Roger Geffen provides evidence on his background as an environmental activist, his involvement with the London Cycling Campaign and Reclaim the Streets (RTS), and the philosophy of non-violent direct action. He discusses the impact of government road-building programs in the early 1990s and the role of civil disobedience in achieving environmental victories.
00:29:52 Good morning everybody. Uh this morning's proceedings are going to be uh livereamed but only after a 10-minute delay after the uh uh events that are
00:30:03 delay after the uh uh events that are being described. Uh those with um uh mobile devices may use them to transmit to the outside world what they have heard in the proceedings but only after
00:30:14 heard in the proceedings but only after 10 minutes have elapsed since the event that they're describing. They may not be used for recording or photography. Yes. Can the witness be sworn please? Thank you
00:30:27 please. I do solemnly, sincerely, and truly
00:30:30 truly I do solemnly, sincerely, and truly declare and affirm declare and affirm that the evidence I shall give that the evidence I shall give shall be the truth shall be the truth the whole truth the whole truth and nothing but the truth
00:30:41 and nothing but the truth and nothing but the truth.
00:30:45 Yes. Good morning, Mr. Geffen. Thank you for attending today to give evidence to the inquiry.
00:30:56 evidence to the inquiry. I will try to keep my questions short and simple, but if you do need me to repeat anything or clarify anything, please just say so.
00:31:07 please just say so. Again, if you feel the need to have a break at any time, we will accommodate that. In any event, there will be a break after one and a half hours.
00:31:17 Could we have up on screen please document UCPI 508772?
00:31:24 508772? That's 38772. It's tab A1 of Mr. Gan's bundle.
00:31:32 Mr. Gin, you gave a signed witness statement to the inquiry dated 17th September, 2025. Is that correct? Yes.
00:31:39 Yes. Do you recognize the document on screen? Yes.
00:31:41 Yes. Is this your witness statement? Yes.
00:31:44 Yes. Could we go to the final page, please?
00:31:52 Is that your signature? Um it's I'm sure that that the original was my signature. I've got a a mark over it, but um yes, I'm sure I do remember signing that document. Yes.
00:32:03 Yes. I'm grateful. And can you confirm that the contents of your witness statement are true and correct? Yes.
00:32:11 Yes. To the best of your knowledge. Yes.
00:32:13 Yes. That puts the whole of your witness statement into evidence. Thank you. I want to show a second witness statement as well. Could we take that down please and put up UCPI 5038295?
00:32:27 That's 38295. That's tab A1 of the RTS bundle.
00:32:38 Mr. Geffin, you were also a contributor to the Reclaim the Streets Group witness statement. Is that correct? Yes.
00:32:44 Yes. And do you recognize the document on screen?
00:32:46 screen? Yes.
00:32:47 Yes. Is this the RTS witness statement? Yes. And if we could also go to the final page of this document, please. Again, um well, your name appears there. Mhm.
00:32:57 Mhm. But can you confirm that you signed this document?
00:32:59 document? I signed that statement. Yes. And can you confirm that the contents of this witness statement is true and correct to the best of your knowledge and belief? Yes.
00:33:06 Yes. Thank you. That puts the whole of this witness statement into evidence as well. to give you an indication of the areas of the questions I will be covering. They will include your background, how
00:33:19 They will include your background, how you became involved in activism, the main groups you were involved in, in particular reclaim the streets, I'll be referring to that as RTS, the aims and the philosophies of these
00:33:31 the aims and the philosophies of these groups,
00:33:32 groups, their key activities and and your role within them. any knowledge you may have of undercover officers, the key ones being HN14 Jim Boiling and
00:33:43 the key ones being HN14 Jim Boiling and HN 100 Mark Kennedy and their roles and activities within RTS and other groups. We will look at the reports that they produced.
00:33:55 produced. I will then move on to speak a little bit about
00:33:59 bit about the occasions or some of the occasions where you were arrested and the circumstances of various legal proceedings.
00:34:08 I will ask your personal views on key topics such as public disorder and breaking the law. And finally, I will ask you about the impact on you of
00:34:20 ask you about the impact on you of the undercover policing. If we may start with your background following your graduation from university, is it true that becoming an environmental activist was not something
00:34:31 environmental activist was not something you had actually planned to do? That is true. And what was your initial plan after university? I was uh I'd uh studied a music degree and I started work well firstly in a
00:34:42 and I started work well firstly in a classical record shop and then with a classical um record company where I was a a record producer. And what shifted that changed your path? Um it was really how I started traveling
00:34:54 Um it was really how I started traveling when I start when I first moved back to London after um uh after university and I took up cycling not because I'd thought about green issues at all but because I wanted to save money. it um frankly it was may felt slightly
00:35:06 frankly it was may felt slightly eccentric. There were fewer people cycling in London at that time. Um but in the course of taking up cycling uh I realized that I was overtaking a lot of people in metal boxes. I was doing something far more sensible that would
00:35:17 something far more sensible that would you know if um anyway I coming came across the London cycling campaign that made sense. I was in London. I was cycling. I could see why you want might might want to campaign for it. Um and
00:35:28 might want to campaign for it. Um and that led me to um to well two things that are relevant here um through my LCC background. One was that I was campaigning for cycle facilities on Waterloo Bridge because Westminster City
00:35:40 Waterloo Bridge because Westminster City Council at that time was obstructing the idea of a London cycle network from the center of London and also as um where I was living in southeast London I was close to Oxley's Wood where there was a threat of road scheme at that time. And
00:35:53 threat of road scheme at that time. And you started, you were working at London Cycling Campaign, the LCC in 1988. Is that correct? Correct.
00:36:00 Correct. And shortly after you started, you did some volunteer work for them. Yes. Is that correct? What did that entail?
00:36:07 entail? Uh, a number of things. I was uh I particularly took on a role uh coordinating campaigning to to deal with Westmin City Council who, as I say, were obstructing the idea of a London cycle network. Um, and particularly to get
00:36:18 network. Um, and particularly to get involved in pressing for cycle facilities on Waterloo Bridge. Um but also I was involved in the local group who were very concerned about the threat of a road scheme through Oxley's wood which was only um an 8,000 year old
00:36:29 which was only um an 8,000 year old ancient woodland only about two miles from where I was living. Um this was at an interesting time in environmental politics because the year after I got involved in London cycling campaign 1989 this was the year that that climate
00:36:40 this was the year that that climate change really first um uh came into public consciousness when the then prime minister went Margaret Thatcher went to the United Nations summit and declared that as a scientist she was she was
00:36:52 that as a scientist she was she was convinced of the need to take action on climate change but her government then announced what they called the biggest road building program since the Romans and one uh and one of the road one of those road schemes was just near my patch.
00:37:03 patch. And at some point you made the decision to get involved in direct action. Yes. Um I think the the first point of
00:37:14 Yes. Um I think the the first point of point of contact with direct action was when a phone call came into the London Cycling Campaign office and I just happened to be there at the time. It was from a a group that was just setting up called Reclaim the Streets Action Network. They had those extra two me
00:37:27 Network. They had those extra two me words on the name at the time and they were planning to do a sitdown blockade on waterl bridge. So um the call was passed to me. I thought this sounds interesting. I went along and met some
00:37:38 interesting. I went along and met some people who whose you know perspective on life would would change mine fundamentally. I I came I went along to that first blockade act reclaim the first reclaim the streets first blockade
00:37:49 first reclaim the streets first blockade action on Mortly Bridge. I didn't sit down and and and risk arrest. I wasn't ready for that at that stage, but I was starting to form connections. Thank you. I will get to the Waterloop um bridge um uh action uh shortly just
00:38:03 um bridge um uh action uh shortly just before I do before
00:38:06 before you joined or you had the meeting where you you joined reclaim the streets. Mhm.
00:38:11 Mhm. Can we just take a step back? um when you decided to join or get involved in direct action, what was your understanding then as to what direct action meant doing and
00:38:23 what direct action meant doing and actually getting involved in on the ground?
00:38:26 ground? Um it meant um I suppose when you know the system uh the system that of democracy and you know public input and all the rest of it breaks down and you
00:38:37 all the rest of it breaks down and you fail to get your message through and you just have to um effectively take take action directly to confront the causes of the problem to highlight
00:38:48 the causes of the problem to highlight the problem to confront it directly um and and thus push for a resolution of it. You know, I was, you know, we then during my time at London cycling campaign, we held workshops around
00:38:59 campaign, we held workshops around exactly this sort of stuff introduced to the sort of concepts of Gandian direct action where um you you you look to conf uh confront the the root causes of the
00:39:11 uh confront the the root causes of the problem directly in order to push for resolution. And did you consider to what extent at this early stage you were prepared to go to achieve either your own or your group's objectives?
00:39:22 own or your group's objectives? That that changed over time. As I say, my my first arrest came quite a little while uh quite a bit later. Good, you know, um 6 months into the camp uh the direct action campaign at Twifford Down,
00:39:34 direct action campaign at Twifford Down, which was the the first of those road schemes from the government's major road build road building program. The first to take the first to go into the direct action phase. I started going with others from the London cycling campaign
00:39:45 others from the London cycling campaign largely to try and understand what I thought we were going to have to deal with in my own backyard at Oxley's wood. Uh now Triford Down the direct action campaign was so effective that the government decided there was no way they were going to get to build the road
00:39:57 were going to get to build the road scheme through Oxley's wood and they dropped it. So um trifford down ended up being a noisy defeat for the direct action movement and Oxley's wood became one of the first of a large number of quiet victories for the direct action
00:40:08 quiet victories for the direct action movement. I will get to the Twoer Down and the Oasis Wooden in in due course. Um, at this stage we're still looking at your thought processes before you
00:40:21 your thought processes before you decided to go down the direct action route.
00:40:24 route. Mhm.
00:40:24 Mhm. And
00:40:26 And my question was what you were actually thinking about getting involved and whether you had given any consideration to, for example, breaking the law if necessary at that early stage.
00:40:39 early stage. I think I realized I', you know, I'd seen the the the film Gandhi in earlier in my teens and you I the idea was there that there are times when you do need to
00:40:50 that there are times when you do need to break the law in order for justice to prevail.
00:40:52 prevail. And what was your view again at this early stage on the use of violence to meet the objectives of a direct action? I was very much against it. And did that view ever change?
00:41:04 And did that view ever change? No.
00:41:05 No. You went on to get involved in various environmental groups over the next few years. Um, some more than others. We'll be covering some of these. In 2015,
00:41:17 be covering some of these. In 2015, you were awarded an MBE for services to cycling. Is that correct? Correct.
00:41:20 Correct. Yes.
00:41:21 Yes. Right.
00:41:22 Right. Can we now go on to Sorry, just just if I may on that. Um I I always saw um direct action as a necessary complement to more conventional ways of campaigning
00:41:34 to more conventional ways of campaigning and I've continued to make a career in more conventional ways of campaigning as you say leading to uh to the ward of NMBB. I worked for uh I I reverted to um having started with cycle campaigning. I later worked in it professionally for
00:41:46 later worked in it professionally for cycling UK which is originally known as CTC or the cyclist Touring Club and I worked there for over 20 years and that is where my MBE came from. Um, in that context, I was very much campaigning for
00:41:57 context, I was very much campaigning for proper enforcement of things like road traffic law. So, I've always seen uh direct action and uh more mainstream campaigning as as complimentary rather than one or the other. Thank you. I've just been given a note.
00:42:08 Thank you. I've just been given a note. Um, if I could ask you to to slow down um when you speak a little bit. Thank you very much. Thank you. The reason I'm sure you understand is that shortand writers have to try and
00:42:19 that shortand writers have to try and take down what you say and if you speak too fast, it's simply not possible. Okay, the transcript is getting behind me. Is it all right? Sorry about that. Thank you. I'd like to move on now to
00:42:32 Thank you. I'd like to move on now to talk about your first involvement with Reclaim the Streets, RTS, and you already touched upon this earlier. Um, this is in early 1992.
00:42:43 earlier. Um, this is in early 1992. A phone call came in to the LCC office where you were working and it
00:42:49 and it I wasn't working. I just happened to be in the office. I was a volunteer but and therefore I was not normally in the office. By coincidence I happened to be in the office that day. Certainly you were in the you were in the office.
00:43:02 Who was the phone call from? Uh
00:43:06 Uh without mentioning any names. All right. It was from one of the people who was co-ounding Reclaim the Streets. someone who had already um who was already under bail conditions not to go
00:43:17 already under bail conditions not to go back to uh uh Twifford down and was therefore keen to kind of uh develop if you like a a wider alternative to you know in complement to the road protest
00:43:28 know in complement to the road protest to raise wider issues about the over dominance of motor motor traffic hence reclaimed streets and
00:43:36 and the message was passed on to you can you think of a reason why they would want to speak to you in particular at this stage As I say, because one of the one of the things that I was focused on in my London cycling campaigning role was
00:43:47 London cycling campaigning role was cycle lanes on Waterloo Bridge because Westminster City C it it epitomized the fact that Westminster City Council were being so obstructive to the idea of a London cycle network. And
00:43:59 And can you tell us briefly what happened as a result of this request? So I uh I went along to a meeting at the London Green Peace Office um in North London near
00:44:12 Peace Office um in North London near King's Cross where I met some people whose perspectives would fundamentally change mine. Um I um I went along to the
00:44:23 change mine. Um I um I went along to the Waterl Bridge um occ uh occupation action but didn't sit down and and face arrest at that time. But I um it was at around that time that I left my job. uh
00:44:35 around that time that I left my job. uh with um the record company that I was doing record producing with and I uh effectively filled what was originally an unwanted v void in my time um supporting reclaim the streets action
00:44:46 supporting reclaim the streets action network particularly in organizing minibuses to take people down to Twford down
00:44:51 down thank you um I will get to Twifford down um in due course can I just take you a step back
00:44:58 step back um so you met these people and then you became part of the early setup of RTS Yes. Is that correct? Yes. I was effectively I was spending some time in the reclaim the streets
00:45:10 some time in the reclaim the streets office which was in a in a building in uh in Brixton that had once been the dollhouse where John Major used to sign on when he was an unemployed lad. And at this early stage
00:45:23 And at this early stage and in this early incarnation of RTS, what was your specific role? I didn't really have a specific role. Um I got involved in you know we we held
00:45:34 I got involved in you know we we held regular meetings to plan um various things we did. We uh we we we went and did a little action at the first the Birmingham Motor Show one year
00:45:45 first the Birmingham Motor Show one year and the um London Motor Show another year where we kind of hung banners and somebody um got in on a costume and pretended to be a supermodel except that he was male um in the slinky costume on
00:45:56 he was male um in the slinky costume on the top of a car really to highlight the problems of you know car consumerism and um uh and you know the whole uh motoring industry advertising a fantasy a very
00:46:07 industry advertising a fantasy a very environmentally damaging fantasy. So, we we did those things. We edited some car uh car posters. We painted in some cycle lanes that Lambeath Council hadn't gotten around to finding the paint for.
00:46:18 gotten around to finding the paint for. So, we did it for them. These were little examples of um you know, the kind of non-violent direct action that you know dealing with a problem very directly by taking action ourselves and taking taking responsibility for it.
00:46:31 taking taking responsibility for it. Now, moving on to the Waterloop Bridge blockade. This took place on the 15th of March 1992. Is that right? Correct. And you've already said you participated in that. Yes.
00:46:40 Yes. This was RTS's first action. Yes.
00:46:44 Yes. What was the reason behind this action? If you could just tell us briefly what the rationale and why you did it. Um from reclaim the streets point of view it was as I say from my interest was the specific point about water water
00:46:55 was the specific point about water water bridge cycle lanes but from reclaiming the streets is a wider point of view. It was a excuse me a first action to highlight um the problems of a society
00:47:06 highlight um the problems of a society that is over dominated by you know dependence on motor vehicles and lacks uh sustainable um sustainable transport alternatives to enable people to get around without depending on motor vehicles. Um alternatives that would be
00:47:19 vehicles. Um alternatives that would be better for our health, better for our air quality, better for our climate, better for social justice, better in so many ways. And yet uh the motor manufacturers sell us this dream that we all have to depend on our cars and you
00:47:30 all have to depend on our cars and you know that's and so much about how the government spends its transport budget is contingent on perpetuating car culture rather than providing the alternatives and you participated in this um this
00:47:44 and you participated in this um this action. What was the result of the action? What happened? Um a few people got arrested. I don't think it had huge impact, but it um you
00:47:55 think it had huge impact, but it um you know it I suppose the main thing it did is it advertised the existence of reclaim the streets to people who were potentially interested in in in joining in. I can't say that that first action
00:48:06 in. I can't say that that first action really did more than that. Um but you know it it um yeah it it um yeah it it it uh it it it marked us out as we're here um and invite effectively
00:48:18 as we're here um and invite effectively invited people to join in. I think we would, you know, pe people would love to to have had more impact than that, but that's that's as far as I can honestly say that it really went in practice. Did you get arrested?
00:48:29 Did you get arrested? No. As I say, I didn't sit down. I didn't feel ready to to to go as far as being arrested at that time. I wasn't ready for it. I was still new to the whole idea of taking direct action. I was convinced of the theory, but I
00:48:40 was convinced of the theory, but I wasn't ready for it in practice. I was still in employment and all the rest of it. So, I uh I I held off at that stage. But the attitude towards getting arrested would change over time. Yes, I at that, you know, throughout I
00:48:53 Yes, I at that, you know, throughout I would have preferred to being able to take action in ways that didn't involve getting arrested, but eventually I found myself in a situation where I get got arrested even though I didn't want to. And having kind of broken through that
00:49:04 And having kind of broken through that glass glass barrier, um, you know, I realized that the world hadn't ended. Um, I had and I I felt proud of what I had done. But that's trifford down. You you said you were going to come to that.
00:49:16 you said you were going to come to that. Yes.
00:49:17 Yes. Um, and you continued after the Waterloo Bridge, okay, action to be involved with RTS.
00:49:24 RTS. Sorry,
00:49:25 Sorry, you continue to be involved with RTS after the Waterloo Bridge. As I say, uh, those those various actions of the motor shows um, uh, cycle lanes and and car posters, but then also this point about organizing minibuses to
00:49:37 this point about organizing minibuses to enable more people from London to travel to Triford down. Yes.
00:49:40 Yes. To to take to take part in the action there.
00:49:43 there. Well, let me ask you a few questions about Triford Down. This was um first of all, you got involved in the direct action at Twifford Down. Yes, sir.
00:49:53 Yes, sir. This was in December 1992. Is that correct? Around then. December was when I first visited the um the the little protest camp at Twifford Down where um some people were living on
00:50:04 Down where um some people were living on the land that you know on the on on the on the chalk downland that was to be destroyed for that road scheme. Um, I just went and visited the protest camp at that stage before it really went into into the direct action phase. There had
00:50:17 into the direct action phase. There had actually been a an earlier direct action phase in spring92 that I'd not been involved in. I hadn't even known about it at the time. Um, where um people took action to prevent the destruction of the
00:50:28 action to prevent the destruction of the water meadows. Um, what was happening here was that the M3 had been built from London to just short of Winchester and then from just beyond Winchester to Southampton. But um it in between was a
00:50:41 Southampton. But um it in between was a missing you know traffic bottleneck that had been fairly deliberately created to to to create the need for the missing link to be filled in through a a a particularly environmentally sensitive area and uh the camp was on some this
00:50:55 area and uh the camp was on some this wonderful land that was due to be destroyed. Um Mr. Gon I've been asked again if you could slow down please just a little bit. Um
00:51:05 bit. Um another point if you could as much as you can um keep your answers slightly briefer that would be that would be helpful. Um I will guide you to the topics which you
00:51:18 will guide you to the topics which you are talking about. Okay. Um you will have a chance to speak on on on the topics that you want to speak about. Um but if you could wait until I get to those stages that would be that would be great. Thank you so much.
00:51:32 your involvement with the tri down was that through RTS? Yes, I was organizing um with others. I was organizing minibuses to take people we uh from London to triford down. We
00:51:43 we uh from London to triford down. We were advertising those through the uh through the contact list we had through the reclaim the streets contact list we had which was predominantly a Londonbased group and uh yeah we were arranging for people to get to Twifford
00:51:54 arranging for people to get to Twifford down to take part in the action there. And was that the extent of your involvement um at Twifford Down? Yes. I mean well I I did also um take part in the actions there as well as
00:52:06 part in the actions there as well as organizing transport for to get people there. Yes. I want to ask you about an injunction by the department for trans transport regarding the um the twifer down action.
00:52:18 regarding the um the twifer down action. This is set out in paragraph 33 of your statement. And sometime in 1993, the government and specifically the Secretary of State for Transport obtained an injunction
00:52:30 obtained an injunction as well as a civil claim for for damages against a large number of activists. Were you one of those? No.
00:52:37 Can you recall what the nature of those breaches were? Can I recall? Can you recall what the nature of the breaches were that under the injunction? the the terms of the injunction roughly
00:52:48 the the terms of the injunction roughly were to not trespass on the on the work site. Um the um the Secretary of State for Transport uh this was in in the days before the Criminal Justice Act created the offense of aggravated trespass. Um
00:53:00 the offense of aggravated trespass. Um so um the the uh the Secretary of State resorted to civil action seeking an injunction to say I'm I the Secretary of State suffering losses. it's costing me
00:53:11 State suffering losses. it's costing me extra money to uh because of all the delays caused by the protests and therefore it was an injunction to not go on the work site um in in anticipation of a civil claim for damages that uh was
00:53:23 of a civil claim for damages that uh was never in never ultimately pursued. An injunction is a tool parties can use to seek redress or protection under the law. Do you agree with that?
00:53:35 law. Do you agree with that? Do I
00:53:35 Do I do you agree? Do you accept that? That's my understanding of Yes. of the legal position. Yes. Do you believe that this particular injunction was justified? Justified? Uh I understand its legal
00:53:47 Justified? Uh I understand its legal justification, but I also believe that it was within the philosophy of direct action. This was um this was one of those laws that needed to be broken in order to highlight the fact that the
00:53:59 order to highlight the fact that the permission to grant the road in the first place, steamrolling the the permission for the for the for the road scheme through the public inquiry process that the p that the public inquiry process was so fundamentally not
00:54:10 inquiry process was so fundamentally not um
00:54:12 um not designed to to provide the answer that the government wanted i.e to build a road that it was justified in breaking breaking the law to defy that injunction. And it was and it um
00:54:23 injunction. And it was and it um achieved as it it ultimately achieved its objective in that other road schemes got cancelled because of the power of protest.
00:54:32 protest. Notwithstanding its justification or lack thereof looking back now. Mhm.
00:54:38 Mhm. Do you have any thoughts on how the government might have obtained the evidence of these breaches to enable it to get an injunction? Well, yes. We we know that they employed a private detectives agency, BRA
00:54:51 a private detectives agency, BRA detective agency um and they were videoing and filming and taking notes of uh with the action file numbers of the various people who were regularly seen to be protesting. But I do also wonder
00:55:04 to be protesting. But I do also wonder whether um undercover police officers were also involved in that. um not least because it um not only did uh did my name appear on the consulting
00:55:15 name appear on the consulting association's blacklist or green list um and I do wonder how that happened but I also now know from the evidence that was disclosed to me as part of this inquiry that a special branch file was opened up
00:55:27 that a special branch file was opened up and the the the n the numerical reference to my special branch file suggests it was opened in 1993 which means it presumably was either during Twford down or the early days of the No M no M11 link campaign.
00:55:41 M no M11 link campaign. I therefore do wonder what what role undercover police officers may have played in that. We do know that Andy Davyy was spying on uh first and some reclaim the streets. I wasn't disclosed that. I wish I had been. Um but I I I
00:55:55 that. I wish I had been. Um but I I I would really urge the inquiry to look into whether undercover officers were playing roles either in feeding information to the consulting association or indeed where is where is the contents of my special branch file.
00:56:06 the contents of my special branch file. I did ask to see the contents of that as other many other participants in this inquiry have done and I was shown nothing.
00:56:13 nothing. Thank you. Uh Mr. Kein, you will have an opportunity um at the end of my questions to to raise whatever topics you wish about what the
00:56:24 whatever topics you wish about what the inquiry what you feel the inquiry should be looking at. Um until that point, if you could stick to simply answering my questions, I'd be grateful. Thank you. I want to take you to state a statement paragraph paragraph 163 of your
00:56:37 paragraph paragraph 163 of your statement which says that on the whole you believe in the law. Is that correct?
00:56:46 Yes. I I as I say I I do not believe I believe that the rule of law is is an important principle but I also believe and I do not believe there is a
00:56:57 and I do not believe there is a contradiction that there are times when when the rule and the process of law and of public inquiries ultimately fails and that bad laws sometimes need to be broken and that this is this is if you like the the kind of Gandian principle
00:57:10 like the the kind of Gandian principle that there comes a point where if the justice system is failing then you have to take you have to take personal account uh take take personal action to try and correct to correct the system um
00:57:21 try and correct to correct the system um because it is it is far from perfect. Going back to the um injunction again without mentioning any names, an acquaintance of yours whose name I won't mention deliberately breached the
00:57:33 mention deliberately breached the injunction by participating in a major trespass action just two days later. Were you aware of this? Yes.
00:57:39 Yes. And were you aware that this person and others went to prison for this? Yes, I got involved in in um various activities to publicize the fact that
00:57:51 activities to publicize the fact that they were in prison um and you know uh and and indeed to uh make him um make sure that they got plenty of publicity when they were released from prison. Ironically, on the day that the
00:58:03 Ironically, on the day that the government announced that it was speeding up the public inquiry process to give people even less right to object to road schemes, it was ironic that that happened on the very same day that my friends were coming out of prison. Did
00:58:14 friends were coming out of prison. Did you support your friend's action at that time?
00:58:16 time? Yes, absolutely. I believed that what they would there was there was a wonderful quote uh when those six people appealed against their sentence for
00:58:28 appealed against their sentence for breaking the injunction. Uh it was before Lord Justice Hoffman and he came out with a wonderful quote that really influenced that really kind of solidified my own understanding of what I doing what I was doing. He talked
00:58:39 I doing what I was doing. He talked about the honorable uh tradition of civil disobedience in this country and he added and that those may who take part in it may be vindicated by history and that that I think really crystall
00:58:50 and that that I think really crystall you know it wasn't my words but I think that very much crystallizes the philosophy that led me to do what I was doing.
00:58:58 How do you reconcile your position that you believe in the law while supporting at the same time what is criminal in this case imprisonable behavior
00:59:11 imprisonable behavior at that time what what those six people were doing was not criminal. They were they were imprisoned for contempt of court which was was civil. Um so yeah I
00:59:22 court which was was civil. Um so yeah I was as I say I was there was a later point which sorry I'm jumping ahead again h but I I where I was caught in a later injunction where I very point I was very pointantly made the point that
00:59:33 was very pointantly made the point that I had not broken the criminal law in you know in a good couple of years of taking direct action. Um but I do reconcile um the idea that you can believe in the in
00:59:44 the idea that you can believe in the in the rule of law whilst also believing in the need to to break the law whether criminal or civil in on occasion exactly because of that point that Lord Lord Hoffman made so so eloquently
00:59:57 Hoffman made so so eloquently and
01:00:00 and is it correct that shortly after the injunction breaking action the government abandoned plans to build the East London and river crossing through Oxus Wood. Absolutely. And for me that was a real
01:00:12 Absolutely. And for me that was a real vindication of everything that the wider movement that I was now part of had done at twifer down that it had highlighted the sheer injustice of not just that one road scheme but road schemes in general.
01:00:25 road scheme but road schemes in general. Within a couple of years, the government had abandoned a good twothirds of its uh of that that largest building road building program since the Romans that they they try trumpeted in 1989. By
01:00:39 they they try trumpeted in 1989. By 1996, most of it was gone. Mr. Gibb, may I ask you again if you could keep your answers slightly brief, please? Thank you. Can you think of a reason why they abandoned the plans for
01:00:52 reason why they abandoned the plans for Oxus Wood? I think the government had realized that if we were able to mobilize such an effective direct action movement and gain so much public support for what we were saying and what we were doing in uh
01:01:05 were saying and what we were doing in uh rural Winchester, then our movement was going to be so much stronger within London, close to the media in you know uh in whopping um
01:01:16 the media in you know uh in whopping um and within the M25 which people had witnessed being built only over the previous decade and which had immediately filled up with traffic and therefore or Londoners were generally ahead of the rest of the country in
01:01:27 ahead of the rest of the country in understanding that new road building doesn't resolve traffic problems. It just worsens them by creating extra extra traffic. It it creates more space for more for more new development road
01:01:39 for more for more new development road de roadbased new development and that therefore road building in in general was a bad idea not just the road scheme at twford down.
01:01:50 So moving on, is it correct that RTS temporarily paused in around the summer of 1993?
01:01:57 of 1993? Yes. Um yeah. Can you tell us briefly why? Well um there had been three road schemes that had sort of risen to the you know um to the to the forefront of
01:02:09 you know um to the to the forefront of people's consciousness you know awareness of the problems with road schemes because uh one of them was trifford down the other uh one was Triford, one was Oxley Wood, the third was the the M11 link road. Um they had in all three cases the local campaign
01:02:22 in all three cases the local campaign groups who'd been opposing the road scheme those road schemes through public inquiries for many years had brought complaints to the European Union for breach of uh regulations around environmental impact assessment. Um the
01:02:35 environmental impact assessment. Um the the uh the M11 link road was if you like the Cinderella of the three. Uh unlike Twifford Dan which was through an ancient um uh through the edge of a national parks two special sites sites
01:02:47 national parks two special sites sites of special scientific interest scheduled ancient monuments um Oxy's wood and 8,000-y old ancient woodland. The M11 road link road by comparison was 350 homes that had been sort of left to fall
01:03:00 homes that had been sort of left to fall apart ever since the government had compulsory purchased many of them back in the 1960s. And therefore it was sort of the the Cinderella of the three and yet it ended up being the most powerful of the protests.
01:03:15 So sorry you your question was about why did we pause reclaim the streets? um because the because we saw the need to um galvanize the protest around this Cinderella once the Oxley road scheme
01:03:27 Cinderella once the Oxley road scheme had been dropped which we had previously been gearing up for. We therefore decided let's focus on the no M11 um which moved the debate on in many ways and therefore reclaim the streets had to
01:03:38 and therefore reclaim the streets had to be had to be put on put on ice. We didn't know that we would revive it later.
01:03:42 later. Yes. And it would be revived in in um in late '9495. Right. Well, we'll return to that second incarnation of RTS, but before
01:03:51 before we do, can I ask you a few questions about the no M11 link campaign, please? Uh, were you involved in this campaign? Yes.
01:03:59 Yes. And was this through RTS? Uh, yes. It was very much through the through the contact network that had formed from Reclaim the Streets. who were effectively a a Londonbased network
01:04:11 were effectively a a Londonbased network of people who were concerned about road building and wanted to support the alternatives. Here was a road scheme. We felt we needed to focus on on on that. Um that was the the urgent issue in
01:04:23 Um that was the the urgent issue in front of us. And was Earth first involved as well? Yes, the uh these things are fluid. Earth first had been a very prominent sort of identity at Twifford Down. Um it
01:04:37 sort of identity at Twifford Down. Um it was less so at uh the NM1 we kind of it wasn't a conscious decision you know people would show up with our first banners or first t-shirts and whatever but we very much um you know built the
01:04:50 but we very much um you know built the campaign on the back of the local campaign that we called ourselves the no1 link campaign um and in some ways the whole point about the the no1 link campaign was that it moved the debate
01:05:03 campaign was that it moved the debate about you know what's wrong with road building from it destroys beautiful landscapes and shed and ancient woodlands to it destroys homes and communities, causes air pollution and you know uh causes
01:05:16 air pollution and you know uh causes climate change. So um we were but there was very much this social dimension of the destruction of communities that hadn't been there in either Oxleywood or Triford Dam. Can I just ask you um a little bit about
01:05:28 Can I just ask you um a little bit about Earth First? What was your involvement in Earth First specifically? Um, reclaim the streets was effectively a sort of an offshoot of Earth First. Earth First had initially well it was
01:05:41 Earth First had initially well it was brought um it was brought from the United States where there was there were a lot of campaigning around logging. Uh some of the early Earth first actions that before I got involved in it in sort
01:05:52 that before I got involved in it in sort of 1991 in the UK were also around logging. Um it it ended up you know um coming to prominence by its involvement in in Twifford Down. Um so and um that
01:06:04 in in Twifford Down. Um so and um that office in uh John Major's dollhouse in Brixton was effectively a shared office between Earth First and Reclaim the Streets. There was there was um a lot of fluid back fluidity as to who was who is
01:06:16 fluid back fluidity as to who was who is what depending on what we were doing whether doing things around logging or whether we were doing things around cars and roads. If we were doing things around cars and roads we're more likely to say this is reclaim the streets. But who who was what who was you know
01:06:28 who who was what who was you know wearing what hat didn't greatly matter at that time. Did you have group meetings? Yes.
01:06:37 Yes. And were these open meetings or were they closed meetings? They were open. Can you explain how they worked please? Uh I think at that time we were meeting reg uh weekly. I know that I've got
01:06:49 reg uh weekly. I know that I've got notes that I took of some of those meetings. Um I I believe that uh there has been disclosure of Andy Davyy having been at some of those meetings that I
01:07:00 been at some of those meetings that I didn't see that disclosure myself but yes we had open meetings and if obviously we we were a very small network with no publicity budget so we had you know we were reliant on informal
01:07:11 had you know we were reliant on informal networks to get the word out as to who we were what we were doing. Um but uh yeah we were any anybody who came across one of our leaflets or phoned up they were welcome to come to our meetings.
01:07:23 were welcome to come to our meetings. So at this stage you were an amalgamated group as such between RTS and Earth first.
01:07:29 first. So there was something I missed. At this stage you were an amalgamated group. So there was RTS, there was Earth first. You were working together.
01:07:37 together. They were there were there were overlaps um between both what they stood for and who was involved in them. Yes. Some people focus more on earth first, some people focus more on reclaim the streets, but the boundaries were not
01:07:48 streets, but the boundaries were not were not hard and fast. There was a clear overlap. And looking at both groups or what if it was one group in its entirety? Mhm.
01:07:58 Mhm. What would you say was the attitude towards violence, criminal? At first had a very clear principle of nonviolence. Um, you know, it it was uh
01:08:09 nonviolence. Um, you know, it it was uh the the the sort of phrase that was used was no compromise in defense of mother earth, no violence to to to to people or or living creatures. I I can't I may not have got that precisely right, but those
01:08:21 have got that precisely right, but those two things that the no compromise but no violence were seen as like ab those were the guiding principles. And you drafted press releases and publicity leaflets. Is that correct?
01:08:33 publicity leaflets. Is that correct? Yes, I was um helping to put out reclaim the streets newsletters to advertise the opportunities to take take part in the various actions we organized. Sorry, when I talked about the reclaim the
01:08:44 when I talked about the reclaim the streets actions, I forgot I forgot about one where we um uh got a clapped out old car, stripped it of its engine to make it easy to pull down Park Lane and um
01:08:55 it easy to pull down Park Lane and um and then uh you know in front of all the car showrooms on Park Lane. Um and then had a poetry reading of poems about uh poems by a poet called um Heathk Williams called and we had a sort of
01:09:08 Williams called and we had a sort of ritual ceremonial destruction of the car which symbolized what we what we stood for in front of all those car showrooms. Can I take and so we were advertising the fact that you know the opportunity to take part in things like that as well as come down to
01:09:20 things like that as well as come down to trier down on our mini buses. Can I take you to one of the um the leaflets for the campaign against the M11 link road? If we could have up on screen please UCPI
01:09:31 UCPI 438784
01:09:35 and that's at tab A19 of Mr. Gffin's bundle. Sir, do you recall this? Yes.
01:09:44 Yes. And did you produce this? No, but I know you did. And it appears to be a call to action for a specific date. 22nd of January. Is that 1994? That would be 1994. Yes.
01:09:55 That would be 1994. Yes. And what was being planned for this day? Do you remember?
01:10:01 Um, I'm now trying to remember. I
01:10:08 I I think that we were having a rally that day. There may well have been, you know, if there it was similar, it was probably similar to what we were doing at um at
01:10:19 similar to what we were doing at um at Twford Down, which was if they're working, we will stop them. If they're not, we will start repairing some homes. We this was at that stage in the campaign. Um
01:10:30 campaign. Um the
01:10:32 the the sweet chestnut tree, you may want to take me to the sweet chestnut tree on on G on uh on George Green had been destroyed. We were that at that stage uh planning to defend four beautiful homes
01:10:44 planning to defend four beautiful homes next to George Green in onestead which we declared to be oneonia the independent free area of oneonia and uh so if there wasn't work to be stopped we were more likely to say now come and
01:10:55 were more likely to say now come and help do some work to repair these homes prep make uh make uh prepare the defenses because we knew that the the the government's baiffs and uh destruction company were going to come
01:11:07 destruction company were going to come along and destroy those homes. they did in fact do so uh almost exactly a month later. So we were probably you know gathering more hands to to help defend those those those homes is what I think
01:11:19 those those those homes is what I think we were probably doing. I can't remember absolutely clearly but that's what I think we were doing. Thank you Mr. G. May I ask you again please simply to keep your answers brief um and simply to answer my my questions. I will get to the um to those points.
01:11:31 I will get to the um to those points. You will have an opportunity to just come out speak about them. That's just come out of sequence but fair enough.
01:11:40 Is this typical of the nature and tone of pamphlets produced for other events? Yes.
01:11:47 Yes. And to whom and how were the pamphlets distributed? Uh
01:11:54 Uh we had a mailing list which was growing quite rapidly by this stage largely off the back of that chestnut tree action that I mentioned. Um so um yeah we were
01:12:06 that I mentioned. Um so um yeah we were doing regular mailouts. This was obviously in the days before most people had email, social media. We we stuffed a lot of envelopes in those days. Did you ever consider when producing these pamphlets and and distributing
01:12:18 these pamphlets and and distributing them that it might attract activists of a more militant persuasion of a
01:12:24 of a militant and violent persuasion to get involved? Yes, we've no there was always that slight risk, but I never felt it was a
01:12:35 slight risk, but I never felt it was a serious risk. Um, we had a very strong commitment to nonviolence, so anybody who breached it would stand out a mile and we would, you know, not not defend
01:12:46 and we would, you know, not not defend them at all. Uh, it never happened. There's always people talk about this fear. So, of course, we discussed what would we do if that ever happened, but it never did.
01:12:57 Can we take that document down, please? And if we could get up on screen, UCPI 438785.
01:13:06 That's 38785. And that's at tab A20. Sir, during the course of the M11 campaign, you were arrested on more than one
01:13:18 you were arrested on more than one occasion. Is that correct? Uh, I can't remember that. Yes. I think there were at least four occasions. I think it was more than that. There were four that I documented in this. Yeah. Yes. I want to take you to a few of
01:13:29 Yes. I want to take you to a few of them. The first one I want to take you to is your arrest on the 18th of October 1993.
01:13:35 1993. Is it correct that this led you to be eventually charged with obstruction of the highway?
01:13:43 Uh
01:13:46 yes, that is just re reminding myself by reading it. Yes, that is what I was charged with. Can you again summarize for us very briefly what happened on that day that led to your arrest?
01:14:00 that day that led to your arrest? As I recall, this was um this was an instant where um the where is this?
01:14:11 We were walking to and fro on the public highway. Um there were two lorries trying to get into a work site. Um, we were walking along the
01:14:22 were walking along the highway across the driveway. Um, the police tried um tried to claim that I was obstructing the highway because my foot had landed on the carriageway. Um, I don't believe it had, but that was
01:14:35 I don't believe it had, but that was their pretext for arresting me. Could we go to the bottom of page two of the document, please? And there's an addendum at the end of that page where you claim you were
01:14:46 that page where you claim you were wrongfully arrested. I'll just read it out. Having been tried and found not guilty in Redbridge Mag's court on a charge of obstruction of the highway arising from this incident, I maintained that I was wrongfully
01:14:57 maintained that I was wrongfully arrested, the arresting officer one, had no reason to believe that my presence amounted to an obstruction, two, made no attempt to caution me, and three, made no attempt to establish my identity before arresting me for a nonarrestable
01:15:09 before arresting me for a nonarrestable offense.
01:15:13 Can you think of any reason why the police arrested you despite your compliance with their request? Despite
01:15:18 Despite your compliance with their request to get off the the highway? I think they simply wanted to be on the side of building the road. Um they, you
01:15:30 side of building the road. Um they, you know, we
01:15:34 Yeah, I I I I don't think that they had a legitimate basis for arresting me. As I say, I think they were simply felt that their role was to support what the government was doing and to prevent us
01:15:45 government was doing and to prevent us from exercising our right to peaceful direct action to prevent the building of that road. Could we turn to page three of the same document, please?
01:15:57 This is an account you're of a separate time you were arrested. This time on the 16th of March, 1994. This time it's for breach of the peace. Again, same question. Is it correct that
01:16:09 Again, same question. Is it correct that you complied Yes.
01:16:11 Yes. with the officer's warning that if you did not get off the fence, you would be arrested?
01:16:14 arrested? Yes.
01:16:15 Yes. And you were arrested nonetheless? Exactly.
01:16:18 Exactly. And is it correct that this matter went to trial?
01:16:22 to trial? Uh,
01:16:24 Uh, this is
01:16:29 No, this didn't this didn't go to trial. I was released without charge. You released without charge? Sorry.
01:16:38 Sorry. Understood. Can I take you to another example? We don't need to bring up this document on screen. The transcript for the record is MPS
01:16:49 MPS 0739546
01:16:52 and it's a tab B1 of Mr. Gffin's bundle. This is a special branch report. you refer to this document of paragraphs 92 and 95 of your statement
01:17:05 and 95 of your statement and a paragraph two
01:17:10 it states appendix A of special branch report dated 18th November 93 lists the names of the persons arrested and it lists you as being arrested for criminal damage on the 6th of November 1993. Do
01:17:24 damage on the 6th of November 1993. Do you recall that? Sorry, I'm I'm I'm not seeing. Maybe it would help to get the document up if I may, please. I'm I'm I'm You say 92 and 95 of my statement.
01:17:35 95 of my statement. Um paragraphs 92 and 95. This is the um November 1993 arrest at George Green and Wstead.
01:17:47 Wstead. 6th of November. Right. Right.
01:17:50 Right. Um
01:17:54 yes. Okay. So, this is the day of the tree dressing, right? Okay. Um,
01:18:06 right. Okay. Yeah. I'm I'm now I' I've now recalled what the incident was. Yes. Can you tell us very briefly again what what happened that led to your arrest? Uh, yes. Um, there were um people trying to get into
01:18:20 there were um people trying to get into one of the work sites where they were building where construction work was. Well, um, destruction work was taking place. Um, and, uh, there wooden fences,
01:18:31 place. Um, and, uh, there wooden fences, sort of seven or eight foot high wooden fences, and some people were trying to push the wooden fences down so we could get into the work site. Um, I wasn't involved in pushing the work those fences down. Um, but once the fences uh,
01:18:44 fences down. Um, but once the fences uh, did come down, a a panel of the wooden fencing came down. Um, I was one of those who uh, ran onto the site. I was arrested and uh the allegation was made
01:18:56 arrested and uh the allegation was made that I had been one of the people who had caused the criminal damage of pushing down a fence. This was untrue and I was able to despite if I recall a right being held overnight. I think the
01:19:07 right being held overnight. I think the um I think this was an occasion where I was then held overnight and the charge was changed to breach the peace and I was readily No, it wasn't. Sorry, that's that's wrong. Um, I was able to get
01:19:19 that's wrong. Um, I was able to get someone to attend court to disprove that I'd been involved to, you know, without having conferred at all with them because I'd been in hell held in the cells. They were able to provide the witness evidence that I had not um
01:19:31 witness evidence that I had not um pushed over the fences. There were glaring incon That's right. There were glaring inconsistencies in their in their statement. How how could they have se how could the officer or the security guard who claimed to have
01:19:42 the security guard who claimed to have seen me um when they were inside the work site there was a a fence that was much taller than me between them and me and yet they claimed to have seen me pushing the fence over. It was just it
01:19:53 pushing the fence over. It was just it did not make sense. It was very it was very clear that they were making evidence up. How would you describe the mood of the security guards and and and their attitudes at that time at that on that
01:20:05 attitudes at that time at that on that day?
01:20:08 day? The security cards were were interesting. Uh some of them could be very confrontational. Others were just know it was a job that they'd got from the job center or whatever and they were
01:20:19 the job center or whatever and they were actually secretly really quite sympathetic to us. And some people from the from the campaign formed good friendships with some of the security guards. The sad thing was that um it was the more brutal confrontational security
01:20:30 the more brutal confrontational security guards who managed to get who who always got promoted and ended up in more senior roles. And therefore the the tone of the security the security um operation got more confrontational as time went on.
01:20:42 more confrontational as time went on. And the more confrontational guards get get um get retained and got retained and promoted and the less the the less confrontational more friendly guards um left or you know whatever disappeared.
01:20:56 left or you know whatever disappeared. Did you witness on that day any violent behavior by protesters? No, no violence and
01:21:03 and nor at any time during the whole of the M11 campaign. And would you agree with the statement that the police conduct in the circumstances was restrained?
01:21:14 circumstances was restrained? No.
01:21:22 Again, without mentioning any names that you know of. Mhm. Did anyone else in the group that day actively encourage others to undertake activities which they knew
01:21:33 undertake activities which they knew might carry a risk of arrest? Actively encourage activities. Yes.
01:21:40 Yes. Yes. Um
01:21:44 Yes. Um I can't remember what briefing was given beforehand but there was an understanding that you know we were involved in peaceful direct action that you know we regarded the the the
01:21:55 you know we regarded the the the building of the road as illegitimate and that therefore taking direct action you know um so long as it remained nonviolent was legitimate and yes so people were expecting to take direct action um encouragement no I think you
01:22:09 action um encouragement no I think you know people were taking personal responsibility. People were making their own decisions and were very much encouraged to, you know, only go as far as they felt able and willing to go in their personal situations. There was no
01:22:20 their personal situations. There was no kind of pressure. People were making their own decisions. And as I say, one of the points about uh direct action is you make your own decisions. You take responsibility for how you feel you want to confront the injustice that that is
01:22:32 to confront the injustice that that is there in front of you. Moving on, you mention in your statement at page 36, paragraph 99 an action which you refer to as operation roadblocks.
01:22:44 operation roadblocks. Um, is it correct this was an umbrella term for actions targeting the M11 link road work sites? Yes.
01:22:52 Yes. And can you explain again briefly what the goal of operation roadblock was and how you envisioned it would be achieved? Yes. The idea was to um
01:23:06 Yes. The idea was to um to hold um direct action to enable people to know take part in direct action. We aimed to do every day and we managed to take action pretty much every
01:23:17 managed to take action pretty much every day over a course of a month. At the end of that month, we were exhausted. But um yeah, the the I we were advertising the idea, take a day off work. We will do some very quick direct action training
01:23:29 some very quick direct action training training in both the principles of direct action, the practicalities of um what what might happen, the legal implications for people so that they
01:23:40 implications for people so that they could make an informed decision as to how far they were prepared to go. And then we went and took direct action um getting onto the diggers on the work sites to stop that road being built.
01:23:52 sites to stop that road being built. And one of your roles was creating publicity um for this campaign. Is that correct?
01:23:57 correct? Yes.
01:23:58 Yes. And
01:24:00 And did you hold meetings? As I say, each what to to plan it or to actually on the days of those actions? Both because the answer is both. Both. Um yes, we had sort of informal
01:24:11 Both. Um yes, we had sort of informal meetings to kind of create the create the publicity. Um but then on each day of the direct action, we you know, we sort of said arrive at I think where our
01:24:22 sort of said arrive at I think where our campaign office was at that time. uh and we gave people a little briefing as I say on the principles of direct action, the practicalities of what might be involved, the legal implications and then at the me in the meantime people
01:24:35 then at the me in the meantime people were effectively out on their bicycles scouting to see where the road building was taking place that day. So we knew where to take people where where was where was their work that you know to be
01:24:46 where was their work that you know to be stopped.
01:24:47 stopped. Were there any restrictions on who could attend these meetings? No. Totally open. The more the marrier. And in your view, did Operation Roadlock achieve what it set out to?
01:25:00 achieve what it set out to? Yes. Um, it it added to a the costs to the Department of Transport of building that road. Now, I remember being asked
01:25:12 that road. Now, I remember being asked by the media about, well, was it a good thing that we were effectively inverted commas wasting public money? to which I ended up responding, well, I'd far rather that money was spent on the
01:25:24 rather that money was spent on the health service, education service, you know, protecting nature, whatever. But if the government is determined to build it to spend it on building a road, then it's better that we waste it than it continues to be spent on yet another
01:25:35 continues to be spent on yet another road.
01:25:38 road. After Operation Roadblock, attention turned to Claremont Road. Is that right? Yes. This is a road which was to be demolished as part of the M11's construction. Indeed.
01:25:49 the M11's construction. Indeed. And
01:25:51 And you state in your witness statement, there was an incident where the Department for Transport contractors destroyed the roof of a home. Yes. In Claremont Road. And you then go on to state that, and I quote, defeating
01:26:03 state that, and I quote, defeating Claremont Road would be strategically crucial.
01:26:06 crucial. Yes.
01:26:07 Yes. What did you mean by that? of all the little side streets uh along the route of the M11 link road, the Claremont Road was the last that was
01:26:18 Claremont Road was the last that was effectively fully intact. Um so yeah, it it was Claremont Road was three sides of a rectangle. It went off a main road, um
01:26:30 a rectangle. It went off a main road, um ran parallel to that main road, and then a little uh a little short side of a rectangle back onto the main road. So, it was a street that only served a row of houses on one side of the road and there was a tube line and and and and
01:26:42 there was a tube line and and and and some trees on the other side of the road. It was effectively a self-contained little community. Um, some as as I mentioned earlier, me the houses had all been compulsory with one
01:26:53 houses had all been compulsory with one exception had all been compulsory purchased by the Department of Transport I think back in the 1960s. Um, some have been let out to uh on short-term less to, you know, people you know involved
01:27:04 to, you know, people you know involved in arts or whatever. others were squatted. And then in the middle of that row of houses, there was the home of Dolly Watson. Um Dolly Watson was age 93 at that time. She had been born in that
01:27:15 at that time. She had been born in that home. She wanted to be able to die in that home. And she really welcomed us as the new community that replaced uh the the the the arty folk, the designers or whatever who'd been there on short-term
01:27:26 whatever who'd been there on short-term contracts who made sure that their key when they lost their homes that the keys came to us, not back to the department. So we ended up with a a fully squatted street uh with Dolly Watson in the middle of it.
01:27:39 middle of it. Can we have up on screen please UCPI 40 38789?
01:27:45 40 38789? That's 38789 and that's at tab A23 in Minan's bundle. Sir, yes.
01:27:54 yes. Mr. Geffin, do you recognize this photo? I do.
01:27:56 I do. Can you explain it to us? So yes, it was at around the time when um you know the the contractors while while we were out taking direct action
01:28:07 while we were out taking direct action on one of their work sites effectively came came sort of behind our backs and took the roof off one of the houses on Claremont Road and um we had this
01:28:18 Claremont Road and um we had this conversation where somebody kind of laughingly said, "Oh, we should go and smash up the move roof of John John McGregor who was the transport secretary at the time." They weren't serious, but you know, it kind of prompted this idea
01:28:29 you know, it kind of prompted this idea that we should do that symbolically by painting this banner that you can see there that effectively showed a road going through John McGregor's own home. So, yeah, this was a piece of direct
01:28:41 So, yeah, this was a piece of direct action that worked incredibly well in in media terms. um peaceful direct action um on the on the roof of this the the the transport secretary on beha on whose
01:28:53 the transport secretary on beha on whose behalf baiffs were smashing up um other people's homes um to really just highlight the injustice of what the transport secretary was doing. Can I ask you how did you obtain the
01:29:04 Can I ask you how did you obtain the transport secretary's private address? I honestly can't remember. I I I recall that there had been a previous action um where some chalk from Twifford down was
01:29:15 where some chalk from Twifford down was also taken to John McGregor's home. I can't remember where where where the information had come from that led to that action, but I knew the I knew his address from that earlier action. And did you consider that publicizing
01:29:27 And did you consider that publicizing the private address of a high-profile politician, incidentally, the head of the organization you're campaigning against, might have caused a security issue for him and his family?
01:29:39 issue for him and his family? I would juxtapose that with the fact that the baiffs acting on his behalf were causing far greater um alarm, harassment and distress to the residents
01:29:51 harassment and distress to the residents of Claremont Road. I would contrast it with what happened to one of the residents of um one of the long-standing residents involved in the long-standing campaign through the public inquiries who one morning very early in the
01:30:03 who one morning very early in the morning when he wasn't yet dressed um had a call. Are you there? are are are you there? And the minute he said yes, the door was of his home was smashed down in spite of the fact that he was caring for his elderly mother. She was
01:30:15 caring for his elderly mother. She was taken out in shock on a stretcher from her home for the last time ever. And that uh and and you know and that happened to numerous other people in the in on on the on the route of the road. There was another guy who was looking
01:30:27 There was another guy who was looking after a 5-year-old severely autistic son who also had his his door smashed down one day. I think that that is a rather more a rather greater injustice. After all, cabinet level secretaries are
01:30:39 all, cabinet level secretaries are expected to have a certain amount of thick skin and they've got the weight of the state behind them to to to protect them whereas the the residents of Claremont Road had nothing of the sort. Mr. Geffin, if I may repeat my request
01:30:50 Mr. Geffin, if I may repeat my request to to keep your answers slightly brief, please. And also, if you could slow down a little bit, I'd be grateful. Thank you very much. Looking back now, do you believe that taking a protest, even a
01:31:04 believe that taking a protest, even a peaceful one, to someone's private home might be taking it a bit too far? No, I don't think that I think this is exactly in the line in in the line that I talked about earlier, Gandian direct
01:31:16 I talked about earlier, Gandian direct action going to the root of the problem. The transport secretary was ultimately the root of this problem. We were confronting the injustice. Um the people who got onto his roof were indeed
01:31:27 who got onto his roof were indeed charged with um causing alarm, harassment, and distress and and were found not guilty because it was it was held that John McGregor and his wife had
01:31:38 held that John McGregor and his wife had not suffered alarm, harassment, and distress. This had been an entirely peaceful protest. It had been conducted safely. um precautions have been taken and this was again in the in that
01:31:49 and this was again in the in that honorable tradition of civil disobedience confronting the root cause of the problem in a peaceful way. Was a transport secretary the only high-profile politician to be targeted?
01:32:00 high-profile politician to be targeted? Um, no. There was later in the summer, this was kind of somewhat going beyond um road protests itself, but Michael Howard, who was then the home secretary,
01:32:12 Howard, who was then the home secretary, was passing the uh criminal justice bill as it then was, act as it is now, 1994, which effectively criminalized a lot of the forms of direct action that we were engaged in, as well as many other things, squatting, raving, and therefore
01:32:24 things, squatting, raving, and therefore brought together a wider movement um of uh of of groups who were targeted by his um uh by his criminal justice bill. So um one of the things that he was
01:32:35 um one of the things that he was criminalizing was aggravated trespass or trespassery assembly. They're both criminalized in that bill. So we held a little trespassery assembly in his garden um entirely peacefully. We had a picnic. We had a little effectively a
01:32:47 picnic. We had a little effectively a little piece of drama where we um uh put the criminal justice bill itself on trial, found it guilty. Again, as with the the rooftop protest on John
01:32:59 the the rooftop protest on John McGregor's house, this too attracted very positive coverage because it was going straight to the root of the problem in a peaceful in an entirely peaceful manner that but in a way that dramatized the injustice.
01:33:11 dramatized the injustice. And was he home at the time? No.
01:33:13 No. Did you know that? We didn't know that. Um we did know, however, that he'd only recently bought that house and therefore there was a fair chance that he hadn't moved in yet and that turned out to be the case. Can
01:33:24 and that turned out to be the case. Can I ask you what steps did you take, if any, to ensure that those who attended the garden picnic would not get carried away and resort to, for example, destroying his
01:33:35 to, for example, destroying his property?
01:33:37 property? As I recall, um, we held a little briefing on the coaches going down there. Um, again reiterating all of the points about uh non-violent direct action, the the legal implications of
01:33:48 action, the the legal implications of what people were doing so that people could make an informed decision as to what they were doing because we had not advertised where we were going. We' we'd merely said we will be going for a um I
01:34:00 merely said we will be going for a um I can't remember the wording we used but sort of an adventurous trespasser assembly. Um so we wanted to make sure people before before people got there once they were on the coach that they were they knew what they were doing. uh
01:34:11 were they knew what they were doing. uh knew where they were going, what the legal implications were, but we also stressed as we always did the importance of maintaining peaceful direct action. So I was very confident as I was all along um that the people who we were
01:34:23 along um that the people who we were networking to believed in the sort of things we stood for. If anyone had stepped out of order, we would have we would have done nothing to defend them. But I never seriously feared that that
01:34:34 But I never seriously feared that that was going to happen. our networks were you know very solid on that common philosophy of believing in non nonviolent direct action. Can we move on now to page 39? This is a
01:34:46 Can we move on now to page 39? This is a paragraph 106 of your statement where you say you carried out a good deal of police liaison notably with a police sergeant whom we don't need to name.
01:34:55 name. Yeah.
01:34:57 Yeah. You say there was a reasonable level of mutual respect. He recognized that the group was sincere in its commitment to peaceful protest. Is that right? and that neither he nor the officers involved in the last phase of the M11
01:35:09 involved in the last phase of the M11 campaign tried to present you as anything but peaceful. Is that right? Yes.
01:35:13 Yes. And do you accept that those officers observations contrast with some of the SDS reports about you and the group's actions?
01:35:21 actions? Absolutely. No, I I would I would give that officer credit for having never um tried to make out that we were a violent movement in contrast to so much of the
01:35:32 movement in contrast to so much of the propaganda that was, you know, sent against reclaim the streets later on. That that officer um played absolutely fair in what he communicated to, you know, via the media about the nature of
01:35:44 know, via the media about the nature of our protest. Can you think of any reason why there would be this contrast?
01:35:51 I think that would be a really good question to put to the SDS's management. Why was it that they were so out to smear us with it with tarnish tarnish us with this label of being violent when we
01:36:02 with this label of being violent when we absolutely were not? An example of this contrast, right or wrong,
01:36:10 wrong, can be seen by the actions of the Department for Transport. Is that fair to say?
01:36:15 to say? In September 1994, for example, they obtained another injunction. Mhm. And this one prevented you and others from trespassing on the work sites of the M11 link road. Yeah.
01:36:27 Yeah. How did you and the group respond to this injunction?
01:36:32 Um, we we contested it, but I suspect I'm I'm trying to remember the details. Um we saw it as an opportunity to publicize
01:36:44 saw it as an opportunity to publicize the injustice of the the secret the the state again using its um its power to prevent us from taking the direct action in you know to that we we felt was
01:36:56 in you know to that we we felt was justified. Um it helped that they they brought that injunction against 11 of us. So we ended up being the no M11 um which helped our publicity cause. Um so
01:37:08 which helped our publicity cause. Um so yeah we we we saw it more as an opportunity to publicize injustice. Um yeah ultimately they they obtained the the injunction but this was at a fa this
01:37:20 the injunction but this was at a fa this was a point in the campaign when it was not that far from winding down. In fact, I think by the time that we actually got to the point where the the injunction was granted, the houses had all all gone
01:37:31 was granted, the houses had all all gone and we by this stage already moving on to re reviving reclaim the streets and therefore accepting the terms of the permanent injunction actually made no practical made no practical difference to us because our focus had been move
01:37:43 to us because our focus had been move had moved on by then. And you refer to this injunction as a a slap. It's LP which stands for strategic delegation against the public participation.
01:37:54 participation. Uh what made you say that? There were a number of other um slaps doing the rounds at that time where either government or corporations were using what's now often referred to as
01:38:07 using what's now often referred to as lawfare um to to to to sty protest to silence protest to prevent protest. So yes, this was, you know, we obviously
01:38:18 yes, this was, you know, we obviously the stated legal reason was to prevent the costs um uh being posed on the secretary of state by by the protest action, but in practice we saw this as we just want to mle protest. Um and we
01:38:31 we just want to mle protest. Um and we wanted to publicize that that's what the secretary of state was doing. Claremont Road was eventually evicted in late November, early December 1994. Is that right? Correct. And that brought an end to the
01:38:43 Correct. And that brought an end to the M11 link road campaign. Now, not quite. There was there were a few other houses that were still to be demolished and some people stuck around
01:38:54 demolished and some people stuck around right to the bitter end. I I and several others didn't. By the time we'd lost Claremont Road, um Claremont Road itself had been a kind of a sort of a a prototype street party throughout the
01:39:05 prototype street party throughout the six months that we were we held it as a car-free street. We decorated it. We defended it. We built barricades. We built scaffold towers on the roofs of houses. There were all sorts of things
01:39:16 houses. There were all sorts of things that were both visually creative but also practical for defending against the eviction. But the effectively it was a six-month sort of street party. And the idea of street parties was therefore
01:39:27 idea of street parties was therefore born on Claremont Road. And once Claremont Road went, this idea that we could hold street parties to move the debate on from opposing road schemes into um moving on to opposing the wider
01:39:38 into um moving on to opposing the wider car culture, which is what regular streets had set up to do in its first incarnation, we were now much better placed to do it and that's where we moved on to. Thank you. And I I will get to that. Thank you. Sure. You've already mentioned this um
01:39:51 Sure. You've already mentioned this um but I want to ask you again the fact that you deliberately sought to waste the government's road building budget. Yeah.
01:40:02 Did you stop to consider the financial impact on the public purse taxpayers money being to yours wasted? Absolutely. As as per my earlier answer, I I I remember saying this in the media.
01:40:14 I I I remember saying this in the media. Um, I would much rather that that money had been spent on any number of things. This is exactly what we were communicating was there was so many other better uses of the money that the government was spending on on on the M11
01:40:27 government was spending on on on the M11 link road and other road schemes. 24 billion pounds of road building that was soon to be cut to just 6 billion. You know, in that sense, we were successful in saving the public purse. um because
01:40:38 in saving the public purse. um because that that was 20 that was uh 18 billion pounds of of road budget that ended not ended up not being spent on roads. So I absolutely justify the money that you
01:40:49 absolutely justify the money that you know the 1 million tiny fraction of a percentage point of the total roads budget that was inverted commas wasted. Ultimately, we saved the public person an awful lot of money as well as
01:41:00 an awful lot of money as well as averting an awful lot of uh greenhouse gas emissions from road traffic that would otherwise have been generated by all those other road schemes. Can I move on now to the revival of the RTS in um the summer of 1994?
01:41:14 RTS in um the summer of 1994? Um what prompted RTS's revival? As I say, uh it was the the idea of street parties just seemed to us so
01:41:26 street parties just seemed to us so obvious from what we'd kind of organically created on Claremont Road. This space which had been a a road for, you know, motor vehicles to provide access to people's front doors was no longer, you know, was a car-free carfree
01:41:38 longer, you know, was a car-free carfree street um where people could do all sorts of other things where the children who are in, you know, of people involved in the campaigns could play in the street, they could decorate. local school children were coming down were
01:41:49 school children were coming down were being brought down by their teachers to paint things on the on the walls of of Claremont Road. This idea that what else can you do with street space when the cars aren't there was a really powerful idea and we thought we need to we need
01:42:01 idea and we thought we need to we need to replicate this. Um so effectively the no one can remember who had the idea of moving on and doing street parties. It was just such an obvious idea born out of Glenmont Road.
01:42:12 of Glenmont Road. You mentioned a core group. Was this a closed or open group?
01:42:18 it became a closed group. Um because and this this was a pattern that would would come to be replicated in many other movements since. Um we had open meetings
01:42:31 movements since. Um we had open meetings but there was one really important thing that needed to be kept secret which was where was the street party going to take place and how were how was you know the party equipment going to get there and
01:42:42 party equipment going to get there and so on. So we had open meetings and the first open you know we had held the first open meetings um in early uh 1995
01:42:55 first open meetings um in early uh 1995 um where we presented this idea and obviously there were people who'd all to a lot of the people there had already uh witnessed Claremont road so they were already receptive to the idea um that we
01:43:07 already receptive to the idea um that we could replicate street parties on a busy street transform a busy street from a street filled with cars into a street full of whatever everyone else wanted to do, children playing in the street and
01:43:18 do, children playing in the street and all the rest of it. We put this idea they endor the the wider meeting endorsed it. We said there would need to be some secrecy around the destination but there would be roles involved in
01:43:29 but there would be roles involved in creating banners, creating food, producing food for the party, um distributing publicity and so on. And that therefore, you know, there were some wider things that the wider meeting
01:43:40 some wider things that the wider meeting that the open meeting could people involved in the open meetings could do. And just to confirm, you were part of the core group. Yes.
01:43:48 Yes. I want to move on now to page 71. This is a paragraph 214 of your statement. It refers to a document. We don't need it up on screen, but for the transcript, it is MPS 0245714.
01:44:03 That's 0245714 and that's a tab B3 of Mr. Jeff's bundle. Sir, this is an event performer containing information about a weekly meeting of
01:44:14 information about a weekly meeting of RTS that took place on the 21st of November 1995. Yes.
01:44:17 Yes. Do you recall, have you read that meeting?
01:44:25 Yes, but not terribly clearly if I'm honest. Do you recall seeing UCO HN14 Jim Boiling at that meeting? No, I couldn't. Um
01:44:37 No, I couldn't. Um Jim Boiling, this is uh when is this? This was uh sorry um the date of this meeting was can you help me with the date of this
01:44:48 can you help me with the date of this meeting?
01:44:48 meeting? 21st of November 95. 95. Yeah.
01:44:51 95. Yeah. So Jim Boiling by that stage was I think this was actually the first meeting that Jim Boing attended. Um, so he would have just been another face. There were, you know, people who came and went. And I,
01:45:03 know, people who came and went. And I, to be honest, I don't have a good memory from for faces. I, it runs in the family. My brother, my father also suffered from a very poor memory for faces.
01:45:12 faces. The report suggests that the failure of the RTS action at the Earls Quad Motor Show was due to you trying to dominate the direction taken by the group.
01:45:23 the direction taken by the group. Do you accept that? No, I I think that's I think that is Jim Boing at what seems to have been his first meeting misreading what was actually going on. Um
01:45:37 actually going on. Um the background to this is a story in its own right. And I'm not sure whether you want to ask me a question about the time when the the forward intelligence team intercepted me, but that was part of the background to um to this meeting. I had
01:45:50 background to um to this meeting. I had effectively been offered an opportunity to become a police informant and to be supported in any direct action proposal we took. I believed that in that off offer was insincere. Um reclaim the
01:46:04 offer was insincere. Um reclaim the streets the wider meeting had come up with a a plan for an action at the court motor show which just wasn't viable. the the idea that we would somehow get away with getting into
01:46:16 would somehow get away with getting into the old court motor show despite having openly advertised where we're going was never going to work. So I thought well let's take this police officer up on this offer of you know supporting us to bring off direct whatever direct action
01:46:28 bring off direct whatever direct action we wanted. Sure enough it didn't work. Um it um it was it was it it it led to frustration entirely foreseeable entirely foreseeably but I think that
01:46:39 entirely foreseeably but I think that that frustration given the action plan that people had come up with was inevitable but I took the I took the blame for it but I don't think that was fair and I think the fact that people were blaming me for it was well that was
01:46:52 were blaming me for it was well that was Jim Boiling misreading what was going on in Jim Boiling's statement and we don't need it up on screen for the transcript. The document number is UCPI5036294.
01:47:06 That's a tab A2 of HN14's bundle. He refers to a document paragraph 129 of a statement. And I quote, probably the first report based on information
01:47:18 first report based on information provided by me to my handler about a meeting of reclaim the streets. RTS meetings were closed and not publicly advertised at this time.
01:47:31 Is it correct? No, absolutely incorrect. Um that was not a closed meeting there. Um that meeting and and others like it. Weekly meetings um were openly advertised. As I
01:47:42 meetings um were openly advertised. As I say, we still didn't have the kind of budget to be able to put, you know, place adverts or whatever. But um we were distributing leaflets that carried, you know, time, date, and place of when
01:47:53 you know, time, date, and place of when we were when we were when our regular meetings took place. Anybody who phoned up, who found our phone number, phoned up, they were openly they were openly welcome to to join our meetings. That was definitely not a closed meeting.
01:48:04 was definitely not a closed meeting. And again, in your view, can you think of a reason why Mr. Boiling is reporting that the meetings were closed? Again, I think that would be a good question to put to to to Jim Boing. Um
01:48:17 question to put to to to Jim Boing. Um whether he was whether he was just misunderstanding because he was invited along by u I as I understand from his statement he was invited along by someone he had met through hunt sabbing. He may have got the wrong end of the
01:48:28 He may have got the wrong end of the stick or he may have been um hyping the the value of his of his undercover reporting. I really don't know. I suggest that would be a question worth putting to Jim Boing.
01:48:41 Mr. Boing goes on to mention another instance where he states there was a closed meeting. This time it wasn't RTS. was Earth first. Again, there's no need to bring it up on screen, but the document number is MPS 40169
01:48:54 document number is MPS 40169 and that's a tab C103 of HN14's bundle. In this document, he recounts an event involving the Celar Opencast
01:49:06 involving the Celar Opencast mining site. Um,
01:49:10 Um, and it mentions that you were excluded from a closed meeting. Do you have any knowledge of that? No,
01:49:19 No, I I again I I wouldn't be surprised if he is if he is making things up. Um I would have whether whether his claim is
01:49:31 would have whether whether his claim is that I was told you're not allowed to join or whether the meeting just took place without without me being invited. I wouldn't have wanted to join a meeting um about what to do in the circumstances
01:49:42 um about what to do in the circumstances where the original plan which was to hold an action um at Milford Haven dock a year on from the oil spill um the the the oil spill at Milford Haven. Um that
01:49:55 the oil spill at Milford Haven. Um that plan had clearly been thwarted. The meeting as I understand was to discuss well what was the alternative plan. I had no local knowledge. I had I had nothing you know I wasn't by this stage I'd really stepped back from being
01:50:06 I'd really stepped back from being involved in reclaim the streets I would have had no wish to be involved in that meeting I would have completely understood if people wanted to have a meeting that I wasn't going to be part of but to my I never knew about that meeting I have no reason to believe that
01:50:17 meeting I have no reason to believe that there was an active decision taken to disclo exclude me I wouldn't have wanted to be included thank you um sir wary of the time might this be a good time for the morning Certainly.
01:50:46 15 minute break.
02:12:04 Mr. Geffen, we before the break finished talking about the M11 link campaign. I want to return now to RTS.
02:12:17 In your statement at page 17, paragraph 43,
02:12:22 43, you refer to the first street party held on Camden High Street. Is that correct? Yes.
02:12:30 Yes. And
02:12:31 And to enable this street party to go ahead. Mhm.
02:12:35 Mhm. It was necessary to block off the street from vehicular traffic. Yeah.
02:12:42 Yeah. How was that done? Uh, sorry. sorting the paperwork. So, uh, the plan that was hatched was to get two clapped out old cars, you know, from
02:12:53 two clapped out old cars, you know, from Breakers Yard. I think might have been secondhand. Again, strip them their No, it wasn't strip them, their their motors, but no, two cars that I think had cost 100 quid each. They were parked up in opposite side roads on opposite
02:13:05 up in opposite side roads on opposite sides of Camden High Street. um at meanwhile the um the the people who who' come for the party had been um told where to meet which was in Kentish Town
02:13:18 where to meet which was in Kentish Town uh at a um as a squatted center that we were using for our regular meetings. So a lot of people involved in reclaim the streets already knew the venue. Um they were told to meet there. We had a little briefing beforehand. Um again stressing
02:13:31 briefing beforehand. Um again stressing nonviolence, giving people the legal information they needed to know, all that sort of stuff. And then the idea was they would travel by tube. They didn't know where where they were going, but they were only going one tube stop from Kentishtown to Camden High Street.
02:13:42 from Kentishtown to Camden High Street. At the point where the first tube load of partygoers were coming out of the tube station, these two cars that were waiting in these side streets came out of the side streets crashed into one another um which had the practical
02:13:55 another um which had the practical effect of of blocking Camden High Street, which was a one-way street. um uh and uh create uh the the two drivers got out and in a paracism of um
02:14:06 got out and in a paracism of um synthetic rage, it was all street theater. They started smashing each other's cars up so that the the street was then couldn't be reopened. Now um this freed up the space behind those two
02:14:17 this freed up the space behind those two cars for the street party to um to begin. people filled the space with um with uh food, dancing, um various sort of artworks, creativity, and of course,
02:14:30 of artworks, creativity, and of course, you know, Camden High Street on a Saturday afternoon was full of people buying trendy things from Camden Mart market for whom the idea that there was this this car-free street instead of a
02:14:41 this this car-free street instead of a traffic sort of um a a traffic stream separating the two sides of the road. This was very appealing. it made for a much nicer place to to to enjoy a Saturday afternoon. So, you know,
02:14:52 Saturday afternoon. So, you know, actually by the time the party was underway, the people who had come knowing that there was a party and the people who just happened to be there were sort of pretty much indistinguishable from each other. And toward the evening when it started
02:15:03 And toward the evening when it started to go dark, you say that the police chose to pick a fight with those remaining partygoers so they could all reopen the street for motor traffic. Yes. Um, well, looking back,
02:15:14 Yes. Um, well, looking back, would you accept that the police had a duty to try to reopen the road for traffic?
02:15:20 traffic? As a point of law, yes, I I I I accept that. I I I think it was probably with hindsight, one of the things we learned was that we should have made sure that we had a plan for how how to end without
02:15:31 we had a plan for how how to end without allowing the police to do that. We did we did indeed make such a plan for a later street party. We'll come to that, I'm sure.
02:15:38 I'm sure. We will. Um, just one last question. When you say they picked a fight, what do you mean exactly? It was at a point in the evening where actually quite a lot of people were were
02:15:50 actually quite a lot of people were were leaving. It was it was beginning to get dark. Um
02:15:55 dark. Um some of the some of the people who were still there were, you know, just drunk or whatever. Um, and they were they were easy pickings for the police to sort of
02:16:06 easy pickings for the police to sort of start a fight with what was now a really quite reduced group of partygoers. So it was it was easy for pickings for the police and with hindsight we should have foreseen that they would do it do this
02:16:18 foreseen that they would do it do this and as I say it does seem that their motive their motives rather than they could have they could given the numbers that were there they could probably have just peacefully dragged people off the
02:16:29 just peacefully dragged people off the street had they chosen to but they got they decided to get their riot shields and their bats out in order to make out that the mood had turned ugly. a phrase I have seen in so many news reports of incidents like this where in fact the
02:16:41 incidents like this where in fact the mood turns ugly because the police get their riot their riot shields and and transions out and there was a second street party on the 23rd of July 95. This was in upper street. Is that correct?
02:16:52 street. Is that correct? Correct.
02:16:53 Correct. And there were quite a few more attendees. You say four times more at this event than at the Cameon event. Yeah. Yes. Can I ask you was there any violence that you witnessed um or
02:17:05 violence that you witnessed um or disorder at this event as at Camden? None until the police got their riot shields and battons out. It was a lovely It was a lovely day. And you know there is a a media report
02:17:17 you know there is a a media report quoted in my statement of uh someone from know one of the local bars came out and said what a lovely peaceful day. A bus driver said it's fine. I've got my picnic. There was just and there's there's video footage that I've cited in
02:17:29 there's video footage that I've cited in a footnote to the statement where you can see just what a lovely day it was. There were kids playing in a sand pit. Uh it was it was an entirely deliberate thing that we wanted our events to be the sort of events that people could
02:17:41 the sort of events that people could bring their children to. I want to ask you about some advice that you you give to the people attending these parties. You state that while you're obviously hoping for a peaceful event, that the police may not
02:17:54 event, that the police may not treat it that way and that you advised people what to do if arrested or assaulted or if they saw someone else arrested or assaulted. Sure.
02:18:02 Sure. My question is this. If your intentions were entirely peaceful, why did you anticipate and feel the need to warn people about potential police involvement and arrests or assaults?
02:18:14 or assaults? Because because you never know what the police are going to do. Um we'd already seen that you know this this this tarnishing of our reputation by start instigating a fire at the end of Camden.
02:18:25 instigating a fire at the end of Camden. Um so we we felt that it was uh you know our duty in a way to make sure that people were forewarned what would you know what what might happen so that they
02:18:37 know what what might happen so that they could make decisions as to whether they wanted to be involved, whether they wanted to leave before the police you know what uh before before the police um you know took that kind of action. what
02:18:49 you know took that kind of action. what to do if they were arrested just to make sure people were as forewarned as possible for the anything that we could foresee. You know, we were just making sure that people were, you know, try and avoid a situation where people had a
02:19:01 avoid a situation where people had a terrible experience because something unfored happened to them. And you mentioned about advising people what to do if arrested or witnessing other people arrested. Very briefly, can you tell us what was
02:19:12 Very briefly, can you tell us what was this advice? we were providing I can't remember precisely I think we sort of ran through briefly the sort of things that you
02:19:23 briefly the sort of things that you could be arrested for of which obstruction of the highway was the the obvious main one but breach the peace were others um and what to what to do what to say in the event of being
02:19:36 what to say in the event of being arrested for anybody who for who found themselves being arrested for the first time in their lives which is obviously a quite disorientating experience particularly if it happens to you when you when you haven't planned for it,
02:19:47 you when you haven't planned for it, when you when you aren't anticipating it, when you don't particularly want it, you know, bearing in mind, as I say, my my early direct action, I had not wanted to be arrested either. And so very, you know, very conscious that people are at
02:20:00 know, very conscious that people are at different points in their sort of different places in what they are prepared to do, what they're ready to do, what they're not, what they don't want to happen, and to give people the information that they they need to make the choices that are right for them.
02:20:13 the choices that are right for them. Do you feel the police were acting proportionally that evening in the exercise of their duties? No. No. There's again there was absolutely no need for them to get their riot their riot shields and their trenchions out given the numbers who
02:20:25 trenchions out given the numbers who were left by the time they they did that.
02:20:28 that. I want to move on now um to the second half of 1995, excuse me, where you took a break from activism. Is that correct? Yes. And I want to ask you about an
02:20:39 Yes. And I want to ask you about an incident that occurred on the 29th of September 1995 where you encountered the police forward intelligence team or fit yes
02:20:47 yes team. Um you set this out in detail in paragraphs 53 to 61 of your statement. I don't need to take you there. Sure.
02:20:54 Sure. But looking back now can you tell us what happened? Yes. Briefly. Um the as briefly as I can um I took a I took a break working for
02:21:06 um I took a I took a break working for you know developing environmental policy for a telecoms uh company out in Maiden Head. Um I was cycling to Paddington taking the train to Maiden Head. Um one morning that morning on arrival at
02:21:17 morning that morning on arrival at Maiden Head station had a tap on the shoulder. I was shown a police warrant. There were two police officers um one uh uh one inspector, one more junior. uh and they tapped me on the shoulder to
02:21:29 and they tapped me on the shoulder to say that there was a warrant out for my arrest. Um this was because I had previously been arrested. I'd taken pay part in a uh there were there were various demonstrations against the live export of animals. I'd been to one of
02:21:41 export of animals. I'd been to one of those demonstrations and been arrested on that and had then evidently failed to attend court. Now I had no recollection. I had not I'm pretty absolutely certain
02:21:52 I had not I'm pretty absolutely certain that I had not been notified of the court date. I suspect that the notification was actually in, but I cannot prove that that notification of that court date was probably intercepted
02:22:03 that court date was probably intercepted exactly to give the police the pretext to come and arrest me outside my work as just as I was arrived from work within sight of my workplace um so that they could have a conversation with me. Um I
02:22:16 could have a conversation with me. Um I um they offered me their my they offered me their mobile phone so that I could phone in allegedly to claim I was working I was off sick. I said, "No, I'm not I'm not I'm not I'm not going to shy away from what's happening here." I I
02:22:28 away from what's happening here." I I made them take me into my workplace. I explained in front of them to my my manager what was happening. Um and then they took me for a long drive uh from Maiden Head all the way to Colchester to attend uh a court hearing for um
02:22:41 attend uh a court hearing for um allegedly having failed to attend court. During that conversation in uh during that drive, they effectively said um reclaim the streets. you've done wonderfully on maintaining peaceful
02:22:53 wonderfully on maintaining peaceful direct action. We'd had a one of the officers said he really enjoyed some of our actions. He'd tell his grandchildren about them. Um but wasn't I afraid that sooner or later those violent anarchists would infiltrate the movement and did I
02:23:06 would infiltrate the movement and did I he didn't put it as bluntly as this, but was I was I prepared to be a police informer if that ever happened? And he insinuated that some of the people who I was working with were potentially on that trajectory, which like no, you are
02:23:19 that trajectory, which like no, you are just making that up. you're trying to scare me. Uh so I did not accept his offer. Um this was the point where he offered that if um you know uh if we wanted to be able to kind of do things,
02:23:31 wanted to be able to kind of do things, you know, um hold street parties or whatever, he would facilitate them. Um which is exactly why u we ended up in that situation I touched on earlier with the where I took him off on the offer because I believed it was insincere um
02:23:44 because I believed it was insincere um to be able to get him to the Ears Court uh motor show. Um, and sure enough, it did turn out to be insincere. We ended up in a little police um police pen, unable to do anything effective, but I I
02:23:55 unable to do anything effective, but I I was um effectively uh offered the opportunity to become a police informer. Um, and uh it was it was just really really underhand the way in which that
02:24:07 really underhand the way in which that was done.
02:24:08 was done. And what was at the point where you also learned that you had been followed by a police officer on a pike from your home? Correct. Yes. How that make you feel? They would they told me how they had come to find out that I was working in
02:24:20 come to find out that I was working in Maiden Head. They had had a police officer who had tried to follow me from from my from my home to Paddington Station. They told me that they'd lost me a couple of times because I cycled too fast around round high Park Corner.
02:24:32 too fast around round high Park Corner. So they'd had to follow me sort of several times before they actually worked out where I was going each morning. But there they were. They were they arrested me outside my workplace to take me for a long drive from Maiden Head to Colchester and have this lovely
02:24:44 Head to Colchester and have this lovely friendly conversation with me. Reflecting on it now, how does that incident make you feel? Um it's uh
02:24:56 Um it's uh I just I just think how utterly insincere it was that uh the police were trying to make out that you know this fear which was obviously an an a at
02:25:08 fear which was obviously an an a at least a hypothetical fear of violent an anarchists infiltrating our movement but one that was really only theoretical. I never really believed that it would happen because we had such a strong
02:25:20 happen because we had such a strong culture of non-violence. Um, and the way that he tried to insinuate that people around me were on that course towards moving towards a more violent form of
02:25:31 moving towards a more violent form of anarchism. Um, no, it just wasn't true. He was trying to insinuate uh a whole load of stuff that just wasn't true in order to get me to be an informer. I wasn't having it and I stand by that.
02:25:44 wasn't having it and I stand by that. And at paragraph 62 in your statement, you make an observation about HN14 UCO Jim Boiling and the fact that his deployment began 2 months after this
02:25:57 deployment began 2 months after this incident.
02:25:58 incident. Mhm.
02:25:59 Mhm. Can you expand on why you mentioned this?
02:26:04 Well, this is because I think there is a question to be put both to boiling and to the police more generally about what was the relationship between under um
02:26:15 was the relationship between under um undercover police and you know uniform police but also police informants. Um, now again, I'm going to have to resist the temptation to jump ahead, but we know of two other police informants um
02:26:27 know of two other police informants um who were who was as well as undercover police officers who were later to spy on reclaim the streets and other movements. Um, what was the relationship between them? Um, was there duplication? Were
02:26:39 them? Um, was there duplication? Were they aware of each other? Who how was their intelligence being used? um you know what what was what what kind of dynamics were going on between the you
02:26:50 dynamics were going on between the you know different bits of the police and intelligence gathering agencies and individuals that I think this inquiry needs to explore more fully. I can't I can't fully answer those questions. I think they need to be explored with with
02:27:02 think they need to be explored with with the people who can answer who will have much better you know I'm an outsider to those to those power dynamics. You reached early 1996 and you then
02:27:13 You reached early 1996 and you then returned to RTS. Is that right? Yes.
02:27:15 Yes. And that was a return to full-time activism.
02:27:17 activism. Yes.
02:27:19 Yes. And upon your return, what role did you assume within RTS? Well, the um reclaim the streets by that stage uh reclaim the streets was sort of
02:27:32 stage uh reclaim the streets was sort of two things. It was a group in London but it was a a slogan for groups around you know earth food first groups and others around the rest of the country. A slogan and a tactic. So there were other groups by this stage who were organizing street
02:27:43 by this stage who were organizing street parties which they would just talk about as we're doing a reclaim the streets. But we the group in London were now planning on a much bigger street party um than the ones we'd organized in uh in
02:27:55 um than the ones we'd organized in uh in Camden and Islington. We knew it had to be bigger because if we tried to just simply repeat what we'd done before, the police, you know, knew how we how we organized the previous ones. Um, so we
02:28:07 organized the previous ones. Um, so we needed to plan more intensively for larger numbers of people. So we held the plan, you know, we wanted to go for a bigger venue. We spent quite a bit of time deciding what the venue would be.
02:28:18 time deciding what the venue would be. we had, you know, had a short list, but we eventually settled on, uh, the the M41, um, which was, you know, Britain's shortest motorway. It's no longer a motorway. It's the little section of motorway, um, alongside what's now the
02:28:30 motorway, um, alongside what's now the Westfield Shopping Center from, uh, Shepherd's Bush to, um, you know, White City. Um, it was then a motorway. Um, a leftover from the 1960s plans for a
02:28:42 leftover from the 1960s plans for a whole motorway box around London. and we plan to, you know, hold a party there with what ended up being several thousand people. Um, not least because that criminal justice bill act had now
02:28:55 that criminal justice bill act had now been passed bringing us together not only with people involved in various forms of protest, squatting, but also it had also criminalized raving the the um any kind of music involving repetitive
02:29:06 any kind of music involving repetitive beats. So there was a whole kind of rave scene that were also completely up for joining in a street party. So, we had a lot more uh we we were able to, you know, uh hold a party with a lot more people by this stage, but we needed to
02:29:18 people by this stage, but we needed to plan more intensively for how how we were going to get the people and all the equipment and the food and all the rest of it to the party venue. Want to move on to the M41 Street.
02:29:30 Want to move on to the M41 Street. Um you were involved in planning that, is that correct? And
02:29:35 And this was held on the 13th of July 1996. Yes.
02:29:40 Yes. You say approximately in terms of numbers a range between 6 to 10,000 people.
02:29:45 people. Yes. Attended. I'll pick pick 8,000 as the as the middle of the range. Yeah. Something like that. Did you consider then that a crowd of that size might contain elements of more extreme or violent factions that could
02:29:58 extreme or violent factions that could lead to to violence disturbances? As per previous answers, there was of course a hypothetical risk, but there was also such a strong culture
02:30:10 but there was also such a strong culture of that is not going to that's not going to help our cause. Um, so yes, we similarly, you know, had uh, you know,
02:30:21 similarly, you know, had uh, you know, briefings for people and it was very much a kind of no, we are going to have a party. We're going to have an event that children can take part in. um play in the middle of a motorway. This was,
02:30:32 in the middle of a motorway. This was, you know, a kind of transformational vision of what you can do when you transform the space that's normally filled with cars and pollution and all the rest of it into a into a place where children could play. And for anybody who
02:30:44 children could play. And for anybody who wanted to instigate violence in the midst of where children were playing, that was clearly going to be out of order. So, I think we were setting everything up to um to create a space
02:30:55 everything up to um to create a space where nonviolence would prevail. And as I say, this time we did learn from the one mistake I think we made in our earlier street parties. We made a plan and we disseminated that plan through the crowd that we were going to end the
02:31:07 the crowd that we were going to end the party so that the police did not have the the the pretext to instigate disorder at the end of the day. Uh we said we're turning off the sound systems. This party will end and uh it
02:31:18 systems. This party will end and uh it disbanded entirely peacefully. I want to go on to ask you again about Jim Boiling. This is a paragraph 71 of your statement
02:31:29 your statement where you raised the question whether the maintenance of public order was in fact the real reason for boiling's continued deployment within RTS after the M41 party.
02:31:40 the M41 party. Absolutely. Can you explain what you mean by that? I think all the evidence that Boiling andor his managers must have been aware
02:31:51 andor his managers must have been aware of um indeed the um the the the evidence that we've seen, you know, they were expecting a carnival mood. Um and they
02:32:03 expecting a carnival mood. Um and they recorded only minor disorder. Um that's their quote. I wouldn't I wouldn't even go so I wouldn't even go that far. um that they had the very clear evidence
02:32:14 that they had the very clear evidence that our intentions were anything but. We were working um we were taking much more active steps now to avoid any of the kind of disorder if disorder means you know violent confrontation or or you
02:32:25 you know violent confrontation or or you know instigating fear. We were working very hard to avoid that and the police knew that. So I do wonder why why this you know particularly in the light of
02:32:36 you know particularly in the light of the fact that one spoiling was at the heart of reclaim the streets. um disorder became more prevalent. It does seem that the police were actually using their intelligence gathered by Boiling
02:32:47 their intelligence gathered by Boiling and others to create a greater likelihood of disorder in order to tarnish our reputation and for all sorts of other reasons. We were working very hard to prevent it.
02:32:58 In or around the autumn of 1996, you stepped back from activism. Sure.
02:33:05 Sure. Yet you continue to participate in office action. Is that right? To what extent did you still participate? I I would by I was by that stage I was
02:33:16 I I would by I was by that stage I was doing a degree a transport masters. I was going to go back into sort of more mainstream ways of tackling car culture through you know working on sustainable transport professionally. I was no
02:33:27 transport professionally. I was no longer regularly going to reclaim the streets meetings. However um I still wanted to support what reclaim the streets was trying to do. So um I would
02:33:38 streets was trying to do. So um I would you know I'd be available if you know when when other actions were being planned the the subsequent um Mayday uh you know Mayday the various
02:33:50 Mayday uh you know Mayday the various Mayday carnivals the carnival carnival against capitalism the uh uh never mind the ballots action in infra square I was I was available for I was available for those but I wasn't around to do the
02:34:01 those but I wasn't around to do the organizing in the regular weekly meetings
02:34:06 And is it correct or accurate to say that at this stage you were no longer one of the principal organizers? Correct.
02:34:14 Correct. I want to ask you now about an incident by that took place by the M25 Dartford Bridge toll booth. Yeah.
02:34:24 Yeah. This involved planning to occupy a BP tanker.
02:34:28 tanker. Yes.
02:34:29 Yes. Can you tell us what happened and what your role was, please? Yes. Um the part of what was going on within reclaim the streets was a desire to broaden the agenda further still. I
02:34:40 to broaden the agenda further still. I talked about how we've moved on from opposing roads to opposing you know car dependence car car culture um and there was this desire to go beyond that to sort of say well fossil fuels oil and
02:34:52 sort of say well fossil fuels oil and all the rest of it um as part of part of the wider problem. So the plan um which uh I'm I I want to note that Jim Boiling
02:35:03 uh I'm I I want to note that Jim Boiling ascribes uh in his one of his reports claims that I was an organizer of this event. I was absolutely not and I would urge you I urge the inquiry to ask him why he named me as an as an organizer. I wasn't. I was if anything actually a
02:35:15 wasn't. I was if anything actually a rather reluctant participant. I I have to admit um I didn't particularly fancy the idea of getting arrested in the on on on Dartford Bridge. um once I was
02:35:26 on on Dartford Bridge. um once I was into my uh degree course, but I had sort of said to myself, I want to continue to support reclaim the streets when as as and when needed. The plan was um to stop
02:35:37 and when needed. The plan was um to stop an oil tanker as it slowed down as on the approach to one of the toll booths at the northern end of the bridge going southbound uh to have a couple of cars, hired cars I think in front of it to
02:35:49 hired cars I think in front of it to make sure that it was once it had stopped at the toll booths that it would stay stopped so that people could safely climb onto it. And I can't remember what what banner was going to what the banner
02:36:00 what banner was going to what the banner was going to say or anything like that. To be honest, my memories of this are somewhat hazy, but um the plan was to stop an oil tanker as it stopped at one of the toll booths on on on the M25 on
02:36:12 of the toll booths on on on the M25 on the on the at the northern edge of the northern end of the Dartford Bridge. You said that you were a reluctant participant in this. Why did you participate if you were reluctant?
02:36:23 participate if you were reluctant? I yeah it I was sort of a little bit torn between I really want to support the cause versus I could do without the disruption of a of an arrest in high-profile circumstances now that I'm doing my degree course. It was much more
02:36:35 doing my degree course. It was much more it was it was a very much sort of relating to my personal circumstances.
02:36:44 I want to take you to a document. I'm not going to show it up on screen. It's for the record MPS 40169. We've discussed it earlier. It's a tab C103 of HN14's bundle sir. And in this
02:36:58 C103 of HN14's bundle sir. And in this document, he recounts an event involving the Celar Opencast mining. Yes. Site. We've discussed that earlier. And you suggest at page 67, paragraph 196 in
02:37:09 you suggest at page 67, paragraph 196 in your statement that he was trying to sex up the significance of his intelligence. Yes.
02:37:15 Yes. What makes you say that? Well, um
02:37:21 Well, um actually this is this this al is this is also relevant to the previous point about Dartford where um in the aftermath of that despite having provided intelligence that the action was to be safe and was to block just one toll
02:37:33 safe and was to block just one toll booth um there were there was police intelligence doing the rounds to help Jim Boing get his commendation to whatever whatever the police were trying to do to make out their role was far more important that they averted a far
02:37:45 more important that they averted a far more dangerous and destructive action that could have caused you know chaos on the whole motorway network. No, that was absolutely not the case. Um and um I also wonder whether um he was you know
02:37:58 also wonder whether um he was you know making out that there were conflicts, you know, there were conflicts in which I was being excluded from meetings in order to highlight this idea that um you know there were tensions that the that
02:38:09 know there were tensions that the that the police and the spy cops could exploit. You know, this person doesn't like that person there. Some people are kind of trying to be more peaceful, others are trying to be more anarchistic. None of it was true, but I
02:38:20 anarchistic. None of it was true, but I think there was real pressure on the It looks like there was real pressure on the spy cops to try and identify and exploit those kind of dynamics and they just weren't there. As I say, that there
02:38:31 just weren't there. As I say, that there was also apparent from that incident where the Ford Intelligence team tried to suggest that some of my friends involved in reclaim the streets earlier on were also on that trajectory towards
02:38:42 on were also on that trajectory towards a more violent anarchism. they just seemed obsessed with trying to find these splits that they could you know drive wedges within our movement. So on the whole in your view and from
02:38:53 So on the whole in your view and from the reports that you have seen of HN14 Mr. Boiling Yeah.
02:38:59 Yeah. how would you rate their accuracy?
02:39:03 Uh variable. There were you know as I say the claim that I was an organizer of the M25 action just wrong. um the uh
02:39:15 M25 action just wrong. um the uh the um claims that you know there there are conflicting messages from uh Jim Boings and other spy cops evidence. Sometimes they would sort of say yeah
02:39:27 Sometimes they would sort of say yeah it's going to be disorderly. Sometimes they would say no we know it's not going to be disorderly. There's some really conf some really mixed messages as to what they were saying and it's it's really unclear why they were saying some
02:39:39 really unclear why they were saying some of the things that they said. um other I'm just trying to think other inaccuracies besides besides the yeah the that
02:39:49 the that um making out that there was a conflict going on in the aftermath of the ERS court. Yes, there was some tensions but nothing like no we can drive a wedge in this movement. There was some specific
02:40:00 this movement. There was some specific tensions around what had happened on that action but they just seemed to sort of want to find more tensions that were really there. I want to take it down to April 1997.
02:40:11 I want to take it down to April 1997. This is ahead of the 19 1997 general election. And I want to ask you about the reclaim the ballots demonstration. Yes.
02:40:19 Yes. Did you participate in that? I was prevented from doing so. Um I had intended to do so. However, on the on
02:40:30 intended to do so. However, on the on the eve of that action, one of the things that Reclaim the Streets had done was to produce a spoof newspaper um that looked like the Evening Standard, but was called Evading Standards. Um you may
02:40:41 was called Evading Standards. Um you may want to I'm not sure whether you want to ask me a separate question on that but it provides the context for why I was unable to participate in um never mind the ballots. I was arrested wrongfully
02:40:54 the ballots. I was arrested wrongfully um the three of us who were arrested at the point when we were starting to distribute this uh spoof newspaper. This was in the run-up to the 1997 general election. The headline on the front of
02:41:05 election. The headline on the front of this free newspaper that was due to be uh given out at tube stations all across London was general election cancelled. It was all about what's wrong with the political system and so on. Um and um we
02:41:17 political system and so on. Um and um we were prevented from distributing it. I and two others were arrested on the on the eve of that action. We were then bailed to return um to Walworth Road Police Station at exactly the time that
02:41:29 Police Station at exactly the time that uh the never mind the balance demonstration was taking place. allegedly to be interviewed. And then when we showed up when we when we showed up at Wworth Road station, there was nobody to interview, nobody to interview
02:41:41 nobody to interview, nobody to interview us. So we were held for a long time while while they tried to find somebody to interview us. Uh and then we were released once once Trafalga Square was cordoned off and we could I I couldn't join in. So and we we successfully
02:41:52 join in. So and we we successfully obtained wrongful arrest compensation. It really seems as if the, you know, even Jim Boing's evidence that we've now seen through the disclosure suggests that something the police got something
02:42:03 that something the police got something very wrong in arresting the three of us. We obtained our six grand each of wrong for arrest compensation. And as you say, the impact of your arrest um was to miss the demonstration.
02:42:14 arrest um was to miss the demonstration. Is that correct? Well, that was the impact on me. Yes. Um but as I say there was also a wider impact in that this spoof newspaper which would have been incredibly newsworthy um in communicating why we
02:42:26 newsworthy um in communicating why we were holding that action um was dis was prevented from going out and it does look like another act of political policing um not the not the only one in reclaim the streets's history where the
02:42:39 reclaim the streets's history where the the purpose of the arrest seems to have been to prevent us from getting our message out rather than to prevent disorder and is not the only occasion on which that happened. And looking back now, how does that make
02:42:50 And looking back now, how does that make you feel when you think about what happened that day? It makes me feel that this was this was an example of political policing. Um it had although the sensible reason for uh
02:43:01 had although the sensible reason for uh the undercover cop's involvement was to prevent this disorder. Um, there are a whole load of reasons which I suspect we'll come to in a moment as to why it appears that the police were using Jim
02:43:12 appears that the police were using Jim Boiling's evidence to create a situation in which disorder was more likely, not less likely. Um, whilst preventing us from getting our message out. Moving on, you ventured into
02:43:25 Moving on, you ventured into anti- capitalist activism in the late 90s. Is that correct? Yes. The reclaimed streets moved on, as I say, from having started with the road protest being opposing road schemes to
02:43:36 protest being opposing road schemes to opposing wider car culture to um taking on capitalism more generally and oil in particular. Now, there were various debates about how quickly we should move
02:43:47 debates about how quickly we should move we should move on. Um I was at the more cautious end sort of saying hang on let's let's stick with the let's stick with the focus on the car and explain why this epitomizes what what's wrong
02:43:58 why this epitomizes what what's wrong with capitalism but others was like let's just go straight forward capitalism. I was a little uneasy about that not as it were um on principle I agreed with the need to highlight the
02:44:11 agreed with the need to highlight the ecological environmental social justice damage being caused by the capitalist economic system. But I also felt that in terms of being able to communicate with the with the public, we would have done
02:44:22 the with the public, we would have done better. I may, you know, I I can never know whether I was right about this, but I think we might have done better if we just stuck with the car for a little longer.
02:44:30 longer. Can I ask you a question about the the J18 Carnival against capitalism? Sure.
02:44:35 Sure. I'm not going to ask you about the actual carnival itself. It's a very specific question. It's been suggested by another witness who will be giving evidence to this inquiry as well
02:44:46 evidence to this inquiry as well that it was Jim Boiling 1814 who had the idea to purchase a number of cars and crash them at both ends of the of the street to
02:44:57 street to to create a uh a closed off street. Were you aware of this? No, not at the time. Um I think you will be hearing more evidence about that this afternoon.
02:45:08 afternoon. At this stage you ceased to be involved in planning RTS activities. Is that right?
02:45:12 right? Yes. I I turned up for the colonel of against the capitalism but by this stage I was effectively a punter. Somebody who showed up on the day I'd had no prior role I had no prior role in organizing
02:45:24 role I had no prior role in organizing any of it. And RTS eventually closed down in 2002. Yes. Roughly. I mean it kind of fizzled out. I'm not sure that there was ever a a formal we're going to wrap it up. It
02:45:35 a formal we're going to wrap it up. It just fizzled out by then. Yes. Can I move on now and ask you about the climate camps? Yes.
02:45:44 Yes. Can you tell us briefly about climate camp? What was it? What were its aims and and and format? So the the idea for climate camp was
02:45:55 So the the idea for climate camp was born out of um you know what was effectively the last sort of anti- capitalist action that took place in the UK. um for all that reclaim the street sort of fizzled out. It the what had
02:46:09 sort of fizzled out. It the what had happened at the carnival against capitalism 99 had sparked an international movement of of protests against you know capitalism whether it was the World Trade Organization or the uh um uh G8 whenever they showed up in
02:46:22 uh um uh G8 whenever they showed up in cities whether it was in Seattle, Prague, Genanoa people would hold mobilizations to oppose the capitalist road show. Then they came back to Britain in 2006 and held a protest camp not in a city but in the countryside in
02:46:34 not in a city but in the countryside in uh at you know in Glenn Eagles in Scotland that forced people to work out how to hold a protest camp in the in the open air. Um and it was huge amount of
02:46:46 open air. Um and it was huge amount of work. I went again I wasn't involved in organizing but I did go and out of that was born the idea that we could do a similar sorts of camps to highlight um
02:46:57 similar sorts of camps to highlight um the sources of climate emissions. Uh, and so the following year and for several years after that two, sorry I think I got the year wrong. The the the
02:47:08 think I got the year wrong. The the the Glenn Eagles camp was 2005. The first climate camp was 2006 at Drax which was then a cold fired power station and there were subsequent climate camps at Heathrow in 2007. Um Kings North which
02:47:21 Heathrow in 2007. Um Kings North which is another um cold fired power station in 2008. The offices of the Royal Bank of Scotland we who were dubbed the Royal the Oil Bank of Scotland because of what they were investing in in 2009. um to
02:47:34 they were investing in in 2009. um to really again to hold camps to shut down sources of you know ma major sources of climate emissions. I will get to Drax in in a moment. Um before I do
02:47:47 before I do on the structure of the climate camps, there was something called a land group. Yes.
02:47:52 Yes. And you say in your statement this was this was secret. Yes.
02:47:55 Yes. Can you explain what this was and why it was kept secret? for very much the similar reasons to why the core group in reclaim the streets was also a secret group. Um there were
02:48:06 was also a secret group. Um there were open meetings um for people involved in climate camp. I did um come back in into uh being involved to the extent that I was regularly going to climate camp meetings which were taking place every
02:48:18 meetings which were taking place every month or two months um to decide roughly what we wanted to do but not precisely where we would go. The land group had the task of working out precisely where
02:48:30 the task of working out precisely where to hold the camp and how to get all of the equipment, the mares, other tents, kitchen equipment, toilets, composting, uh, infrastructure, all the things that were needed for people to be able to
02:48:42 were needed for people to be able to hold a an action camp for several days in in in open countryside close to those various places that we were targeting over those over those those subsequent
02:48:53 over those over those those subsequent years. that that had to be kept secret because the the precise location was clearly a thing that you know if the camp was going to work um they needed to
02:49:04 camp was going to work um they needed to they need to keep that secret. Did they engage with the owners of the land?
02:49:08 land? Did they engage with the owners of the land? As soon as as soon as people arrived, as I understand it, pe me members of the land group, you know, as soon as a land owner showed up or any
02:49:19 soon as a land owner showed up or any kind of agencies of land owner or the police offered to provide a dialogue with the land owner or whatever, there I was never part of this, but I understand that negotiations were always held and were always successfully completed and
02:49:31 were always successfully completed and we, you know, made undertakings which were always kept to tidy up to not destroy any to, you know, people had, you know, the land group as I understand it were always very careful to find places where we would not be destroying
02:49:43 places where we would not be destroying crops, interfering with livestock, doing ecological damage. They were finding, you know, places that wereow um where they could negotiate with the land owner to sort of say we will leave, we will
02:49:54 to sort of say we will leave, we will leave tidily um after, you know, and they they give, you know, the time scales and so those negotiations always took place. Um I was aware of that. I heard about it. I was never part of it. It was done by members of the land group
02:50:06 It was done by members of the land group and I, you know, never actually knew precisely who they were, but we just heard feedback that they'd managed to negotiate with the land owner and all was well, we'd be able to stay. And is it correct that you Mark Kennedy
02:50:19 And is it correct that you Mark Kennedy was a member of this land group? So I So I now go so I now gather. I was unaware of that at the time. I never knew. I never knew this from your own experience. Sorry.
02:50:30 your own experience. Sorry. You don't know this from your own experience? No. Correct. Right. I I I I understand that from what I've learned since. I never knew at the time who were the members of the land group, whether it was Mark Kennedy or anybody else.
02:50:41 else. How well did you know Mark Kennedy at the time?
02:50:45 the time? A little bit. Not very well. He was a familiar face. Um as I say, I was going to, you know, climate camp meetings. He had been one of the one of the many faces that was there. But as I said earlier, I didn't have a great memory
02:50:56 earlier, I didn't have a great memory for faces. He was somebody who I event you know gradually his faith seeped into my consciousness. I I knew of him and then there was an occasion which I
02:51:07 then there was an occasion which I suspect you will you know have a question about um when I needed to I I I one of the the role I took on at the first climate camp and indeed subsequent camps was to be part of the legal team
02:51:19 camps was to be part of the legal team and one of my roles was to you know work out who'd been arrested and make sure we got transport uh to get them back particularly when as in the case of Mark Kennedy he and the group he was arrested
02:51:31 Kennedy he and the group he was arrested with were released from police custody. a long way from the climate camp in the middle of the night and I had to arrange transport for him to get back. I had no idea that he was a police spy. And I'm again I'm asking in your view.
02:51:43 And I'm again I'm asking in your view. So if it's not within your own experience, um please say so. But if it is, how well connected would you say that Mark Kennedy was likely to be with others who were central to organizing
02:51:55 others who were central to organizing the climate camps? I didn't know at the time how central he was. um I would have known that he was a regular face. It would therefore not have surprised me um to have to have
02:52:08 have surprised me um to have to have known that he was you know um involved in the land group. Um but yeah he was he was mostly active in in Nottingham and Leeds whereas I was
02:52:20 in Nottingham and Leeds whereas I was based in London. So he was you know part of the wider national network rather than the the London specific network which was my my main kind of circle of people I knew.
02:52:31 people I knew. Um, turning now to the the first climate camp, the uh the Drax co power station. I want to take you to paragraph 124 of your statement, if I may,
02:52:42 your statement, if I may, where you say you were part of the legal team.
02:52:45 team. Yes.
02:52:46 Yes. And that, and I quote, you regularly advised people who were arrested together to debrief and exchange information about what had happened while they were still together before returning home from the camp. Is that
02:52:57 returning home from the camp. Is that correct?
02:52:58 correct? Yes.
02:53:00 Yes. And
02:53:03 And was this appropriate advice in your view?
02:53:05 view? Yes, absolutely. This was to make sure that people who would then have to go on and prepare their defenses had,
02:53:17 go on and prepare their defenses had, you know, as good an understanding as possible of, you know, piecing together the jigsaw of what had happened to whom and when. um so that they were as well placed as possible to identify
02:53:29 placed as possible to identify um inconsistencies in the evidence that the police or you know security guards or whoever um mounted against them. As I say I from my earlier experience that I
02:53:41 say I from my earlier experience that I talked about on the no m1 campaign I was well aware that the police would sometimes fabricate evidence. I had been subjected to that and therefore it was important for people to be able to kind of you know
02:53:52 people to be able to kind of you know have as much information together to be able to piece together the jigsaw so that they could mount them they could mount their defenses. I want to ask you about Mark Kennedy's proximity to the legal advice. Was he
02:54:05 proximity to the legal advice. Was he part of a legal team? No.
02:54:08 No. Given that you advised people who were arrested to exchange information
02:54:14 in your recollection, would Mark Kennedy have been party to such conversations? I think it very likely because he was, you know, he was so part of that kind of
02:54:26 you know, he was so part of that kind of the the group that were at the center of climate camp organizing. Um I have I I find it very unlikely that he was not party to conversations with others who
02:54:37 party to conversations with others who had been arrested particularly given that he was arrested himself um at the at this action that which resulted in me having to arrange transport for him and others to get back to the climate camp
02:54:49 others to get back to the climate camp from uh places around the northeast from Hartley uh Cleveland Middlesborough and so on. I have little doubt that he was party to conversations with his co-arrestes about the circumstances of
02:55:00 co-arrestes about the circumstances of their arrest. And I I would I would really urge the the inquiry to ask him what information he gleaned from conversations like that because I have little doubt they would have taken
02:55:11 little doubt they would have taken place. And it follows from your view on that that you believe that there was a risk in your view that Mark Kennedy as a trusted member
02:55:23 trusted member was allowed access to confidential discussions about legal issues involving other members. I I think highly likely that that that would have happened. I as I very unlikely that it would not have happened
02:55:35 unlikely that it would not have happened if anything. Can you recall if charges were brought against Mark Kennedy or his co-arist following following the arrests? No, they were not. They were not. Which in hindsight is is kind of
02:55:47 Which in hindsight is is kind of curious. And again, I mean, it may be that other people involved in the climate camp disclosure have now seen more evidence as to how come charges were not brought against Mark Kennedy.
02:55:58 were not brought against Mark Kennedy. that the very fact that they were not they were not brought in circumstances where one of the one of the undercover police officers had been arrested um should have been a you know with hindsight looks like a bit of a red
02:56:10 hindsight looks like a bit of a red flag.
02:56:11 flag. I want to ask you about a specific incident involving Mark Kennedy. You already touched upon this at a time I think you drove a minivan um and he drove it back to the camp. Is that correct? And it was during that
02:56:23 that correct? And it was during that trip back to the camp when Mark Kennedy was driving. You were in the van at the time.
02:56:26 time. I was in the back of the van now. Yes. where in your statement you said he drove the mini bus straight at one of the police officers who was standing near the gateway forcing that officer to run out of the way for his own safety.
02:56:38 run out of the way for his own safety. Is that right? Yes. Yes.
02:56:39 Yes. Yes. Did you confront this with
02:56:43 with No, I didn't. Um it did strike me as odd. Um I did wonder, you know, it it just struck me as an an act of bravado. Um,
02:56:58 struck me as an an act of bravado. Um, I suspect that if if the police officer had failed to run out of the way, he would have hit the emergency brake. But it's just struck me as he is showing off that he is he he he was known for
02:57:09 that he is he he he was known for regularly wanting to kind of um incite more disorder, a more confrontational attitude. And this was, you know, just a part of a pattern of
02:57:21 you know, just a part of a pattern of Mark Kennedy's behavior. Can we move on to the second climate account? This would have took place at Heathther airport in 2007. Is that right?
02:57:29 right? Mhm.
02:57:32 Was this not have been a security risk in your view? No, this was um just going uh you know we we spent a lot of time making the decision about
02:57:44 of time making the decision about whether or not to go to Heathrow. And people felt that as um as one as during the climate camp gathering where we made that decision,
02:57:55 gathering where we made that decision, people were gradually coming around to the idea that it could be done safely. Um there were still people who were very concerned that we would be branded as terrorists and we did think how will we make sure we're not. We found a field
02:58:07 make sure we're not. We found a field that was off that was away from the flight path. the the flight path basically goes, you know, planes coming coming in or taking off east or west depending on which way the wind's going.
02:58:18 depending on which way the wind's going. Our campsite was to the north, so offsite off off out of the out of the way of the noise of the planes. Um the media did attempt to brand us as terrorists. They there was a story in
02:58:30 terrorists. They there was a story in the um Evening Standard about how there was a plot to create, you know, to plant some fake bombs that was there was no evidence for it. We responded by having
02:58:41 evidence for it. We responded by having a little photo call where people um put uh copies, blew up um blew up as an enlarged I shouldn't say um enlarged uh
02:58:52 enlarged I shouldn't say um enlarged uh images of the um front cover of the um uh report from the uh climate um international panel on climate change. Um the their latest report on the the
02:59:05 Um the their latest report on the the climate risks we were then facing. Um and the uh this the slogan we we went out to the media with was we are armed only with pure reviewed science. This
02:59:16 only with pure reviewed science. This was this is our way of saying no this is nothing to do with terrorism. We are taking on a much greater security threat to to our future. Um we don't need to go into the details.
02:59:28 Um we don't need to go into the details. Um, but I want to ask briefly about an injunction obtained by Yeah.
02:59:34 Yeah. BAA, the owners of Heithro airport to prevent the action taking place. Mhm.
02:59:40 Mhm. You refer to it in your statement as an absurd injunction. Another example of a strategic lawsuit against public participation. Yes.
02:59:48 Yes. Why do you think it's absurd? because um it it included injuncting people um and organizations who were involved in uh the um Heathro against
03:00:01 involved in uh the um Heathro against climate action hackan um which included groups like the National Trust patron the queen um it would have ultimately meant that the queen was not allowed to travel on the Piccadilly line to
03:00:12 travel on the Piccadilly line to Heathrow that it was it was that absurd in its in in the scope of what was prohibited under the injunction. And
03:00:22 And when was the injunction obtained? Do you recall that? Not precisely. I'm sure I could find the media coverage. There was a lot of coverage of the injunction. I think I I
03:00:33 coverage of the injunction. I think I I think I exhibited some of the media coverage in in my in my statement if I recall right. Uh but uh yeah it was it was about 2 or 3 weeks before the uh
03:00:44 was about 2 or 3 weeks before the uh before the camp took place and obviously in a way it helped us to publicize the camp because the injunction itself was so outrageous in its scope. And in your view how do they know to obtain an injunction two or three weeks
03:00:56 obtain an injunction two or three weeks before the event? It was being very openly publicized that the the camp was to, you know, set up near Heithro to, you know, effectively
03:01:07 near Heithro to, you know, effectively confront the climate emissions um caused by Heathrow and our overdependence on the fossil fuels that get burnt by um by aircraft. And the the whole point about
03:01:18 aircraft. And the the whole point about Heathrow is they were trying to get obtain permission to expand to build another runway to destroy a lot of homes in the village of Simpson and exacerbate the climate emergency and we were there
03:01:30 the climate emergency and we were there to to confront all of that. Um the fact that they obtained this objunction um in a way aided supported our publicity machine.
03:01:40 machine. Can I move on now to a different topic? This involves the arrest of 114 people. Yes.
03:01:46 Yes. Um, including yourself in Nottingham on the 30th of April, 2009. Yes.
03:01:55 This was in relation to a climate related action. Mhm.
03:02:02 Mhm. Which would take place um at the coal fire power station of Redcliff. Is that correct?
03:02:10 correct? And you were among those arrested. Yes. As was Mark Kennedy. whom he then knew as Mark Stone. Is that correct?
03:02:17 correct? Correct.
03:02:19 Correct. And you and most of the group who were arrested were eventually released without charge. Is that right? Correct.
03:02:26 Correct. Of those remaining, you say they were split into two groups. Yes.
03:02:31 Yes. Both charged with conspiracy for agreeing to commit aggravated trespass. One group was called the justifiers. Yes.
03:02:39 Yes. And they basically they openly admitted their involvement, but they said they were justified in their actions. Indeed. And they ended up being convicted
03:02:45 convicted initially. Initially initially and the deniers was a second group. They denied being part of any agreement and the prosecution against that group ultimately discontinued before trial in January 2011. Is that
03:02:58 before trial in January 2011. Is that correct?
03:02:59 correct? Do you have any thoughts as to why the denier's case was discontinued?
03:03:07 No, I to be honest I haven't thought about that question. Um why the denier's case?
03:03:13 case? Yes. I don't know. I don't know. I I suspect, but it'd be interesting to know that this was because Mark Kennedy was one of the people arrested. Um we now
03:03:25 one of the people arrested. Um we now know that, you know, um of the 114 people arrested, 113 of us went to um Mike Schwarz as our defense uh
03:03:36 Mike Schwarz as our defense uh solicister and uh the 114th was Mark Kennedy. We now know, but we didn't know at the time that he was then taken off active duty because, you know, he was if
03:03:47 active duty because, you know, he was if know the case was proceeded against all 114 of us, he would have ended up in the dark alongside the rest of us and therefore he was he by this stage by being arrested in the in that situation,
03:03:58 being arrested in the in that situation, he he'd effectively, you know, made himself a a liability. So, I wouldn't be in the least surprised if that's why um prosecutions were dropped against most of us and possibly why um they were also
03:04:10 of us and possibly why um they were also dropped against the uh the six the the um the the deniers. But again, I I I think this is a question for the inquiry to explore further what was what was going on. All we know is that it was the
03:04:22 going on. All we know is that it was the start of the process that led to us finding out that Mark Stone was actually Mark Kennedy, a police spy. You mentioned your statement um that there was undisclosed evidence from Mark
03:04:34 there was undisclosed evidence from Mark Kennedy which was relevant to the case and not disclosed. Is that correct? That is correct. He um a couple of years later, by which time
03:04:45 a couple of years later, by which time he'd lost his job in the in the police, but he had gone on holiday with his um his his uh his partner at the time. And at the border, his um his passport had
03:04:58 at the border, his um his passport had said Mark Kennedy when she thought his name was Mark Stone. And this was one of several things that started to un unravel his his legend. Um leading eventually to his friends confronting
03:05:09 eventually to his friends confronting him, his former friends confronting him with the evidence that they pieced together by this stage and saying, "You're a police spy." And he broke down in tears as I understand it and confessed. Now I as somebody who wasn't there for any of that was initially wary
03:05:22 there for any of that was initially wary of this claim that he was a police spy because we were very wary just generally of
03:05:28 of you know myths being started that person is a police spy you know it could create massive distrust that people were alleging ex x ex x alleges the y is a police spy. So we we wanted more
03:05:39 police spy. So we we wanted more evidence. Well later my then downstairs neighbor obtained that evidence because he was one of the justifiers. He was one of the 20 people who was convicted. Um
03:05:50 of the 20 people who was convicted. Um and he had made he and his other do codefendants had made the argument that um they were there to avert um the climate emissions. The counterargument put by the crown prosecution service was
03:06:02 put by the crown prosecution service was no you just wanted to get in the media and they were convicted on that basis that their claim to be averting climate emissions was insincere. Um, following that conviction, Mark Kennedy, now out
03:06:14 that conviction, Mark Kennedy, now out now pushed out of his job in the police and left without support as we understand it, got in touch with my downstairs neighbor, phoned him up, um, said he wanted to speak. Uh, my downstairs neighbor took the precaution of recording the conversation in which
03:06:26 of recording the conversation in which Mark Kennedy said, "I've been shafted by the police. I was there in among in that room where where we held that briefing where we were told how much climate how much CO2 emissions we would avert if we
03:06:39 much CO2 emissions we would avert if we shut down Rcliffon store power station for a day and that that ple that evidence that Mark Kennedy had recorded had not been disclosed to my downstairs neighbor and his codefendants and
03:06:50 neighbor and his codefendants and therefore their convictions were unsound and this is why I said they were only convict convicted initially because those con convictions were overturned because the evidence that Mark Kennedy had recorded as a police spy had not
03:07:01 had recorded as a police spy had not been disclosed to them as it legally should have been.
03:07:12 I take you now to some questions about public disorder and breaking the law. What is your attitude towards public disorder? You've touched upon this
03:07:23 disorder? You've touched upon this before, so I'm not I don't need a um you to go to detail, but looking back today, what briefly is your attitude towards public disorder?
03:07:34 public disorder? It depends on what you mean by disorder, but I think in the in the sense in which it is commonly understood as in, you know, confrontation, threatening, violent, I'm against it. Very clearly
03:07:45 violent, I'm against it. Very clearly against it. Um, it is completely antithetical to everything I, you know, everything I stand for, everything that the movements I've been part of stand for, a fairer, more socially just, more
03:07:56 for, a fairer, more socially just, more harmonious world. And that to engage in that kind of confrontation was just not not just antithetical to what I believe in, but what I strongly believe was was
03:08:07 in, but what I strongly believe was was the common belief of all of the movements that I participated in. To engage in disorder would have been absolutely antithetical to what everything we stood for. And this is why I was always very confident that if
03:08:19 I was always very confident that if anybody had proposed anything involving that kind of confrontation, it would never have got through the consensus decision-making processes of any of the groups I was ever involved in because other people would have blocked it.
03:08:31 other people would have blocked it. Consensus decision-making, I'll try and learn this very briefly. Consensus decision-m is all about not simply voting. Not making decisions by having 52% in favor, 48% against, but making
03:08:42 52% in favor, 48% against, but making sure you listen to the concerns of people who are perhaps in a minority, as happened with the Heathrow decision where there was a minority who were really concerned about the possible implications of holding a climate
03:08:53 implications of holding a climate climate camp. And we listened very carefully to their concerns and we adapted their plan until we got to the point where everybody was at least content for it to go ahead. uh and
03:09:04 content for it to go ahead. uh and ultimately some of the people who'd had those res reservations got very fully stuck into it. It's a very powerful decision-making process um that makes sure that you never upset a a narrow
03:09:17 sure that you never upset a a narrow minority. You try to bring everybody behind as fully as you can behind any decision. And anybody who had proposed any kind of violence, violent confrontation, disorderly confrontation,
03:09:28 confrontation, disorderly confrontation, that proposal would have been strongly blocked in any movement that I was ever part of.
03:09:35 move on now to talk about and again we have touched upon this in the past um your attitude towards the law. Yeah.
03:09:45 Yeah. Can you tell us about the time you made a Nazi salute in court? Yes. It's it's an incident that I'm not proud of. I've provided an account of it in my written statement. Um it arose in
03:09:56 in my written statement. Um it arose in uh uh in the context of a um an action another road protest up in Lanasher. the M construction the M65. There was a row of houses due for demolition. I was one of several people
03:10:08 demolition. I was one of several people arrested um resisting the uh resisting eviction from those houses. Um the magistrate uh then we had uh bail conditions imposed. Everybody involved
03:10:20 conditions imposed. Everybody involved in that protest who was arrested had bail conditions to stay off the route. Excuse me. the magistrate, the Stendry magistrate then kept perpetuating those bail
03:10:32 then kept perpetuating those bail conditions, not just in our case, but in many other arrests. Um, we argued, there were several of us um who were cfendants in the same action. We argued that this was an abuse of process. The Stenia
03:10:45 was an abuse of process. The Stenia magistrate rather understandably dis did not want to find himself guilty of an abuse of process. He went out of the room to find a tape recorder to record his reasons why he had not abused the process in perpetuating our bail
03:10:57 process in perpetuating our bail conditions. One of my other codefendants proposed that we do an Nazi salute when he came back into the room. Uh he didn't look up and therefore my codefendants all sort of sheepishly sat back down
03:11:08 all sort of sheepishly sat back down again. I when he looked up I was the one person still doing a Nazi salute. He sent me down into into the court cells for um you know contempt of court. I purged my contempt of court later. Um,
03:11:20 purged my contempt of court later. Um, I'm not proud of it, but I do wonder firstly why is that question relevant to an inquiry on police spying? Was a rather silly gesture of contempt for the magistrate um a justification for
03:11:33 magistrate um a justification for undercover policing? And secondly, who was the undercover police officer who recorded the intelligence about that? And what you know, what was what legal information was he party to? I believe
03:11:45 information was he party to? I believe that that intelligence was was gathered from from um Boiling. It's in his It's not clear from the document itself, but it's in his disclosure um folder. And I I therefore wonder what legally
03:11:57 I therefore wonder what legally privileged information he might also have been party to on that occasion. Can I go on and ask, have you ever used pseudonyms? Have I ever used pseudonyms? Yes. Um there were there were various
03:12:10 Yes. Um there were there were various cases uh around you know particularly reclaimed streets where we were concerned to avoid news stories that became about the individuals. I had been
03:12:21 became about the individuals. I had been subjected to one where the um evening standard you know did a sort of personal expose of me my lifestyle. They went and went behind my back and interviewed my
03:12:32 went behind my back and interviewed my father who said some pretty supportive things actually. But the whole idea that the story became me was something I was very opposed to and everyone else was too. So we were apt to use pseudonyms in
03:12:44 too. So we were apt to use pseudonyms in order to not make it easy for the police or the media, particularly the media, to turn us into the story. And of course the the the most acute case um was arising from the Newbury bypass campaign
03:12:56 arising from the Newbury bypass campaign when the media made a huge story out of the road protester known as Swampy. Um and he became the story instead of the reasons why the protest was happening. and we wanted to avoid that.
03:13:07 and we wanted to avoid that. I want to finally ask you about your own knowledge and interaction with UCOs's I've already covered this with respect of
03:13:16 of HN14 Jim Boing and to an extent HN100 Mark Kennedy as well. H78 Trevor Morris. Do you recall him at all?
03:13:24 all? No, I have absolutely no recollection of him. I Yeah, I I wonder why he was gathering evidence on me though. Um it beca it's you know
03:13:35 on me though. Um it beca it's you know from the disclosure evidence it's become evident that he recorded my bank details. Um I do wonder why he did that. Um, I also wonder whether there was more spying going on um around both Twifford
03:13:47 spying going on um around both Twifford Down. As I say, I mentioned the lack of disclosure from um uh Andy Davyy, but I also wonder whether there is undisclosed evidence from Trevor Morris. And indeed, I understand that Peter Francis um also
03:14:00 I understand that Peter Francis um also had some some involvement in spying on the M11 campaign. And I would really love to see that as well as that point I mentioned earlier about uh my uh my special branch file dated sometime in
03:14:11 special branch file dated sometime in 1993. I'd love to know more about that because I feel there is evidence that hasn't been disclosed. Mr. Gavin, my final question to you is about the impact on yourself of learning
03:14:23 about the impact on yourself of learning that you were being reported on and followed from your home by undercover police. How do you feel about that? This is disconcerting. Um the but in my
03:14:35 This is disconcerting. Um the but in my case not a huge surprise I already knew that I had been followed and that incident in Maiden Head that I talked about earlier. I think the thing that was most unsettling was to find out that
03:14:48 was most unsettling was to find out that um the way in which the state was gaining ev was was gathering evidence on us was by placing people who were right at the heart of our social networks. We kind of assumed that things were happening like our phones being bugged.
03:14:59 happening like our phones being bugged. Um and it does surprise me that um it is easier for the police to obtain authorization around the bugging of someone's phone than to place a police
03:15:10 someone's phone than to place a police spy in our midst to gather the kind of intrusive evidence that they gathered. But I have to say that in my case the invasion of my prophecy was far less than many of the people who have also
03:15:21 than many of the people who have also involved in this inquiry. And I do partly wonder why, you know, other people who have much more compelling stories to tell uh have not been invited to give evidence. I'm very pleased to be
03:15:32 to give evidence. I'm very pleased to be offer to be able to have the opportunity to provide this evidence this morning, but I believe there are others who should have been invited to give evidence, too. Mr. Geffin, thank you. I have no further
03:15:43 Mr. Geffin, thank you. I have no further questions for you. Um, is there anything that you now want to add that we have not covered? um probably rather a lot to be honest. Uh let me just go to my notes. Um I have
03:15:56 Uh let me just go to my notes. Um I have touched on um the point about police informants. Um there were other police informants um involved in our movement. I did mention that briefly earlier. Uh in particular, there was a guy who um we
03:16:10 in particular, there was a guy who um we knew involved in the Newbury bypass campaign who visited my flat at least once when I was living with somebody who had also uh uh who had also been involved in the Newbury bypass campaign. Nick Gratwick um was recently convicted
03:16:23 Nick Gratwick um was recently convicted of some horrific child abuse uh pornography offenses um child abuse offenses. during his trial um it it was publicly confirmed that he was a police
03:16:34 publicly confirmed that he was a police informer during the Newbury campaign but also on reclaim the streets and Greenpeace and other movements. I would love to know I would love the inquiry to explore why was he recruited initially by Tame's Valley police? What what use
03:16:46 by Tame's Valley police? What what use was made of his evidence? um how was it fed through from Tame's Valley presumably transferred to the Met or what wherever he was going once he was spying on reclaim the streets and other
03:16:58 spying on reclaim the streets and other movements. Um he uh there was another um what was known about his um his behavior was you know did the police already know about his his kind of misconduct at the point
03:17:09 his his kind of misconduct at the point when he recruited him uh as a as a as a police informer? You know what what evidence was going on? Did the police know about the fact that there were police spies and police informants both
03:17:21 police spies and police informants both spying on the same movements? Was there unnecessary duplication or exchange? What was going on? Um, there was a another police informant who uh Jim Boing alleged was a police informant.
03:17:33 Boing alleged was a police informant. We've only got his word for it, but we suspect it was true. It'd be nice to get confirmation of whether that other person was indeed a police informant at the in reclaim the streets around the time of the um carnival against
03:17:45 time of the um carnival against capitalism. Um if it was true, what use was being made of that person's intelligence? If it was a lie, then why was Jim Boing spreading that lie? So I think the whole question of the
03:17:56 think the whole question of the relationship between police informants needs to be explored. Um why were uh moving on to the Dartford incident? Why were the police um recording Jim Boing
03:18:07 were the police um recording Jim Boing recorded uh as I'd mentioned earlier that the intention was to simply shut stop one lorry at one toll booth whereas afterwards the police were seeking plaudits for Jim Boing and for
03:18:19 plaudits for Jim Boing and for everything they'd done as if this had been a complete shutdown of the Dartford Bridge and really dangerous and you know massively disruptive. They were massively exaggerating what happened in that case. Why were they um depriving us
03:18:33 that case. Why were they um depriving us of our um ability to communicate not just with the evade uh take confiscating all those copies of the evading standards but also in the case of a whole load of leaflets uh ahead of the
03:18:44 whole load of leaflets uh ahead of the Mayday um the Mayday action. Um there too they seem to have just concocted an opportunity to arrest or um
03:18:55 opportunity to arrest or um raid the homes of 10 people in reclaim the streets. Three of whom were central uh we learned from Jim Boing's evidence was central to planning that action. Seven of them were not. One of them was
03:19:07 Seven of them were not. One of them was Jim Sutton so that he could be arrested as if he were a genuine activist thereby supporting his cover as well as uh preventing another leaflet going out about why um why that action involved
03:19:20 about why um why that action involved simply planting some some you know bill and blend flower pots in in in in Parliament Square um whilst putting out news stories about how this was terrorism. Um why was there so much
03:19:33 terrorism. Um why was there so much disruption going on? Not just you know sewing discord um you know creating these myths about splits and and and and all the rest of it but also a plot to as
03:19:44 all the rest of it but also a plot to as to harass people in the run-up to the Mayday action um as well as this whole idea of arresting people know confiscating people's homes. But there was also um one of the people
03:19:56 But there was also um one of the people who wrote the uh M11 state, sorry, the reclaim the street statement with me had um had an incendiary device planted on him which went off as if to make out that he was a terrorist who' then been
03:20:08 that he was a terrorist who' then been um caught out by his own, you know, caught out by his own terrorist actions because the the incendiary device that had been planted off on him went off in his own home at night. um as if to make
03:20:21 his own home at night. um as if to make out well they're the terrorists but this guy is actually just being caught out by his own act of terrorism at the time when reclaim the Straits was de was de holding demonstrations against the
03:20:33 holding demonstrations against the escalation of laws against um non-violent act direct action from civil matter to criminal matter to terrorism which takes us to the point where people are now being arrested for terrorism for
03:20:45 are now being arrested for terrorism for simply holding up signs that guy had an incendiary device planted on him what was that all about? Um why were the police so determined to effectively use
03:20:57 police so determined to effectively use their intelligence not to prevent disorder but to make it more likely? I've talked about um well firstly in the case of the march for social um march for social justice where a um as the
03:21:08 for social justice where a um as the inquiry heard yesterday the original plan was to um end up occupying the empty former offices of the department of environment and hold a two-day
03:21:19 of environment and hold a two-day gathering there in that plan was thwarted so that the the the that action happened took place instead infala square where this order was much more
03:21:30 square where this order was much more likely to take place. The police's intelligence the the um the um we now know that in June Boiling's evidence was seen as a great triumph leading to plaud. It's raining down on the police.
03:21:42 plaud. It's raining down on the police. Um I'm quoting there from their evidence. What was this this triumph that they led led us into a situation in which disorder was more likely not less?
03:21:53 which disorder was more likely not less? The same happened then um two years later um with the carnival against capitalism where we know from the evidence that's now been disclosed to us
03:22:04 evidence that's now been disclosed to us that um Jimbo they there was several documents I think four documents from a year ago till two weeks before the action a year before the action to two weeks before the action where they were constantly saying this is this evidence
03:22:16 constantly saying this is this evidence is not to be disclosed to the city of London police why was evidence being withheld from the city of London police that Jim Boing had gathered. Was it firstly to create a situation in which
03:22:29 firstly to create a situation in which um the uh futures the the the LFY building the futures trading exchange building which was in fact the main target. Jim Boing knew that but the LFY building was unguarded in spite of the
03:22:41 building was unguarded in spite of the fact that the city of London police had huge forces to defend the bank of England. Jim Boing knew exactly what the plan was. He was central to organizing it. Um, and yet somehow that information
03:22:52 it. Um, and yet somehow that information seems not to have been fed through to the city of London police. Was this partly to tarnish reclaim the streets's reputation? Was it also partly some power dynamics going on between uh the Met and the City of London police? We
03:23:04 Met and the City of London police? We now know from Jim Boing's own statement that he he talks about some rivalry going on between the Met and the City of London Police. Was this also part of the power dynamics that led to the um uh
03:23:18 power dynamics that led to the um uh strengthened the case for the um replacement of the SDS with the national uh the NPOIU? What were the power dynamics going on um that that um meant
03:23:29 dynamics going on um that that um meant that Jim Boing's police was withheld from the city of London to create a greater prospect of disorder. I would strongly urge the inquiry to call relevant police officers from both the
03:23:40 relevant police officers from both the Met and the City of London, um Anthony Speed from the Met, uh Perry Nove from the City of London to give evidence on this. And I would also urge um the uh
03:23:51 this. And I would also urge um the uh the inquiry to call one of my um co-authors of the reclaim the streets winner statement Jay Jordan who was much better placed who published an investigation of of all this in the Guardian 10 years ago um suggesting that
03:24:03 Guardian 10 years ago um suggesting that this was what was happening and a lot of that evidence has been further borne out by by the disclosure we've since received. Jay Jordan would also be better placed to talk about another arrest where he was arrested alongside
03:24:16 arrest where he was arrested alongside um Mark Kennedy at an office occupation of London Underground. Um Jay would also be better placed to talk about the wrongful arrests of Jay, myself, and one
03:24:27 wrongful arrests of Jay, myself, and one other person when we were preparing to distribute that evading standard newspaper. Uh Jay is much better placed to give evidence on those things than I than I am. So uh there's further evidence that should be brought before
03:24:38 evidence that should be brought before this inquiry. Um, why were the um why were news stories going out in advance of the um the November the 30th
03:24:49 of the um the November the 30th demonstration uh after the carnival against capital about capitalism about that being terrorism with uh reclaim streets allegedly stockpiling incendurary devices when in fact Jim
03:25:01 incendurary devices when in fact Jim Boing's evidence talked about it as a non-confrontational de demon de demonstration. who was who was lying to whom and for what reason? Similarly, why
03:25:12 whom and for what reason? Similarly, why were there new stories going out about terrorism in advance of this action where um in Parliament Square where the plan was simply to plant some some seeds and some flowers to do some gorilla
03:25:23 and some flowers to do some gorilla gardening? Why were the police continuing to spy on Reclaim the Streets and other groups that sort of spun off from Reclaim the Streets? um indie media
03:25:34 from Reclaim the Streets? um indie media who were providing indep independent media coverage because of the way that the media would were demonizing everything that reclaimed the streets did. Why were the police spying on Indian media uh on the Wombles who
03:25:45 Indian media uh on the Wombles who developed a tactic for um of wearing these kind of padded overalls um to you know be able to peacefully resist uh police confrontation on on demonstrations like this on um people
03:25:57 demonstrations like this on um people who were taking action against the arms fair disarm dicey the building where a lot of reclaim the streets's later meetings were taken the London action resource center rising tide which was a
03:26:08 resource center rising tide which was a group that was dealing with climate change the descent network who was dealing with some the wider anti capitalism stuff. Why are all these groups being spied on and what and yet have not been called as core participants and therefore have not seen
03:26:19 participants and therefore have not seen a whole load of the evidence which we reclaim the streets have seen but have not been able to share with them so that they could help us piece together what was going on. I would urge that they too should be able to see the evidence that
03:26:30 should be able to see the evidence that we've now seen and should be able to present their evidence once they had had opportunities to to digest it. Um, finally, um, well, no, two two last points, if I may. Um, what were the
03:26:43 points, if I may. Um, what were the police's real reasons for why they did what they did? Um, I've talked about, um, sharing intelligence, not just, um, well, who were they sharing intelligence
03:26:54 well, who were they sharing intelligence with? Um but specifically were they sharing it with organizations like the consulting association uh an organization that was helping companies to blacklist people who were involved in
03:27:06 to blacklist people who were involved in any kind of protest whether it was union protest whether it was environmental protest my name ended up on on on that on that blacklist. Um how come what what if any was the role of police police
03:27:17 if any was the role of police police spies or police informants or or what was going on there? Um, to what extent were the reasons actually about tarnishing our reputation for all the reasons I've I've touched on now? Uh, why were they apparently exacerbating
03:27:29 why were they apparently exacerbating rather than preventing disorder, spreading distrust, uh, and distress? Um, as I say, particularly things like uh the harassment campaign and the planting of that incendiary device and
03:27:41 planting of that incendiary device and indeed acting as a provocator in several several occasions where um Jim Boing wasn't just um spying on but was instigating plans including hiring one
03:27:52 instigating plans including hiring one of the vehicles for the for the June the 18th action. Um after all of that, did the police have any justification at all based on this idea that they were they were um
03:28:05 idea that they were they were um preventing disorder uh in whatever sense of the word that means. Uh I want to argue that they had no such justification whatsoever. They had all sorts of ulterior motives. Um they knew
03:28:17 sorts of ulterior motives. Um they knew perfectly well as I have said earlier that our intentions were always to keep actions actions peaceful. Um, we wanted to create the s sort of actions where people could bring their children to
03:28:28 people could bring their children to play in the street, to play in sand pits, um, to plant seeds in the middle of Parliament Square, to to have, you know, um, very kind of eloquent, visually symbolic ways of confronting
03:28:40 visually symbolic ways of confronting and highlighting, you know, what was wrong with with car culture, what was wrong with capitalism, what was wrong with the oil industry, and so on. And yet the police were spent
03:28:51 and so on. And yet the police were spent were sent in to undermine us, to frustrate our ability to get the word out um about about the the growing and escalating climate and ecological emergency. Only a fortnight ago, the um
03:29:05 emergency. Only a fortnight ago, the um the the state's own um security uh uh services um published eventually were forced to publish a report on the sec
03:29:17 forced to publish a report on the sec national security implications of the growing um climate and emergency crisis. That support was supposed to been published last October and was suppressed by the government. He was forced out by the Green Alliance putting
03:29:30 forced out by the Green Alliance putting in a Freedom of Information Act research. Even the security services were were being prevented from getting the word out about the growing climate and ecological crisis that we were
03:29:42 and ecological crisis that we were trying to warn about uh 30 years ago. If only we had been listened to instead of thwarted, demonized, and undermined. We might have been in a better place if
03:29:53 might have been in a better place if we'd been if we'd been able to say what we wanted to say in the way we wanted to say it and action had been taken on the basis of everything we were trying to say at that time.
03:30:17 So I'm told there are no there is um our 10 questions. Um that is the end of my there's um my questions. Um normally there would be a break to
03:30:29 Um normally there would be a break to see if there are any rule 10 questions but I would expected that they would have been notified to you by now. Is there any re-examination? Ser just one very brief matter. It won't
03:30:40 Ser just one very brief matter. It won't take more than a moment. Of course. Um just one matter to clarify Mr. Geffin. You were asked about your use of pseudonyms. Yes.
03:30:48 Yes. Um can you just please just explain briefly the sorts of circumstances in which you might have used a pseudonym? Oh. Uh, this was, um, when putting out,
03:31:01 Oh. Uh, this was, um, when putting out, you know, putting out media quotes, as I say, this was the the reason for doing it was overwhelmingly to avoid, um, the personalization of the story and to be able to make sure that um, journalists
03:31:13 able to make sure that um, journalists who are trying to do personal expos personal expose of of myself or anybody else, as I say, there were various, you know, media
03:31:24 there were various, you know, media stories, including one about one focusing on me but other people too. We wanted to diffuse the idea that the story was us as individuals and keep it focused on the issues we were trying to
03:31:35 focused on the issues we were trying to raise.
03:31:35 raise. You use pseudonyms in relation to contact with the media but for example in in legal proceedings or anything like that would you ever Oh no never did that. Thank you. No further.
03:31:49 Thank you for attending to give evidence. Um, I hope you feel you've had the opportunity to have your say as well as to provide evidence to the inquiry. Um, you seem to me to have exercised it and uh,
03:32:01 and uh, we're a free country. Um, despite all the difficulties that I am examining. Thank you. I'm I'm very pleased to have have had the opportunity and I but I do
03:32:14 have had the opportunity and I but I do hope that the questions that I've raised will be more fully explored. Um not all of them will be but uh I'm afraid my terms of reference permit me only to explore um those that I am required to.
03:32:25 explore um those that I am required to. Well I hope I have been of service today.
03:32:27 today. Thank you. Now um we will resume at 10 2. Uh there will then I think be um a difference in the hearing arrangements. Uh the
03:32:39 the hearing arrangements. Uh the evidence will be transmitted by voice only to protect the interests of the individual giving evidence. Don't worry.
03:33:01 Thanks.
03:33:11 Thank you.
03:33:19 I'm going to give you everything
03:33:28 covered. Thank you.