Robert Hastings (HN18), a former SDS officer, provides testimony regarding his recruitment, the lack of institutional support for his family, and the operational details of his undercover deployment from 2004 to 2007. He discusses the psychological and personal toll on his partner and children, as well as the specific rules regarding sexual relationships while undercover.
00:22:48 Good morning everybody. Uh today's evidence like tomorrows and uh Thursdays will be transmitted uh over the live link after the usual uh 10-minute delay.
00:22:59 link after the usual uh 10-minute delay. Those with mobile telephones may use them 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 photography or recording.
00:23:13 for photography or recording. Yeah.
00:23:15 Yeah. I do solemnly 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
00:23:26 shall be the truth shall be the truth the whole truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth and nothing but the truth.
00:23:36 Yes.
00:23:39 Thank you. Can you give your full name, please?
00:23:41 please? Uh, Robert Paul Edward Hastings. And can we have up on screen, please? Exhibit A1, UCPI 3557.
00:23:53 Exhibit A1, UCPI 3557. It's behind tab A1 of the bundle, sir. Do you recognize this as your witness statement to the inquiry? I do. Yes. Okay. And on the last page, please. This was signed and dated on the 26th of
00:24:05 This was signed and dated on the 26th of June, 2023. Is that right? Says the 23rd of July 23. 23rd of July, 2023. Yeah.
00:24:14 Yeah. Um, are the contents of that witness statement true and correct to the best of your knowledge and belief? Yes.
00:24:20 Yes. Thank you. Um,
00:24:25 Um, now it's right, is it that you joined the MPS, the Metropolitan Police Service on the 23rd of April, 95? That's correct.
00:24:34 correct. And uh you were about 23 years old at that time. That's correct. And by the age of 30 on the 27th of August 2002, you joined Special Branch.
00:24:46 you joined Special Branch. That's correct. And did you enter Squad at that stage? I did. Yes. And why was it you wanted to join Special Branch? As I recall during my training at
00:24:57 As I recall during my training at Henden, I'd expressed a wish to one of the training sergeants that I wished I imagined I'd join TSG, the territorial support group. Um, and the training
00:25:08 support group. Um, and the training sergeant took to one side and said, "I don't think that's quite where you ought to go. I think Special Branch would probably be more appropriate." Um, and at the time I didn't know anything about Special Branch. It hadn't occurred to me. And so um I then became curious and
00:25:20 me. And so um I then became curious and I decid once I'd explored what it was about and learned what it was about I thought no that would be somewhere that I'd like to work. So you you you then had a special interest in special branch work. Yes.
00:25:31 Yes. Um
00:25:34 Um you spent about uh a year and a half on C squad. By the 5th of January 2004 you had joined the SDS. Is that right?
00:25:45 you had joined the SDS. Is that right? That's correct. And uh is it right that by that time at the age of 31 you had no previous undercover work? You you'd done
00:25:56 previous undercover work? You you'd done no undercover work before that? That's correct. Um you hadn't worked using uh cover identity before joining the SDS. Is that right?
00:26:05 right? That's correct. Yes. And and did you have any concern that as an inexperienced undercover officer um going into a long-term undercover deployment might uh have some uh pose
00:26:17 deployment might uh have some uh pose some difficulties for you? I think at the time I possibly didn't pay as much mind as perhaps I ought to have done given a view to the future. I think I was more concerned with undertaking a role that I felt would be quite challenging, quite exciting and
00:26:29 quite challenging, quite exciting and add value to it. And when you say quite exciting, had you heard much about the SDS by that stage? No, I just think the nature of under as you imagine undercover work to be um
00:26:40 you imagine undercover work to be um there is obviously an attraction there and it's different from day-to-day policing.
00:26:46 policing. Um
00:26:48 Um you were deployed on the 24th of August 2004
00:26:52 2004 and you exfiltrated around November or early December 2007. So just over three years deployment. Is that right? That's correct. And the groups you infiltrated were the
00:27:05 And the groups you infiltrated were the International Solidarity Movement. That's correct. And that was pretty much throughout the deployment. Yes.
00:27:12 Yes. Um and from 2006, kind of spring 2006, you were focused also on the uh state of emergency collective. Is that right? That's correct.
00:27:23 That's correct. And no borders. Yes.
00:27:25 Yes. Okay. So that's just a a a briefly uh summary of your deployment. Now, in terms of selection, I'd like to ask you a little bit about that.
00:27:36 a little bit about that. You say in your witness statement, and this is at page three, paragraph six. We don't need to bring it up, but you were approached by HN9. That's correct. Do you have him on your cipher list? Um,
00:27:49 Do you have him on your cipher list? Um, and he approached you when you were still on C squad. Is that right? Yes.
00:27:53 Yes. Was he a DS in the SDS at that stage? I believe so. a detective sergeant. Um, the inquiry understands that he left the
00:28:04 the inquiry understands that he left the SDS in January 2003. So, when he first approached you, was it around the end of 2002, beginning of January uh beginning of 2003?
00:28:16 January uh beginning of 2003? I can't recall. Okay.
00:28:19 Okay. Um, can you recall whether it was probably about a year before you actually joined the SDS? I remember there was a prolonged process. It it it wasn't um something that happened very
00:28:30 wasn't um something that happened very quickly.
00:28:33 Um initially, is it right that he there was just an informal conversation that he had with you? Yes. He appeared at New Scotland Yard um sat behind me and said, "I think you and
00:28:45 sat behind me and said, "I think you and I need to go and have a conversation." And did you go somewhere then to have a conversation? Yeah, we went for a walk around the environs of NSY as it was at the time. And how long was that conversation that
00:28:56 And how long was that conversation that you had?
00:28:57 you had? I think probably half hour or so. Do you remember the contents of that conversation? I think he as it was explained to me there was work. There was a unit that
00:29:09 there was work. There was a unit that existed. There was undercover work. Um, and it explained to me as I recall that it was it could be quite challenging. It'd be quite interesting. I think he
00:29:20 It'd be quite interesting. I think he related to me at the time some I believe he may have been an undercover officer himself.
00:29:24 himself. um and he related to me some of his experiences and some of things that you might need to consider. Um anything in particular stand out in your mind as to the types of things that you would have to consider before
00:29:35 you would have to consider before joining the SDS? Just that that would be very challenging and there and it would necessarily have an impact upon you and your family.
00:29:46 an impact upon you and your family. Did he say what type of impact that might have on your family? No. Did he talk about the excitement of the job and what it would open up for you?
00:29:55 you? Not particularly none. Um, did he say that you would need to speak to your partner before deciding whether to join or not?
00:30:07 whether to join or not? I believe that it would have been mentioned because it was a requirement that the officers from SDS, supervisory officers would have to go out and speak to your partner and just to make sure that they were aware that this was something that you would be doing.
00:30:19 something that you would be doing. Um, was there anything in particular that you would be speaking to your partner about in terms of the impact it would have on her? I would be speaking to or what they
00:30:30 I would be speaking to or what they would be speaking to that you personally would before before you made any decision as to whether to join or not? No, just to make make my partner aware or my exartner I should say, forgive me that um I'd been had a conversation and
00:30:43 that um I'd been had a conversation and it involved it was around undercover work and was this something that uh that she would be happy with? Okay. And did you explain to her at all the impact it would have on her and family life?
00:30:54 would have on her and family life? I don't think at the time I would have had any idea what the impact of working as an undercover officer on the STS would have been. Is it right you'd been with your partner for about 17 years by that stage?
00:31:06 for about 17 years by that stage? That's correct. Yes. And you had children together. Is that right?
00:31:09 right? We did. Yes. Um, and you said that being in a a relationship was a requirement of the SDS.
00:31:20 SDS. I think my understanding was it was something that they felt was to their advantage that it would provide some sense of stability to officers who undertook the role.
00:31:31 undertook the role. So that was a almost a protective factor to keep you anchored in real life. Was it when you were also perhaps as they understood it? Yes. Okay.
00:31:40 Okay. And did you understand that as your partner
00:31:45 partner providing some kind of security for the SDS almost providing a service for the SDS in keeping you anchored in your home life in your family life? And that yes.
00:31:56 And that yes. Okay. So she obviously had uh quite a stake in the decision as to whether you would join the SDS or not. Yes.
00:32:05 Yes. Um was the responsibility
00:32:11 wholly on you and your partner to maintain that link to reality, to maintain that anchor,
00:32:22 or was there much support from the SDS that was offered to help you maintain that grip on reality in light of the demands of the job? I think the expectation that partners alone would be able to keep SDS officers
00:32:35 alone would be able to keep SDS officers grounded in reality is is is nonsensical. Frankly,
00:32:41 Frankly, do you want to expand on that a little bit?
00:32:43 bit? The demands of the job in terms of the hours that you spend away from your home, the hours that you necessarily spend away from your children, uh the impact that has on your relationship with your partner, the impact it has on
00:32:54 with your partner, the impact it has on on your your relationship with children. I don't think there's any way that the you can be prepared for that. Um and certainly there was no preparation offered by SDS. So none of that was conveyed to you by
00:33:07 So none of that was conveyed to you by HN9 at this stage? No.
00:33:10 No. So
00:33:12 So prior to you making any decision as to whether to take it forward, what were you able to discuss with your partner about the demands of the job? Only in very general terms because
00:33:23 Only in very general terms because clearly at that time I didn't actually know what the the specifics of the job would entail. So is it right then that she wasn't in a position to be able to make an informed decision as to whether that option to
00:33:36 decision as to whether that option to join the SDS was right for you or your family?
00:33:38 family? I think that would be a fair comment. Um is it right that about a week later following the discussion with HN9 you did confirm that you were interested in
00:33:50 did confirm that you were interested in taking it forward? Yes. Um and that means going down the line of uh recruitment and applying for for the job. Yes.
00:34:00 Yes. Um and it was a while after that that you were contacted by HN9 again and invited to a hotel for interview and psychometric test. That's correct. I believe so. Yes.
00:34:13 That's correct. I believe so. Yes. Um
00:34:15 Um I don't need to take you to it but there is a document in the bundle be behind tab uh B23 sir in volume two the reference just for the record is MPS0738984
00:34:30 and on page two it says that you sat that psychometric test on the 8th of August 2003. Does that sound right? Yes.
00:34:40 Yes. And I understand that you were interviewed on the 14th of October, 2003.
00:34:46 2003. Yes.
00:34:47 Yes. Does that sound right? May I just interject about a date? You put it uh to this witness at the start of the uh your questions that HN9 had
00:35:01 of the uh your questions that HN9 had left the SDS in January 2003. My um note of uh his own statement and recollection of what is in his documents is that it
00:35:12 of what is in his documents is that it was November 2003 that he left. Um sir, I will certainly check that. I'll I'll confirm that. Thank you. That that date fits in better with what
00:35:23 That that date fits in better with what has been described about the recruitment process than um a January date. Yes, sir. Thank you. Don't worry about it for the time being.
00:35:34 Don't worry about it for the time being. We'll sort this out in a moment. Thank you.
00:35:38 you. Uh Mr. Hastings, the um the scenarios that were put to you uh in the interview, were they put to you by a panel of officers from the SDS?
00:35:49 panel of officers from the SDS? Yes.
00:35:50 Yes. And on that panel, it was DCI Dell, Michael Dell. Yes.
00:35:55 Yes. HN53 who is ciphered. Yes.
00:36:01 Yes. He was the detective inspector at the time. And a detective Sergeant Gilbertson. That's correct. Yes. And another detective constable. Yes. Is that
00:36:12 Yes. Is that right?
00:36:15 right? Um
00:36:17 Um in terms of the scenarios that were put to you,
00:36:21 to you, was there a scenario about um the risk of sex undercover or sexual advances towards you? No, I don't believe there was. No. Uh, was there any scenario that involved
00:36:34 Uh, was there any scenario that involved racist incidents and how to cope with those?
00:36:37 those? No.
00:36:38 No. Can you recall at all about the types of scenarios that were put to you? I recall I think one and that was related to the issue of violence. If you found yourself in a confrontation at a demonstration, what would you do?
00:36:53 demonstration, what would you do? Okay.
00:36:54 Okay. Any others? Not that I recall. No.
00:37:00 in terms of the pre-eployment discussions. Now, um you were selected for the SDS. Is that right?
00:37:10 right? Yes.
00:37:11 Yes. And uh following that selection, DCI, Dell, and DI HN53 visited your family home to speak with you and your partner. Do you recall that? I certainly recall the fact that
00:37:24 that? I certainly recall the fact that they visited my exartner uh and I at our home address at the time. Yes. Okay. And do you recall how long that meeting took?
00:37:33 took? I think no more than 30 minutes. Um you say in your witness statement at paragraph 13.1 that you understood the purpose of that meeting was for them to
00:37:45 purpose of that meeting was for them to see evidence of stability in your family life. Was that your sense of what that meeting was about? Yes. And also to confirm that you'd had
00:37:56 Yes. And also to confirm that you'd had the discussion with your partner and that your partner was indeed aware of what that you would be actually working in an undercover role. Okay. Um
00:38:07 so was there any sense that that meeting was also for you and your partner to ask any questions that you might have about what the role entailed?
00:38:19 I think it was for them. I think they saw it as them providing reassurance to my partner or my exartner, forgive me. Um, as to uh the restrictions that existed relating to our work on SDS.
00:38:32 existed relating to our work on SDS. The restrictions did you say? Yes, I did. Yes. And what do you mean by that? I very clearly remember that they had said that if you engage in a sexual relationship whilst as a undercover officer, then you will be removed from
00:38:43 officer, then you will be removed from the unit.
00:38:44 the unit. Okay. Who said that? I cannot recall which specific officer said that, but it was most certainly um stated to myself and my partner. Okay. And was that when all four of you
00:38:56 Okay. And was that when all four of you were sat together? Yes.
00:38:58 Yes. In in the in the home. And so there was an agreement, was there, between the two managers that that was definitely a rule that you had to comply with? I don't know if there was an agreement. It was a statement that was made by by
00:39:11 It was a statement that was made by by those when they visited. Okay.
00:39:14 Okay. Um,
00:39:17 I want to come to that in a little bit more detail in a moment, but just before we do, can I ask you, did you did you and your partner feel that you were obliged to convey a sense of stability
00:39:31 obliged to convey a sense of stability for the purposes of you being recruited? I would imagine it would have been foolish for an officer and their partner to have given any sense of instability
00:39:44 to have given any sense of instability um when the two officers from the SDS visited.
00:39:49 visited. Did they inquire with you separately to that meeting at all um whether you had a sex life outside of the partnership?
00:40:00 sex life outside of the partnership? No.
00:40:03 Did they give you any information at that meeting about the impact of the deployment on you and your family in
00:40:14 deployment on you and your family in front of your partner? Not that I recall now. Um, so was the amount of information given by the SDS to you and your partner
00:40:27 given by the SDS to you and your partner sufficient to be able to make an informed decision about you joining the SDS? I think in retrospect, no. Um, what do you wish you had been told? I think it would have been
00:40:41 I think what's become clear is there are a number of revelations that have been made, information regarding the history of the SDS um that I was certainly unaware of uh as
00:40:53 um that I was certainly unaware of uh as an SDS officer indeed whilst on the unit. And I think perhaps if I had been better informed as to some of the problems that the unit had experienced historically and some of the issues that had come up then I'm not certain I would
00:41:05 had come up then I'm not certain I would have made the decision to join.
00:41:11 Do you think your partner would have been supportive had she known that sort of thing as well? I think my exartner much to her credit was incredibly supportive given the circumstances. Um whether she would have
00:41:24 circumstances. Um whether she would have been so supportive if she had been aware or if we'd both been aware, I doubt very much that she would have been to be fair, particularly given what happens in the future. Was she given any means to contact the
00:41:37 Was she given any means to contact the SDS back office in case of an emergency? I don't believe so. No. Or over any concerns about your own uh behaviors or your your welfare? I don't believe so. No. or any
00:41:50 I don't believe so. No. or any considerable impact it was making on the family?
00:41:52 family? No.
00:41:55 No. Do you know what support if any she was given during the course of your deployment? I as far as I'm aware I would say now there was only one particular incident that arose when the back office if you
00:42:07 that arose when the back office if you like activated to try and provide support to us. Okay. And was that to do with harassment uh in 2005? I'll come on to that. Um,
00:42:19 2005? I'll come on to that. Um, in terms of the uh the reference to sexual relationships, which you've you've touched on already, um, you say in your witness statement at paragraph 13.2 that there were two key aspects
00:42:30 13.2 that there were two key aspects that you really recall about that meeting. And the first was, um, the sense that you would be looked after. Um, can you expand on what you understood that to mean?
00:42:46 I think the general un there was a general understanding that having volunteered to undertake SDS work um you would return to special branch after you'd completed your your deployment um
00:42:58 you'd completed your your deployment um there would always be a recognition of the fact that you'd undertaken this work there was a recognition of the value of SDS work and whilst you would have to accept there would be a limit in terms
00:43:09 accept there would be a limit in terms of potential um promotion um
00:43:15 um if you like your your service would have been rendered into the cultural memory of special branch
00:43:22 and so you would be looked after in that sense that you would be provided with good career path after the SDS. I I don't know I mean in terms of what you mean by good career path that that's that's a question but but certainly
00:43:33 that's a question but but certainly there would always be a recognition of the fact of the work that you'd undertaken whilst on SDS and the value that it that it the value that it it offered to the special branch at the time. Okay. But it didn't mean, as far
00:43:45 time. Okay. But it didn't mean, as far as you understood it, to mean that you would be looked after in terms of your welfare, in terms of your family's welfare.
00:43:51 welfare. Perhaps it perhaps that was included as well, but I can't be clear about that. In terms of the second aspect that stood out for you in this reference to the sexual relationships and that there
00:44:02 sexual relationships and that there should be no sexual relationship whilst undercover. Um you said that you felt that was to provide reassurance to your partner and what do you mean by that?
00:44:15 partner and what do you mean by that? When the when the two individuals had left I I I certainly remember that my partner was of the opinion that it that it struck her as being no more than a tickbox exercise.
00:44:28 And why was it said in a jokey manner? Was it said in a very brief fleeting way?
00:44:33 way? No, it was just an obs a very quick observation that she'd made. Um there was no discussion around that point then, was there? Did she ask any questions at the time about
00:44:44 questions at the time about what do you mean sexual relationships? Is that a risk? A question to me or a question to uh did she ask any questions? Not that I recall of the managers. And did the managers
00:44:56 of the managers. And did the managers expand on it at all as to whether that might be
00:44:59 might be No.
00:45:00 No. something that was a risk uh during the deployment? No, not that I recall. No. Um
00:45:09 Um did you take that uh instruction or that direction seriously at the time? Yes.
00:45:20 Yes. And did you understand then that it was a serious risk that there might be a temptation to enter into sexual relationships undercover? I think I took the view at the time that if I entered into a sexual relationship,
00:45:31 if I entered into a sexual relationship, I would be kicked off the unit. And so did you see that as uh an absolute prohibition? At the time of their coming to the home
00:45:43 At the time of their coming to the home address, yes. Did you have a sense that um it might be something that you would uh come across during the course of your deployment
00:45:57 that it might that it might be something that your deployment gave rise to? The fact well the very fact that they mentioned that would indicate that there was obviously a concern at some at some level within the special branch that
00:46:08 level within the special branch that this was an issue of some kind. And so did you raise it later on with them in private or speak to any other UCOs about it? No.
00:46:18 No. Did you make any other inquiries or research into the issue? Not specific to that. No. Um do you recall whether DCI Dell made
00:46:29 Um do you recall whether DCI Dell made reference to that prohibition on other occasions? Um he mentions in his witness statement that um on an occasion where all the officers were in the safe house and he said to the group that they were
00:46:42 and he said to the group that they were not to be out shagging as he had a duty of care to the officers and their families. Do you recall that? No.
00:46:50 No. Do you recall anything like that being said by the managers to the UCS in your group?
00:46:55 group? No.
00:46:58 Um, can I ask you what was the state of your relationship with your partner at the time? Was it a stable relationship you were in? I believe so. Yes.
00:47:09 I believe so. Yes. Um,
00:47:10 Um, at the time, would you have been attracted to the idea that sexual relationships might be involved in the work of the SDS? No. Was it ever seen as a perk of the job?
00:47:21 Was it ever seen as a perk of the job? Certainly not. No. Was there ever a sense that this is a secret world that you'd be entering into and you can practically do what you like and nobody would ever know about?
00:47:32 and nobody would ever know about? Absolutely not. What you got up to? No.
00:47:37 Had you heard about UCS having uh uh relationships whilst undercover
00:47:45 prior to joining? No.
00:47:48 No. When did you first become aware of it? I believe the first time I became aware that this was a was a was an issue was when I was directed to read the tradecraftraft manual that um was held within SDS
00:48:02 and that was when you first joined the back office in January 2004. I would have been introduced to that whilst I was in the back office. Yes. And did that give you cause for concern then if you're reading that uh UCOs have
00:48:15 then if you're reading that uh UCOs have had sexual relationships during the course of their deployment? Did it make you think I need to consider this? I need to be aware of this. I need to make provision for this so that I don't get
00:48:27 provision for this so that I don't get pulled into such behavior. Well, in retrospect, yes, perhaps I should have done and ought to have done. Do I take it from that you didn't at the time?
00:48:37 time? No, I not at the time. No. And why didn't that thought occur to you at the time? Well, there was certainly a conflict that existed between on the one hand the statement that was made to my
00:48:48 hand the statement that was made to my exartner and myself when they visited the home address and the tradecraft manual which as I recall uh made reference to if you had a relationship if you had to have a relationship you
00:49:00 if you had to have a relationship you were to make it short fleeting and um and I cannot recall the the precise wording but it was essentially to say to bring it to a close as quickly as possible to try and avoid it as much as possible.
00:49:12 possible. Okay, we can we can come on to that in a moment. Um,
00:49:21 in terms of uh anything else that your exartner could have said or inquired about at the time of the meeting that DCIDell and DIHN50 uh 53 attended at
00:49:35 DCIDell and DIHN50 uh 53 attended at your home, did she make any further comment about uh the meeting being quite uh a cynical meeting.
00:49:46 meeting. She was beused about their approach. As I've already said, I think she she perhaps felt that it had been no more than a piece of theater.
00:49:59 Um,
00:50:02 looking at the impact that your deployment did have on your family and your exartner, um,
00:50:11 um, is it fair to say that it was a really significant impact that uh, your deployment did have on your partner, particularly from the start, she almost became like a single parent.
00:50:23 became like a single parent. Yes. I think the
00:50:36 Forgive me.
00:50:41 I think the personal cost to her and my family
00:50:45 family has been immense in ways that I could never have envisaged
00:50:51 envisaged both to her and to myself.
00:50:57 Is that because largely you weren't able to spend much time at the family home during the course of your deployment? I think that there is the impact of the deployment itself in terms of times
00:51:09 deployment itself in terms of times away. She very much as you earlier described became a pretty much a single mom. Uh we'd moved during that time as well. We'd moved into a new environment. She very much had to establish the
00:51:20 She very much had to establish the family, new friends on her own. They're the issues of the embarrassment of being with an individual who clearly doesn't look anything remotely like the kind of person they perhaps might have expected my exartner to have been with. Um the
00:51:34 my exartner to have been with. Um the dayto-day damage it did to her. I I think I can't even begin to imagine and the children. And you mean the change in your appearance? Changing the appearance being absent, not being there to take an active part in the children's lives in in at a very
00:51:46 in the children's lives in in at a very important time for them when they were quite young. um
00:51:53 she had to carry that weight and bear that burden largely by herself.
00:52:03 We'll come on to legend building in a moment, but um your the background that you had the job that you had undercover was as as a DJ. No, that's not quite correct.
00:52:14 No, that's not quite correct. Okay. Um, I had whilst I'd worked in South London as a uniformed police officer, I had developed a friendship with a a
00:52:24 with a a I think we just have to be careful now about how
00:52:28 about how came about. Um, the legend was built very much upon previous experience that I had and also personal interest I had. Um, was that as a sound technician?
00:52:39 Um, was that as a sound technician? Yes.
00:52:40 Yes. Um, you were um Okay. So you developed a a a cover employment as a sound technician. Did that include DJing then or is that something that developed
00:52:51 or is that something that developed during the course of your deployment? I think that pretty much developed during the course of the deployment. Okay. Um did that take you away from your family during evenings and weekends
00:53:04 your family during evenings and weekends more so than the SDS role in itself would have? It was all wrapped up into one. Um, were you not going home in evenings,
00:53:15 Um, were you not going home in evenings, staying overnight? Yeah, you would you would be away from home very often for entire weekends,
00:53:23 weekends, days, when deployed elsewhere, weeks,
00:53:28 and was there a sense from the start that um we've heard this term deep swimming? Were you were you trying to be a deep swimmer? Had you heard about that
00:53:41 a deep swimmer? Had you heard about that uh uh when you first started in the SDS? In contemporary terms, no. Um
00:53:49 but I believe it was it was a term that I became aware of subsequently. Uh and it clearly related to the the idea of
00:53:57 some officers the amount of effort perhaps that officers put into their legend into their work. Was there a difference that you were aware of at the time between uh
00:54:08 aware of at the time between uh different UCOs and how much effort they put in in terms of how committed they were to the the role? I think I I think all of my colleagues were committed absolutely to the role
00:54:19 were committed absolutely to the role that they had undertaken. The degree and extent to which they engaged utilized their legend would have been entirely theirs to make. Did you get the sense that some people were managing to go
00:54:31 that some people were managing to go back home to their families more often than you were? It wasn't anything that we spoke about to be fair. Uh
00:54:39 Uh did you feel pressure to be living in your duff and being on on duty as an undercover officer uh 24/7 or
00:54:52 undercover officer uh 24/7 or in many respects, whether you're duff or not, it became a 24-hour role. You had a telephone. You could be called at any time. you had to you had those relationships with with your um your targets.
00:55:02 targets. And did you work to build boundaries between your cover identity and your family uh real life identity? I I think that was impossible.
00:55:13 I think that was impossible. Did you did you speak to anybody about how you might go about doing that? The only um individual I'd spoken to around legend building in that sense was
00:55:25 around legend building in that sense was was an officer. an officer who was in the office at the time of my joining
00:55:31 um who was that
00:55:38 was it somebody called Matt Simmons? Yes.
00:55:40 Yes. Okay. And was he a was he a constable I believe
00:55:44 I believe back office? Yeah.
00:55:46 Yeah. Was he responsible for security of the operation? I think he was I think he was deployed by the SDS back office for a variety of tasks and Matt
00:55:57 office for a variety of tasks and Matt as I recall um undertook any task that that that that were required of him. So he was a constable in the back office. He wasn't an undercover officer himself.
00:56:07 himself. No.
00:56:08 No. But he was there to assist the UCOs with whatever they needed. He was certainly there in terms of building my legend and helping me to establish my legend.
00:56:21 So he was the key person that you spoke to. You didn't speak to managers or other UCOs in developing your legend. Not in terms of development. I think there was, as I recall, there was I
00:56:32 there was, as I recall, there was I wrote out a rough sketch of a potential legend. I believe that was subject to some critique by a fellow officer. Um, and then subsequent to that, I then was
00:56:43 and then subsequent to that, I then was interviewed, if you like, by by three SDS officers at the time to test the legend to see if it held up to scrutiny.
00:56:56 Did Matt Simmons have any sense of you needing to protect your real life and your family life and to build that into your legend? Not that I recall. Did he he didn't speak about that with
00:57:08 Did he he didn't speak about that with you?
00:57:08 you? Not that I recall.
00:57:12 Um, we know that you did have a sexual relationship with a woman known to the inquiry as Maya. Um, did you disclose that relationship at all to your
00:57:24 that relationship at all to your exartner?
00:57:25 exartner? No.
00:57:27 No. Um, were there other advances that were made to you or other sexual flirtations you had with other women that you disclosed to your partner?
00:57:39 disclosed to your partner? Not that I disclosed to my partner.
00:57:44 Um, was there any sense within the SDS that you needed to be open about that aspect of your deployment with your uh with
00:57:56 of your deployment with your uh with your real partner? Was never discussed.
00:58:05 Um, is it right that you had a meeting with HN 118
00:58:12 HN 118 and HN3
00:58:16 prior to joining the SDS? With them together or singly? Uh, either. You say at paragraph 12 of your witness statement that you had a meeting with those two officers, but you
00:58:29 meeting with those two officers, but you can't recall if it was before or after you joined the unit. That's correct. Yes. Do you remember was that separately or together?
00:58:37 together? I believe that was most likely separately. And do you recall what you spoke about? No.
00:58:47 No. Was it uh generally about SDS deployment? It could have been would it would it necessarily have been about the different challenges? Would it was it a conversation to help you uh in
00:58:59 was it a conversation to help you uh in terms of starting your deployment? I can't recall the conversation.
00:59:07 I'd like then to move to legend building. Um you were known in your cover identity as Robert Harrison. Is that right? That's correct. um uh known to uh uh people that you uh
00:59:22 um uh known to uh uh people that you uh uh met as Rob. Yeah.
00:59:27 And is it right you also used the handle Boogie Boy when you were posting on websites or blogs? Yes.
00:59:36 Yes. That handle Boogie Boy that related to you and your identity as Rob Harrison. Is that right? Yes. as an activist?
00:59:47 Yes. as an activist? Yes.
00:59:48 Yes. And you were posting in that persona? Yes.
00:59:52 Yes. Um, and is it right that you contributed to websites such as Urban 75? Yes.
00:59:57 Yes. India?
00:59:59 India? Yes.
01:00:00 Yes. Okay.
01:00:01 Okay. Any other website that you can remember? Riseup.net. Rise up. Yep. Um,
01:00:11 Um, did you contribute to web forums or chat rooms such as the red room? I don't recall. I don't recall what that is or was
01:00:23 is or was um,
01:00:28 were there any other websites that you contributed to or different forums? None that I recall immediately.
01:00:38 And was it through that uh identity that you arranged CD swaps? Yes.
01:00:45 Yes. And that would Can you just explain how that worked? Uh the CD swaps were essentially consisted of individuals who
01:00:56 essentially consisted of individuals who uh volunteered to take part. They would record CDs of music. um addresses would be collected, different addresses would be sent out and individuals would receive a random CD of music um from
01:01:07 receive a random CD of music um from someone they didn't know and then it was up to them whe they then disclose later on um who had actually recorded the CD for them
01:01:13 for them and you facilitated that yes that swap and part as part of that did you receive the names and addresses of people that were using that website and were they
01:01:24 were using that website and were they largely activists they it's possible they were activists included there also people who were likely not activists. And did you disseminate or record those
01:01:36 And did you disseminate or record those email address or the email addresses, the home addresses and the names of those people for any other purpose? No, only for the purposes of the CD swap.
01:01:45 swap. Did you uh uh note those and send them to the SDS back office?
01:01:55 I can't recall. would you have done if they related to an activist in one of your groups? Certainly. Yes. I think that would have been the case.
01:02:09 As well as using the handle Boogie Boy, did you use any other handle on
01:02:14 on uh on any of the sites that you engaged with?
01:02:18 with? Not that I recall.
01:02:22 And did you use Boogie Boy for the uh duration of your deployment? Yes.
01:02:28 Yes. Did you use it after you withdrew from the SD?
01:02:31 the SD? I believe so. Yes. For how long did you use that handle Boogie Boy? Um possibly. I I can't recall, but I don't imagine it would have been for any more than a year after.
01:02:42 more than a year after. A year after you left the SDS, possibly.
01:02:47 Um, is it right that you had email addresses as well? So, there was one email address rsp harrison at hotmail.com. Do you remember using that?
01:02:59 hotmail.com. Do you remember using that? Um, and you've mentioned the riseup website. Did you use boogie at riseup.net as a that sounds email address? That sounds correct. And did you use those to be included on
01:03:13 And did you use those to be included on distribution lists within the groups that you infiltrated? Yes.
01:03:17 Yes. So those would have been used for ISM, the international solidarity movement. Where you had where you would have had political groups act operating on there,
01:03:28 political groups act operating on there, I would have been reporting on them. Okay. So where where political groups are uh acting or or or or engaging with rise up websites?
01:03:39 rise up websites? report on that, would you? Forgive me, but if I recall correctly, Rise Up was a website that you had to be invited
01:03:45 invited um to enter into and that was done by way of another activist who would then get you an invite and that would be sent to you and you would then be able to join the group. And so then you used that as an in to be
01:03:57 And so then you used that as an in to be able to report on everything that was being said on Rise Up by a whole raft of different activist groups. I don't know if it would have been on a whole raft of activist groups, but certainly if it had related to the activist groups that I
01:04:09 related to the activist groups that I was concerned with or individuals, then yes, I would have reported it. And what about if there were posts on there from other groups um that you weren't directly infiltrating?
01:04:20 weren't directly infiltrating? If they fell within the purview of SDS operations or in or special branch interest, then yes, I I likely would have reported on them. That was particularly wide, wasn't it?
01:04:32 That was particularly wide, wasn't it? Generally, was it any left-wing uh uh activist group that would have fell within that purview? From my operation, it would have been necessarily left-wing anarchist groups.
01:04:45 necessarily left-wing anarchist groups. It wouldn't have included the right wing, for example. Okay. What about environmental groups? Would you have reported on that even though it wasn't a direct uh target group for you personally?
01:04:56 group for you personally? Again, if they'd come within the purview of my operation, then yes, I would have reported on them. um within the perview of your own operation, but what about the SDS more widely?
01:05:06 widely? As as understood by the requirements for special branch. So if I was at for example um if I was at a demonstration and there were individuals there from my
01:05:17 and there were individuals there from my group, there may have been individuals who were concerned or part of other groups. Then by the nature of their being at the demonstration, if there was an interaction, then I would have reported on them. Okay. So other groups such as the the
01:05:29 Okay. So other groups such as the the Cardiff Anarchist Network perhaps or Smash Ao Edo or these other groups would you have reported on whatever they posted in the Rise Up website potentially. Yes.
01:05:48 and the actual email distribution lists for ISM and no borders which you came to report on later on. Um, you would have
01:05:59 report on later on. Um, you would have had access to all of the the the data from those uh emails being sent out. I don't know about all of the data, but it's likely I would have had access to the email traffic. Okay.
01:06:11 Okay. Um, in your witness statement, you say at paragraph 61 that state of emergency didn't actually have an email distribution list.
01:06:22 distribution list. Is that right? Forgive me. Um, not that I recall. But nonetheless, people involved with those groups would post on the websites that you were interacting with.
01:06:34 that you were interacting with. Possibly. Yes. Um, so this was a real source of information for you to be able to feed into your reports to the SDS. Is that right?
01:06:44 right? Yes.
01:06:46 Yes. Was it also a place for you to sew seeds of discord or disruption amongst the groups that you were involved with? Potentially could have been used to those purposes. Yes. Okay. And did you use it for those purposes?
01:06:58 And did you use it for those purposes? Not that I recall. No. Um,
01:07:04 Um, in terms of your contributions uh to the discussions, would you often put a different view to those that were otherwise posting uh genuine activists
01:07:17 otherwise posting uh genuine activists as genuine activists? So, would you often have uh differences of agreement or differences of perspective and disagreements online or outside in the real world? Uh, online possibly. Yes.
01:07:30 possibly. Yes. Was there any guidance provided to you about what was or was not acceptable in relation to that? No.
01:07:38 No. Did you have any sense that like in the real world you're not there is a prohibition against being an aan provocator? You're aware of that. Is that right? I understood that
01:07:49 that right? I understood that necessarily my role was to be a wallflower as much as possible in many instances to not and that was a very hard thing to to to maintain in
01:08:01 very hard thing to to to maintain in certain circumstances because you necessarily as you rightly said you're not there to provoke things to make things happen. And did you have were you were you quite clear about that? Did you understand
01:08:13 clear about that? Did you understand that rule that you weren't allowed to provoke things into into happening in in your discussions with people in
01:08:24 in in your discussions with people in your activities with people more across the tenure of my Yeah,
01:08:28 Yeah, it was difficult. It was very difficult. Um demonstrations for example, you're constantly aware of the fact that you're not you're trying not to be arrested. Um you're not trying to provide the
01:08:39 Um you're not trying to provide the impetus to a particular action. you may participate in it, but you're not the one leading. And that principle, whilst that was something you were aware of in your
01:08:52 something you were aware of in your deployment, did that did that carry on over into your if you like your cyber identity and and and the digital aspect of your deployment?
01:09:03 deployment? I would have thought as much as possible that would have been the approach I would have taken.
01:09:10 Um, staying with Legend Building, I want to ask you about your accommodation. Uh, your first accommodation was a second floor flat in Holloway. Is that right?
01:09:21 that right? Yes.
01:09:22 Yes. Um, you moved from there because I think the person below was a police officer. Is that right? Yeah. Well, PCSO, I believe. Okay.
01:09:29 Okay. Um, your second your second accommodation was a second floor flat in Holay as well, just a different building.
01:09:35 building. Yes. Um, and you say that HN72 wanted you to move from that flat eventually in order to save money. Do you recall that
01:28:28 Mr. Hastings, we're talking about your uh legend and I'd like to ask you about your legend of sexual relationships. So when you infiltrated groups, did you
01:28:41 So when you infiltrated groups, did you explain or did you uh give the sense that you'd had failed relationships in the past, but you didn't have any children?
01:28:49 children? Yes.
01:28:51 Yes. And you were known to be single. Is that right?
01:28:54 right? Yes.
01:28:56 Yes. So no other commitments in your personal life or responsibilities for others? That's correct. Yes. In that sense, were you then open to relationships, sexual
01:29:07 you then open to relationships, sexual relationships with others in your group? Not necessarily. No. If directed to, could you have built something in to your legend to prevent temptation of entering a sexual
01:29:19 temptation of entering a sexual relationship whilst undercover
01:29:23 to build to get build against mitigate against the temptation of a sexual relationship? Yeah.
01:29:29 Yeah. By that I'm suggesting that could you have put something into your your legend where you had a a a a partner elsewhere or you had children or you'd had some
01:29:40 or you had children or you'd had some terrible experience that meant that you weren't open to a sexual relationship at the time.
01:29:47 the time. That certainly would have been helpful. Yes.
01:29:49 Yes. Did that ever occur to you to to build that into your legend? No.
01:30:00 and and and why not given that from the very start this issue of sexual relationships undercover had been flagged by uh the two managers that came to your home to speak with you and your
01:30:12 to your home to speak with you and your partner? Well, in retrospect, I would say that I would have very much appreciated a cover officer of some kind as was provided on occasion to uh other officers
01:30:22 officers by that support role player or fake girlfriend, that sort of thing. An undercover officer who would act as a partner or girlfriend. Did you raise that with managers at some
01:30:34 Did you raise that with managers at some point?
01:30:35 point? Not that specific issue. No. And why not? I'd raising
01:30:44 with them the fact that I was being approached by some activists, female activists who were making it clear that they wanted a sexual leazison of some type.
01:30:55 type. And at that stage, did it occur to you that you might want to open up about something in your fake legend that might mitigate against entering a sexual
01:31:07 mitigate against entering a sexual relationship? Well, I wish I had. I certainly recall raising the fact of the approaches I was having in a meeting and I recall that it was
01:31:19 was almost as I recall laughed off by who?
01:31:23 by who? By the group generally are the UCOs within the discussion group and were the managers there possibly likely. And when you say in the discussion
01:31:35 And when you say in the discussion group, would that be one of your general Monday meetings? You that or the other day? Yes. Okay.
01:31:42 Okay. And when people laughed off that suggestion, what was said? Well, as I recall, it was I don't think they took it seriously. I think the the view on the view was that you it wasn't
01:31:53 view on the view was that you it wasn't an issue. You would just have to deal with things. Don't that that would be how how I describe it. You deal with things. you're a big, you know, for one of a better term, you're old enough, wise enough, and experienced enough, you
01:32:05 wise enough, and experienced enough, you you deal with the issues, don't bring us any problems. That was something that was conveyed from management, was it? That would be my understanding of the general culture and approach of SDS.
01:32:16 general culture and approach of SDS. And this sense of dealing with things, was it you manage a sexual relationship yourself or you stop that from happening yourself? You're big enough and brave
01:32:27 yourself? You're big enough and brave enough to say no. or where you were able to say no and there were some aggressive approaches, you would try and say no. When you say aggressive approaches, what
01:32:38 When you say aggressive approaches, what do you mean? If someone is sat next to you in a car and you've driven them home and a fellow activist and they then turn and face you and say, "I like to uh perform fellatio
01:32:49 and say, "I like to uh perform fellatio during the evening or when someone's driving." That's a fairly direct approach. Equally, if someone says to you, "My partner and I have got have got a rule that when we're not when we're not in the UK or we're separated, we are
01:33:00 not in the UK or we're separated, we are free to do what on earth we like. Would you like to come back to my tent?" And in each of those scenarios, are these scenarios that actually happened? I wouldn't mention them otherwise.
01:33:13 I wouldn't mention them otherwise. And and did you not feel in a position to say no? I did say no. Okay. So, in that way, you you dealt with those I dealt with those those issues. Yes. these issues. Um, and so was that what
01:33:25 these issues. Um, and so was that what was expected of you? Is that what you understood was expected of you to be able to do that? To say no and move on to deal with these situations as best you could. Okay.
01:33:39 And so in your experience uh throughout your deployment, were you always able to say no when somebody made a a direct
01:33:50 no when somebody made a a direct approach to you in that way? To the best of my rec recollection, yes.
01:33:58 And is that the sense you got from other officers
01:34:04 officers um when you're discussing that in the going back to this this meeting at the safe house? What I would say to you is that these things were not discussed generally within the office that which
01:34:15 generally within the office that which is why the one time when I raised it that there I was experiencing issues that needed to be addressed. That's why I remember it. Beyond that, these things weren't discussed. So you were almost shut down in talking
01:34:27 So you were almost shut down in talking about them. It was just not discussed. If there were specific issues, the opportunity perhaps was there for officers to speak perhaps their line managers about
01:34:38 perhaps their line managers about specific things.
01:34:48 Um I'd like to talk to you about racism as well. Um, racism did play a part of your legend, didn't it? Um,
01:35:00 legend, didn't it? Um, or or race in particular. Um, at Eive Chowry
01:35:06 Chowry says in his witness statement that he recalls you saying as part of your legend that you had a Nigerian girlfriend and that your mother refused to talk to you because of that
01:35:18 to talk to you because of that relationship. Do you recall saying that to Mr. Chowry? Not specifically, but it fits within the context of the legend that I'd built. Okay.
01:35:26 Okay. So, that was a part of your background, your your cover background, I expect so. Yes. And
01:35:35 And Maya, the cipher. Meer recalls that you said you moved out of your home early and moved in with a black family. Do you recall saying that? Yes, that been part of my legend. Yes.
01:35:47 Yes, that been part of my legend. Yes. And why did uh the racial uh uh elements play such a key part of your legend? Uh because of the details of my family,
01:36:00 Uh because of the details of my family, the racial characteristics of my family, shall I say? Um,
01:36:07 Um, I want to come on to uh that in a moment, but did did that racial element of your background make you feel that you would have something to talk about, something in common with those that you
01:36:19 something in common with those that you were targeting? No, it was there largely my legend was there to provide some kind of protection to me, but also the fact that my because of the racial makeup of
01:36:30 that my because of the racial makeup of my of my family, my exartner should, for example, if I was out and we a activists had seen me, then I would be able to explain why they may have seen me with a
01:36:41 explain why they may have seen me with a particular person. Um,
01:36:47 and that's because your exartner is of AfroCaribbean of background. Is that right? Yes.
01:36:56 Did you plan to target people of black or Asian uh race as part of your legend as part of your deployment? No, that would never have entered my mind.
01:37:12 Um,
01:37:15 in terms of being tested on your background, uh, I understand you were test on your background by DCI Dell and DS Gilbertson. Yes.
01:37:25 Yes. Was DS Gilbertson in particular interested in this issue of the support role player? My general recollection of DS Gilbertson was that he was not particularly interested in anything to be frank.
01:37:38 interested in anything to be frank. Do you recall him saying to you at the outset of your deployment that nobody came out of the SDS clean? That I do remember. Yes. What did you take from that?
01:37:49 What did you take from that? Well, at the time I would have taken it in relation to crime or to drugs or to drink
01:37:57 drink that you that anyone who undertook SDS in some way, there would be things that you would be doing potentially such as undertaking criminal acts if if required um that you obviously wouldn't do. So if you're a police officer or as a police
01:38:09 you're a police officer or as a police officer rather, did you feel that the SDS was morally and ethically ambiguous given that phrase that he used? Yes, I think there was a liinal space
01:38:22 Yes, I think there was a liinal space that existed.
01:38:26 And what was what do you mean by that? that necessarily because of the nature of the work.
01:38:36 Um going back to this point about uh you raising the issue of uh increased amount of unsolicited advances towards you.
01:38:48 of unsolicited advances towards you. There is a document uh where that is recorded. It's behind tab B126 in bundle four. Sir MPS0749
01:39:00 459
01:39:11 is paragraph four. So this is a
01:39:19 a document specifically about support role players and we can see that during HN18's Rob Harrison's deployment the use of a support role player to play a fictional partner to assist in
01:39:31 fictional partner to assist in deflecting the increasing amount of unsolicited advances from other female activists was considered in December 2005. So that's just over a year after you're deployed.
01:39:43 just over a year after you're deployed. you raised this issue. Well, that would indicate at least give some sense of time in terms of when this issue was raised by me. Okay. So, within the first year, you'd had uh as you say some quite aggressive
01:39:54 had uh as you say some quite aggressive approaches. No, the approaches I described did not all take place within the first year. Some of those took place, one of them at least took place at the very end of my deployment. Okay. So, you're talking about other approaches here.
01:40:06 approaches here. Yes.
01:40:07 Yes. And had you by that point been able to say no and and move on,
01:40:15 move on, it' have been very difficult. But yes,
01:40:22 putting it into context, and we're going to look at the relationship that you had with Maya later on, but is it right that you started
01:40:34 but is it right that you started flirting with Maya in early 2006?
01:40:42 I can't recall the specific dates, but I I accept that I did flirt with her. Okay. Um, on her account that would have been around the beginning of 2006. So, putting that into context with this
01:40:54 putting that into context with this document, you've raised this issue by the end of 2005. You say nothing was done about it. Was there any sense that you needed then
01:41:07 Was there any sense that you needed then to go on and find a girlfriend to deflect other advances? Was it an operational decision to start
01:41:18 Was it an operational decision to start looking for a a a girlfriend in your cover uh identity? Not that I recall. No. No, I don't think it was. Would that have been why a support role
01:41:31 Would that have been why a support role player wasn't provided ultimately? I don't know. To be fair, I don't know why that a support player was not provided.
01:41:40 provided. Was there any sense that using somebody as a a partner, a sexual partner in your cover identity was free
01:41:53 partner in your cover identity was free as opposed to having to pay for a support role player, another officer as you described? No,
01:42:01 No, there wasn't that sense from management that we can't afford it. No, the issue of cost as I recall related to the issue of of the issue as as I described earlier
01:42:12 the issue as as I described earlier related to the uh housing
01:42:17 did it not uh uh filter across the board into other costs? I don't know.
01:42:27 Uh, in terms of finalizing your cover legend, you suggest in your witness statement at paragraph 57 that you spent about six months finalizing your cover
01:42:38 about six months finalizing your cover legend. Would it be fair to say that you spent time in the back office from the beginning of January through to August
01:42:49 beginning of January through to August before being deployed? So, a period of about eight months building your your legend.
01:42:55 legend. Yes.
01:42:56 Yes. And why did it take so long? Not going into any particular details, but in terms of that, that's an extensive period of time building a legend before being deployed. My understanding at the
01:43:07 being deployed. My understanding at the time was that there were issues in getting sign off from the then special branch commander for authorization for my deployment
01:43:19 and that was the only reason is it that I'm aware of stuck in back office during that time in the back office undertaking research making sure that I was happy with um the legend
01:43:31 legend and traveling. Did part of the research involve research into the groups you were going to infiltrate? No.
01:43:41 No. Uh did you do any research into the individuals that you were going to focus on?
01:43:46 on? Because just to add to that, because those questions would have developed organically once the employment began, not prior to for my operation.
01:43:57 not prior to for my operation. Um you touched on the issue of racial harassment that you and your family experienced. Um that was on the 18th of July 2005 or at least that's when we
01:44:08 July 2005 or at least that's when we have a report dated from that time. It's in bundle uh 4 behind tab B129 MPS072
01:44:19 MPS072 9811.
01:44:33 So this is a report we can see by DS Gilbertson of the 18th of July 2005. It's titled a request for temporary
01:44:44 It's titled a request for temporary relocation. But did you actually request temporary relocation? I didn't request it. It was something that was offered to me and my family at the time.
01:44:53 the time. offered by the SDS. Yes.
01:45:04 And ultimately, is it right that you didn't take up that offer? That's correct. Yes. Paragraph two of the detail, we can see uh what appears to have happened uh
01:45:18 appears to have happened uh in relation to this incident. We can see that your partner is of AfroCaribbean origin. Is that right? Sorry, my exartner. Exartner. Sorry.
01:45:32 And that you had two children and that they had been intimidated by white youths. Yes.
01:45:39 Yes. In the area. And had that been something that had happened uh because of who you were or understood because you were understood to be a police officer? I think they may
01:45:50 to be a police officer? I think they may have played a part. Yes. Was there any sense um
01:45:59 that they were aware of you being an officer in the SDS? I don't think it would have been spec as specific as that, but clearly my appearance
01:46:10 appearance uh would have changed and they had seen me previous to that obviously walking back and forth wearing half blues. Was there a sense that the harassment
01:46:21 Was there a sense that the harassment was because of who you were or was it racial harassment against your exartner and children? I think it could have been both. Moving on to page two,
01:46:35 Moving on to page two, paragraph two.
01:46:42 There is reference to this potentially being retaliation following the bombings, the 77 bombings, uh the terrorist bombings in London. Did you get the sense that that was a
01:46:54 Did you get the sense that that was a cause of the harassment? No, that's arrogant nonsense. Okay. You didn't raise that. That's something that the SDS has put in, Gilbertson has put in. I didn't write that. Okay.
01:47:05 Okay. Do you know where Gilbertson may have got that impression from? No.
01:47:10 No. And why do you say that that is nonsense?
01:47:14 nonsense? Because he had that reading that had nothing to do with the circumstances that I was experiencing and my family were experiencing at the time. I don't recall that ever coming up as a question in relation to what was going on at that time.
01:47:29 Um, did you or your family experience race discrimination or or racial harassment outside of this incident
01:47:41 outside of this incident when
01:47:43 when is it something that is has generally been a part of your uh uh adult life? I my experience of racism is rooted in as is something that's been with me since the age of 17.
01:47:56 the age of 17. And because of that, do you feel that you have a good awareness of race discrimination and what that means? I have some awareness of a subjective experience of what racism is and how it
01:48:07 experience of what racism is and how it can manifest. And is that through your own experience and that of your family? Yes.
01:48:15 Yes. Sorry, ex family. Exartner. Exartner. And I feel I need to make that distinction because I'm certain that if you had my exartner here, she'd be very unhappy that she was being referred to as my partner.
01:48:26 as my partner. I apologize. I I I will the the apology is not for me. It's more for the hurt that was caused to my family.
01:48:31 family. I appreciate that and I will I will uh uh
01:48:35 uh uh strive to say ex partner. Um I'd like to ask you about training. It may be a an appropriate point to break now before I go into training. Unless you want to
01:48:47 I go into training. Unless you want to carry on because we had a break earlier in the morning. Let me ask the transcribers, would you like to break now or a little later?
01:48:56 Um h how how long would that be before we have a break?
01:49:03 Um well, I can I can carry on for another 5 10 minutes. Okay, let's do that. Yes. In terms of the training that you received when you joined the SDS, I want to ask you about the uh race
01:49:15 to ask you about the uh race discrimination training that you had. Was there racial awareness training when you joined the MPS in 1995? I certainly recall and I think I make mention this in my statement having to attend a
01:49:27 in my statement having to attend a course delivered at Lewisham and also whilst at Henden there was um I think an afternoon where we had a rabbi attend to speak of uh the issues relating to
01:49:39 speak of uh the issues relating to anti-semitism. Was there also discussion against about racism in South Africa at the same time? That was in relation to a discussion that was raised by a fellow recruit.
01:49:52 that was raised by a fellow recruit. So that was just the general discussion. They raised that in terms of their experience as a white female who had grown up within South Africa. In addition to that, was there a one-day
01:50:03 In addition to that, was there a one-day training on race when you were deployed in Lewisham? That's correct. Yes. That was the mandatory training was it that arose out of the findings of the Steven Lawrence inquiry? I believe so.
01:50:15 I believe so. And was that known as the racial instance awareness course? I believe so. Do you remember the race to succeed video?
01:50:24 video? No.
01:50:27 In terms of that training that you had when based at Lewisham, um you say in your witness statement at paragraph 20 that it addressed the impact of policing on the AfroCaribbean communities in
01:50:39 on the AfroCaribbean communities in London.
01:50:39 London. AfroCaribbean and African. Okay.
01:50:42 Okay. So if we say African diaspora. Okay. And it it addressed their experiences of policing in London. Is that right? Clearly with the death of Steven Lawrence and the impact that had had um
01:50:55 Lawrence and the impact that had had um this would have been would have come out of that.
01:50:58 of that. Okay. And did individuals come into uh the police station and give training about their own experiences in this in this instance? Yes, we had a
01:51:09 in this in this instance? Yes, we had a a AfroCaribbean female came in and related
01:51:13 related her experiences of policing within London and also more generally tied that into historical questions of the relationship that existed between the police and those very same communities
01:51:26 police and those very same communities and did you engage in that training?
01:51:33 I mean my view on that would be that was the training of any use and value to me? No. Because I'd had experiences I was aware of this these questions through my own lived experience.
01:51:46 through my own lived experience. Did the other officers engage in it? Was it a a useful learning experience generally? I would hope so. Was there a vibrant discussion about the issues that were raised? I think
01:51:58 issues that were raised? I think certainly there were there were it I can recall at least there being a discussion in which various opinions were shared. Clearly not everyone agreed with with some of the positions that were being taken.
01:52:09 taken. Was the issue of Islamophobia raised during that training? Not that I recall. No.
01:52:21 in terms of the the attitude towards the finding of institutional racism that uh McF the McFersonen inquiry found. What
01:52:34 McF the McFersonen inquiry found. What was the attitude of your fellow officers in relation to that?
01:52:41 That's a very difficult question to answer.
01:52:45 answer. Um, some were opposed, some refused to accept the findings. Some were highly critical of the political nature of the McFersonen report. Some were very critical of the individuals who'd been called upon to give evidence of them at
01:52:57 called upon to give evidence of them at first and report given their political leanings
01:53:00 leanings and that those questions continue to to uh in some to some account continue to well they continue to be considered and and given uh your uh understanding
01:53:12 and and given uh your uh understanding of race discrimination institutional racism is that something that you would recognize? No.
01:53:20 No. you you wouldn't recognize it or you you know what it is. You just don't think that the the Met was institutionally racist.
01:53:29 racist. I do not accept. I think I I would put I would answer this question this way. I think it needs to be understood how this question arose. I think it needs to be understood the mechanisms of description
01:53:40 understood the mechanisms of description that we used. I think that the question of racism within the police is far more complex.
01:53:46 complex. I'm not denying that racism existed does not exist within the police and did not exist. I I personally subjectively I've often wondered whether the McFersonen report managed to capture the
01:53:57 report managed to capture the complexities of the questions at play. Did you witness racism amongst your colleagues in the police? No.
01:54:07 No. Uh did you so is that in relation to uniformed colleagues or once you were in special branch in non-uniformed colle? Both.
01:54:18 Both. So you didn't see any racism at all? Not that I recall. No. During the course of your uh uh involvement in the MPS? Yeah.
01:54:29 Was there any refresher training for race discrimination? Not that I recall. Um any training upon joining the SPS in 2002?
01:54:41 joining the SPS in 2002? Not that I recall. No. Sorry. The special branch. Um
01:54:46 Um not that recall. No. No.
01:54:48 No. And in terms of when you joined the SDS in 2004?
01:54:52 in 2004? Not that I recall. The training. Um, do you think it would have been useful for there to have been race discrimination training in the in in the uh special branch and
01:55:05 in the in in the uh special branch and in the SDS?
01:55:11 Possibly.
01:55:15 Did you feel personally that there was a sense of an understanding as to race discrimination in the decisions that were made within the SDS and your fellow colleagues?
01:55:26 colleagues? The issue of racial discrimination within SDS never came up as a specific question.
01:55:33 um
01:55:36 your
01:55:40 target group um the ISM when you first entered the ISM, did you get the sense that they were strongly anti-racist?
01:55:53 No. And on what basis do you say that? ISM, as I recall, they occupy a very curious position in terms of their role
01:56:05 their role in relation to Israel and the fact that activists have traveled to Israel and continue to be critical of Israel and the treatment of Palestinians by the Israelis. Clearly, the question of race
01:56:16 Israelis. Clearly, the question of race is a part of that. But are would they be anti-racist in the same way that say the Anti-Racist Alliance might be for example or the Anti-Nazi League? No.
01:56:28 Anti-Nazi League? No. Okay.
01:56:30 Okay. Um,
01:56:35 was there a sense that you had with your own tasking into the ISM that there was a racial element of it that you were looking for Islamic
01:56:48 looking for Islamic uh extremists, for instance, or that you were looking for uh uh uh people related to uh uh the Palestinian
01:56:59 to uh uh the Palestinian uh support effort. I think my recollection is that the concerns that existed were around the question of being able to identify individuals who might use ISM as a mechanism or means to travel to Israel.
01:57:13 mechanism or means to travel to Israel. Was there any unconscious bias in terms of racism looking at that particular group?
01:57:18 group? I wouldn't say so. No. I mean,
01:57:23 I mean, were there any racist assumptions in your tasking to Palestinian support groups?
01:57:29 groups? Not that I'm aware of.
01:57:38 Uh, and in terms of training or guidance given to you in relation to reporting on justice campaigns, was there any racial uh element to that?
01:57:49 uh element to that? No. Was there any training at all into whether you should be reporting or not reporting on family justice campaigns? No.
01:58:02 That might be an appropriate time to break.
01:58:04 break. So,
01:58:05 So, usual 15 minutes. Yes, we'll break for 15 minutes. All right.
02:13:47 Thank you. Uh Mr. Hastings, I'd like to ask you about sex discrimination training now in the SDS. Um was there any training or information
02:14:00 was there any training or information guidance given about sex discrimination? No.
02:14:05 No. At the bi-weekly meetings, was there any reference to uh uh sex at all? No.
02:14:15 No. Any sexist jokes, banter, sexist attitudes that you recall? No. I would say that the
02:14:24 the officers who worked in special branch generally were that was not what they were about. Would
02:14:33 Would you say that having deceitful relationships with women as part of an operation would be seen as sexual discrimination?
02:14:44 seen as sexual discrimination? Possibly. Yes. And so knowing what you know now, would you say that you were actually working amongst
02:14:53 amongst officers who did sexually discriminate against people? possibly
02:15:02 possibly in the sense that you allow therefore by your question the fact of the the issue of a person's sex or gender making them open
02:15:12 open by a member of the opposite sex or gender.
02:15:17 Do you accept that the use of women for operational purposes is discriminatory against women?
02:15:29 Yes. And so in terms of uh the lack of any sex discrimination training, was that a real uh uh lacuna
02:15:43 training, was that a real uh uh lacuna in the training that was provided to undercover officers alongside all the other issues of training that we've identified that didn't take place? So do you think it would have been helpful?
02:15:54 helpful? Possibly. Yes. Um, I don't think I actually asked you. Do you think race discrimination training would have been helpful within the SDS?
02:16:05 Again, the same answer, possibly.
02:16:12 Was there any training that or guidance that could have been given to you to prevent you from having a sexual relationship undercover? I think practical steps would have been
02:16:23 I think practical steps would have been more helpful in terms of providing the cover officer for me and or indeed for other colleagues. Um when you raised the issue in that
02:16:35 Um when you raised the issue in that meeting that you've spoken about and of of
02:16:39 of receiving interest from women in your deployment. Did you who was there? Who were the people that laughed it off? I can't recall specifically who would have been there. It would have been the
02:16:51 have been there. It would have been the people though who most likely were in the office during the time my deployment. So that information of course is available to you. Okay. And because you've said that that is it was one of those general meetings,
02:17:02 is it was one of those general meetings, it would have been the people who were um it was the full uh most likely meeting most likely because of the fact that on those two meetings the expectation was that you needed to
02:17:13 the expectation was that you needed to have a good reason not to be in attendance. So in all likelihood it would be in the people that were in the SDS at the time end of 2005 around that
02:17:25 at the time end of 2005 around that time.
02:17:28 In terms of SDS training in general, do you recall ever being on a training course, a formal course during back office time? I never attended any training nor was I
02:17:39 I never attended any training nor was I offered any.
02:17:45 Can I have up on screen please MPS 000031195.
02:17:54 It's behind tab B36 that's in volume two. Sir,
02:18:00 this is a document with uh Rob Hastings at the top. Uh induction period is stated as being the 5th of January to the 16th of May 2004. target area is the extreme left wing and
02:18:13 target area is the extreme left wing and your handler is Steve Beals. Was that your DS cover officer at the time? No, I believe that my cover officer was Ron Gilbertson.
02:18:28 This document uh looks at various issues that would be covered during a weekby- week program. And as we can see
02:18:39 weekby- week program. And as we can see on this page, we have introduction. So join the SDS introduction and initial briefing by is that Mike Dell and HN53.
02:18:50 briefing by is that Mike Dell and HN53. Does that seem right? You would have had an initial briefing into the STS and you attended field meetings as part of your back office responsibilities.
02:19:01 Tuesday the 6th of January, so second day on tour, you've got a strategy meeting with an with the managers. Do you recall that happening?
02:19:13 you recall that happening? Were you ever part of a strategy meeting?
02:19:19 Not that I recall. Can you recall having any input into the strategy of your deployment? No.
02:19:31 Can we go on to the next page, please?
02:19:38 On Friday the 9th of January, there's another strategy meeting. Are you saying these didn't actually happen? You weren't part of those? I don't recall attending any strategy
02:19:50 I don't recall attending any strategy meetings.
02:19:56 Next p page, please.
02:20:03 Monday the 19th in week three talks about personal and organizational background research. Your evidence so far has been that you didn't conduct any research into the
02:20:15 didn't conduct any research into the groups or the individuals that you were going to target. Is that right? Yes. During this time, the research was very much orientated around the questions of who I was likely to be, how my ledger would be
02:20:26 to be, how my ledger would be constructed, what my ledger would consist of. So, not looking at those uh of who were part of the groups that you were going to be uh reporting on. Not at this stage. No.
02:20:38 Not at this stage. No. Can we move on to the next page, please?
02:20:44 At the bottom of week six, we have a a box that relates to operational briefing with Mike Dell in HM53. Was that something that you recall happening and being part of?
02:20:57 happening and being part of? No.
02:20:59 No. Would that have been any different to a strategy meeting? The suggestion would be by the by the words operation will be more about the actually the how something is done rather than the why something is being
02:21:10 rather than the why something is being done.
02:21:10 done. Okay. I don't recall that taking place. Did you have meetings with uh uh DCI, Dell, and DIHM53 about going into the the field and who
02:21:24 about going into the the field and who you were going to be targeting and why? My recollection is that it was very general. um launching into ISM for example, I think the I remember a conver recalled a conversation with Mike Dell
02:21:36 recalled a conversation with Mike Dell where he indicated that the expectation was my lead my operation would run for between five and seven years and that the area of interest or it would initially be to float and ISM would be
02:21:49 initially be to float and ISM would be would be a first organization that I would initiate contact with but that left open the possibility for there for me to move at a later date And so at what stage did you start researching ISM
02:22:02 what stage did you start researching ISM and the individuals within that group? That would have been after I'd launched. Okay. So you were already in the field by the time you start looking into these groups.
02:22:12 groups. Why didn't you look at that before deploying? Well, as as I would recall, I would have thought that would have been the most appropriate thing to do because clearly you're engaging with the group would have been necessarily part of your
02:22:23 have been necessarily part of your legend. So you wouldn't and also you wouldn't want to go into a group an organization and by way of utterance or by way of action indicate that you know far more about them than you actually do. So that would make operational
02:22:36 do. So that would make operational sense.
02:22:38 sense. How was it you came to be of the view then that ISM was a group that should be infiltrated? I was aware of the fact that
02:22:49 that it had been a group that had been of interest to ES squad at NSY in the past.
02:22:58 And how were you aware of that? Just by virtue of being on the left wing desk.
02:23:03 desk. So you became aware of ISM when you were in C squad. Is that right? In a very general way as a group. Yes. Okay. So they were on your radar not because of uh any targeting by SDS
02:23:18 because of uh any targeting by SDS management but just because you're aware of their their existence. Yeah.
02:23:23 Yeah. In the same way that I'm aware of the revolutionary communist group or the revolutionary communist party all these different things.
02:23:31 And who was it that said you needed to infiltrate the ISM or is that purely something you took upon yourself? I think it could have been a combination
02:23:43 I think it could have been a combination perhaps of both. I don't recall being explicitly told ISM is the group that you need to infiltrate.
02:23:53 Thank you. that document can be taken down
02:23:58 down in terms of policy and guidance and what you were told about uh when you were first part of the SDS at paragraph 16 of your statement you
02:24:09 at paragraph 16 of your statement you relate you refer to a raft of different policies and legal documents which you largely say I cannot remember if I've seen this prior to or at the time of my deployment in the SDS. So as part of the
02:24:22 deployment in the SDS. So as part of the the questions put to you by the UCPI, you were shown all sorts of yes operational guidance and policies and that sort of thing. But there are some policies that you do recall and I want to have a look at
02:24:33 recall and I want to have a look at those if I may. The first one is addressed at paragraph 16.6 of your witness statement and it's the SDS policy guidelines relating to
02:24:44 policy guidelines relating to participation in crime. Yes.
02:24:48 Yes. Uh if we can have up on screen please MPS0748350.
02:24:56 It's in volume 2 behind tab B13.
02:25:03 This is a 1994 document. It's a two-page document
02:25:10 and effectively it's the principles around uh SDS participation in crime.
02:25:19 And do you recall being generally aware of the the principles about when you could participate in crime and when you shouldn't? As a general notion, I was aware of the fact that you should not engage in crime
02:25:30 fact that you should not engage in crime wherever possible.
02:25:34 And and in your statement, you talk about
02:25:38 about minimizing the risk of being involved in criminal activity because of how you say the issues that would arise if arrested in your cover identity. And what did you mean by the issues that would arise?
02:25:50 mean by the issues that would arise? Well,
02:25:50 Well, the issue being that you would have to avoid um being arrested and then you the possible fallout potentially for you being arrested, what would happen then? And largely was that in relation to
02:26:01 And largely was that in relation to maintaining cover? It would have been to maintain cover. And what about the principles of not misleading a a court and that sort of thing?
02:26:09 thing? I don't recall those being discussed. That wasn't the issue. The issue was about breaching cover. Yeah, cover was the most important thing. So,
02:26:19 So, was there any discussion around miscarriages of justice? No, not that I recall.
02:26:27 Was there any sense of the degree to which you could participate in the organization of any potential criminal activity?
02:26:36 activity? I recall a general sense that the idea would be not to to participate as little as possible and wherever possible to avoid actually being arrested and that goes back to your earlier
02:26:47 and that goes back to your earlier question about Asian vocur. The next document that you recall is the tradecraft manual which I think you looked at fairly early on during your time in the back office. If we can have
02:26:59 time in the back office. If we can have up on screen please MPS 0527597
02:27:05 please. It's behind tab B8 of volume two of your bundle sir. And this is a document from around 1990. And you say in your witness statement that you recall two specific parts of
02:27:17 that you recall two specific parts of this manual. The first one being on page 41
02:27:24 41 paragraph 9.2.1. 2.1.
02:27:31 Yeah. Which relates to these questions. Um, in particular, what you recalled was the question, why am I poor? And I think you say that's largely because of the the humor uh involved in these questions.
02:27:45 humor uh involved in these questions. The answer being because you've got used to spending do'H, which you no longer have. And this is post SDS deployment. Is that right? You have either. Yes.
02:27:56 You have either. Yes. Okay.
02:27:57 Okay. And do you recall that uh that well why why did you recall this in particular? Because of the humorous element in it. Whoever wrote that clearly had a sense of humor.
02:28:09 of humor. Was the suggestion that you had a lot more money than you were used to when you were working in the SDS? I think there was a recognition that you would undertake the the job and that there was overtime and you would work hard for it. So yes, there was a
02:28:22 hard for it. So yes, there was a recognition that you will be you'll be paid for it to some degree. And the overtime that you spent during the course of your deployment, was that significant because it made a a
02:28:34 significant because it made a a significant impact on your take-home pay?
02:28:36 pay? I don't recall it being particularly significant to be fair and certainly as the operation went on. Were we fairly recompensed for our work? That's a separate question.
02:28:49 That's a separate question. Do you feel as though you were given everything in my terms of my experience with SDS? No. How much overtime were you doing uh during the course of your deployment?
02:29:01 during the course of your deployment? I think there was a set figure in terms of how much the maximal limit you could actually claim that often bore no resemblance to the work hours that you actually worked. I
02:29:12 work hours that you actually worked. I think the thinking behind it was that at the start of your operation perhaps you would be working less hours or fewer hours in the field and then as you went on and you became more involved with your groups clearly the amount of time
02:29:23 your groups clearly the amount of time that you'll be spending with them would increase. So the thinking that I suspect behind that was that it would even out eventually. Did you consistently hit that upper ceiling of the overtime?
02:29:34 ceiling of the overtime? I believe so. Can we go to page 27 please and paragraph 5.6. Six. This is the section about sexual liaison, which is the other
02:29:46 about sexual liaison, which is the other part of the tradecraftraft manual that sticks in your mind.
02:29:54 Do you recall reading this part of the tradecraftraft manual? Yes.
02:29:59 Yes. In particular, 5.6.3, it says, "While you may try to avoid any sexual encounter, there may come a time when your lack of interest may become suspicious. And in these circumstances,
02:30:11 suspicious. And in these circumstances, you can try to introduce an appropriate male or female from your own relations or friends to meet the weareries on a few occasions. Did you ever consider that as an option?
02:30:22 that as an option? No.
02:30:23 No. Why was that?
02:30:28 I find it odd that they would ask that you would
02:30:31 you would consider introducing one of your own relations into into an operation. That strikes me as being odd and also dangerous to the operation itself and also the individuals who might be involved in that.
02:30:43 involved in that. It goes on to say or ask the office if they can find an XSDS operative to fill such a role and your evidence is you did ask.
02:30:51 ask. I what I said is that I made it clear that I was experiencing approaches. The question as to where a potential cover officer would come would be a matter for the back office to consider and to initiate.
02:31:02 initiate. Did you actually ask the office if they could find you somebody to fulfill such a role?
02:31:07 a role? Not specifically, but as I've indicated earlier, I certainly made them aware of the fact that I was experiencing problems in the field. Did you say I need support? I would have said to them that I was
02:31:19 I would have said to them that I was experiencing approaches from individuals and it was an issue for me, but it didn't go any further than that. As you've seen from the document that you've produced, it appears that this was something that was discussed, but no
02:31:30 was something that was discussed, but no action was taken. I was never given a cover officer. Did you try and chase that up at all with your managers? No, I have no recollection of doing so. You just felt that you were left to your
02:31:41 You just felt that you were left to your own devices? Yes. To deal with any issues that arose. Um,
02:31:48 Um, the tradecraftraft manual goes on to say, "If you have no other option but to become involved with the weary, you should try to have fleeting, disastrous relationships with individuals who are
02:31:59 relationships with individuals who are not important to your sources of information." Um, the way that's worded suggests that there are multiple, it's plural, isn't it? Uh, fleeting, disastrous
02:32:11 it? Uh, fleeting, disastrous relationships with individuals. Was was that the guidance that stuck in your mind as to how you approach this situation? The reason I remember this is because it
02:32:22 The reason I remember this is because it was so much at odds with the performance that I had experienced with the two officers coming to speak to myself and my exartner. So, did you ever raise that conflict and
02:32:34 So, did you ever raise that conflict and try to seek clarity between the two forms of guidance you've been given at the time? No. And I wish I did or had rather. What prevented you from raising it at the time? Possibly the fact that I of this time I
02:32:46 Possibly the fact that I of this time I was concentrating on my operation. Wasn't this part of your operation? Would have been part of the preparation for the operation, but not the operation itself.
02:32:58 Once you are deployed and you say you are approached by females in the field, does that not necessarily become a part of your operational considerations?
02:33:11 of your operational considerations? It's it's very much an active part of of what you're doing. Yes. And at that point, did you start to wonder about what you should be doing?
02:33:23 wonder about what you should be doing? I can't recall doing so at the time.
02:33:32 Was it open to you to seek further clarification as to what is the party line here? What is the the policy? What what are the managers expecting of me?
02:33:44 what are the managers expecting of me? Potentially, yes. But if there's a failing there, it's on me that I didn't actually seek that. Do you consider that as a failing on you because you didn't seek clarity? Or do
02:33:55 because you didn't seek clarity? Or do you consider that a failing on the part of managers because they didn't reinforce and make clear to you? I would my own view on this would be that it's both. I look back upon my
02:34:06 that it's both. I look back upon my career in SDS and I'm aware of my moral and ethical failings. I take full responsibility for those.
02:34:17 Um the suggestion here is that if you have no other option but to become involved and this the sense is that you couldn't say
02:34:28 this the sense is that you couldn't say no, you couldn't be that big boy and say no.
02:34:33 no. Well, no. Because being being, excuse me, forgive me, but being a big boy would also mean potentially having a sexual relationship as much as not having a sexual relationship. Did there ever come a point in your
02:34:44 Did there ever come a point in your whole deployment where that did become an issue that you that you couldn't say no to an advance an advance of sexual interest? I think
02:34:56 an advance of sexual interest? I think as the longer the operation went on, I became aware that it would become harder and harder to to not have a cover officer and to be single and have to constantly try and deflect as best you
02:35:08 constantly try and deflect as best you can or deal with a particular relationship or potential relationship or indications that have been given by an individual that they wish to pursue some form of relationship with you. And although it became quite difficult,
02:35:20 And although it became quite difficult, did you ever get to that stage where you couldn't say no? If you're asking me did I engage in a relationship with Mayer because of the fact that it was operationally necessary to do so. My position on this is is complex.
02:35:35 position on this is is complex. I'm not specifically asking you about Maya at the moment because I understand that you made the advances to Maya. She didn't make the advance to you. Is that is that right? I would see it as being far more
02:35:46 I would see it as being far more organic.
02:35:48 organic. Um, I'm specifically asking you about situations where a woman makes an advance to you where you didn't feel that you were in a position to say no.
02:36:01 that you were in a position to say no. Did that ever arise?
02:36:13 I'm going to say no.
02:36:20 And finally, the the last part of this extract
02:36:24 extract says, "One cannot be involved with a weary in a relationship for any period of time without risking serious consequences." What did you understand from that sentence?
02:36:35 from that sentence? Well, my underlooking it now would say the key word there is weary because that's clearly someone who would have been within a target organization or group. And clearly if you're going to be engaged with a relationship with someone
02:36:46 engaged with a relationship with someone who's a weari there are going to be risks there. So you made the distinction between an activist and a non-activist. I make that distinction now.
02:36:59 Were could there be serious consequences for entering into a relationship in your cover identity with somebody who wasn't as you call a weary
02:37:11 as you call a weary and there be serious consequences both for you as an undercover officer and the woman involved? Well, going back to the description I've already given in relation to the briefing I was given, it was a sexual
02:37:24 briefing I was given, it was a sexual relationship. There was no distinction made by the two officers who visited the home address between an relationship with a weary and a relationship with a for one of a better term a non-weary.
02:37:35 for one of a better term a non-weary. So those two officers, Dell and HN53, they didn't make any distinction at all about sexual relationships, whether that's with an activist or a non-activist
02:37:46 non-activist or a one night stand or a one-year relationship. No,
02:37:51 No, no distinctions at all. No. Um, and was that ever clarified during the time that you were in the SDS?
02:37:59 SDS? Not that I recall. No.
02:38:05 And
02:38:08 this guidance, the one in the tradecraftraft manual, is the one that you chose to abide by, you say? Is that right?
02:38:16 right? It was certainly one that I'd read and was aware of during my deployment. and the sense that um any relationship should be uh uh fleeting.
02:38:29 should be uh uh fleeting. What did you understand from that? Short,
02:38:33 Short, not long term, not long terms. And so are we talking a night, two nights, or what would fall into that category? That would depend on the individuals involved.
02:38:48 What do you mean by that? Well,
02:38:54 for an officer, the relationship, a long-term relationship is going to come with greater risk as it as it continues on. A one night stand potentially is going to have less impact.
02:39:06 We'll come on to your relationship obviously with Maya, but that certainly wasn't fleeting, was it? No. And so even if this were guidance that you should comply with, you
02:39:18 that you should comply with, you breached this guidance. Yeah.
02:39:20 Yeah. Do you accept that? I do. As well as the guidance given to you by the managers. Yes.
02:39:29 Um, in terms of not putting anything in your legend to mitigate against any risk of a sexual
02:39:41 mitigate against any risk of a sexual relationship, was your plan just to wait and see and if you ever came up to this stage of your deployment, you would work out what to do then and there?
02:39:52 out what to do then and there? I didn't have a plan.
02:40:00 Were the managers open to you asking for clarification about what to do in relation to sexual relationships or was it that they were quite closed they
02:40:11 was it that they were quite closed they didn't want to be bothered as you say my impression as I've had is there's the comment by Gilbertson no one comes out of SDS clean beyond that it wasn't any it was not anything that was that was
02:40:23 it was not anything that was that was discussed openly me and I wasn't given any guidance other than as I said to you be beyond the initial visit and then you're then confronted with this after that nothing.
02:40:34 that nothing. We've heard uh that some officers had the sense that there was high maintenance and low maintenance officers. Is that something that you were aware of? No.
02:40:52 I want to ask you about your initial tasking now please. Uh can we have up on screen please MPS 0000311 05.
02:41:05 It's in volume two behind tab B35. This is a document of the 15th of December 2003.
02:41:20 This is a document that was created after the true spies document was aired on TV. Do you do you recall that happening? I have a memory of that doc documentary.
02:41:31 I have a memory of that doc documentary. Yes.
02:41:32 Yes. Um if I can go to page three, please.
02:41:41 Oh,
02:41:49 right. That's not particularly helpful.
02:41:54 Uh, it may be paragraph paragraph three, please, on page one. Sorry. Yes, that is more helpful. Um, the Commonwe SDS on the 5th of January.
02:42:06 the Commonwe SDS on the 5th of January. and be ready for deployment in the early spring. Um to be targeted towards the extreme left complementing coverage of E squad intelligence requirement.
02:42:21 The reference there is to the European Social Forum in London the following year and the G8 summit in Scotland in 2005.
02:42:31 2005. Do you recall that as being your initial targeting? No.
02:42:37 No. Although I will say I did attend the J summit in Scotland. Okay. European social forum. I don't recall attending that. Did you see your deployment as being
02:42:50 Did you see your deployment as being complimentary of the E squad interest? Well, it could be both. Both C squad and obviously E squad. Ha. Have you heard E squad being
02:43:02 Ha. Have you heard E squad being referred to as the black and brown desk? No.
02:43:07 No. Is it right that E squad looked at international uh groups and the east, Middle East, Far East? Yes.
02:43:16 Yes. Although I have to say to make it clear, I didn't work in Equad. So the actual intricacies of their work I wouldn't be aware of.
02:43:24 aware of. Did you have any sense that or did you understand that some of the tasking was coming from E squad? Possibly.
02:43:31 Possibly. You
02:43:31 You I wasn't clear as to where the tasking would come from. It just came and you would then you know if a question came up then you would deal with it. So is it was it your sense that you
02:43:42 So is it was it your sense that you didn't know where the tasking came from and you didn't know where your reporting went to?
02:43:46 went to? No, I had a sense that my reporting went back to New Scotland Yard. Um, and then from once it had got back there, um, having been sanitized, it would then be disseminated as was deemed appropriate by the individuals handling the
02:43:58 by the individuals handling the intelligence. I had no control over where the intelligence went once it had been fed in. In terms of specific questions, can you give examples of the types of questions you might be asked? Well, I can recall,
02:44:09 you might be asked? Well, I can recall, for example, um, at least one meeting where I was presented with an album of photographs and I was asked to identify or provide names to the individuals who had been photographed, presumably by the
02:44:21 had been photographed, presumably by the Ford intelligence teams.
02:44:26 Was part of your tasking verbal or was it written?
02:44:32 as I recall particularly around ISM verbal
02:44:37 verbal and who would that be from your I would imagine that would either have been Mike Dell.
02:44:44 Excuse me a moment.
02:44:53 Possibly HN30. Yeah,
02:44:58 Yeah, possibly
02:45:00 possibly Ron Gilbertson. So your two DS's and the DCI. Yes.
02:45:09 How would that be communicated to you? Just in the meeting I would have been they would have said this is what you need to do. So the weekly meetings that was for you to be debriefed if you like and given
02:45:20 to be debriefed if you like and given further tasking possibly.
02:45:24 possibly. Can we have up on screen please uh UCPI
02:45:31 uh
02:45:35 sorry no I don't need to go to that
02:45:44 what you say I was going to take you to your witness statement but I don't think I do because you've you've covered some of it already in terms of your initial tasking to ISM.
02:45:55 tasking to ISM. Uh
02:45:57 Uh you describe it the verbal tasking as being vague and not comprehensive. Is that right? Yes.
02:46:06 Yes. And the sense that you were floating between target groups. Is that is that how you felt when you were first uh deployed into the field? No, I think the the floating certainly floating yes at
02:46:18 the floating certainly floating yes at the at the early point, but also that description allows for the potential that there could be a change in where you your targeting was directed to.
02:46:30 you your targeting was directed to. Right from the start, was it clear to you that you were to get intelligence on Palestinian Israeli related issues? Broadly, yes.
02:46:41 Broadly, yes. and potentially Islamic ter terrorism if it fell within the purview then yes. Okay. Um
02:46:51 Okay. Um and that was the targeting that was aligned to E squad is it my understanding would be yes.
02:47:00 When you say falls within the purview was it your understanding that that was the interest of es squad that it was Islamic terrorism and the Palestinian Israeli issue? They certainly would have
02:47:11 Israeli issue? They certainly would have had an interest in that area. They they would had a responsibility to monitor events that related to that particular area.
02:47:17 area. And so when you went into the field, that's what you were looking for with ISM. Yes.
02:47:26 Was the interest in Islamic terrorism largely because of 911? I suspect so. I think it probably related the to the fact that special branch had there was a requirement for
02:47:38 branch had there was a requirement for special branch to change and to flex in order to meet what was clearly a a different paradigm.
02:47:48 um when you go out into the field and you're looking for uh evidence or intelligence about Islamic terrorism,
02:48:00 intelligence about Islamic terrorism, um
02:48:03 do you quickly become alive to the fact that that isn't the purpose or the the focus of ISM or how did you feel about that element of your tasking, the
02:48:14 that element of your tasking, the Islamic terrorism element? I would have at the time I would have reported on anything or anyone that had come across that potentially intersected with that or I viewed as being part of that and
02:48:25 or I viewed as being part of that and then would have reported it back to um NSY.
02:48:31 Uh were you ever able to find any evidence of Islamic terrorism through ISM?
02:48:41 I am aware that there were two individuals who had previously been linked to ISM and had traveled out to um Palestine, Israel. Um
02:48:54 Palestine, Israel. Um and they had been involved or at least one of them involved in an act of terrorism. And is that the one instance? No, that was that occurred prior to my joining ISM.
02:49:07 joining ISM. Okay. We can have a look at that in more detail. But just in general, your sense of being deployed into ISM, was it a source of intelligence in that area or
02:49:18 source of intelligence in that area or did you quickly become alive to the fact that you weren't getting anything in relation to that topic? Not initially, no. There was there at least initially there was nothing that I could see that related to to that
02:49:29 could see that related to to that specific issue. There were individuals who occasionally expressed solidarity with
02:49:35 with with groups that have a very particular agenda within the um within that that area of the world. In terms of the Palestinian Israeli
02:49:47 In terms of the Palestinian Israeli related issues, was it apparent that the ISM group of activists were supporting and defending Palestinians in their in their homes?
02:49:58 their homes? I well I my view of ISM was that it was a a group or my view came to be of ISM that it was a group that
02:50:12 I questioned the actual value of the support that they feel that they were able to supply to the Palestinian cause
02:50:22 and there's also the issue that you have race you've mentioned racism racism I think might also play a part within this in the sense that you have Europeans traveling to a different
02:50:33 Europeans traveling to a different theater and perhaps their very whiteness being used as a defense or a potential defense against against the aggression of the Israelis and the IDF.
02:50:45 So was there any sense of the Palestinian Israeli issue that ISM were dealing with that would have been of interest to special branch
02:50:56 interest to special branch potentially in terms of individuals who might utilize ISM to then travel to the occupied territories Palestine and Israel. There is going to be an issue there because you don't know who they are. And it's worth remembering as well,
02:51:07 are. And it's worth remembering as well, as far as I'm aware, the ISM did not have the ability, did not have techniques available to it to fully vet individuals who might then use it as a channel to travel to that area of the
02:51:18 channel to travel to that area of the world. The risk then obviously exists to both ISM, but also to the area to which they're traveling, but also to the UK. And and was there any sense that the individuals who were traveling as part
02:51:30 individuals who were traveling as part of ISM were doing anything other than as their
02:51:36 their Their objective objectives would be to uh support Palestinians in their homeland.
02:51:46 Not as far as I'm aware. Did you ever get information or intelligence from other sources uh
02:51:57 uh regarding ISM?
02:52:01 Were you fed intelligence at all about people within your group or about their objectives? No.
02:52:14 Um, you talked before about a change in tasking during the course of your deployment. Do you recall whether it was HN72 or HN30?
02:52:27 So that's the DI HN72 and the DS HN30. I believe it was the HN72 who said that ISM was no longer a
02:52:38 who said that ISM was no longer a sufficient primary target. Yes. And directed me to widen outward away from ISM to leftwing more
02:52:49 outward away from ISM to leftwing more anarchist groups. Was it HN72 that said use ISM as a jumpoff point or implied that?
02:52:58 that? That would have been earlier. That would have been Mike Dell. Okay. So Mike Dell suggested that ISM should be a jump off point to long term
02:53:08 long term could be a potential join point. It could potentially be a jumpoff point but would obviously be a useful point to establish your initial identity and legitimacy and authenticity within the environs of activism.
02:53:21 environs of activism. So a bit of a stepping stone into another area of interest potentially. Yes. But there was obvious crossover because of the nature of the individuals who were involved.
02:53:35 And whilst you were there in ISM, it was worth reporting on the ISM activities all the same. Was it even though potentially they were just a stepping stone to continue report on them with because
02:53:46 to continue report on them with because of the risk of the fact of the risk that you may have had individuals who would be traveling through as I've already said who might have traveled to the occupied territories Israel Palestine um we would need to know who they were
02:53:57 we would need to know who they were would like to know who they were what they were up to what they were doing who they were in contact with what was the purpose of their trip was there a particular reason why they would be using ISM as a vehicle to go there
02:54:08 using ISM as a vehicle to go there did you ever pick up on any sense of there being something more sinister than the open uh approach to going out to stand in solidarity with people and help protect.
02:54:19 help protect. I don't know if I would necessarily describe as open. I remember a training day where I had a squat where I arrived on the second day to be confronted by a door that had been blocked and someone saying to me, "What is the purpose of your visit to Israel?"
02:54:31 your visit to Israel?" So they were clearly aware of the fact that they that there were potential issues with with individuals traveling to Israel and they were clearly aware of the fact that there was likely to be some form of that the interaction with the Israeli
02:54:43 that the interaction with the Israeli authorities might not be positive.
02:54:47 You continue to report on ISM through to the end of your deployment essentially in lesser uh uh uh uh volume. Is that right?
02:54:57 right? That's correct. Yes. And so did you tend to report
02:55:02 to report on whichever groups had the activities going on? Was it direct dictated by whatever the groups were doing? Maintain an operational watching brief and then as and when specific events
02:55:15 and then as and when specific events arose then report on those. Was it ever directed by special branch and what they saw coming up further down the line? It could have been, but that
02:55:26 the line? It could have been, but that would have been part of a a strategy and that would have been communicated to me only verbally. Was there ever any sense that you need to stop reporting on ISM now?
02:55:37 to stop reporting on ISM now? Concentrate on these other I was never asked to stop reporting on ISM.
02:55:44 In terms of being a bit of a a floating uh uh deployment to start with, were you personally responsible for who you targeted?
02:55:56 targeted? Other than the advice that was given that I would be out for five, seven years.
02:56:01 years. Just on that in terms of the seven years, did that seem like a long time to you? Was that an unusually long period to be? At the time that was said to me, I would not have been aware what a
02:56:12 I would not have been aware what a standard expectation would have been in terms of deployment, whether it be three years, four years, 5 years, six years, seven years. I wouldn't have known.
02:56:22 Um, so say for that roving brief to go into London and try and find information that would be of interest in those main categories. Yes. The Palestinian Israeli
02:56:34 categories. Yes. The Palestinian Israeli and the Islamic terrorism. Yes. Was that seen as one and the same thing or quite different? I think it would have been seen that there was a relationship, a potential relationship at least between the two given the fact that the location of
02:56:45 given the fact that the location of Israel obviously and the fact of its importance um
02:56:51 um to Muslims worldwide and not directed towards any individual in particular.
02:57:02 Was it your understanding that the purpose of your deployment was not to detect crime and disorder but to concentrate on intelligence gathering?
02:57:15 gathering? I think the distinction perhaps I would draw out there would be that disorder can also encompass public order. So that would have been something that I would have reported on if I was involved on that. But certainly the generally understanding that I had was that there
02:57:27 understanding that I had was that there was an understanding that we were not reporting in such a way that we would be in court or would be expected to appear in court. We were intelligence gatherers. We were not reporting as UCOs in the crime world might do with the
02:57:38 in the crime world might do with the with the with the the view to obtaining a prosecution or putting the question of a prosecution before a court. In terms of that intelligence,
02:57:49 In terms of that intelligence, we've heard some evidence that you just hoovering up any information you come across, but did you have a sense that there was a intel that would be useful for detecting
02:58:01 intel that would be useful for detecting crime and disorder? It was in intelligence related to that particular point of your deployment as opposed to any information.
02:58:13 any information. disorder would have been would have been a concern to me because of the fact of protest. Um, beyond that, crime was not a was not a concern. That was not something that I was expected to report on.
02:58:24 on. So, you were reporting on any information that you had that could lead to potential disorder. Disorder would have been part of that. But then you've also got to consider the question of general intelligence. Who
02:58:36 question of general intelligence. Who are the individuals? What are they doing? What are their inter relationships? What are their interests? And that part of your intelligence gathering was very broad, was it? Yes.
02:58:49 Yes. And I think you you you you say that you didn't have any guidance in terms of how broad that element of your no data gathering should be. No, it was it was it a sort of covert
02:59:01 No, it was it was it a sort of covert human intelligence listening device might be how you would describe SDS officers.
02:59:09 Can we have up on screen please MPS 0004113.
02:59:21 This is a report in volume two behind tab B43.
02:59:28 It's a document from the 2nd of March 2005
02:59:32 2005 concerning your value to sea squad. the uh initials up at the top of the page being common wheel and that was your code name. Is that right?
02:59:43 that right? Yes.
02:59:49 So the three bullet points in particular say that you've provided intelligence on the ISM whose actions have embarrassed the embarrassed the UK government and
03:00:00 the embarrassed the UK government and drawn on the resources of police in London and the UK. Um, was that something that you were aware of? It was the I didn't write this. I didn't write
03:00:11 I didn't write this. I didn't write this.
03:00:12 this. That's not a sense of the benefits of your deployment. I provided intelligence. I didn't write this document. Uh, the second bullet point says that the reporting on the ISM has been passed
03:00:24 the reporting on the ISM has been passed to the security services. Were you aware that it was being passed to the security services?
03:00:28 services? No. As I said earlier, once the intelligence has been passed on, where it was disseminated was not within my gift.
03:00:39 The third bullet point says that Commonwe reporting has enabled police to proportionately control public order situations at legitimate business interests, particularly M&S and Caterpillar. Those were two uh companies
03:00:52 Caterpillar. Those were two uh companies that were
03:00:55 that were targeted if you like for protest because of their involvement in Israel. Is that right?
03:00:59 right? I didn't write this report so I can't comment on that. Was there any sense that you had that any of your information was being used for informing businesses as to what the
03:01:12 for informing businesses as to what the ISM? Well, I I simply say this once my int again I make the point once the intelligence had been submitted wherever it was disseminated to was I had no control over that whatsoever. I would not have been involved in the decision-m
03:01:24 not have been involved in the decision-m process or decisions as to this needs x this amount of information needs to go there.
03:01:37 DCI Mike Dell in his witness statement, I'm not going to bring it up, but it's at paragraph 350 states that your tasking did not lack purpose and was informed by the
03:01:49 purpose and was informed by the intelligence requirements of our customers in the usual way. Did DCI Dell discuss with you what that might be or you have no idea? I can't comment on that.
03:02:04 your sense of the purpose of your operation. Did that change at all during the course of your deployment or were you quite clear that you were still reporting on ISM because of its role in
03:02:17 reporting on ISM because of its role in Palestinian territory? There were differences between the groups that I reported on but at the same time it's worth remembering that you are dealing with individuals who again they exist in a liinal space. They will they will operate and function and
03:02:29 will they will operate and function and be attracted to a particular group and that may change
03:02:36 I want to look at your authorizations under reaper, the regulation of investigatory powers act. There are two essential composites of uh authorizations
03:02:48 of uh authorizations and they're in dockets. MPS I'm not going to uh uh bring both of them up, but the first one is MPS0526805
03:02:59 behind tab B32. That's a 79 page docket from which looks at reporting from the 23rd of August
03:03:10 at reporting from the 23rd of August 2004 to the 22nd of August 2006. And the other is behind tab B54 in bundle three which is MPS052
03:03:23 6935 which is a 238 page composite looking at authorizations from the 21st of November
03:03:34 authorizations from the 21st of November 2005 to the end of your deployment.
03:03:41 Is it right that you had not seen any of the Reaper authorizations? I wouldn't have been shown them.
03:03:51 And did you have any sense that uh you were able to feed into those authorizations or was there any discussion around them at all? I don't recall being asked to provide
03:04:02 I don't recall being asked to provide justification or information that would go in that process. Okay.
03:04:09 Looking at the first one behind tab B32, MPS0526805.
03:04:18 The first authorization of your deployment starts at page 73, please. Page 73 to 79.
03:04:30 And the sign off date of this is the 24th of August, 2004.
03:04:38 So we can see this is an authorization. The grounds for the justification we can see in box C. Can you see that? Yeah.
03:04:53 So this is for the early detection of individuals on the left wing who seek an outlet for their commitment in support for those active in the areas of terrorism of concern to E squad.
03:05:08 Did you have the sense that you that's what you were looking for? People who were supporting terrorist acts potentially, but I didn't write this document.
03:05:18 document. The second bullet point says for the prevention of public disorder in the NPS area by extreme left-wing activists, including members of Globalized Resistance and other allied groupings.
03:05:31 Resistance and other allied groupings. Globalized resistance. Was that ever part of your deployment? No, I would challenge this. I'm aware that Globalized Resistance has featured on more than one occasion on documents that apparently relate to my deployment.
03:05:42 that apparently relate to my deployment. I I I don't recall ever being tasked to report on Globalized Resistance. That has been covered by another officer. So, you didn't ever try and infiltrate globalized resistance.
03:05:53 globalized resistance. There was no there was no need for me. That had already been covered by another officer.
03:05:59 officer. Um, paragraph three for the early detection of attempts by those same individuals and groups to subvert legitimate forms of protest.
03:06:10 legitimate forms of protest. Did you have a sense that you were looking for people subverting legitimate forms of protest?
03:06:18 I can think of a specific example where two individuals decided it would be fun to jump across a barrier and then run towards Tony Blair with the explicit intention of of potentially uh engaging
03:06:30 intention of of potentially uh engaging with him. That would be an example where is that is that legitimate protest? That's a question to consider. But in terms of that being a an objective of your deployment, is that
03:06:42 objective of your deployment, is that the sort of thing you were looking out for? I think within the realms of protest, you would certainly be mindful of the fact as to were there in any individuals there who would seek to push protest in a particular direction or
03:06:53 protest in a particular direction or might act in a particular way within a protest in a way that others might not choose to.
03:07:02 In terms of extreme left-wing activists or putting globalization, globalized resistance to one side, did you consider ISM to be extreme leftwing?
03:07:15 ISM to be extreme leftwing? I I would regard ISM as being defined more by the area of interest, less by the politics of the individual members. Did you have the sense that they were extreme in their ideology or their
03:07:29 extreme in their ideology or their activities? Again,
03:07:32 Again, my my concern with ISM was the potential as to what they were likely potentially and unwittingly u making possible in facilitating people to travel out to those territories. So you were looking
03:07:44 those territories. So you were looking out for individuals joining the group who were going to use ISM as a vehicle to commit serious crime or potentially good to go and protest um
03:07:58 or potentially good to go and protest um in the occupied territories Palestine, Israel with the attendant risk that obviously came with that as we saw with some of the individuals who who were involved in this in and of itself. There was no uh
03:08:10 in and of itself. There was no uh illegitimate act being undertaken by those within ISM simply by going out to Israel and Palestine, was there? Not necessarily. But that's not to say that they may not engage in acts once
03:08:22 that they may not engage in acts once they were within that arena. And the type of act that they were engaging in, did you ever come across anything that was suspicious or illegal? I never visited the occupied territories
03:08:34 I never visited the occupied territories or isra Palestine, so I can't comment. But in terms of the intelligence you were able to gather, was there anything that suggested people in ISM were doing anything illegal?
03:08:47 anything illegal? No.
03:08:51 We look at page 74 of this authorization, please.
03:09:02 And box one, please.
03:09:13 Uh this first item,
03:09:18 item, your subsequent tasking is seen to will be to seek to determine if there is a threat to public safety from such individuals.
03:09:31 from such individuals. um
03:09:33 um seeking to support terrorism, however, peripherilally. Is that what you you're talking about? That there might be somebody on the periphery of the groups that you're targeting who might be
03:09:44 that you're targeting who might be seeking to support terrorism. That's what you
03:09:46 what you for ISM. Yes.
03:09:56 And the second one, the second item you're saying that doesn't really relate to you, say for the G8 uh meeting.
03:10:06 Public order was certainly a part of my deployment. Globalized resistance, as I've already said, were not part of my deployment. Public order, I was certainly involved in things that
03:10:17 certainly involved in things that involved,
03:10:19 involved, should we say, breaches of public order. Can we have a look at box four, please?
03:10:27 Can we have the whole line?
03:10:32 So, consideration is being given to any adverse impact.
03:10:41 He says there's minimal support for the activities of extreme left-wing organizations amongst the community as a whole.
03:10:48 whole. Um, and it's unlikely therefore that the use of you as a source or information produced by you would have any degree of adverse impact on community confidence.
03:10:59 adverse impact on community confidence. Is that something that arose post the true spies documentary that there wasn't really any sense of um outrage from the
03:11:10 really any sense of um outrage from the community, from the public at large about uh infiltration of leftwing groups? I can't I didn't write this and I would say the most important word there is community. What do you mean by
03:11:21 there is community. What do you mean by community? Who are they referring to? Is there a single thing as a community or communities? Do you think it would have been useful for you to have a look at this authorization document to understand
03:11:33 authorization document to understand your deployment and the objectives of your deployment more clearly or do you think it just doesn't really relate particularly well to your deployment at all? I think there's there is some there is a relationship but I didn't write
03:11:45 is a relationship but I didn't write this document so I have no idea what was intended by the person who wrote it.
03:11:51 Was there any sense that you had that you were helping to protect the general public from extremists
03:12:04 potentially? In what way? in the sense that you will always you will have individuals who protest and they and it depend again is the where do you put the line for extremism. For some people extremism
03:12:17 extremism. For some people extremism would be seen to people run towards Tony Blair with the intention of harassing him.
03:12:23 him. Those definitions are are you know they shift.
03:12:27 shift. Box five please.
03:12:34 in terms of those who you were reporting on and this is looking at collateral intrusion
03:12:41 again it's referring to globalized resistance and I understand you didn't infiltrate that group it says only information regarding those involved in such activity will be sought
03:12:52 involved in such activity will be sought and actioned and it it's referring to people who are involved in public disorder or unlawful direct action when you're in ISM M
03:13:04 when you're in ISM M you reported on a number of different people and we'll have a look at the reports but uh this suggests that you are very much focused upon only individuals who are involved in public
03:13:15 individuals who are involved in public disorder or unlawful direct action. Did you know did you have any idea that you should only be focusing on those people not on the general membership of a group? didn't write this document and I
03:13:27 group? didn't write this document and I think we can clearly see that that last line perhaps or that general tenor of that does not apply to ISM because they weren't involved in public disorder or unlawful direct action.
03:13:40 disorder or unlawful direct action. Not whilst I was with them. No.
03:13:45 Can we have a look at page 75 please? And the legal risks.
03:13:54 So under this subheading the legal risks and considerations
03:14:01 the second paragraph says that the officer is the subject of comprehensive codes of conduct relating to the use of each element of their covert identity. Um did DCI Dell discuss with you the
03:14:14 Um did DCI Dell discuss with you the codes of conduct? No.
03:14:17 No. When you joined the MPS you would have been aware of the codes of conduct of police officers. Is that right? broadly. Were you aware of the special branch codes of conduct when you joined special
03:14:29 codes of conduct when you joined special branch?
03:14:30 branch? No.
03:14:31 No. Were you aware of any codes of conduct specifically relating to SDS officers?
03:14:40 Can we bring up please MPS07
03:14:45 29815?
03:14:58 So this is the special branch officers code of conduct for undercover officers. Um,
03:15:08 Um, paragraph one, two, and three are of interest. If you just want to refresh your memory about that.
03:15:30 Okay. So the sense that even though you're undercover in a different identity, you're still bound by the rules and and code of conduct of police officers in in
03:15:41 code of conduct of police officers in in as far as possible and the general purpose and values of policing generally. Yes. Did you understand that to be true? In general terms, yes.
03:15:53 In general terms, yes. And did you understand that you weren't to uh use the logistics of the SDS uh operation other than in direct
03:16:04 uh operation other than in direct support of your operation? Yes.
03:16:10 And can we can see uh on page two that you've signed that. Do you remember sign reading this and signing it? I don't remember reading signed. No. But do you accept that you have signed it and that you would have been aware of
03:16:22 it and that you would have been aware of it? I accept that I have signed something that has been presented to me for signature. Would you have read it before signing it?
03:16:29 it? I would I would expect so hope so. And so that principle that you are still a police officer, albeit in a different identity, you're bound by the code of conduct.
03:16:42 bound by the code of conduct. Chry. Yes.
03:16:46 Can we go back to MPS0526805
03:16:52 please? This is the composite of authorization documents at page 75.
03:17:03 So this is going back to your initial authorization under Reaper
03:17:12 and it's paragraph three under the legal risks and considerations.
03:17:30 The last sentence of paragraph three. They, meaning you, the officer, are aware that the scrutiny and control exercised by me and my staff is
03:17:41 exercised by me and my staff is immeasurably greater than that achievable by the most dedicated of source units.
03:17:50 This is something that's uh signed off by DCI Dell. Did you have the sense that you were operating under immense scrutiny and control by those in the
03:18:01 scrutiny and control by those in the back office? I would say no. But at the same time, they had access to our mobile phones and every all those other bits and pieces if they wanted to. They could have
03:18:12 they wanted to. They could have undertaken um they could they could they could have scrutinized us at any time if they chose to. So they had access to your mobile phones. Did they have access to emails?
03:18:24 phones. Did they have access to emails? I don't believe so.
03:18:28 They didn't have access to any computer equipment that you had. I don't believe so. That's not to say it would not have been possible.
03:18:38 possible. Save for looking at your uh mobile phone. Did they ask questions about where you were, who you were with, what you were doing? No.
03:18:47 No. On a daily basis? No. Only Oh, however, sorry, allow me to correct myself. Um there was an expectation that we would call into the office twice a day and you might be asked general questions. What are you doing? What are you up to? Anything
03:18:59 doing? What are you up to? Anything going on?
03:19:00 going on? Okay. Um and it was down to you to discuss as much as you wanted about your Yeah.
03:19:07 Yeah. uh deployment. Any particularly scrutinizing questions that you were asked?
03:19:14 asked? None that I can recall. Did it feel like you were calling in because somebody in back office was monitoring you and asking searching questions about your deployment?
03:19:25 deployment? No.
03:19:30 So is this true then that you were subject to scrutiny uh by back office? I could have been. I don't know if I was but I could have been. From your
03:19:42 but I could have been. From your understanding, from your awareness, there wasn't an awful lot of searching uh uh scrutiny. That's correct. Unless they were looking at your mobile phone
03:19:51 phone or anything else they wish to look at.
03:20:05 Further up, the second sentence in that paragraph, they are aware of the precise limits of this authorization and are in are subject to detailed briefing on their legal obligations at each new turn
03:20:17 their legal obligations at each new turn in their operation.
03:20:20 Was that right? I don't recall that at all. Were you aware of the legal limits of your deployment? I do not recall there being
03:20:31 I do not recall there being given to me or communicated to me at any time.
03:20:49 Can we have a look at the next section down please?
03:20:59 Um page 76 please. moral considerations.
03:21:16 In terms of the moral considerations, did you feel as though your betrayal of those whom you had befriended
03:21:27 befriended was actually outweighed by the requirements of the deployment?
03:21:34 Sorry, could you ask me that again please?
03:21:36 please? Um, in terms of the moral considerations that you had, did you feel that there was any challenge around betraying those that you had become close to that those
03:21:48 that you had become close to that those that you had betrayed through friendship that was outweighed by the need of your operation? Yes. You were satisfied that the need of your operation outweighed any betrayal
03:22:01 your operation outweighed any betrayal at the time? Yes. But I would say that subsequent to my deployment and afterwards less so
03:22:07 less so less so. So with hindsight, do you think that
03:22:13 the extent of your betrayal is probably not warranted? I think with no what I would say is with hindsight the impact of spying on people
03:22:25 is immense and the feeling of betrayal that you hold particularly around people that you considered to be your close friends and people that you developed close genuine attachments to and felt to
03:22:39 close genuine attachments to and felt to be your friends genuinely and that is something that I still struggle with. Did that bear on your psychology
03:22:50 Did that bear on your psychology at the time? Perhaps not to the extent that it should have done because I perhaps didn't understand quite was being asked of me.
03:23:06 Um, can we go to page 77, please?
03:23:13 Paragraph two.
03:23:17 two and three please.
03:23:21 So authority was granted for common wheel
03:23:27 um in light of the fact that the UK is facing a severe general level of threat from international terrorism.
03:23:44 It says that by developing an extremist pedigree in the extreme left wing, the source, that being you, will be used to identify potential links or roots to
03:23:55 identify potential links or roots to supporting terrorism. Now, this is what you've described. Um, is that what you were trying to build an extremist pedigree in the
03:24:06 build an extremist pedigree in the extreme left wing? or did you see it slightly differently? I would see it as by developing a a pedigree in the activist community of which ISM was a part
03:24:26 and at the bottom of paragraph three
03:24:31 again it goes back to saying the source and the controller will discuss the detail of the codes that those being the codes of conduct the discipline codes and sign in acknowledgement
03:24:44 and that use does not include tasking to participate in crime. Such tasking must be the subject of a separate application. So was it that you understood that you could go into the uh
03:24:57 understood that you could go into the uh the groups but you weren't allowed to participate in any criminal activity unless you got separate authorization. More generally, it would have been that I was to avoid participating in criminal activity to to the best of my ability.
03:25:14 So, that might be a time to break for lunch.
03:25:16 lunch. Indeed. Um, we will resume a minute or so before 5 so that everyone has an hour.