you went out for the uh the Farmborra air show, the Groner House
02:53:28 Farmborra air show, the Groner House protest being the first time you went out without [snorts] your child that you intended to be far more careful and holding back. And so what would you say to the suggestion that leaving aside the
02:53:40 to the suggestion that leaving aside the language and the name should never have been provided? There is nevertheless a pleasing purpose in reporting a significant life event because of the effect that it could have on your
02:53:53 effect that it could have on your ability to to organize. What would you say to that uh suggestion that justification for this type of report? I I would still say it was completely unnecessary. I mean as already talked about um
02:54:06 about um you know and and and you're framing the question I was organizing protests um that level of intelligence doesn't need to be collected on um people organizing protests and it's
02:54:19 um people organizing protests and it's not like it's not has any benevolent purpose in it. It's not like to say oh be nice to Emily cuz she's had a baby. It you know that made no difference. um HN3 tried to suggest that in reporting
02:54:31 HN3 tried to suggest that in reporting my pregnancy that oh well maybe um CO11 the fit teams might have given me a a less hard time. That didn't happen. I
02:54:42 less hard time. That didn't happen. I got pushed in the stomach at um a dicey protest when I was legal observing. I got dragged out of a park for sitting in a park when I was just trying to catch my breath on a on another protest and I
02:54:53 my breath on a on another protest and I was deliberately targeted. Like both those times it was very very deliberate targeting. Um, so it, you know, like even if like best case scenario, you could try and um attribute some
02:55:06 could try and um attribute some benevolence in looking out for my best interest. That just simply is rubbish. I didn't exist. But there is no need to be be reporting on my pregnancy, on the birth of my child is just unnecessary.
02:55:20 birth of my child is just unnecessary. Could we please take that document down? What I want to ask you about next, it's in relation to uh stop the war. And what I want to do is just go through with you um one of HN3's reports on stop the war
02:55:32 um one of HN3's reports on stop the war that mentions you and then we'll have a look at how that's referred to in his authorization documents. But let's begin with the report which is MPS39594.
02:55:44 So this is at your tab B56. It's a report from HM3 dated the 10th of November 2004.
02:55:58 the Stop the War demonstration, Parliament Square, 10th of November, 2004. Uh this evening, Emily Apple will be attending the Stop the War demonstration in central London. It
02:56:09 demonstration in central London. It would appear that she is keen to get involved with or initiate some direct action of some sort. She anticipates that she may be arrested. Okay. So in
02:56:23 that she may be arrested. Okay. So in terms of that, do do you have any particular observations in relation to the accuracy of what is set out there? Bearing in mind that it refers to some direct action, some sort in there's a
02:56:36 direct action, some sort in there's a lack of clarity, but to the extent that it's set out there, is it at least correct?
02:56:42 correct? No, it's not correct at all. Um, I had no intention of um doing any direct action on that demo. As I said, like I was trying not to get arrested. My child was still young. Um, it was only a few
02:56:55 was still young. Um, it was only a few months after the farmer one. Um, I always anticipated that I might be arrested because the police arrested me for not doing anything lots and lots and lots of times. You know, I I always felt
02:57:08 lots of times. You know, I I always felt there was a risk I could be arrested regardless of what I was doing and what my plans were. Um, but I had no plans to actually go and do anything. And I think
02:57:20 actually go and do anything. And I think in one of the later ones it suggests that I was going to go and do some criminal damage which would have been utterly pointless and I had no intention of doing whatsoever. And by then I was very very disillusioned with the stop
02:57:31 very very disillusioned with the stop the war demos. Um I I I went to them because I lived in London and um I'm a lot softer towards how I felt about some of those things now because I
02:57:42 about some of those things now because I do think there is is value in those big mobilizations and that diversity of tactics. But at the time I would, you know, I was very sort of disillusioned with them and I would I would go to them and I would see people, but I I didn't
02:57:53 and I would see people, but I I didn't really think a I didn't think they were necessarily going to achieve anything, but also they weren't the places that I was going to go and initiate some kind of action at it. There just wouldn't
02:58:05 of action at it. There just wouldn't have been any point. So if we if we just zoom out of that um particular section. So again we can see date information obtained at the top 10th of November
02:58:16 obtained at the top 10th of November typing date 10th of November 2004 and we can see the heading stop the war demonstration parliament square 10th of November 2004. So just bearing in mind that date, I wonder if we can take that
02:58:28 that date, I wonder if we can take that document down please. Uh and moved to I want to go to HN3's or authorizations. If we go to MPS 0526873,
02:58:40 If we go to MPS 0526873, please. So this is at your tab B2. It is a large selection of HM3's authorities. I'd like to go to page 81 in this uh
02:58:51 I'd like to go to page 81 in this uh bundle of documents, please.
02:58:58 And if we can just expand the penultimate paragraph please.
02:59:05 So, we were just looking at the report and you can see here what is set out in the authorization request. detailed intelligence in
02:59:16 request. detailed intelligence in relation to Emily Apple, a disarmed DSI activist, intending to commit an act of criminal damage during the stop the war demonstration in Parliament Square on
02:59:30 demonstration in Parliament Square on the 10th of November 2004 at the start of the Fallujah offensive. As a result of this intelligence, a forward intelligence team was deployed
02:59:42 a forward intelligence team was deployed on Apple and criminal damage offenses averted. What is your response to reading that in the context of the intelligence report we just looked at,
02:59:54 intelligence report we just looked at, please?
02:59:54 please? I mean, quite laughable. Um, yeah. Well, yes. say firstly um detailed intelligence unless there's other intelligence um I don't think that
03:00:07 intelligence um I don't think that report can exactly be described as detailed we've now got the addition of criminal damage here and uh you were asking that question earlier about who
03:00:18 asking that question earlier about who bears responsibility with the managers and the undercover officers I mean one of the essential questions for the managers is around these authorization documents because in so many of them I'd say virtually all of
03:00:30 say virtually all of that I've seen and that you know that are around events that I you know I I know about there are exaggerations and just complete overblowing of what
03:00:43 and just complete overblowing of what was in those initial intelligence reports. Um but yeah, I had no intention of going to commit criminal damage um during a stop the war demo. Um
03:00:55 during a stop the war demo. Um in my statement I'm very open about I was involved in acts of criminal damage but they were very very targeted. Um they were by this stage um covert
03:01:07 they were by this stage um covert actions where I was trying not to get caught and there just would not have been any point in going to a stop the war demo and
03:01:18 in going to a stop the war demo and committing criminal damage. It was just not something that I would have thought was valuable or useful or would have achieved a political objective. It just
03:01:31 achieved a political objective. It just wasn't going to happen. And added to the fact of my child being so young still and that I was trying not to do things that that involved um sort of risking
03:01:42 that that involved um sort of risking arrest in that way. But um I was certainly targeted by a forward intelligence team. Um, I would very much query whether that was a result of this intelligence given I was targeted by a
03:01:53 intelligence given I was targeted by a forward intelligence team anytime I went to any demo in central London whatsoever. Can you just in terms of that particular
03:02:04 Can you just in terms of that particular demonstration, do do you have again some time ago, do do you have a recollection of it?
03:02:10 of it? Yeah, I do. And could you just help us with because what is set out here is that essentially thanks to the forward intelligence team
03:02:22 intelligence team you were prevented from carrying out any criminal damage offenses. Can you help us with what that might have been a reference to or was was there anything in particular
03:02:34 or was was there anything in particular where you were you were stopped from doing anything? No. Um the forward intelligence teams are about harassment. Um as a whole the forward intelligence
03:02:47 as a whole the forward intelligence teams
03:02:49 teams disrupted, intimidated and limited our article 10 and 11 rights to protest, gather to assemble. But in terms of specific actions, then no. I mean, I
03:03:01 specific actions, then no. I mean, I used to get stopped and searched all the time. And I wasn't stopped and searched on this particular um event, which would seem a logical thing to do if they'd been told that I was going to commit
03:03:13 been told that I was going to commit criminal damage. I mean, what was they going to commit criminal damage with? Surely it must have had something on me. And then they might have had a case, but it was all made up, so they wouldn't have done. Um, I remember them following us, I think, return. I mean generally
03:03:27 us, I think, return. I mean generally I I'm sure it is the it's not the bit that I remember from this particular day but generally I would turn up at something within a few minutes uh
03:03:38 something within a few minutes uh forward intelligence team would spot me I think as well and stuck to me like glue um and they would follow me throughout the day. Um on this occasion I remember we got picked up by Ford
03:03:50 I remember we got picked up by Ford intelligence team. We went to the pub for a bit. We left the pub. They they kept following us. Um I remember it being quite an intensive day for fit harassment, but then lots of
03:04:02 day for fit harassment, but then lots of days were intensive for fit harassment.
03:04:06 When you read documents such as the one we have on screen, does that in your own mind explain to you why you received such attention? So for example, when it
03:04:18 such attention? So for example, when it says there's as a result of intelligence provided by the SDS, the forward intelligence team was deployed. Yeah, absolutely. Does that when you've read that and and
03:04:30 Does that when you've read that and and similar references, does that make more sense as to why you were targeted by them?
03:04:35 them? Yeah, definitely. And especially because I said before that the sort of targeted started um around 2001 when I first got to know HM3 and they particularly hated me. Like
03:04:47 and they particularly hated me. Like they had a real hatred of me. Like I was really targeted more than like lots of people were targeted but um I was targeted a lot more than quite a lot of other people. And we test them
03:04:59 other people. And we test them sometimes. We split up see if they'd follow they'd always follow me. [gasps] Um
03:05:05 Um and
03:05:08 in terms of so there's there's several points around this. Firstly, when we talk about police violence, we talk about physical violence and people are rightly very very upset about
03:05:21 are rightly very very upset about physical and violence that police officers carry out against people. We don't talk about the mental health impact. We don't talk. We have parity of esteem supposedly between physical and
03:05:32 esteem supposedly between physical and mental health, but we never talk about this in terms of policing. So what does it mean if you're going to say to a police force that they are going to
03:05:44 police force that they are going to undertake harassment style policing? Um which even um Jackie Smith, the home secretary at the time, um admitted that was what ford intelligence policing was about.
03:05:55 about. If you are going to say that you are going to harass someone off the street, what are you saying you are prepared to do to their mental health? If you are prepared to force someone not to attend
03:06:09 prepared to force someone not to attend protests, not to go to meetings, you are saying that you are happy for the police to go and damage people's mental health to the point where they will not
03:06:20 to the point where they will not exercise their article 10 and 11 rights. And I think that is a really really serious point that often gets missed when we're talking about police violence and policing is that impact of
03:06:33 and policing is that impact of disruption and harassment. Um I would also say that there is so much evidence now of the links between the forward intelligence teams C11 um
03:06:45 the forward intelligence teams C11 um and C11 intelligence unit and also with the NPIU that these units are symbiotic. they do not exist in isolation that we should be hearing um from CO11. We
03:06:57 should be hearing um from CO11. We should be hearing from the FIP teams here because their intelligence like it was cyclical the way the way it all worked. Um and also they have reports on
03:07:08 worked. Um and also they have reports on you know we've seen the few crims that I've exhibited. They've got reports on what these undercover officers were doing from their perspective but but also none of these units exist in isolation. And they're all feeding
03:07:19 isolation. And they're all feeding intelligence to them each other and they're all working within that same purpose to disrupt and to harass and to suppress our movements. And with all these documents and with so many of
03:07:31 these documents and with so many of them, they are showing that very very clear link between forward intelligence policing and CO1 and the SDS. And I think that really needs to be examined.
03:07:42 think that really needs to be examined. and CO11 and the Ford intelligence teams should also be as answering these questions around what this relationship was, how it works, and how they operated
03:07:53 was, how it works, and how they operated together to suppress our right to protest.
03:07:56 protest. Will we please take that document down? I'd like to ask you about disarm DSCI in 2005. Wonder if you could please put up on screen MPS41293.
03:08:08 So this is at your tab B64. It is HN3's reporting. The date's not on there, but the inquiry have dated this as 22nd of March 2005.
03:08:22 as 22nd of March 2005. I just want to ask you about the second paragraph. So, it begins, the disarm DSCI group comprises a core group of Emily Apple, Victoria, Privacy, Jason
03:08:34 Emily Apple, Victoria, Privacy, Jason Bishop, and Privacy. Now just pausing there that description of first there being a core group but secondly you and
03:08:46 being a core group but secondly you and HN3 being in that group. Is [clears throat] that accurate? Is that is that a fair reflection of the reality at the time? Oh yeah definitely it was a very small group that he was part of and he was
03:09:00 group that he was part of and he was very involved in all our decision- making processes. is the direction that the group went in. Um, yeah, he was he was very very involved. And in terms of your
03:09:12 And in terms of your your role, because of course you've seen the references you being a main organizer, an organizer, how would you define what your role was in relation to
03:09:23 define what your role was in relation to that group? Because I think you'd accept that it that it was uh a significant role or would you? Um, yeah, the No, the reports refer to me as a leader, not an organizer. I would except I'm an organizer and not a
03:09:34 would except I'm an organizer and not a leader. It's the other way around. Um yeah, I'm I'm certainly an active organizer. I would facilitate meetings. Um I write stuff. I used to do press work. Um I used to do still do um all
03:09:49 work. Um I used to do still do um all sorts of things, but I'm not a leader of anything at all. And I don't want to be. And I and I've never sought out organizations or positions where I'd be in that leadership role. For me, it's
03:10:00 in that leadership role. For me, it's all about trying to break down those power structures. And you know, like if I've got certain skills in a certain area, I want to teach other people those skills so they can do them. I want to empower other people to be able to do
03:10:12 empower other people to be able to do different things and to be involved in organizing. It's never been about leadership. And just to give an idea sort of a snapshot in time for so for DSCI in 2005 as as part of what you were organizing
03:10:26 as as part of what you were organizing bearing in mind you you have a child at this time. Could you just help us with how that affected your your activism and and what you did in relation to disarm DSI but also the police response to
03:10:37 DSI but also the police response to that? I mean in terms of my organizing I I was very clear that um I didn't want to stop or like I might have taken a step back from doing like
03:10:48 have taken a step back from doing like the direct action the frontline stuff but having a child wasn't going to stop how I organized. So I used to take my child to meetings. Um before I started walking it was a lot easier because
03:11:00 walking it was a lot easier because [laughter] you just sit breastfeed and and you know stuff about you can't do stuff with babies. I found that bit really really easy. when he started walking, it was it was a lot harder. I keep getting up and following him
03:11:11 keep getting up and following him around. Um but yeah, I I I just took him with me to to organizing meetings um and just got on with organizing. I went to my, you know, added him to his first meeting when he
03:11:23 added him to his first meeting when he was two weeks old. Now, I'm going to ask if we can put up it's your exhibit 29. It's UCPI 38134 tab 830.
03:11:33 tab 830. Sir, I wonder if we can put that up on on screen. And just from what you were describing and in terms of the the tone, could you what are we looking at here? What's
03:11:41 What's Oh, yes. Sorry. You asked me what we actually did at DIY 2005. It would have been good if we'd asked HN3 about what he did at DIY 2005 because we didn't mention it at all. Um, so yeah, so we organized a baby block um um because I I
03:11:55 organized a baby block um um because I I I knew other parents and we thought it would be nice to do a protest with our children at the Excel Center. So this is what what we came up with. Um I
03:12:06 what what we came up with. Um I apologize for the diaper, but the aliteration worked. Uh what one of the things you just said was in terms of uh what HN3 did at DIY 2005.
03:12:19 what HN3 did at DIY 2005. What did he do that you you feel should be uh made? Well, because he was with us for for so much of it. Um so I remember him. So we um had a squatted school in East London
03:12:33 um had a squatted school in East London and um we had a lovely um kids room in in the store school that I stayed in with um a couple of other parents and um he was around there a lot. Um
03:12:47 he was around there a lot. Um he was there through the protests. He was around on um Cat organized a big march and
03:12:57 march and he attended that march with the woman Glinda who he claimed was his new partner
03:13:08 partner um who'd come over from Holland um and came to meet us. He talked about his arrest at the GH, about how
03:13:20 arrest at the GH, about how she didn't like the fact that he had been arrested, that that was one of the reasons why he had to start um not doing as much with us. Um it was very much part and on edge of his exit strategy.
03:13:33 part and on edge of his exit strategy. Again, we didn't touch on at all. Um and and he was around for a lot of it and he was part of the organizing for it. Um it was where we discovered the spotter card that he wasn't on and he was there when
03:13:44 that he wasn't on and he was there when that was discovered. Um I remember him being at the squat when people talked about that. In certain deployments there has been criticism that the undercover officer has been engaging in
03:13:57 undercover officer has been engaging in public disorder or maybe encouraging it or involved to some extent in violence. But as far as HN3 is concerned uh in relation to disarm DSI 2005 in
03:14:11 relation to disarm DSI 2005 in particular or generally would you agree that this wasn't an undercover officer who who encouraged such behavior? So he wasn't one of those what would your
03:14:22 wasn't one of those what would your reaction be to someone who said well this is not someone who's encouraging. No he absolutely did. He was very interested. He he always said that he was more interested in covert actions
03:14:35 was more interested in covert actions like he was involved in the organizing of the public um mobilizations. Um I mean firstly like I mean I'm saying there isn't disorder. Um I agree there's no disorder but um if we're talking from
03:14:49 no disorder but um if we're talking from policing language of them saying there's a threat for disorder he was very much involved in organizing all of it. Um but also he was very involved in covert actions. He carried out criminal damage
03:15:01 actions. He carried out criminal damage um against arms companies. Um he provided
03:15:07 provided um I'm going to stop you there because the the next series of questions I'm going to ask if we could please come off the YouTube stream and this will
03:15:19 the YouTube stream and this will probably take us um up to lunch. So we'll be resuming on YouTube after lunch. Um, we're still transmitting to the webinar, but I wonder if that could please be confirmed before.