Former SDS manager HN36 Michael Dell is questioned in detail about 'Operation Lime', the fabricated France gun-run invented by HN16 (DS James Thompson) to prolong his deployment, and the decision - taken with Colin Black and HN53 - to discipline Thompson only informally, which let his deception of two women continue unchecked. The hearing then turns to HN81's intrusive reporting on the Stephen Lawrence family and campaign, including intelligence that fed into the MPS response to the Macpherson Report, before closing with HN77's deployment despite a failed psychometric test and brief questions on HN60 and HN3's tradecraft.
00:53:38 Good morning everybody. I understand there are a number of people here who have not attended before. Please therefore listen to what I am about to say with care. Today's proceedings are
00:53:50 say with care. Today's proceedings are going to be transmitted over the live link, but only after a 15inute delay. Those with mobile telephones may use them to report what they have heard in
00:54:02 them to report what they have heard in the hearing room, but only after 15 minutes have elapsed since the event that they're reporting. They may not be used for recording or photography. Yeah.
00:54:25 Mr. D, good morning. Good morning. Yeah. Um, before we start on a a separate topic today, I just wonder if I can clarify a few things that arose from the hearing yesterday. Um firstly I asked
00:54:39 hearing yesterday. Um firstly I asked you some questions about the investigation into HN16. Um and I suggested that I [snorts] think HN49 was excluded from the
00:54:52 HN49 was excluded from the investigations because it was suggested that he was close to HN16. Yes.
00:54:57 Yes. Um it was uh my uh fault that I suggested it was HN49. In fact, it was DS Greeny that I should have put to you, which is HN52.
00:55:09 which is HN52. Yes.
00:55:09 Yes. HN Green uh DS Greeny. He was HN16's cover officer. Is that right? Yes.
00:55:16 Yes. And was he excluded from any investigation into HN16 because of the thought that he's probably too close to HN16?
00:55:26 HN16? No. No. Everyone was. It was only 53 and myself kept it to ourselves. So, everyone was excluded. Um, Bernie Greeny wasn't picked out, selected.
00:55:41 [snorts] Returning to what you said yesterday morning, um, when I was asking you about your involvement in the TSG. Yeah.
00:55:51 Yeah. You said there was always a special branch threat assessment when you were serving in the TSG. How did you know that?
00:55:58 that? No. Well, there was always a special branch threat assessment at every public order event in which which was organized and dealt with by TO20.
00:56:10 and dealt with by TO20. Um, and as a uniformed officer, you would hear the briefing officer read out the assessment. So, everyone was was aware of it. How useful were those assessments?
00:56:23 How useful were those assessments? Um,
00:56:25 Um, they were more useful on the mood and temper of of the people. What could be expected?
00:56:31 expected? The numbers, as I said yesterday, were just the subject of a lot of hilarity, but that was almost banter type laughter. Oh yes, there go SB again. No, it was the mood we were interested in.
00:56:44 it was the mood we were interested in. Could we expect trouble or what? And just to clarify, were you aware of uh any of that information coming from SDS specifically? Oh, I had no idea at the time. No.
00:56:57 Oh, I had no idea at the time. No. You said yesterday that and it was in the context of you talking about Robert Marx's 1975 autobiography about him jettisoning 440 corrupt officers.
00:57:08 jettisoning 440 corrupt officers. Yes.
00:57:09 Yes. Um and that SB was the one outfit he could rely upon to keep their mouth shut.
00:57:14 shut. Yeah. Um, you said some of us are so angry about the origins of this inquiry that people just cannot keep their mouth shut.
00:57:23 shut. Yes.
00:57:23 Yes. Who were you referring to when you said that?
00:57:26 that? I'm I'm glad you inquired about that. I was referring to my former colleagues. And I'm not saying they should have kept their mouth shut to pervert the course of justice. It's just the narcissistic
00:57:38 of justice. It's just the narcissistic urge to speak about your former job when you're supposed to be given a new university lecture. It's not very good tradecraftraft, is it? It's just that annoying thing. And that came from a
00:57:50 annoying thing. And that came from a person who was obsessed with the security, but chose to um to blab. That had nothing to do with the content of the inquiry because I didn't know
00:58:02 of the inquiry because I didn't know what shape or form the inquiry was going to take. My reaction was, "What the heck has he said that for?" Are you talking Who who you talking about? Lambert.
00:58:13 about? Lambert. Anybody else who was angry about the origins of this inquiry? I'm not talking about Peter Francis. I didn't know Peter Francis. And have have you spoken to others about
00:58:26 And have have you spoken to others about the inquiry? No, I haven't. I've spoken to two people since I retired. One of them I became friends with after we both retired. Nothing to do with the
00:58:38 we both retired. Nothing to do with the SDS.
00:58:40 SDS. The second was a phone call from HN9 some years ago worried about the effect of the stress of the inquiry [clears throat] on one of our closed
00:58:51 [clears throat] on one of our closed officers
00:58:53 officers and intimating that perhaps I could see him get together bit well and I said no for the obvious reasons we shouldn't meet
00:59:02 meet and that and so in terms of meeting people that was the top and the bottom of Yeah. [snorts] And have you discussed your evidence with anybody else in any other way over
00:59:15 with anybody else in any other way over the telephone or anything like that before giving your I haven't met I haven't communicated not just about the inquiry about anything.
00:59:25 anything. Um the topic I'd like to move on to is Operation Lime which was HN16's uh uh journey into France uh and the the gun run.
00:59:36 gun run. France or fantasy? Uh well if we stick with France for now um this was in January beginning of uh
00:59:47 this was in January beginning of uh 2001.
00:59:48 2001. Yes.
00:59:49 Yes. Um HN16
00:59:50 Um HN16 went to France. He traveled there by car with the person we know as L3 who has given evidence to this inquiry. Yeah.
00:59:58 Yeah. At the end of last year. Um, and and it was based on the intention of L3 obtaining a gun from a person in France in order to use it against a hunt follower that the inquiry knows is L5
01:00:10 follower that the inquiry knows is L5 who'd injured L4 uh using a vehicle at a a hunt subter incident. Yes. Um uh the plan according to HN16
01:00:23 Yes. Um uh the plan according to HN16 was for him and L3 to travel first to Bordau and then to Marseilles where they would meet with a person and obtain a gun and then drive back to England
01:00:36 gun and then drive back to England staying in a hotel, French hotel overnight. um
01:00:41 um L3 when he gave evidence to this inquiry is that that was the biggest thing that had happened to him in his life that he'd never heard of until last year.
01:00:52 he'd never heard of until last year. Yes.
01:00:52 Yes. And he said the scary thing is if if caught he would have been facing a term of imprisonment. Yes. Um
01:01:01 Yes. Um what we understand about that operation lime is that the gun was intercepted at the French hotel. Yes.
01:01:10 Yes. Overnight. Yeah.
01:01:11 Yeah. Um when the car was supposedly broken into
01:01:14 into Yeah.
01:01:15 Yeah. And it resulted in HN16 driving L3 back to the to England in a higher car without the gun. Yes.
01:01:23 Yes. In summary, is that essentially what operation lime was? Yes. Yeah. And for the purposes of operation lime, HN16 DS James Thompson was known as
01:01:34 HN16 DS James Thompson was known as Cottonbud. That was his code name, was it?
01:01:37 it? Right. I can't remember that bit, but yes.
01:01:39 yes. Okay. Um the the inquiry understands that in his operation to infiltrate um animal uh animal rights activist groups, Yes.
01:01:50 Yes. his code name was Magenta Triangle. Oh yes. Yeah. But for the purposes of operation lime and the gun run to France, his uh operation name, his code name was Cottonbud.
01:02:02 name was Cottonbud. Because I wasn't involved in the operation. That's the first I've heard it.
01:02:06 it. Um because it was January 2001, as you say, you weren't involved in the operation, but you were in C Squad. Yes.
01:02:14 Yes. Were you getting any of the intel reports at that time? Oh, yes.
01:02:20 Oh, yes. And you were aware, were you, that there was actually a darth of reporting from DS Thompson around that time? Yes. Yeah. Did that cause you any concern at all?
01:02:33 Did that cause you any concern at all? Not at the time because I was on ES squad and the recipient of the material and I wouldn't particularly notice a falloff in any sources product but I
01:02:47 falloff in any sources product but I think as your documents show I did notice that when I went on to the SDS and it became apparent that um well there wasn't basically any product of
01:02:59 there wasn't basically any product of any value
01:03:02 any value and that the whole operation lime was [clears throat] simply followed on from 58 and 53's discussions with him about beginning his extraction uh from the
01:03:13 beginning his extraction uh from the SDS. Your time's up. And of course, he didn't want to go. And so this was invented, as you know from other evidences, this was invented to prolong his stay.
01:03:24 his stay. Can we have on screen please MPS075 triple01 is behind tab B77.
01:03:36 What we understand as part of the investigation into DS Thompson was that there was a schedule of reports created that set out his reporting from around
01:03:47 that set out his reporting from around this time. Yeah. This happens to be a report that wasn't included in that schedule. Um, just for the record, the reference of that schedule of reports is
01:03:58 of that schedule of reports is MPS0748361,
01:04:01 but I don't intend to bring that up. Um, we can see here that the title is Cotton Bud, which refers to his code name and operation lime. It says SDS use
01:04:14 name and operation lime. It says SDS use only.
01:04:16 only. Is this the sort of thing that would have crossed your desk in S squad? No.
01:04:21 No. Is this the sort of thing that would have not made its way out of the SDS office?
01:04:29 office? That's right. And what was the reason for that? Why did some intel reports remain within the SDS
01:04:38 SDS and not go to the customers? I'm having to second guess why 58 did it that way.
01:04:45 that way. Uh, and I can't, but I can see the point of making a record um of of what went on separate from the
01:04:56 um of of what went on separate from the actual operation file. Um, it gives you the option then if should anyone ask to see something about it, you can show them either this or
01:05:07 it, you can show them either this or depending on their needs, you'd show them the whole file. I'm guessing of course, but it doesn't have a report number and it says SDS use only. So I'm I'd be
01:05:21 it says SDS use only. So I'm I'd be second guessing why 58 did it that way? Okay. Um would one reason be so that it wouldn't be disclosable in court proceedings if this if this um uh
01:05:34 proceedings if this if this um uh operation had come to be prosecuted? No. bec there was no I mean I wasn't involved in the operation but as I was involved with discussing with 58 and 53
01:05:46 involved with discussing with 58 and 53 how we should develop what appeared to be Thompson's intelligence and how we would deal with it and the overriding principle was was this is not in any
01:05:57 principle was was this is not in any shape or form going to court and that's what 58 and 53 came to bounce ideas off me for just to see if we could get the best out of it and and uh my
01:06:09 get the best out of it and and uh my answer was no, you were right first time. We can't go anywhere with it. We've just got to disrupt it. Um MPS triple04924, please. It's behind tab B62.
01:06:28 Uh this is a a a general overview of Operation Lime. If we can go to page six, please.
01:06:40 We can see your name, penultimate name on the record. Yeah.
01:06:44 Yeah. Contact point in the UK. Were you part of the operation lime UK support team? Uh, no. But I had knowledge of of the operation.
01:06:56 operation. I had knowledge of what they were going to do. I didn't have a knowledge of the operational detail. Okay. So is that why the report we just looked at wouldn't
01:07:07 the report we just looked at wouldn't have come to C squad? No. Only certain information would be sent up to you. They were speaking to me, not to C squad. And they were speaking to me again with my previous experience with
01:07:20 again with my previous experience with informants. So your involvement here as a contact point in the UK wasn't as your DCI role [snorts] in Squad. It was you personally. Yes. Uh with having the
01:07:31 personally. Yes. Uh with having the background that you did. Yes. If the commander is saying, "What the heck's going on?" and he can't contact the other two. Here's the third point. Who can tell you? Had you been tipped to be the person that took over SDS squad a few months
01:07:44 that took over SDS squad a few months later by this point? So, this is January 2001 and you joined the SDS's manager in May of 2001. No.
01:07:53 No. Okay.
01:07:55 Okay. In in your view, what further investigation should there have been into operation lime at the time given your evidence is well we were skeptical about it
01:08:08 about it at the
01:08:08 at the I wasn't skeptical because I'm on C squad and they're just coming to bounce ideas off me about the participating in form can we can we run it let it run and
01:08:20 form can we can we run it let it run and arrest them no as you've as they appreciated themselves No, it's too dangerous. We've got to disrupt it. And that was the end of mine. I had no idea it was a complete scam because
01:08:33 it was a complete scam because he was Jim Thompson on the SDS and that's all I knew. Okay. So, not until not until you joined the SDS. Um, and the point at which he went to Indonesia. Is that when uh you
01:08:45 went to Indonesia. Is that when uh you started to look back at Operation Lime and start to think, hang on a minute, all of this is when 53 started digging around. That's when it came out. Um, at what level was Operation Lime
01:08:58 Um, at what level was Operation Lime authorized? Do you recall? The documentation would tell you, but it would be the commander at least. And is that because it involved a a gun across international borders?
01:09:10 across international borders? Yes. And it's just the very fact of of traveling to another jurisdiction that would be sufficient for commander [clears throat] authority. And was there a contingency plan in place in the event
01:09:21 a contingency plan in place in the event that the gun did make it back into the country in the hands of an activist? I don't know. I can't remember because I had I had no role in the operational planning.
01:09:34 The inquir is aware of numerous documents that outline anticipated criminal proceedings against L3 arising from operation lime. Um and it's noted
01:09:46 from operation lime. Um and it's noted that most of these arise after HN16 has been to Indonesia. So um if we look at MPS 071
01:09:56 MPS 071 9701
01:10:07 at page four Please.
01:10:36 Um. And we can see on the the top paragraph, first paragraph, we can see reference here to operation cottonbud
01:10:48 and reference to other force involvement. [snorts]
01:10:53 [snorts] Is Bernie Greeny the author of this? Um, we can have a look at the end uh please in terms of the date of the report as well.
01:11:04 I'm not too sure who's who who is the author of this. It dates from the 19th of the 10th, 2001.
01:11:12 2001. I mean, it probably would be because I know he worked closely with him on the extraction thing, right?
01:11:19 right? Um,
01:11:21 Um, can we also have up please MPS0719790?
01:11:27 So, this is from the same date.
01:11:33 This is a report by you or a file note by you.
01:11:37 by you. Yeah.
01:11:38 Yeah. And there's reference you can see in the the par the first paragraph to a C investigation. Yes.
01:11:45 Yes. And uh discussion about um you you say you banged on again about the overriding duty not to mislead a court and explained for Magenta Triangle the
01:11:57 explained for Magenta Triangle the issues surrounding uh revelation and disclosure. So, was that something that was very
01:12:03 was very uh clear at the forefront of your mind as to what on earth was going on if you were if there was going to be a prosecution in relation to this? Yes. And not only in my mind, but in everybody else who worked with me.
01:12:14 everybody else who worked with me. That's the phrase I banged on again about it. Uh is it fair to say then that there was contemplation if not by you then at least by others
01:12:27 if not by you then at least by others that this operation was going to run and potentially uh uh conclude with a prosecution against L3? No.
01:12:39 No. No.
01:12:40 No. What what was what was your discussion then around disclosure and revelation?
01:12:49 and a CD investigation. Well, I explained to M Magenta trial the issues surrounding revelation and disclosure.
01:13:00 disclosure. I know what that is, but I can't I can't think what the context was. Uh but there's certainly no question no question at all of going anywhere near a court. um MPS07241
01:13:15 might assist. Couple of weeks later, we've got um another report from the 6th of November 2001 again written by you
01:13:29 and you're briefing Colin Black. Yeah.
01:13:32 Yeah. Regarding the developments in the L5 L4 matter. So that's obviously the the um uh ongoing trial for uh I think it was
01:13:43 uh ongoing trial for uh I think it was GBH against L5 and who assaulted L4 with a vehicle
01:13:58 and Colin Black is mindful of revelation or disclosure and that should that say If if Suz agrees agreed that MT should be
01:14:10 if Suz agrees agreed that MT should be withdrawn from L2 and L3's discussions probably L5 as soon as practical. So this is in relation to the investigation uh of L2 and L3 acquiring the gun from
01:14:24 uh of L2 and L3 acquiring the gun from France to take have a revenge attack against L5. Is that I'm very much aware of that. I'm just getting a bit confused about the relationship to court proceedings.
01:14:35 relationship to court proceedings. Okay.
01:14:36 Okay. Um I it's it's the passage of time, but there's certainly no intent in Operation Lime anywhere for it that to go to court. And the only court proceedings
01:14:48 court. And the only court proceedings are probably the ones you were referring to about the the assault, which which again I don't recall because it was before my time. But that would be the only court proceedings that we were
01:14:59 only court proceedings that we were speaking about. Um, this
01:15:03 Um, this note is dated the 6th of November 2001. So we know that that is when you're in charge of the SDS and it's post HN16 going to Indonesia. Yes. I just can't remember. you see what
01:15:15 Yes. I just can't remember. you see what the
01:15:16 the that the events with el one to five or whatever had occurred before me. Um I don't have the story in my mind. Um in terms of what was happening around
01:15:27 Um in terms of what was happening around this time, we can see in paragraph two that there's a discussion with Alan Mitchell.
01:15:33 Mitchell. Yeah.
01:15:34 Yeah. NIU, the national uh uh national public order investigation unit. You should read it discussed with Alan Mitchell. Miu Progress, not Alan
01:15:46 Mitchell. Miu Progress, not Alan Mitchell. NIU. I see.
01:15:49 I see. He was in charge of both the SDS and the NIU, but he sat above them. I see.
01:15:54 I see. So, um I've not made that clear in the way I've expressed that. That's all right. I mean, it's a a final note, so um it's it's it's um not particularly detailed, but what was
01:16:05 particularly detailed, but what was happening? Can you help us with what was happening with Alan Mitchell in terms of information that the SDS had and any crossover with NOIU
01:16:18 crossover with NOIU and their inquiries into the activities of L2 and L3 the activists. I can only go to the sentence we agreed
01:16:31 I can only go to the sentence we agreed the MT and deduce from that that there is some other investigation which linked to my desire to get
01:16:43 which linked to my desire to get Thompson off the unit as soon as I could. there was some other investigation into the L2s and threes which might pull him in it if he were to
01:16:54 which might pull him in it if he were to stay in his operation. I'm only deducing that because I I just can't remember what the actual facts were and what caused me to have that
01:17:05 were and what caused me to have that fear, but it was the same principle. We don't want him go going anywhere near a court
01:17:12 court whether it's lime or anou job or whatever.
01:17:18 whatever. Can we have can we have Sorry if you haven't finished. Carry on. Yes. Sorry. Um NPS07389
01:17:29 behind tab B94. This is a further note in relation to um magenta triangle and his extraction.
01:17:41 his extraction. Yeah,
01:17:42 Yeah, it's dated if we can go to the end.
01:17:49 It's not dated on the face of the document, but we understand it's from the 27th of November 2001.
01:17:58 And this would be likely to be Bernie Greeny again, right?
01:18:03 right? Um, page two, please.
01:18:12 Um, we can see at the very top MT's removal from close involvement with Operation Cottonbud 2. This would no longer appear to be practicable. Despite several meetings on the subject, no
01:18:24 several meetings on the subject, no alternative strategy for instigating an operation against the principal protagonists has been initiated to the knowledge of this officer. The principal protagonists
01:18:36 this officer. The principal protagonists being L2 and L3. Yeah.
01:18:41 Um it it suggests that there is still some
01:18:47 some criminal investigation going on in relation to those two people. despite there being at least in your mind, am I right to say that it but by
01:18:59 mind, am I right to say that it but by this time you're thinking this is a scam. This is James Thompson and he's made all of this up. Yes. Were there any steps taken by you or others that you're in discussion with
01:19:12 or others that you're in discussion with at this time uh to call off the investigation into L2 and L3 knowing that this is just not
01:19:23 and L3 knowing that this is just not I'm not sure what the investigation was. You see,
01:19:27 You see, um, I didn't write this and I mean, it's perfectly well written, but I don't know what to what it's referring. Is is it not referring to Operation
01:19:39 Is is it not referring to Operation Cottonbud, which was his code name in Operation Lime? Is Isn't it referring to that? Yes, it is. Um, but how does that connect to investigations into L2 and
01:19:50 connect to investigations into L2 and L3?
01:19:52 L3? Um,
01:19:53 Um, is it because that is it because uh James Thompson had said that they're the ones that were acquiring the gun in order to use it against L5? Yes. Um,
01:20:05 Yes. Um, I'm I'm trying to place this in the chronology of the actual operation lime coming in. This is the October of is it 2000 or
01:20:19 This is the October of is it 2000 or 2001? This is November 2001. So it's well after lime. Yeah. Yeah. So lime was January 2001. So it's a good 10 months later. I I don't know. I mean I I just don't
01:20:32 I I don't know. I mean I I just don't know because we had disrupted the operation
01:20:37 operation uh the gun plot if you like. So there was nothing to rope anybody in into investigations regarding that. We had decided that an a disruption was the
01:20:50 had decided that an a disruption was the order much the same as any other squad would pull the plug. Um it's getting too dangerous. We couldn't they couldn't 58 and 53
01:21:02 We couldn't they couldn't 58 and 53 couldn't allow the operation to go on because it would mean a gun if we if it was actually a real thing not a scam the gun would be in possession of someone who we obviously couldn't control. We
01:21:13 who we obviously couldn't control. We you just can't do that. you have to pull the plug beforehand. So, I'm trying to see how this links into investigations against L2 and
01:21:25 links into investigations against L2 and L3. I I I can't put it together. Was the criminal investigation against L2 and L3 allowed to run in order to uh protect the security of the SDS
01:21:38 uh protect the security of the SDS operation? No.
01:21:44 and in that way leave L2 and L3 at risk of prosecution in order to protect HN16. No, I don't remember that. And Bernie
01:21:56 No, I don't remember that. And Bernie Green is saying no alternative strategy for instigating an operation against the principal protagonist has been initiated. Um that that's my stance. So what those
01:22:09 Um that that's my stance. So what those two inquiries were, um it would be entirely pointless to disrupt an operation and then to try and go backwards and rope a couple of people in as conspirators.
01:22:20 in as conspirators. Um
01:22:23 Um so it must be something else and I I connected but I I just don't know what it is. Can [snorts] we look please at MPS 0719717?
01:22:36 It's behind tab B121.
01:22:41 I think that
01:22:44 that Yes,
01:22:46 Yes, he ought to be referred to MPS 0719814.
01:22:54 [snorts]
01:23:03 This is your note. Yes. uh when you discovered that uh he had not told you the truth about going to Indonesia. Yes.
01:23:14 Yes. Um
01:23:16 Um just remind yourself of his contents.
01:23:33 Yes. What was your frame of mind in the light of this note uh about his participation in operation lime at that time? As the
01:23:44 in operation lime at that time? As the note makes clear, my position is that by that time I had I had decided that he was telling a pack of lies, that the operation line was a complete
01:23:56 operation line was a complete fabrication and that he was playing the SDS along in order to extend his tenure. Forgive me for interrupting.
01:24:07 Forgive me for interrupting. Thank [clears throat] you.
01:24:10 Um, yes. I think I'd asked for 0719717
01:24:16 report up. This is a report or a final note from 15th of April 2002 in relation to that firearm.
01:24:27 to that firearm. And
01:24:29 And we can see that it's there had been a disclosure
01:24:35 about halfway down the second paragraph. The name is redacted out blank then said that MT had told them that when MT was
01:24:47 that MT had told them that when MT was on protection duties, a principal had given him a handgun as a token of gratitude. Yeah. NT had apparently sought permission to keep it as a gratuitity,
01:24:58 permission to keep it as a gratuitity, but had been refused, possibly because of the timing of the request around the time of the Dumblain shootings in 1996. MT did not return the gun, but took it to France and stored it in a deposit
01:25:09 to France and stored it in a deposit box. Um given that information, um
01:25:22 why why then did that not trigger your uh uh thinking around or did that trigger your thinking around criminally
01:25:34 trigger your thinking around criminally prosecuting or uh uh HN16 or referring ing him for disciplinary action for possession of a firearm. Yeah.
01:25:43 Yeah. No,
01:25:45 No, I mean that would have been what you sometimes accuse us of lading. Um it's not really central to the
01:25:56 Um it's not really central to the main thing of the thing of the operation which that it was an entire scam. And this officer is coming to me and saying just to let you know that um you know we
01:26:08 just to let you know that um you know we agreed this is it and but he didn't know how much 53 and I knew so he thought this might be helpful.
01:26:19 so he thought this might be helpful. Um, but it told us, yes, it told us where he got the gun from, and it provides um an additional piece of evidence against
01:26:30 an additional piece of evidence against Thompson, but it wasn't it wasn't fundamental. Would it have been classed as an unauthorized firearm? Yes.
01:26:39 Yes. Um, did you ask DS Thompson whether the gun recovered did belong to him? Um, I can't remember
01:26:51 Um, I can't remember what time or when until the document appears that we confronted him with the whole
01:26:57 whole um the whole charade or sherad.
01:27:04 Um, I think you say in your witness statement at uh, paragraph 250 A that I did not ask James Thompson whether the gun recovered in Operation
01:27:15 whether the gun recovered in Operation Lime had been his own, and nor did he tell me anything about being given a gun.
01:27:20 gun. Forgive me. Why did you ask me then something which you know, you know better than I what I said? Yeah. Um, did you not think about asking him? Why? Why was it that you you didn't
01:27:32 him? Why? Why was it that you you didn't ask him?
01:27:34 ask him? You extract a piece of paper from an ongoing operation. I'm sorry, I'm not being personal. The question does that and asks me what I
01:27:45 question does that and asks me what I felt at a particular time in that operation 24 years ago. I can't I can't answer that. Um the issue of
01:27:56 answer that. Um the issue of prosecuting for an illegal possession of a firearm as I see it is is law school knowledge and reasoning question. Identify all the offenses in this circumstance. It fits there.
01:28:09 circumstance. It fits there. But in the reality of I thought was the bigger offense of his of his entire deception
01:28:19 deception uh which characterized his operation. This was a detail and
01:28:27 and if we had charged him for that it would be because that was the only little tidler we had left. So no I didn't but that was that would have been the reason.
01:28:39 have been the reason. Um we can see that HN3 was to see this note. So both you and HN 53 were privy to this information. Did this information go further up the chain as
01:28:51 information go further up the chain as well? I'm not going to present a piece of paper where where it shows who this went to because I don't think we have evidence of that at this time. Yeah, I would imagine Colin Black would have
01:29:03 would imagine Colin Black would have been briefed orally because when I say that 53 and I kept it to ourselves, we obviously didn't keep it from Colin Black.
01:29:11 Black. Would it have gone further up? Would Roger Pierce have been aware of this? He might have done.
01:29:25 Um, in terms of investigating uh this sort of
01:29:35 uh
01:29:39 behavior by James Thompson.
01:29:46 Was it was it part of the discussion at the time that the director of professional standards should be brought in in terms of investigating corrupt
01:29:59 in in terms of investigating corrupt officers within the MPS
01:30:05 53 and I expected that would be the outcome of the investigation. Um
01:30:15 Um I understand from looking at the evidence now in the Chitty case or hearing it that they somehow managed to keep that in house I think.
01:30:26 keep that in house I think. By in-house you mean within special branch.
01:30:28 branch. Yeah. whether had we got to that point that issue had been raised. Um um I I I can't speculate but we both expected that as I said
01:30:40 but we both expected that as I said yesterday Colin Black said no we're not going that route. I felt we should
01:30:51 but on reflection I would have made in his position I would have made this made the same decision. his decision was right and you've heard it before. You blow up
01:31:02 and you've heard it before. You blow up the whole unit just to nail Thompson down. Would that have been the case had it been the DPS that were investigating
01:31:13 been the DPS that were investigating given that they were able to investigate officers in a in a sensitive role. Um they would have been able to conduct
01:31:25 they would have been able to conduct that investigation, wouldn't they? take proper disciplinary action even despite the fact that he was in the SDS.
01:31:33 SDS. This is my reference to the Chitty thing.
01:31:35 thing. It seems to have been done before and as I said I'd never even heard of Chitty at that time. I heard of him during this inquiry in in terms of his his his misconduct.
01:31:48 his his misconduct. And so as I say that was 53 and my view but we never got to the point of discussing right who would deal with it and how
01:31:58 and how because decision was taken not to charge him. I keep saying it. I was I was angry about that at the time but I realized that I would have made the same
01:32:09 that I would have made the same decision.
01:32:11 decision. Can we have on screen please MPS0719770.
01:32:26 So this is a file note of the 22nd of March 2002. It's behind tab B173. It's authored by you. If we can go to the end of the document.
01:32:42 [clears throat]
01:32:46 Um, and just to go back to page one, um, do do you remember drafting this report, I think Colin Black had requested, uh, a risk assessment for HN16
01:33:00 uh, a risk assessment for HN16 and should his wrongdoing be brought to the attention of the DPS or the media. And do you remember? No, I I'd have to read it through, but obviously I wrote it, so
01:33:13 it, so um
01:33:17 there was a modification of the exit strategy. We know that the exit strategy was quite an elaborate exit strategy that involved him going across the west coast of America involved in film uh production. That had
01:33:30 involved in film uh production. That had been his cover employment. And there was a tension between me and well Thompson uh about that. I wanted him off much earlier and I I saw this as
01:33:41 him off much earlier and I I saw this as just a continuation of the scam. Yeah.
01:33:44 Yeah. Dragging everything out. And so that was curtailed um and it was curtailed but it it earlier documents showed that I wanted him off by January.
01:33:56 by January. Yeah. um of O2 but
01:34:00 but certain elements of it were allowed to run in terms of completing that withdrawal process. Yes, there wasn't an operation to protect was my view. So um this is a lot of um
01:34:16 exagger well not exaggeration but unnecessary use of resources and money uh to counter a threat which wasn't there.
01:34:27 there. If we go to page three please on this file note
01:34:33 we can see that um there had been prolonged and uh thorough decision making in relation to the the process of of withdrawal and in terms of
01:34:45 of of withdrawal and in terms of disciplinary action
01:34:52 sorry page it's page two They're different versions of the pages.
01:35:01 pages. [snorts]
01:35:16 We can see down at the bottom under disciplinary action
01:35:22 um there are three options that you present. uh formal discipline, arrest in charge or informal discipline.
01:35:34 And [snorts]
01:35:38 over the page,
01:35:42 we can see that you've headed up benefits of the preferred option, which is informal discipline. Avoiding public discussion of the entire workings of a secret operation was preferred for the
01:35:54 secret operation was preferred for the following reasons. Secure the safety of MT. Maintain the integrity of the entire SDS operation. Thus, secure the safety of all SDS
01:36:05 Thus, secure the safety of all SDS officers past and present and the wider public interest preserve the ability to provide high-grade intelligence. And that is set against the the risks
01:36:16 And that is set against the the risks of that preferred option. which would involve a neglect of duty, impropriy, lack of supervision, failure to comply with Reaper, prejudice to
01:36:28 to comply with Reaper, prejudice to morale, and vulnerability to embarrassment of the MPS.
01:36:34 I'd forgotten this. Did you say that Colin Black asked me to write this? Yes, it's understood that there was a request from Colin Black for you to carry out a risk assessment
01:36:46 for you to carry out a risk assessment in relation to HN16 should his wrongdoing be brought to the attention of the DPS or the media. Yeah.
01:36:53 Yeah. And we can see here that the preferred option that's been put forward is informal discipline uh set against the risks of you know [clears throat] all these other things
01:37:04 [clears throat] all these other things not being re not being um considered or highlighted. Yes. Um
01:37:12 Yes. Um was that a product of your own uh decision-m or was that given all the discussions that you'd been having with Colin Black 53 and any others that were involved in the process?
01:37:23 involved in the process? No, that reflected obviously um that reflected what Colin Black wanted at the time and he he was chief superintendent and I wasn't.
01:37:35 superintendent and I wasn't. And I and I I will I must defend him because
01:37:41 because um
01:37:43 um I might have been still angry at this time that we were going this route. I might not. I have no idea. But it was my anger that was causing me to prefer a harder disciplinary route.
01:37:57 to prefer a harder disciplinary route. And that anger got the better of me then. and when I was interviewed by Hearn
01:38:03 Hearn more so because the inquiry had been announced.
01:38:09 But on long reflection and I know the inquiry does not agree with his course of action but on long reflection I would have done exactly what Colin Black did. The easy answer is to say whoa no
01:38:21 The easy answer is to say whoa no nothing to do with me. Put it up the chain. Colin Black's fault. No matter what I think I can just get rid of it. Well, I'm not doing that. I'm saying what I preferred,
01:38:33 saying what I preferred, but I'm saying also what I would have actually done if I'd thought about it. And if I'd been in Colin Black's position, I wouldn't have done anything different.
01:38:47 the route uh that was ultimately taken by Colin Black and and you're right, it was his decision ultimately. Yeah. In discussion with you and HM53,
01:38:59 discussion with you and HM53, it avoided the risks that you set out here. Um but in that sense, was it also a cover up as to what was going on in the SDS at that time?
01:39:11 the SDS at that time? This added to my anger. The peril Thompson puts us in, as I think I said yesterday, was a threat to our status, our employment status, our pensions, everything.
01:39:22 everything. We would be um liable to charge with even more serious offenses than him. And this was all part of the anger. And
01:39:34 And this was all part of the anger. And he he just didn't even he didn't even realize what he was doing. He was putting both of us in the position of having to make an impossible decision. So it was not a cover up in the old
01:39:45 So it was not a cover up in the old sense. We are the guilty parties. Let's keep it quiet. We are keeping quiet the whole SDS operation and you're you're doing your
01:39:56 operation and you're you're doing your best to um to counter that. When you say we would have been liable to uh
01:40:06 to uh Con black and I and 53 everyone involved in it
01:40:10 in it in what way? What neglect of duty uh misconduct misfeence in a public office [clears throat] um with the criminal offenses
01:40:23 um with the criminal offenses failing to to prosecute those even where we assisting an offender. I'm not trying to tell a lawyer what the you're asking me so I'm telling you but I'm
01:40:33 [clears throat] But did did that play quite a key role in your decision- making at the time? Was it not only protecting the SDS operation but protecting yourselves? No.
01:40:44 operation but protecting yourselves? No. From any
01:40:44 From any I could protected myself by by charging him.
01:40:48 him. That's the point that we were by charging him would you have exposed yourself and uh the other officers involved?
01:40:58 involved? Well, it would have been the lesser cause, wouldn't it, that we wouldn't have dug ourselves in deeper by covering the whole lot up to protect
01:41:09 by covering the whole lot up to protect the SDS, not you, Thompson. That's the point. And it's not protecting a bunch of conspirators. It's something quite separate from it. And you've pushed us into this situation.
01:41:23 We both saw that. I'm speaking now of Colin Black. Colin Black could see it clearer than I. I knew this was how I would react in any other case where I wasn't angry.
01:41:35 wasn't angry. So, I repeat, um I I don't have any argument with the course of action there. I do have a bit of an an argument with well, what
01:41:48 bit of an an argument with well, what actually happened to Thompson? Um,
01:41:53 Um, so as as a result of this, you're saying that the the punishment wasn't as stringent as it might have been. No, but I w I wasn't party to that. Nor was I party to um what happened to
01:42:06 was I party to um what happened to Thompson in what the 10 years after on a Squad. I'd gone to the head of Aquad and said he you you can't possibly have him doing this job, giving him a credit card, a gun, and a car.
01:42:19 card, a gun, and a car. And
01:42:19 And because that's what he went on to do afterwards, wasn't it? As a protection officer.
01:42:24 officer. Yes.
01:42:25 Yes. I
01:42:27 I there is a published photograph of him in I think is it 2010 coming out in front of Tony Blair. Um,
01:42:38 Um, you know,
01:42:41 you know, and and when you say Colin Black could see the risks and the benefits to this course of action clearer than you, what what was it that Colin Black was saying? No, no, sorry. To you.
01:42:51 To you. Sorry. There was more clarity in his thinking.
01:42:55 thinking. Um, I've written this. I didn't need anyone to prompt me to write what the options were um and and what we should do. his his mind was clearer at the time. He wasn't
01:43:08 mind was clearer at the time. He wasn't angry as I was. And [clears throat] um and that was the difference between us.
01:43:17 And were you why were you particularly angry? Did you see that as something quite personal because you were heading up the SDS at the time? Yes, it it it was it was Thompson's attitude
01:43:29 was it was Thompson's attitude throughout the whole investigation where almost a sneering condescension, a failure to cooperate, a failure to allow us to
01:43:42 a failure to allow us to expose quickly what went on and then get to the point, well, how best can we deal with this? What are our obligations dealing with this? We didn't get to that
01:43:54 dealing with this? We didn't get to that point. It was it that's what I'm saying. It was a personal failing on my part. I let anger get the better of me. I I I say I developed this loathing of him and
01:44:05 say I developed this loathing of him and it colored my judgment. Now the fact that the inquiry might say it's just as well it did and you should have gone ahead with your judgment and charged him is neither here. It's
01:44:17 charged him is neither here. It's neither here nor there. I'm just explaining why I have apparent change of mind. And I could have just let it go to Colin and just let him make the
01:44:28 Colin and just let him make the decision, whatever it was, and I'm clean,
01:44:33 clean, but um I didn't want to do that and I don't want to do it because I would have made the same decision. We can see that the fourth bullet point
01:44:44 We can see that the fourth bullet point under risks reads the failure to comply with Reaper. Yes. And it's right at the time, isn't it, that you were the reaper controller, not at the time of Operation Lime.
01:44:57 not at the time of Operation Lime. Yes.
01:44:57 Yes. Um, but just as he came to the end of his operation, failing to close it down as quickly as we we should have done for just about about a year from when you first joined as a a manager to when
01:45:09 you first joined as a a manager to when he left. Yes. And his deployment ceased. Um, so in terms of failure to comply with Ripper, how did you see your role in that?
01:45:21 in that? I'm I'm sorry. I'm [snorts]
01:45:24 [snorts] Could you just just elaborate, please? Was the failure to comply with Reaper purely in relation to operation lime or was it in relation to his deployment as a whole extending right up until the
01:45:36 a whole extending right up until the point where it was concluded? Yes. No, the whole because we had the benefit of then of which of of hindsight 53 and I which 58 didn't have and so um
01:45:48 53 and I which 58 didn't have and so um I've put it down the list because I didn't think it was a significant uh or the consequences of the failure were significant uh because
01:46:01 significant uh because once we had established that he wasn't complying with Ripper We we took action. We could be criticized for not taking it quick enough, but I don't think we could be
01:46:15 enough, but I don't think we could be described as neglectful. And but I put it on the list because just like the DPS, if they'd come to investigate me and Colin Black and 53,
01:46:28 investigate me and Colin Black and 53, they would have gone through it with a fine tooth comb. So I tried to do the same, identify every risk I could think of. So the reaper authorizations would have
01:46:39 So the reaper authorizations would have run after uh operation lime and after Indonesia
01:46:46 Indonesia in order to facilitate the extraction. Yeah. And so to what extent do you say that it was still necessary, proportionate and lawful to retain him in his position?
01:46:57 in his position? Yeah.
01:46:57 Yeah. Uh post your suspicions about his operation being a sham. This this speaks into what we're talking about yesterday about the SDS having to squeeze itself
01:47:09 about the SDS having to squeeze itself into the demands of Ripper. And by that I mean comply with them. And that extension in truth was simply to
01:47:20 that extension in truth was simply to facilitate his extraction. So he was to it was an authorization to be able to kick him out. But Ripper doesn't allow you to do that. So um
01:47:33 So um this is where don't like the word flexibility but our approach to complying with Ripper had to be a bit imaginative
01:47:45 had to be a bit imaginative and is that hearkening back to this sense that the SDS operated in a gray area and separate from the normal uh compliance requirements of the rest of
01:47:56 compliance requirements of the rest of the MPS?
01:47:57 the MPS? No. I don't like I I don't like the gray area being applied to us. We were police officers sitting alongside the rest of the police service as as I
01:48:08 the rest of the police service as as I saw it. But on the other side was still the boundaries of the law. And it's just this bit of the pitch was the muddiest. It was the difficult place
01:48:19 the muddiest. It was the difficult place to put to play the game. Uh but we had to do it.
01:48:24 to do it. We we had to comply and the best you can do in those circumstances is
01:48:34 stretch things when you are justifying it because there is nowhere I can say I want him to be extended so I can boot him out.
01:48:45 him out. When you say you had to go down this route
01:48:49 route um was there because of the extraction. Yeah. Was there a significant discussion with Colin Black or even uh Roger Pierce
01:49:01 with Colin Black or even uh Roger Pierce uh about alternatives about the more stringent uh uh options like DPS investigation of of Thompson or criminal prosecution?
01:49:12 criminal prosecution? Were they actually properly discussed between you? I'm trying to think. I don't recall any. I think the decision was made quite
01:49:23 I think the decision was made quite quickly immediately after the interview with Thompson when he was confronted with his wrongdoing formally because 53 and I had been
01:49:35 formally because 53 and I had been questioning him about it before. But I think I think that was the key moment and we went from there. We worked on that basis
01:49:47 that basis that we wouldn't be asking S1 to come in and conduct an investigation and for them to then inform DPS
01:49:59 inform DPS and how much of that uh was because of the potential for embarrassment to the MPS? How heavily did that weigh on you?
01:50:19 It's not a personal thing. I I I I don't believe in the old police family guff, but the whole operation was an a possible embarrassment right
01:50:31 was an a possible embarrassment right from the beginning given that the original
01:50:35 original authorization document which I saw was signed not by a police officer, not by a politician, the home secretary, but by the permanent under secretary at the
01:50:47 the permanent under secretary at the home office. And
01:50:52 And given that it that authorization was written on a sheet of A3, half the size of Fool's Cap, it was very obvious from the beginning that you've got to keep this quiet
01:51:05 that you've got to keep this quiet because we would have a heck of a job justifying this, batting off political questions about the police state. And so it was in that context once the
01:51:17 And so it was in that context once the authority for authorizing the continuence of the SDS came down from the home office to the commissioner then the potential for embarrassment comes with it. Previously we'd had top cover.
01:51:34 What was there a sense that the SDS were operating with uh uh political authority? Was that a sense that you had that this is home
01:51:45 sense that you had that this is home office authorization? We don't need uh judicial oversight or or or or law legal oversight. No, I mean that I looked at the original
01:51:56 No, I mean that I looked at the original file when I first went in the in the SDS and I just had a rise smile that I thought no home secretary's got has put his name to this. He's asked Sir Phillip
01:52:07 his name to this. He's asked Sir Phillip Allen at the Home Office who was known for um at the time in ' 68 for wishing a
01:52:18 um at the time in ' 68 for wishing a much more proactive stance by the security and intelligence agencies to get the grip of what appears to be threatening the state. I said yesterday
01:52:30 threatening the state. I said yesterday about the French Republic was regarded as 3 days away from collapse. Is it going to happen here? It was a real It it was a palpable fear,
01:52:42 It it was a palpable fear, but no politician's got to put it to that.
01:52:46 that. Um,
01:52:48 Um, but it was it wasn't it
01:52:54 what Sir Phillip Allen wrote in authorizing us was obviously consistent with what the politicians wanted. And so that was an ingrained part of the SDS that you took over and and ran in 20
01:53:06 that you took over and and ran in 20 from 20.
01:53:07 from 20. I'm not sure that many people in the SDS would know the story of the authorization. Um
01:53:16 uh plenty in the in uh in in the branch. I mean yes in the branch and the SDS. Certainly the current people wouldn't and certainly people [clears throat]
01:53:27 and certainly people [clears throat] going back maybe 20 years wouldn't be aware of the circumstances and we set up in and who and who authorized it. Um
01:53:37 Um there was no culture of impunity. Can can I just say just on two occasions when I addressed the pleenary session
01:53:48 pleenary session I I preface my remarks with and this is for the inquiry because I feel quite smug now
01:53:59 because I feel quite smug now because for once in my life I'd done something which seemed to predict what was going to happen. So it wasn't a culture of impunity. Twice I said that this is for the
01:54:10 Twice I said that this is for the inquiry. In other words, please listen and comply. [snorts]
01:54:16 [snorts] And you're talking about when you addressed the pleenery to say that no sexual relationships are allowed. No, I can't remember the exact circumstances of it, but my view was
01:54:27 of it, but my view was just when I had my little slot on the national course, I had a PowerPoint slide behind me with the entirely unoriginal apherism. If it can go wrong, it will.
01:54:38 it will. And that was the only slide I used. And this was my attitude in the SDS. This is for the inquiry. In other words, it will eventually come on top.
01:54:50 eventually come on top. So we must behave in such a manner that we as best we can can account for ourselves.
01:55:00 Just on that point in in in addition to addressing the officers in the the group meetings,
01:55:07 meetings, um
01:55:10 um having that foresight that things will go wrong and also having the suspicions that you did by that point as well. Um it wasn't in relation to Thompson. It
01:55:21 it wasn't in relation to Thompson. It was in relation to our the whole idea of the SDS. It it will. It's just a game of musical chairs and you just hope you're not sitting in the SDSJO and it does come come off. But
01:55:33 come come off. But most police officers know that they have that outlook. It it will all crash and burn. Um
01:55:43 Um okay. I have no further questions in relation to um operation lime. Finally, just on H and 16, um, we understand that he entered his
01:55:55 um, we understand that he entered his false name on the electoral role. Yes.
01:55:59 Yes. Um, and that being the name of Kevin Crossland. Yes.
01:56:03 Yes. Were you aware of that at the time? When did you become aware of that? I was when 53 um came across it. Yes. Um, it doesn't appear and I can bring up
01:56:14 Um, it doesn't appear and I can bring up MPS 0745
01:56:17 MPS 0745 388 which is behind tab B112
01:56:27 at page two please.
01:56:42 Um, sorry I haven't noted the paragraph actually. So it's um paragraph nine.
01:57:01 Yeah. Fine. Final sentence. has entered a false name on the electoral role. Um, was that seen as something serious enough
01:57:13 enough that you thought he should be disciplined for? Yes.
01:57:17 Yes. What steps were taken in relation to that?
01:57:22 He wasn't disciplined. Did Did you take any steps to ensure that officers under your watch were not entering their names on the electoral role?
01:57:33 role? I can't remember. We we we made a lot of other changes which led to a much more in intrusive supervision of them. We understand from Donna Mlan's evidence
01:57:45 We understand from Donna Mlan's evidence who was the deceived woman uh of HM104 Kylo Saraki. Yeah.
01:57:52 Yeah. Uh she gave evidence on the 24th of February of this year and she said that he did the same thing. He put his name on the electoral role, his undercover name.
01:58:02 name. Um,
01:58:04 Um, were you was that a tactic that was used in terms of legend building or backup for your officers? It it would be for his his own legitimate false identity and the legitimate false
01:58:18 false identity and the legitimate false address that he was living at. So that that was a a known tactic within the SDS at the time. Yes. Um, were you aware if anybody ever
01:58:29 Yes. Um, were you aware if anybody ever voted in that undercover capacity? Were there any electoral offenses? No, I'm I'm not aware. And would it have been a concern of yours that of course that would have
01:58:41 yours that of course that would have been a a breach of the democratic process and as you say electoral? Yes, of course it would. And you when I say you're back to the trust again, it's not off you go. I I trust you. It's
01:58:54 not off you go. I I trust you. It's there are many elements in this whole deployment where the essence is of trust and if it certainly wasn't an elite unit but an
01:59:06 it certainly wasn't an elite unit but an elite unit at least would be characterized by several factors but one of them is obviously the adoption and maintenance of the highest personal professional standards
01:59:19 highest personal professional standards that
01:59:22 that the special forces spend 18 months testing their people to see if they can be trusted in the most
01:59:34 be trusted in the most difficult circumstances. We couldn't do that.
01:59:39 that. But if you think you are doing a special job, and I did. I didn't think they were an elite. An elite is the best of the best. I have no idea whether they were, but they were doing an extraordinarily
01:59:51 but they were doing an extraordinarily difficult job which would place demands on them and would question their integrity. Can you stand up to it? And obviously um
02:00:04 And obviously um if I give you a douff driving license and you get stopped for drink driving, you can give the douff license even though you're not at work. Things like that. Yes, there are all sorts of risk
02:00:17 that. Yes, there are all sorts of risk and of course my job was the management of risk.
02:00:23 We know that there was psychometric testing in place um when you took over. Yeah.
02:00:29 Yeah. And we've seen some of the examples of well an example of the type of scenario that might be given to uh recruit. Yes. In in the recruitment process. Was there
02:00:40 In in the recruitment process. Was there any thought given to having ongoing training on these key issues like that? What do you do if you stop drink driving? You know, what what's the right thing to do in term of terms of
02:00:51 thing to do in term of terms of electoral role uh and sexual relationships. It's not a a oneshot opportunity to set your stall out, but an ongoing duty to ensure that
02:01:04 out, but an ongoing duty to ensure that these messages are reiterated and that there's an open discussion about that about trade craft, not something that's, you know, you've said sat in a garage
02:01:15 you know, you've said sat in a garage and not looked at once somebody's out in the field. Yes.
02:01:20 Yes. What what what thought did you give? Yes, I take your point. That requirement um
02:01:29 The wealth of evidence uh tells me that that is obviously the case.
02:01:35 case. But that was not because of a sin of a mission. It's people just plainly weren't listening. Our supervision was not paperbased.
02:01:49 Our supervision was not paperbased. It was dayto-day. It was face to face as often as we could.
02:01:55 could. It was a repetition of the standards. This one's for the inquiry.
02:02:05 But yes, that didn't work either. Face to face telling people. So yes, it's one for the future. Sit them down like in a classroom and
02:02:18 Sit them down like in a classroom and tell them again face to face and keep doing it. Yes, that is one for the future.
02:02:27 future. I didn't imagine that that would be necessary at the time.
02:02:34 time. Um
02:02:35 Um [clears throat] people were in no doubt and I'm using the first person singular a lot because I'm sitting here but this was this was how we as an office approach things
02:02:47 how we as an office approach things that
02:02:49 that this is we we are under constraints. We are based people are putting their trust in us. We have to do our best to demonstrate
02:03:00 do our best to demonstrate that we are complying with things. Obviously, um, some people weren't listening and
02:03:15 I can see your evidence in terms of, you know, setting out what uh what the standards were in terms of what you needed to comply with. What it's the enforcement part of that I think um that
02:03:27 enforcement part of that I think um that appears to be an emission. Do do you accept that? What appears to be an emission? sorry the enforcement of the standard that you've set out you've told them um
02:03:39 you've set out you've told them um it's the inquiring asking the questions direct questions and monitoring or bit more intrusive supervision that seems to be the emission in the the time that you
02:03:53 be the emission in the the time that you are managing do you do you accept that I do accept that it comes alongside also an acceptance of the difficulty of doing that. So we did um
02:04:05 um introduce more intrusive supervision of the things we could the physical things the trust element I couldn't put anything on that
02:04:16 anything on that the
02:04:19 the sexual misconduct issue was the most difficult to keep a control of.
02:04:28 I can look at someone and see it say why is he behaving this way? Why why does he not make eye contact with me when I discuss whatever?
02:04:43 when I discuss whatever? But ultimately he he can just continue to deceive me and it's it's and that is entirely unsatisfactory and
02:04:55 and it's not good enough to say oh just go out as I say we trust you. It's the personal adoption of those standards. There was no way of ensuring that the
02:05:07 There was no way of ensuring that the people you had in front of you were like that. And I'm only talking about again the two miscreants, not talking about the rest of the group who seem to manage
02:05:18 the rest of the group who seem to manage to get on quite well with doing as they were expected and doing an extraordinary good job in very difficult circumstances.
02:05:30 I'd like to ask you about HN81 now. So um leaving HN16 for the moment. H81. Yeah. Um, we know that his
02:05:40 that his Forgive me for interrupting, but before we get on to HN81, can I ask you to reflect and either answer now or later at your choice? Um,
02:05:51 answer now or later at your choice? Um, the course taken in relation to HN16. Yes.
02:05:57 Yes. Informal discipline, nothing formal. Yes.
02:06:03 Yes. [snorts]
02:06:03 [snorts] had a consequence which you were not aware of at the time that his ability to deceive uh two women Yeah.
02:06:11 Yeah. continued
02:06:12 continued and they have described the impact which [clears throat] that had on their lives. Yes.
02:06:17 Yes. Um in the light of that adding to everything else that you did know at the time
02:06:24 time on reflection uh do you still share the view of Colin Black that it was better to deal with it informally? My view was that if we [clears throat] could have dealt with it, I'm I was
02:06:36 could have dealt with it, I'm I was speaking about the criminal side, sir, that I agreed with that if that came out into the public, then the whole operation would blow up. 53 was of the view
02:06:48 53 was of the view uh the same view as me that it should go to disciplinary procedures and that would involve him at least being thrown out of the branch if
02:07:01 least being thrown out of the branch if not dismissed from the job and that was that was my view and I think that is still my view.
02:07:15 disentangling that those events from the criminal offenses might have been difficult. We didn't know how Thompson would react,
02:07:27 We didn't know how Thompson would react, how he would negotiate with us in terms of well, if you go down that route, I shall be ensuring that everyone knows about the SDS
02:07:39 everyone knows about the SDS and I shall be resisting any in camera proceedings.
02:07:48 So I think overall I I think the two issues were linked. They couldn't be separated in fact. And that's why I think Colin Black's
02:07:59 And that's why I think Colin Black's decision was correct. And
02:08:04 And had I been chief superintendent, I would have done the same. Correct.
02:08:10 Correct. Yes. H81. Well, well, sir, if I may, I might just clarify something that arose out of your questions. Um I think in your evidence yesterday when we were
02:08:23 your evidence yesterday when we were looking at the report by HN53 which was dated uh the 5th of July 2002 behind tab B133
02:08:34 behind tab B133 um MPS0719722.
02:08:38 Um, HN53 raised the uh telephone communications with [clears throat] the the two women, Ellie and Lucy, at
02:08:49 the the two women, Ellie and Lucy, at the time.
02:08:50 the time. And I think you accepted in your evidence that then you understood that to be evidence of uh sexual relationship. Yes. Yeah. Um, so at least by July 2002, you were
02:09:04 Um, so at least by July 2002, you were aware of uh Mr. Thompson's deception of at least two women. Yes.
02:09:12 Yes. Sir, I noticed the time it's it's 5 to the normal break time, but given that we're going on to a new officer, is it worth taking a slightly earlier break? Certainly, that makes perfect sense. Uh,
02:09:24 Certainly, that makes perfect sense. Uh, we'll break for 15 minutes.
02:29:07 Yes.
02:29:11 Uh Mr. HN3
02:29:13 HN3 I'll ask you some questions about [snorts]
02:29:16 [snorts] um
02:29:21 sorry
02:29:26 bear with me.
02:29:37 Sorry, I've just been uh prompted. It's actually HN81 we were moving on to. Um HN81 known as David Hagen Windmill Tilter was his code name. He was only
02:29:49 Tilter was his code name. He was only there until June 2001. So uh his deployment ceased just as you had entered uh the SDS as manager. He was targeted initially towards the SWP in
02:30:02 targeted initially towards the SWP in Hammersmith Fulham and then had this roving brief towards Brixham that we touched upon yesterday. Yes. Um and there he uh uh
02:30:13 Yes. Um and there he uh uh he he started reporting on principally uh movement for justice. Um can we have on screen please MPS0728625?
02:30:25 It's behind tab B85 and this is your recommendation for commendation. Yeah.
02:30:33 Yeah. Dated the 2nd of October 2001. Page three, please.
02:30:44 If we can enlarge that. These sorts of recommendations, are they drafted by the officers themselves essentially or this is something you would have written? Yes, that is my style anyway.
02:30:58 Yes, that is my style anyway. Um, and in doing so, would you have read his file? His product file? Yes. Would you have spoken to his former managers such as uh
02:31:10 spoken to his former managers such as uh Bob Lambert or No.
02:31:12 No. DCI Edmonson? No.
02:31:18 We can see it um paragraph one the last sentence says that the response well it's essentially the response of the MPS the McFersonen report was
02:31:31 the MPS the McFersonen report was informed by his assessments. Yeah. Yeah. So you would have been aware of the McFersonen report and and the response that the MPS had to give to the inquiry.
02:31:42 that the MPS had to give to the inquiry. Yes.
02:31:42 Yes. And uh your sense of the extent to which he fed into that report or the the MPS's response. Um,
02:31:55 response. Um, would you have been aware of the uh meetings that uh uh 81 had with Bob Lambert and
02:32:06 uh uh 81 had with Bob Lambert and Richard Walton who was in charge of drafting part of that response? I'm not sure if I knew at the time. I've read the evidence about it subsequently, but I I I don't know. So
02:32:18 subsequently, but I I I don't know. So you were at least aware to some extent that the SDS reporting from 81 was feeding into the uh MPS response to the McFerson report.
02:32:36 We can see part of uh that in bullet point three. you've noted that the provision of a perspective to those charged with formulating the MPS position on key
02:32:48 formulating the MPS position on key strategic issues um that was something he was involved with and he was thus debriefed thoroughly by the Steven Lawrence review team as it considered how the MPS might regain the confidence
02:33:00 how the MPS might regain the confidence of the black community and how it might assess the potential for disorder by sections of that community and what might be the consequences of sustained political pressure on the MPS from hard left and other groups not well disposed
02:33:12 left and other groups not well disposed to the police. In terms of the Steven Lawrence re review team and the forwardlooking part of that team, did you understand
02:33:23 part of that team, did you understand that to be something that was headed up by John Grieve? Oh yes. Yeah. And so when you wrote this part of the re recommendation recommendation, did you understand that to to mean that he'd
02:33:34 you understand that to to mean that he'd been in receipt of information from HN81? Oh, yes. In order to to draft that?
02:33:38 that? Yes. Uh
02:33:40 Yes. Uh or or at least strategize about how to approach Yeah. uh uh community relations in that way.
02:33:54 The inquiry understands that obviously these were legitimate campaigning issues following the death of Steven Lawrence. Yeah. And and was that your personal view of
02:34:05 And and was that your personal view of the Steven Lawrence campaign? Of course. Yeah. Um
02:34:16 in the first bullet point you've mentioned um high-grade preemptive intelligence was provided on a range of local extreme left-wing groups
02:34:28 local extreme left-wing groups well positioned and 81 was well positioned in those groups seeking to exploit campaigns challenging the quality of police and you refer refer to the uh
02:34:39 and you refer refer to the uh police ethnic minority encounters. Yeah.
02:34:42 Yeah. Yeah.
02:34:43 Yeah. Particularly deaths in custody and street interactions and um and
02:34:51 and those looking to ferment unrest and violence over issues such as the Steven Lawrence inquiry and he provided boran uh commanders particularly at Brixton and Tottenham with daily indications of
02:35:02 and Tottenham with daily indications of the political temperature. you've you've spoken about the political temperature and the the value that [clears throat] SDS reporting had in relation to that. Yeah.
02:35:11 Yeah. Um
02:35:12 Um in terms of his closeness to the Steven Lawrence family campaign and their involvement with the inquiry um and the political groups around them,
02:35:26 um and the political groups around them, would it be your assessment that that was a wellplaced um source? source [clears throat] or was that becoming too close to a
02:35:38 or was that becoming too close to a grieving family with legitimate concerns about the way that the police had handled the investigation into the death of their son. Um and clearly by this
02:35:50 of their son. Um and clearly by this point we you would have known is it right that the Steven Lawrence well the Lawrence family were not uh uh involved
02:36:01 Lawrence family were not uh uh involved in any violent campaign. They weren't seeking unrest and actually moved away from that. Yes.
02:36:09 Yes. Um, it's a very long-winded way of putting to you your assessment, having read 81's file. Yeah.
02:36:18 Yeah. Did you think that his deployment really did qualify for a recommendation given the type of information that he was reporting on so close to the Steven Lawrence family and their campaign and
02:36:30 Lawrence family and their campaign and the inquiry? Yes. Um,
02:36:34 Yes. Um, it's risk manage management that Yes. If his deployment were discovered by the Steven Lawrence family, then yes, that
02:36:45 Steven Lawrence family, then yes, that was a risk you have to take account of. But it's like every time you get on a plane, you're in the pilot's hands. You take, you know, the plane could crash. But we don't run our lives like that.
02:36:57 But we don't run our lives like that. And risk management means weighing up the risks, not running away from them, not being like as so often happens in the public sector, having endless committee meetings
02:37:09 having endless committee meetings because you don't want to make a decision.
02:37:13 decision. and 58 when he was deploying HN81 would have had those considerations in mind that yes this is worth doing and his
02:37:25 that yes this is worth doing and his product has shown it was
02:37:30 and there's no suggestion of
02:37:38 briefing against the Steven Lawrence family.
02:37:43 If I may say, if there's one person who has to apologize to the Steven Lawrence family, it's Peter Francis. The hairs he set running.
02:37:54 set running. We do know that there was reporting on members of the family, don't we? Having read the file, you will see that there's reporting about uh Neville Lawrence, now Dr. Neville Lawrence. Yeah. and his
02:38:07 Dr. Neville Lawrence. Yeah. and his meeting with some of the groups that were supporting the campaign. Yeah.
02:38:11 Yeah. Um and you're aware, are you that there was reporting about um uh Mr. and Mrs. Lawrence separating and that was that was sent up the chain, wasn't it?
02:38:23 was sent up the chain, wasn't it? Yes. So given that there was reporting on a grieving family in that way, um putting aside the sense that the there's collateral intrusion in in SDS
02:38:36 collateral intrusion in in SDS reporting, do you accept that there was direct reporting on the family and their campaign during the course of 81's deployment? Yes, but it wasn't as it was information
02:38:49 Yes, but it wasn't as it was information which was coming to light. They weren't directed to go and find out that information. They were reporting report reporting pattern of life information
02:39:00 pattern of life information to paint the picture as vividly as possible for the people who would have read this. And that is the only intention. Um
02:39:12 intention. Um there can be nothing possibly nefarious about reporting that the Lawrenes had um split up. You you might say and there is an argument to be said that it shouldn't
02:39:24 an argument to be said that it shouldn't have been reported for the sensitive reasons sensitivity reasons you've given but there's nothing nefarious about it and so if we're questioning if we're
02:39:37 and so if we're questioning if we're questioning and I didn't deploy him but if we are questioning his deployment what was the intention behind it is surely the issue were the
02:39:50 were the I don't like the word collateral damage but were the side effects of it did they outweigh the benefits of the deployment
02:40:01 outweigh the benefits of the deployment and that is the decision you have to make otherwise you answer the question from the commissioner what have you found out with the answer well nothing we uh
02:40:11 we uh we were a bit timid and we didn't want to try and get the answers to your questions
02:40:18 questions I in terms of the reporting on the family, would you accept that there's there was no policing value in relation to that?
02:40:24 to that? No policing value because you're not talking about public order intelligence, but it is painting a vivid picture of pattern of life. It's not speurious
02:40:36 pattern of life. It's not speurious title which amuses the people in the SDS office. It's just everything about the situation
02:40:45 situation um
02:40:46 um in terms
02:40:47 in terms to then pick on on ingredients of that mosaic
02:40:52 mosaic uh for criticism is um is easy but I think they have to be seen in context
02:41:00 context in terms of policing value of HN81's reporting
02:41:05 reporting um we know that he was involved with M movement for justice which was on the the the peripheries around the Steven Lawrence uh campaign.
02:41:16 Lawrence uh campaign. We did you have a sense that his reporting actually led to uh uh well gave value to the public order policing around the campaign? What what what
02:41:29 around the campaign? What what what value was it that actually his reporting gave to policing objectives? Yes. Three questions I mentioned yesterday. What's happening? What has happened? What's going to happen? and a
02:41:40 happened? What's going to happen? and a borough commander will be more satisfied with an SB assessment which says don't worry there that you don't need to police this heavily there's going [clears throat] to be no trouble
02:41:51 [clears throat] to be no trouble and it's not that he is charged with coming up with the gems which um [clears throat] forall violent action it's he's able to paint a picture for
02:42:03 it's he's able to paint a picture for the burough commander did you have the sense um you were on C squad. Were you around this time? Did you have the sense in C squad that
02:42:14 you have the sense in C squad that actually
02:42:15 actually matters relating to the Steven Lawrence campaign and the inquiry were not serious concerns for public order given the way the family were dealing with uh
02:42:26 the way the family were dealing with uh the the campaign itself. We know and we've seen footage in the inquiry about both Dorene Lawrence and Neville Lawrence
02:42:35 Lawrence ensuring that people involved uh in the campaign people around them were not violent were not disorderly. That's ex that's exactly it. And if we can just change the prism through which
02:42:46 can just change the prism through which we're looking at this that squad is sitting there thinking about all these violent lefties who are going to disrupt. No, we want to paint the picture. We're quite pleased nothing is
02:42:57 picture. We're quite pleased nothing is going to happen here and an undercover officer hasn't failed if he doesn't turn up evidence of violent disorder.
02:43:08 disorder. Um, the negative is as valuable as the positive report. In terms of the negative, would you say that HN81's deployment would have established that fairly early on and his
02:43:21 established that fairly early on and his retention in that role probably went beyond what was necessary and proportionate for the purposes of uh uh public order intelligence.
02:43:33 public order intelligence. Well, again, it's not just public order order intelligence. It's the we're talking about trying to build community cohesion. We're trying to repair We're speaking about it. Trying
02:43:46 repair We're speaking about it. Trying to repair police black community relations. Um
02:43:52 Um we're not going to just go in there, have a quick look, and come out. We want to be able to answer the question. No, the temperature is as reported last week. Things are calm. the com the
02:44:04 week. Things are calm. the com the campaign is running itself. It's quite capable of looking after itself
02:44:11 itself and any attempt to um frustrate its intentions will get nowhere. And then I'm asked that the next week,
02:44:22 And then I'm asked that the next week, is it still the case? Um and I say, "Oh, I don't know. uh um we we've cleared off um
02:44:32 um the deployments would continue as long as the issue was extent. In terms of bullet point two, there's reference to the home secretaries appreciation of the quality of public
02:44:44 appreciation of the quality of public order operation uh mounted in June 1998 communicated to the ACSO and that rests on H1's file. Yes. Um,
02:45:01 was that something that you paid heed to? I don't think we haven't been able to find a copy of that on his file, but was that something that you um that would have had a big impact on you in
02:45:13 would have had a big impact on you in terms of the recommendation for commendation or was it matter of everybody who's served on the SDS gets accommodation? No, I think I think um such
02:45:25 No, I think I think um such appreciations of of gratitude were not every day and to have the home secretary saying it. I mean some people have had the impression that we were always speaking to politicians and the home
02:45:37 speaking to politicians and the home secretary. No. Um that was quite a rarity and for the home secretary to actually send out a little note was unusual.
02:45:50 Um, I refer to the the meeting between Lambert, Bob Lambert, Richard Walton, and HN81, which we know took place in August 1998
02:46:02 August 1998 at Robert Lambert's house. Yeah.
02:46:04 Yeah. MPS0728625 behind tab B85.
02:46:22 Oh, sorry. P page 12 of the document that we're in.
02:46:31 Uh, this is the the reference to the meeting on the 14th of August. Windmill Tilter, Richard Walton and the author Bob Lambert had a meeting. Um
02:46:43 you would you have read this document in relation to um HN81's feeding into the Lawrence inquiry? Is that what is that what
02:46:55 inquiry? Is that what is that what probably formed part of that? I am aware I am aware of the circumstances. Yeah. Um, we've heard Peter Francis's evidence about his uh view that that should have
02:47:09 about his uh view that that should have been reported to the inquiry chairman uh McFersonen. What view did you take on the propriety of this sort of meeting?
02:47:20 of this sort of meeting? I didn't consider such a course of action or wasn't even in place at the time at the m thing. [snorts] plainly didn't consider it and I
02:47:31 plainly didn't consider it and I wouldn't have considered it. Um, did that have any bearing when you were looking at it reviewing the file and looking at recommending him for recommendation? Did
02:47:42 recommending him for recommendation? Did you have any thought about the propriety of this sort of meeting
02:47:49 in in terms of should it have been referred to the Mac person? No, sorry, I didn't put the question well at all. um in terms of your understanding of the conduct of 81
02:48:01 understanding of the conduct of 81 during the course of his deployment and the purpose for his deployment. Yes.
02:48:06 Yes. And feeding into the Steven Lawrence inquiry review team and their response to the uh report from McFersonen. Well, you're asking me as an observer
02:48:17 Well, you're asking me as an observer some years after to give his personal opinion. Um
02:48:28 [clears throat] ah it's it's it's comment on the on a tactical detail which I don't have the whole MPS strategic vision of their
02:48:39 whole MPS strategic vision of their response to McFersonen. I'm very familiar with McFersonen and the events, but I don't know what their strategic uh positioning was and whether such
02:48:52 positioning was and whether such um a submission to the McFersonian would have been useful. Off the top of your head, you can say, "Oh, yeah, that would have been good." Well, I I don't know. I don't know how it fitted in with the strategic
02:49:03 it fitted in with the strategic response.
02:49:05 response. Um, was it your sense at all, having read his file and read some of these file notes, that HN81's deployment was really an attempt to find out what
02:49:19 was really an attempt to find out what was going on with a campaign that was of significant interest to the MPS because of reputational damage? No. Oh, no. No. Um,
02:49:31 I think there was an overall feeling at the time that the MPS is looking as bad as it's ever looked and anything like that would been
02:49:43 looked and anything like that would been a complete waste of time specifically. No, in his case, there was no question that he was tasked with that. I didn't
02:49:54 that he was tasked with that. I didn't task him. So, but that's my opinion. Um, in the sense of undercover officers reporting on justice
02:50:05 undercover officers reporting on justice campaigns. Yes.
02:50:10 Did did your review of HN81 and the understanding of what happened with him at the very outset of your management of the SDS, did that have any
02:50:22 management of the SDS, did that have any bearing on how you then dealt with the later incident of um uh Jean Charles Deanzes when he was shot and killed by police officers in uh uh 2005
02:50:37 police officers in uh uh 2005 and whether any of your uh investigative uh any of your undercover officers should be reporting on that campaign. They weren't reporting on the campaigns of course they were reporting on the
02:50:49 of course they were reporting on the individuals associated with those campaigns and that is the only congruence between the two issues.
02:51:00 the two issues. Um
02:51:02 Um again if it's this perspective this almost ide not you obviously ma'am but the ideological perspective that we are out to do
02:51:15 that we are out to do down justice campaigns. I mean, where I was, I was in the branch, but we were shaking our heads when the
02:51:28 we were shaking our heads when the details of the investigation of Steven Lawrence murder came out. Um,
02:51:39 and I just remember remarking pompously to my wife that it's not necessarily all racism. Don't forget the institutional incompetence.
02:51:50 incompetence. You know the it's easier to adopt a conspiratorial view and say it's agents of the state in a closely coordinated plan to do down the enemies of the
02:52:03 plan to do down the enemies of the state, the left wing. We could never get ourselves in to be so efficient if we wanted to. What about the concept of reporting on
02:52:17 What about the concept of reporting on uh campaigns uh uh justice campaigns and having a an undercover officer in the uh uh the the the circles around a
02:52:31 the uh uh the the the circles around a campaign group like that. We've heard um evidence from Dorene Lawrence. The fact that there was an undercover officer outside Hannibal House on the day that the five suspects gave their evidence,
02:52:44 gave their evidence, there was some disorder. Um a low-level amount of disorder, but the fact that there was a an undercover officer in amongst the group
02:52:56 undercover officer in amongst the group that was, you know, thrashing about and and being part of that disorder has caused
02:53:02 caused significant upset. Was there a sense by the time you came to be in charge and we have the uh reporting
02:53:12 reporting peripherally touching on the John Charles de Manzes uh campaign and the people that were involved in that. Was there any sense that these are not the things that needed to be reported on for
02:53:24 things that needed to be reported on for policing purposes? Well, no, there were things to be reported on. you can understand anyone can understand the context in which uh Baroness Lawrence found herself.
02:53:37 Baroness Lawrence found herself. I mean, we we've been over it before, the the intense grief she was going through and and she then hears from a source with an
02:53:48 and she then hears from a source with an agenda perhaps that that and the police are spying on you or whatever in whatever form it was presented to her, then you can understand her reaction.
02:54:02 But there's always that danger that others will seek to do harm in those situations and make the police to be the villains. That is another risk. So I
02:54:15 villains. That is another risk. So I accepted the risk. Yes. Can we have on screen please 0749490
02:54:24 page two.
02:54:31 Um, this is HN81's reporting on Dwayne Brooks's civil action against the Met Police dated the 20th of February 2000
02:54:44 Police dated the 20th of February 2000 and the fact that Movement for Justice were organizing a demonstration to take place outside the court um when that trial was due to commence.
02:54:55 trial was due to commence. Um,
02:54:57 Um, this was in his file when you wrote the recommendation for commendation. Did you have a sense that this sort of reporting on civil actions involving the Met Police was
02:55:10 involving the Met Police was disproportionate, unnecessary, and shouldn't have been happening?
02:55:17 the actual as I said yesterday should he be tasked to gather LPP no [clears throat]
02:55:28 he comes across it inadvertently the course of action is clear and as I as I explained yesterday your next question is was this passed on to our the people
02:55:39 is was this passed on to our the people preparing our response we've got we've got we've got the um I don't know minute sheet on page [snorts] one you can see who it's who it's passed to
02:55:55 who who's at bullet point five who's PA which means just means put away
02:56:05 so in terms no further action so in terms of that we can see it in paragraphs three and four of the um of the report itself back on page two it's referring to the legal proceedings ings
02:56:16 referring to the legal proceedings ings themselves. There's no public order reference there. Um, did you have any view as to the type of reporting that HN81
02:56:28 reporting that HN81 uh was creating when looking through his file? Sorry, just just run that again. Sorry, because I was watching the screen come up and then expand and all.
02:56:40 up and then expand and all. Um, yes, in paragraphs three and four, we can see that it's referring to the legal proceedings itself. Did you take any view on the propriety of that
02:56:50 of that and whether in fact sorry go on that is perfectly legitimate reporting because the officer under the latest legislation is compelled to report that
02:57:01 legislation is compelled to report that to his controller. It's what the controller does with it that matters and it shouldn't go to the other party in the dis in the dispute.
02:57:12 in the dis in the dispute. It shouldn't be used. It should be put away.
02:57:18 away. Should be quarantined and put away. Now, what what was the purpose in reporting on it? In any event, should it have been something that was fed back to the
02:57:30 something that was fed back to the group? This this type of reporting isn't appropriate. We don't need it. No, but the obligation is on the officer officer if if they come across it
02:57:41 officer if if they come across it without being tasked to go looking for it. the obligation is to report it and this is what the latest legislation says. So coincidentally
02:57:52 says. So coincidentally um people were doing then what the legislation now demands of them that the and then the controller must ensure that such legally privileged material is
02:58:04 that such legally privileged material is quarantined not passed to uh investigators not passed to parties to a civil litigation but put away.
02:58:15 but put away. So what would be the purpose of reporting on it in the first place? because of his obligation to report it. The officer, I go to him six months
02:58:26 The officer, I go to him six months later and say, and I bring this up and I I would say, um, why did you keep this to yourself? You know that you are obliged to report
02:58:38 You know that you are obliged to report it.
02:58:40 it. um like the uniform police are obliged to report to SB any encounter they have with a a politician say for drink drive
02:58:51 with a a politician say for drink drive doesn't matter whether you want to do it or not you must report it same here only this is uh governed now by legislation three or four five years old
02:59:04 legislation three or four five years old it wasn't then can we move please to 1877 seven. Jacqueline Anderson, she was reporting until 2004.
02:59:15 until 2004. Um, we know from your evidence yesterday that you thought that the the deployment had become uh defunct basically. Yeah.
02:59:25 Yeah. Um, and
02:59:28 Um, and in terms of your regular reviewing of proportionality, you decided that this operation should cease. Yes.
02:59:35 Yes. Uh having a look at MPS 0731 950
02:59:42 950 behind tab B168 [clears throat] at page three please.
03:00:04 If we can increase that. Oh yeah.
03:00:13 See right down at the very bottom of this
03:00:16 this note, the last bullet point. This is looks like my rough notes by the way.
03:00:22 way. Is that what is that what this stuff is? This looks like put them on the word processor. Um we can see reference to her feeling let down. Um her deployment's coming
03:00:33 let down. Um her deployment's coming toward toward to to the end but the bottom bullet point notes is that her supervisors have gone to extraordinary lengths to keep her operation going. What lengths had uh you've gone to is it
03:00:46 What lengths had uh you've gone to is it the DS's or you personally [clears throat] to keep her operation going? The issue was that she had in being initially deployed into a field to
03:00:57 initially deployed into a field to establish her legend, but she was still there. That field was of sporadic episodic interest in public order terms. They were the
03:01:09 public order terms. They were the cyclists who blocked the bridges of the temps. Every now and then they would cause a nuisance and then go home for tea. And that was it. I wanted her to take
03:01:23 And that was it. I wanted her to take over from HN3 because I wanted to finish HN3's operation, but there was this residual public order requirement relating to the
03:01:35 public order requirement relating to the G8 of 2005 particularly, and I didn't want to start a new officer with a 5-year term. So, I wanted Jackie to move over to that
03:01:46 over to that and HN3 could uh go away and to other duties. She didn't want to do that. Um, then and an issue here was I
03:02:00 then and an issue here was I [clears throat] she got on to her Federation representative and presented it that I was just chucking her off the unit and I was ending her operation early. Well, I
03:02:12 was ending her operation early. Well, I could have ended her operation early in compliance with Ripper, but in fact, I wanted to extend it by taking over that. So, that's what that refers to extraordinary lengths. I'm not throwing
03:02:24 extraordinary lengths. I'm not throwing her off. [snorts] Um, I want to extend her tour. But this isn't referring to extending her operation in the position she's in now. It's extending it through to Well, that's my rough notes. I mean,
03:02:36 Well, that's my rough notes. I mean, there is another better document than that. I don't know if you retrieved it where I summarized the whole thing when it became plain that she was contemplating
03:02:47 contemplating uh action against me on the grounds of sexism because she was the only female officer on the unit. Well, yes. And you address that in paragraph uh 30 324g of your witness
03:02:59 paragraph uh 30 324g of your witness statement, right?
03:03:00 right? And you say, "I don't know whether HN77 alleged that she was being bullied only by me or by others, too. She let it be known that she would be considering a sexual discrimination case against me, but she never pursued that.
03:03:11 but she never pursued that. Yes.
03:03:12 Yes. Um,
03:03:16 were you aware of when she was recruited that she had failed the psychometric test? And I can take Sorry.
03:03:24 Sorry. Well, I was just going to take you to the document MPS072 3226.
03:03:30 3226. So, obviously this is before your time. This is back in 1999. page three.
03:03:40 So this is a note about the psych uh psych psychological assessments. Yes, I remember having seen this. So So you would have seen her file. Well, yes, I've seen this recently and
03:03:52 Well, yes, I've seen this recently and at some point during my tenure, I became aware she had failed it and so obviously I was well, let's see how she carries on then because she's in place now. Let's
03:04:04 then because she's in place now. Let's see how it goes. Um, we can see on the top of page four
03:04:15 [clears throat] that um she showed low moral or ethical standards.
03:04:22 And the last sentence, [cough] excuse me, her answer showed that her low personal standards may cause her to be too flexible in an undercover situation without concern for the consequences for
03:04:34 without concern for the consequences for her or the organization. You've said this morning that the level of trust you need to be able to put into undercover officers who are on such intrusive operations
03:04:47 on such intrusive operations needs to be really high. What did you feel about HN77 being taken on despite this uh failure
03:04:58 being taken on despite this uh failure of the psychometric test and and not having been recommended by the psychologist? Like anywhere in the police, um if a [clears throat] senior officer is has me
03:05:09 [clears throat] senior officer is has me posted to them, they've got to put up with me. And it's, you know, they might wish someone to be better there, whatever. Well, I'm here and you you get on with it. And that was my attitude
03:05:21 on with it. And that was my attitude there, that she is on, she is deployed, and I want to move her across anyway. Um, and that's an entirely different
03:05:32 Um, and that's an entirely different question from what would have been my response to a receipt of this report? And if that's the question you're asking, then that would it would have
03:05:44 asking, then that would it would have been no no for me. But it wasn't. She was there. I made do with what I This sounds a bit callous, but I made do with what I got. That is
03:05:55 but I made do with what I got. That is what everybody does. Um,
03:06:00 Um, if you knew that about HN77 was the conclusion of her scope of the the the the deployment she was on, was that not a reason then to conclude her
03:06:12 that not a reason then to conclude her operation? Say that again, everyone. uh if if you knew this about HN77, was the kind of the tailing off of her operation not a not an opportunity then for her to leave
03:06:24 not an opportunity then for her to leave the unit?
03:06:25 the unit? No.
03:06:25 No. Were you satisfied that actually she could continue? Oh, no. because I write elsewhere that um in actual performance of her duties, there's no criticism of Jackie and
03:06:37 there's no criticism of Jackie and situations hadn't arisen where she could demonstrate these uh negatives or contradict them. So, I wasn't in a position to see if this was an accurate
03:06:50 position to see if this was an accurate representation of her personality, but nor was I qualified to question it. But it's again it's my job to well she's
03:07:01 But it's again it's my job to well she's she's working as well as she can where she is. There was just not a lot of intelligence to be had. And Ron Gilbertson and I
03:07:13 Gilbertson and I um
03:07:14 um had a campaign of extra strong encouragement of her because she was getting fed up that nothing was happening. And so when one or two good things did come up, we over praised her
03:07:26 things did come up, we over praised her and made sure as I write elsewhere, there was no criticism of her work. Was there any substance to her criticism
03:07:37 Was there any substance to her criticism of you and being uh discriminatory towards her on the basis of sex? I'm baffled because
03:07:48 I say the efforts I made to try and get women on the unit and why would I chuck off the only one we'd got? Uh MPS0731
03:07:59 Uh MPS0731 947 behind tab B182
03:08:05 is a memo uh concerning a meeting with HN77 regarding the closure of her operation and the issues with her posting. And on
03:08:17 and the issues with her posting. And on page three, the last paragraph on page three.
03:08:26 And who's the author of this? HN19.
03:08:30 HN19. It might be that they're on your cipher list.
03:08:33 list. Yeah, it doesn't matter. Anyway, it's it's
03:08:37 it's I think it's somebody that's just involved with the um the complaint that she was making about being taken off the unit. Yes. Yes, I know where it is now. Yeah. Um and and when uh you were uh meeting
03:08:53 Um and and when uh you were uh meeting um with the person,
03:08:58 it's noted that you agreed that the phrase me chief inspector UDC was not the most appropriate way of speaking to her. And I think that the the implication was that if you speak to
03:09:11 the implication was that if you speak to somebody like that, it's in a bullying fashion.
03:09:14 fashion. Yeah. Um, and you appear to have accepted that that wasn't appropriate. Wasn't appropriate. It's out of context, of course. It was frustration
03:09:25 of course. It was frustration and and it does go on to say that, you know, you you felt exasperated for failing uh for her failing to come to the office. Yes. Yeah. And failing to come to the office, failing to see Ian Palmer,
03:09:39 office, failing to see Ian Palmer, failing to discuss with with us. She just wouldn't speak to us. And yes, I made that entirely inappropriate comment out of exasperation. Just do it. Go and
03:09:50 out of exasperation. Just do it. Go and see Ian Palmer or whatever it was. We can see from MPS 0722153 behind tab B179
03:10:09 that there was a request by HN77 to have uh Bob Lambert Yeah.
03:10:17 Yeah. in a meeting with her in terms of her leaving the uh the SDS. Yeah.
03:10:32 Sorry, I'm trying to refer you to the correct
03:10:34 correct Yeah.
03:10:35 Yeah. uh passage.
03:10:46 Yes. Yeah. Okay.
03:10:56 In fact, I think the better better reference is probably your witness statement. I'm I'm not too sure I need to take you to a a a document in relation to this. If you have a
03:11:07 relation to this. If you have a recollection of HN77 wanting Bob Lambert to Yes. accompany her to a meeting with you.
03:11:17 you. Oh, sorry. It's on page two. Sorry, I thought that was the end of the document because it was signed off.
03:11:24 Oh, it's the penultimate paragraph. Thank you. Um, down at the bottom of the paragraph.
03:11:38 So, FP fever pitch her code name. She indicated that she wanted Bob Lambert uh to accompany her and that was communicated to you. You weren't in
03:11:49 communicated to you. You weren't in favor of that and and what was the reason for that? I didn't want any arbitrator. Um it's just a reminder this is the police service and ultimately when I say
03:12:01 police service and ultimately when I say please do this, you do it.
03:12:06 This was an order not this was an order given to an officer not under incredible pressure not under any pressure at all under very comfortable working
03:12:17 under very comfortable working circumstances. So it came down to it in in in the end and when we then come to discuss
03:12:25 discuss what is my in fact offer of a job to you but you presenting it as me throwing you off. I don't want somebody else to decide who is in the right. I'm running
03:12:38 decide who is in the right. I'm running the SDS.
03:12:40 the SDS. Those are the terms of it. Take my job offer or finish your deployment. Did you know Bob Lambert at that time?
03:12:51 Did you know Bob Lambert at that time? I knew Bob very well. Bob and I worked on C squad. And did you recognize that he was an officer that the UCOs would go to if they needed any
03:13:04 the UCOs would go to if they needed any assistance with anything? Was he was he seen as a bit of a fixer? I don't know about that. I knew he had a high reputation.
03:13:14 I had when I had worked with him on Squad,
03:13:21 I I [snorts] saw the different Bob Lambert to revealed by the inquiry. Notwithstanding his SDS conduct, his his conduct outside of the SDS was of a
03:13:35 conduct outside of the SDS was of a thoroughly conscientious, enthusiastic, um,
03:13:43 um, hardworking, likable person. Um,
03:13:50 Um, and that contrasts sharply with, of course, with his alter ego on the SDS. The time I knew him, he was excellent. And I was very pleased because at the
03:14:02 And I was very pleased because at the time I was trying to bump up the area liaison to have people who were good rather than people who were forced to do it sort of thing. And in the three
03:14:14 it sort of thing. And in the three people I had on this his particular area, I was [clears throat] delighted. Was there any reason that you wouldn't have Bob Lambert? I mean, you've spoken about not having an an adjudicator in
03:14:27 about not having an an adjudicator in the room. Any reason why Bob Lambert specifically you didn't want involved with the with that meeting? [clears throat] Um, on on reflection, I suppose there
03:14:39 Um, on on reflection, I suppose there was the added thing. I didn't want it to be seen that Bob Lambert was running this discussion. And that's obviously why Jackie wanted [clears throat] Bob there. Um it's
03:14:52 [clears throat] Bob there. Um it's obviously Mike Dell doesn't understand what I'm going through and this that and the other. He's not being a UCO and etc etc. And I was having none of that.
03:15:04 etc. And I was having none of that. But I didn't want any arbitrator at all. And then
03:15:09 And then I relented and said, "Right, you can have your mentor." And
03:15:15 And the mentor came along to a meeting at West
03:15:20 West and he was beused when she walked out of that meeting as to what exactly the issue was. You're offering her a job. She doesn't want it. So you were saying, "Well, then
03:15:33 want it. So you were saying, "Well, then your current job finishes." He was beused as to what her beef was. Um, if we can move on to HN60, Dave Evans, please. He was recruited by
03:15:46 Evans, please. He was recruited by Lambert
03:15:47 Lambert and was in the back office between January and May 1998. He deployed in May 98. So before your time, about two two three years before you joined.
03:15:58 three years before you joined. And uh, his operation ran until December 2005. So very long operation about 7 and a half years. Yes.
03:16:07 Yes. Um were you aware to the extent that he was involved in um civil claims against um uh activists in that he was
03:16:22 against um uh activists in that he was involved in his undercover role in civil injunctions being taken out against animal rights activists? No. Was that when when was this?
03:16:34 when when was this? Um, if we can have a look please at um [snorts]
03:16:48 Well, can can I leave that for a moment, please? Can it?
03:16:57 Sorry. Bear with me one one moment.
03:17:06 Before we get to that, can I start at the beginning of his deployment? And of course, you weren't there at the time. No.
03:17:11 No. But what we understand is that and and this is information that is taken from Helen Steel's evidence um that she gave to the inquiry. Um her third witness
03:17:24 to the inquiry. Um her third witness statement, if we can have that on screen, please. UCPI 39908 at page 22.
03:38:12 HN3, please. Um, in terms of his involvement in criminality, we know that HN3 was involved in the disarm dicey or DSCI
03:38:26 disarm dicey or DSCI uh uh uh actions. um
03:38:31 um involvement in criminality was obviously something that you were uh uh well aware of and had to manage. And we can see that as the the deployments progressed
03:38:43 that as the the deployments progressed by this stage uh by the time you take over in 2001 there was more of a chance the evidence that the inquiries heard there was more of a chance of people becoming involved in criminality that
03:38:55 becoming involved in criminality that would lead to arrest because of the types of uh deployments that they were um in. Yes.
03:39:04 In terms of the extent of authorizations of activity that would lead to criminality and potentially arrest and prosecution, what discussions had you had with HN3
03:39:17 what discussions had you had with HN3 about the need for pre-authorization for any criminality? Numerous. And in fact, HN3 referred to that in his evidence uh either on my own
03:39:30 that in his evidence uh either on my own or I can see myself and Ron Gilbertson speaking to him and in general strategic terms saying to him, you're getting too close uh Jay and you are
03:39:44 getting too close uh Jay and you are actually providing the activists with cover because there are no circumstances in which we can prosecute anyone if you're involved in it. So he has acknowledged that he was such
03:39:57 So he has acknowledged that he was such a keen, enthusiastic officer that he had to keep pulling back on the reigns and saying literally at one point, look, this is a waste of time. You're giving them cover. So can I document those
03:40:10 them cover. So can I document those individual instances? No, I can't. But they were a sufficient number either myself or with Ron that uh it's it's obviously sticks in my mind. and he was
03:40:22 obviously sticks in my mind. and he was he was aware of the degree of authorization required anyway. um authorizations are given of course with intent right we know this is
03:40:34 with intent right we know this is happening is it acceptable for you to participate or is it not uh we were talking to him about those situations where he'd had discussions
03:40:46 situations where he'd had discussions with activists and the possibility might arise of something bigger of occurring and
03:40:54 and we saying look you just have to pull back you got to find an excuse not to be there. Whatever. And pro by providing cover, you're talking about being a a participating informant. Yes. Yeah. We would just we couldn't
03:41:06 Yes. Yeah. We would just we couldn't bring any prosecution against them. If a police officers involved, can we have on screen please MPS 0036501?
03:41:31 So this is um a note on HN3 in relation to increased level of criminality. this top paragraph
03:41:42 criminality. this top paragraph increased an RH is red herring which was his code name HN3's code name relating to the increased level of criminality which is being conducted by some members of the disarm dicey group.
03:41:56 some members of the disarm dicey group. Yeah,
03:41:57 Yeah, we can see uh his name is amongst the people listed below. Yeah. And there's reference to uh uh various
03:42:10 And there's reference to uh uh various activities. So this is something you're saying he's getting quite uh close to the involvement in criminality. Was he leading the efforts to be involved in
03:42:24 leading the efforts to be involved in any criminality? No, he he was clear about that and he he articulated the fact that he was he was fully aware about that. He appreciated the risks and it was due to her pure
03:42:37 the risks and it was due to her pure hard work and enthusiasm and
03:42:42 and pull back Jay. Pull back. Um so I'm going to be coming to a a part of the evidence where there's an RRO.
03:42:54 of the evidence where there's an RRO. Um and so it may be that the feed will go down now and I can uh look at that just before the lunch break. Yes.
03:43:03 Yes. Can that be confirmed please when it has happened?
03:43:12 For those not acquainted with our