Afternoon session of Day 2 of Robert Lambert's (HN10 "Bob Robinson") evidence, covering his management of HN26's deployment into an ALF cell led by "Joe Texas" (Frampton) - including tradecraft advice, the disputed authorisation for her to help release thousands of mink in Hampshire without informing local police, and repeated denials of contemporaneous knowledge of her relationship with Frampton. The session then turns to Detective Constable Mark Jenner: Lambert's admission he deliberately withheld from Jenner's wife the known risk of undercover sexual relationships, extensive reporting on black justice campaigns (Brian Douglas, Ibrahim Sey, Trevor Monerville) and the Lawrence family, Jenner's infiltration of Anti-Fascist Action and Red Action, and "Operation LFU" - a scheme to have an activist imprisoned to protect Jenner's cover.
00:29:19 Good afternoon everybody. Uh we continue with the evidence of Mr. Lambert. Uh as this morning uh the evidence is going to be live streamed with a 15minute delay.
00:29:30 be live streamed with a 15minute delay. Uh those with mobile telephones may use them to record what they hear in the hearing room, but only after 15 minutes have elapsed since the event that they're recording, they're transmitting.
00:29:41 they're recording, they're transmitting. Uh they may not be used for recording or photography. Thank you, Mr. L.
00:29:48 Mr. L. Thank you, sir. Could we have up to start with please? 719838.
00:30:00 This is a personnel note. Uh we understand it's one of yours. It dates from 1995 and is recording a meeting on
00:30:11 from 1995 and is recording a meeting on the 6th of September 1995.
00:30:15 1995. We see in the first paragraph that the basics are recorded that you'd had a wide-ranging discussion with HN16
00:30:26 with HN16 10 months into her deployment and were reviewing her strategy. With that context, could we go to the penultimate paragraph on that page,
00:30:38 penultimate paragraph on that page, please?
00:30:40 please? Give you a moment to read that.
00:30:44 [snorts]
00:31:12 [clears throat] Yes.
00:31:13 Yes. Uh we see at the bottom, don't we? you adverting to the dilemma that we were exploring yesterday. Namely, a shadow a shallow paddler is unlikely to get
00:31:24 shallow paddler is unlikely to get anywhere. Uh but a deep swimmer uh has to tread a difficult line between participation and commanding
00:31:36 participation and commanding respect.
00:31:39 respect. This is where good trade craft comes in. What advice did you give HN26
00:31:48 on the subject of good trade craft when getting involved with those committing crimes claimed by the ALF?
00:32:02 committing crimes claimed by the ALF? Um
00:32:09 the um the value of um
00:32:17 um close friendships with individuals that were known or suspected to be involved in um direct action.
00:32:29 to be involved in um direct action. Um and
00:32:32 Um and um
00:32:36 the
00:32:39 um you know the willingness to um
00:32:45 um well number I suppose
00:32:49 f first of all there'd be the need for her
00:32:55 her um
00:32:58 convict conviction that direct action was was the right thing um and that you know she'd come to come to come to this conclusion. That's talking the talk. Can we move to
00:33:11 That's talking the talk. Can we move to walking the walk? Did she did you advise her she would have to show some bottle? um
00:33:19 um you know to follow the example of other field officers who had successfully negotiated this by um
00:33:32 successfully negotiated this by um um
00:33:33 um taking part in activity where you know the well I meant reference to a field mentor
00:33:45 well I meant reference to a field mentor but generally officers um being able to assist in a very in a minor way, driving
00:33:58 assist in a very in a minor way, driving um and so forth. Um
00:34:03 and I think by this point I think she was,
00:34:07 was, you know, she was really quite uh familiar with a lot of a lot of this um good trade craft
00:34:19 trade craft and these examples would include HN1 and yourself.
00:34:24 yourself. Yes.
00:34:27 Yes. Can we look at the last paragraph on that page which runs over the page? Just give a m give a moment for that to come up.
00:35:01 Does the advice recorded in this paragraph amount to you could consider getting arrested as a hunt
00:35:12 consider getting arrested as a hunt sabotur? That might increase your credibility within the group
00:35:19 group and that would be no problem as long as you don't break cover. Yes.
00:35:24 Yes. Even up to and including going to court. Then you're making a distinction, aren't you, between a public order arrest and
00:35:35 you, between a public order arrest and those which arise from clandestine criminal activity? Yes. Do you mean by that the sort of offenses that were being claimed under
00:35:46 offenses that were being claimed under the ALF banner? Yes.
00:35:50 Yes. Not officially sanctioned to participate in that sort of crime.
00:35:58 If you get caught, you will be off the unit.
00:36:03 unit. I think I would have had in mind um
00:36:13 um serious cases um
00:36:19 um as I've outlined already. Does it amount to this? You're telling her
00:36:27 her you are going to have to get involved. Show some bottle. But whatever you do, don't get caught. No, I don't think it does.
00:36:42 And if you do get caught, we'll have to return you to ordinary duties. No, I I don't think that's a fair interpretation.
00:36:53 interpretation. Well, how then does one tread the line and get into an ALF cell without
00:37:04 and get into an ALF cell without participating in Clanderstein criminal activity by taking part in a a minor role in in
00:37:15 by taking part in a a minor role in in the way that uh I've outlined.
00:37:26 Can we test that against an example we're going to come to in more detail in a moment? We know that HN26 goes on to participate in the release of Mink.
00:37:38 participate in the release of Mink. Yes.
00:37:39 Yes. In Hampshire. That was Clanderstein criminal activity, wasn't it? Yes. in which she participated. Yes. In a minor role.
00:37:54 And so the advice here, the latter have never been sanctioned, isn't quite right, is it? Because you did go on to sanction
00:38:04 sanction HN26
00:38:06 HN26 participating in Clanderstein criminal activity.
00:38:10 activity. Yes. I I think you know I could have been clearer in that last sentence. I'm sure that she had the correct understanding.
00:38:26 Can we take that document down now? And can we go to 247472, please?
00:38:41 This is a file note um about HN26 dated the 30th of January 1998 about meeting the day before. Please keep that date in
00:38:53 the day before. Please keep that date in mind because I'm going to come back to it. It has the initials RJ at the bottom. Uh was that the pseudonym you were using Robert Johnson?
00:39:05 were using Robert Johnson? Yes.
00:39:08 Yes. Why did you use that pseudonym in internal SDS documents? I think it just reflected the point in time where
00:39:19 point in time where um the unit was operating for the first time um in in that guise um
00:39:32 um in in that guise um Johnson Graham Green and um that that's the context for it. If we look at the preamble and then the
00:39:44 If we look at the preamble and then the first two bullet points,
00:39:52 would it be right to understand that what is happening here is you and Sergeant Greeny are talking to HN26 and what you are saying to her is that
00:40:03 and what you are saying to her is that in your views her operation is best terminated in March 1999 because
00:40:14 because infiltrating the ALF at a national level was no longer a realistic option. Yes.
00:40:20 Yes. Uh and that she should focus for the remainder of her deployment on London Animal Action. Yes.
00:40:30 Yes. Did you mean March 99 or did you mean March 98?
00:40:35 March 98? Uh oh. Yeah. Um, well, I suppose I need to be reminded of what her start date was, but 94. She went in in in
00:40:48 date was, but 94. She went in in in November 94. I can't recall then. I'm sorry. And then if we zoom out again out of that and then go to the bottom paragraph,
00:41:02 it paints a picture of her uh being disappointed uh but accepting of the position.
00:41:20 Yes. Okay, got it. Yeah. [snorts] Can you help us with why you and Sergeant Greeny had come to the conclusion uh that infiltrating the ALF at a
00:41:31 uh that infiltrating the ALF at a national level was no longer a realistic proposition for this officer? I can't recall now. Um I guess you know
00:41:43 I can't recall now. Um I guess you know obviously at the time
00:41:47 both he and I for whatever reason you know we we came to that conclusion I can't recall it. Was it a conclusion that nobody could
00:41:58 Was it a conclusion that nobody could infiltrate the ALF at a national level or was it a conclusion that this officer couldn't realistically do it? Um, well, it obviously
00:42:10 well, it obviously relates to this officer, so that's clear. I can't say more than that. Holding the date in mind, 29th of
00:42:21 Holding the date in mind, 29th of January, 1998. Can we take the document down and have up, please, 247517?
00:42:31 [snorts] This is a branch note dated the 26th of February 1998 recording a strategy meeting with C
00:42:42 recording a strategy meeting with C squad on the 25th of February 1998. So less than four weeks later and it
00:42:53 So less than four weeks later and it deals with various officers. But if we concentrate on uh the section which says DI Lambert outline outlined current SDS coverage as follows and then the road
00:43:05 coverage as follows and then the road bridge section. Thank you.
00:43:12 Has recently become involved in a small group which has the potential to commit serious criminal damage.
00:43:23 damage. That is painting a completely different picture of where HN26
00:43:30 HN26 deployment is at. And what what's the difference? Forgive me. The difference in time between the 29th of January and the 25th
00:43:41 between the 29th of January and the 25th of February. So 27 days later. Yes. Yes.
00:43:44 Yes. Yes. My question to you is in those 27 days, what had happened? Well, I think um what had happened is is
00:43:56 Well, I think um what had happened is is this that um within her own orbit, so you know we were talking previously
00:44:07 you know we were talking previously about you know the national scene but I mean but within her own orbit I think that um
00:44:15 that um this [snorts] potential arose. So I mean in some ways um well we can be clear that um she hadn't in those in that month I
00:44:29 she hadn't in those in that month I think it's fair to conclude that she hadn't really um
00:44:35 um moved out of her circle
00:44:41 circle um of activists. Um uh but
00:44:47 Um uh but what has she told you that has caused you to conclude that she was involved in a small group with the potential to commit serious? Well, clearly the de the detail
00:44:58 Well, clearly the de the detail she would have provided um some detail about this small group which um it it does become clear.
00:45:12 which um it it does become clear. Does she tell you anything about how she's become involved with this small group?
00:45:18 group? Um, well, I'm sure she would have done. Um, I I don't know. I I I shouldn't speculate, I suppose, but I I I think it's important to
00:45:31 it's important to reflect on the,
00:45:35 you know, the the work that she had done. And maybe after that meeting, maybe she's just had an opportunity to
00:45:46 maybe she's just had an opportunity to um get closer to particular individuals as as indeed transpires. Was she telling you at that stage that
00:45:57 Was she telling you at that stage that she'd got close to Mr. Frampton? I can't recall the precise chronology, but that I guess that's that's what is at issue here, I think.
00:46:10 that's what is at issue here, I think. And Mr. Frampton's name would immediately strike a chord in your mind, wouldn't it, as someone who had the potential to commit serious criminal damage?
00:46:22 commit serious criminal damage? Yes.
00:46:24 Yes. And so, from your point of view, a very positive and exciting development. Um,
00:46:32 Um, yes.
00:46:36 Any discussion between you and her about how she has suddenly turned around a deployment that looked like it was going nowhere into one with this positive,
00:46:49 nowhere into one with this positive, exciting development? Um,
00:46:54 Um, no. Well, not that I can recall, but um
00:47:02 No, I shouldn't. Sorry, I shouldn't speculate. I don't I don't recall. Can we take that down now, please? And can we have 247547? This is tab B228, sir.
00:47:15 This is tab B228, sir. This is one of your file notes. It's dated the 16th of March, 1998. So uh a few weeks later and it's copied to HN58
00:47:28 few weeks later and it's copied to HN58 on page one uh if we look at the first paragraph and if I ask you to concentrate in particular at the top of that
00:47:46 this is the first written record we have recording that You know that the cell she has infiltrated
00:47:58 that the cell she has infiltrated is Joe Texas for the avoidance of doubt. That's Mr. Frampton, isn't it? Yes.
00:48:05 Yes. And it records quite how important Mr. Frampton is in terms of of being of interest to you at the time. Was was understood to be at that time.
00:48:18 Was was understood to be at that time. Yes.
00:48:20 Yes. a man of particular interest to you who your understanding was had been getting away with ALF style actions for a long while.
00:48:30 while. Um well I don't recall now what that was based on but um that that's yep that appears to be the position.
00:48:39 position. Can we look at the last paragraph on the page please?
00:48:46 Give you a moment to read that.
00:49:05 Um yeah, thank you. Picking up on the fact that uh Mr. Frampton has taken HN26 into his
00:49:16 Mr. Frampton has taken HN26 into his confidence and the phrase she is now committed to her cover role to an unprecedented extent.
00:49:26 extent. What did you mean by committed to her cover role to an unprecedented extent? Um,
00:49:34 Um, well, far more um
00:49:47 far more um
00:49:55 involved with a different caliber of activist, far more committed in that sense.
00:50:06 Did it in any way reflect a very close personal connection between HN26 and Mr. Frampton?
00:50:17 between HN26 and Mr. Frampton? Um
00:50:19 Um clearly it involved a um a close friendship.
00:50:27 Um, I don't believe at that time that either myself or uh Bernie Greeny or uh any of the other members of the team
00:50:39 uh any of the other members of the team that we had any um
00:50:46 any understanding that she was or that she either she was um or not um involved in a sexual relationship with Joe Tex.
00:51:00 a sexual relationship with Joe Tex. Did you ask her? I didn't I'm sure I didn't ask her directly because I didn't um I don't think I ever did.
00:51:11 I didn't um I don't think I ever did. Did she say anything to you to the effect that she was doing that or allude to it in any way? No.
00:51:21 No. If we look towards the end of the paragraph, while each case has to be judged on its merits, SDS has the experience, most recently with Jeff Shepard, to mount successful preemptive
00:51:34 Shepard, to mount successful preemptive operations in sensitive ALF cases where source protection is of the essence. Am I right to understand that what you're really referring to there are
00:51:46 you're really referring to there are operations such as those of HN81 which led to Mr. Shepherd's arrest and your own operation which led to the
00:51:58 your own operation which led to the arrests of Mr. Shepherd and Mr. Clark? Yes. Those uh both were operations where the
00:52:10 the SDS undercover officer remained in place after the event. Yes.
00:52:16 Yes. And was not disclosed to the courts? Yes.
00:52:21 Yes. And had from your point of view the successful outcome of convictions of people for ALF crimes? Yes.
00:52:31 Yes. And would it be right to say that you are thinking now that HN26 has got into um Frampton's confidence, there's an opportunity to use the same tactics uh
00:52:46 opportunity to use the same tactics uh and try and get Mr. Frampton convicted? Yes.
00:52:56 And was that strategy one that you discussed with HN26?
00:53:03 Um, well, I I would [clears throat] I'm I'm sure that it would have been, but I can't recall the uh chronology.
00:53:18 If we go to page two of the document, paragraph two, and the last four lines, especially once it's up.
00:53:47 [snorts]
00:53:54 Um, have I interpreted this correctly? Uh, you are saying here that Frampton cell isn't covered by Arie
00:54:05 isn't covered by Arie nor or C squad. And that from your point of view is to put it mildly operationally desirable. Yes.
00:54:16 Yes. And is it desirable? Because the last thing you want when you are trying to repeat what you did and what HN1 did is to have anybody else
00:54:30 what HN1 did is to have anybody else reporting on events at the same time. Um, well, I know it it tends to read that way. I haven't quite been able to
00:54:42 that way. I haven't quite been able to figure out precisely what I was meaning in the uh towards the end of this, but um no, because if you uh think about the
00:54:57 um no, because if you uh think about the um Hane one uh case um you know you know that actually that did involve um other
00:55:09 involve um other source reports There may come a time when other resources need to be used, but
00:55:20 but why is it operationally desirable not to have anybody involved but the SDS at this stage?
00:55:31 at this stage? Um
00:55:35 [snorts] so let me sorry I'll just try reading simp
00:55:42 counter well [clears throat] look I no I can't immediately figure that out. I'm sorry. Does it give the SDS complete freedom of action until you reach the stage where
00:55:55 action until you reach the stage where you need to bring somebody else in?
00:55:59 Um, I I just don't I'm not sure. Um, could we go to paragraph four, please?
00:56:14 I'll give you a moment to read that.
00:56:26 A testament to her ingenuity and dedication. Tribute to Road Bridg's willingness to explore all options available to her.
00:56:40 explore all options available to her. What options had she explored to make this significant breakthrough? Um
00:56:55 I at the time I would obviously I knew precisely what I what I was referring to. It would have been you know factors in her
00:57:08 you know factors in her within her target area maybe.
00:57:14 I you know I don't know. Is this a euphemism for she started to sleep with him?
00:57:20 him? Um, no. No, it it wasn't. Are you sure? Well, I'm sure that uh when I was writing this
00:57:32 when I was writing this um that that was not my intention at all.
00:57:38 all. Can we have the next paragraph, please?
00:57:44 Paragraph five. Thank you.
00:58:05 now regularly enhancing her cover credibility by staying overnight with activists when they travel to different parts of the country on demonstrations and other business. In April, she plans
00:58:17 and other business. In April, she plans to travel with techs and others to a week-long animal rights gathering in Holland, and this will further enhance her standing.
00:58:28 her standing. Had she ever stayed overnight with activists when they traveled to events outside London before this? Well, I I cannot recall. I'd be surprised
00:58:40 surprised if she hadn't. Um, so why are you emphasizing now in this document that she had been
00:58:51 now in this document that she had been staying overnight with activists? and that a weekong stay why are you emphasizing now that she is staying overnight with
00:59:02 that she is staying overnight with activists and that a week-long stay in Holland will further enhance her standing
00:59:09 standing um because of the particular activists that she's uh traveling with. Is it a way of saying euphemistically
00:59:23 Is it a way of saying euphemistically that lots of other activists will see that she is in a relationship with Mr. Frampton?
00:59:31 Frampton? Um
00:59:33 Um um
00:59:39 that clearly that she would be seen to be um with him and others. Um but um
00:59:52 I think as far as I was concerned at that stage um there was no suggestion that she was involved or might be
01:00:04 that she was involved or might be involved in a sexual relationship with text
01:00:10 who covered the trip to Holland from the back office. Um
01:00:19 I I think is this the um is this a trip to is it
01:00:24 to is it Leiden?
01:00:25 Leiden? Um yeah, I spoke to this this morning. I I think I do feature in a a list two was it two two officers or three officers that were cover. I'm
01:00:36 or three officers that were cover. I'm pretty sure that I would remember if I had in fact been there and and the fact that I can't remember
01:00:47 fact that I can't remember um going,
01:00:50 um going, I'm inclined to think that I didn't. Would it help if the document were put up which
01:00:57 up which authorizes his travel? Uh if you've got the URN, sir, that would be very helpful. MS0527645
01:01:13 MPS 0527645.
01:01:26 You can go to the next page, please. Thank you.
01:01:50 Um, do you have any reason to suppose that you did not travel to Holland? Well, let me um
01:02:03 in order to provide essential backup, I intend sending DI Lambert to cover and DS Reini.
01:02:12 DS Reini. Yeah, I'm I'm pretty sure that for whatever reason I I didn't go. I I mean, it's just
01:02:20 it's just I you know, Leiden, I I'm sure I' I remember
01:02:26 remember pl you know, places abroad that I I don't think I've ever been there. when you uh accompanied officers on overseas trips
01:02:37 overseas trips in how close a proximity were you to them?
01:02:43 them? Well, it it would depend on each particular trip and the what what was happening. Um but broadly um
01:02:56 Um but broadly um you know we would maintain a distance. We did we didn't want to uh be too close for obvious reasons
01:03:08 uh be too close for obvious reasons and but we wanted to be close enough in case um they had a an emergency problem of some kind. Would you have expected
01:03:20 of some kind. Would you have expected Detective Sergeant Greeny to have physically seen uh Thompson and HN26 enlighten
01:03:33 enlighten what's the question is would you have expect would I have expected him Detective Sergeant Greeny to have seen HN26
01:03:41 HN26 and Detective Sergeant Thompson in Leiden
01:03:46 in Leiden Um
01:03:49 Um over three uh oh they go oh I see see they travel at slight oh oh slightly different times well
01:04:00 different times well possibly but it it um
01:04:05 um there's I can think of occasions where the the management offic management officer
01:04:16 officer wouldn't see um wouldn't have an actual sighting of the um undercover officer. Did you speak to HN26 before she
01:04:28 Did you speak to HN26 before she traveled to Leiden? I can't recall. Would it be fair to say that when you send officers abroad with activists, uh you have to be particularly careful
01:04:39 uh you have to be particularly careful about their security? Yes. much harder when they're overseas to to help them if they get into trouble.
01:04:47 trouble. Yes.
01:04:47 Yes. Did you discuss with her what level of threat she might have felt at at that time?
01:04:52 time? Well, I'm sure that either myself or DS Greeny or um the um HN58
01:05:03 um one of us um would have briefed her and discussed issues um very thoroughly.
01:05:15 issues um very thoroughly. What level of threat did she perceive herself to be at in Leiden? I think she would have perceived the threat to be pretty
01:05:28 mild. I I think she'd be, you know, fairly unless there was who can say at the time, but on the face of it, um workshops um
01:05:43 it, um workshops um likeminded individuals um within a cell of people committing significant criminal offenses.
01:05:54 Oh, I Where's this come? Well, this is from the documents we've looked at earlier. We know that by this stage she's
01:06:01 she's Oh, with the pe the people she's Yes. But I Okay. But um given the context, I would And was the fact that she was at a
01:06:12 And was the fact that she was at a pretty low level of threat despite mixing with people who you believed were committing quite significant criminal offenses
01:06:21 offenses because she was in a relationship with Frampton.
01:06:27 Frampton. Um, no, that's not the case. And you didn't have to worry about her security very much for that reason. No, that's not fair. Presumably looking at it the other way,
01:06:39 Presumably looking at it the other way, if there had been significant concerns about security, you would have gone, wouldn't you? No, that's No, that's um that's not fair at all. [snorts]
01:06:51 at all. [snorts] Can we take that down, please? Can we go back to um the last document 247547?
01:07:06 And can we have page three, please? And can we have once we get there the last paragraph of text?
01:07:34 Yes. Yes. Shrewd enough to notice a change in Road Bridges lifestyle commensurate with a progression to serious ALF status. What
01:07:46 progression to serious ALF status. What did you mean by lifestyle? Um mixing with um the group of committed
01:08:00 um the group of committed ALF activists that um that she was now doing.
01:08:08 Suffice to say here, her current profile can only help offset any lingering doubts that might exist in his mind. [clears throat] Her current profile, what did you mean
01:08:21 Her current profile, what did you mean by that?
01:08:22 by that? Um, the status of, for example, um, traveling to Leiden with a group. These are her close
01:08:36 Leiden with a group. These are her close friends. It's all about friendship and for someone like Brendan McN um there's a sort of a ready
01:08:50 Brendan McN um there's a sort of a ready appreciation by you know where individuals sit um by virtue of their their circle. Was it
01:09:03 virtue of their their circle. Was it because HN26 was very close to Frampton? Um,
01:09:11 Um, that was not my understanding at the time. Yes, I was uh always aware of the risk
01:09:23 of the risk uh the risk of uh of a sexual relationship arising, but I had no reason to um suspect that
01:09:34 um suspect that in this case at this time. Did you receive from any other source whilst HN26 was deployed anything to
01:09:47 whilst HN26 was deployed anything to suggest
01:09:49 suggest that Frampton and HN26 were in an intimate relationship?
01:09:57 No, I I I didn't. Um, and
01:10:06 and I think I can say when I left the unit, um,
01:10:12 um, late later that year, I don't think I um I don't think I had um
01:10:23 um heard that either directly or indirectly. Mr. Gravit and the activist we are calling Walter have both given evidence to the inquiry to the effect that they
01:10:35 to the inquiry to the effect that they knew
01:10:36 knew and witnessed HN26 and Frampton in circumstances which indicated they were in an intimate relationship. Can you recall whether you ever saw any
01:10:52 Can you recall whether you ever saw any intelligence coming in from any other source? Please don't identify the source uh to that effect. No.
01:11:03 No. Did you later hear any gossip to the effect that they had been in an intimate relationship? Yes.
01:11:14 Yes. At what point? It's hard to pin it down. Um I certainly I think at the point when
01:11:26 I certainly I think at the point when um
01:11:28 um when uh HN26
01:11:34 um concluded her operation and I think um I think it's at the at that same time
01:11:45 I think it's at the at that same time that she
01:11:47 that she um resigns. from the police.
01:11:55 HN1 told us that at some point after he left, it became common knowledge that HN26 and Frampton were in a sexual relationship.
01:12:06 relationship. Might that have been the time you're adverting to, namely when she leaves the police?
01:12:11 police? Yes.
01:12:14 Did you know at any time before that? I don't believe I did.
01:12:23 Operation Hearn, we're told by HN26's now exhusband uh that she had told him 6 months before
01:12:36 uh that she had told him 6 months before the end of her deployment uh that she was in an interim an intimate relationship with an activist called Joe.
01:12:47 called Joe. Would it be right to understand you never heard anything through that source?
01:12:52 source? That's correct. Did you ever hear later on that HN26's ex-husband had provided that information?
01:13:06 had provided that information? No, not that I can recall. Can we take the document down now, please? And can we move on to the fruits of HN26's
01:13:18 of HN26's position within the ALF cell led by Frampton? Could we have up please 247766?
01:13:26 247766? This is B Tab B237. Sir,
01:13:35 this is a file note uh made by Detective Sergeant Greeny. It is dated the 7th of August 19
01:13:47 August 19 98 and it is about the then imminent action to release the mink on the 8th of
01:13:59 action to release the mink on the 8th of August.
01:14:47 Once you're ready, we'll look at the next page. Yes. Thank you.
01:15:36 Um that um if you need that the if you need to look at the next page as well by all means. Yes. But I just wanted to ask the privacy
01:15:46 privacy is that's not Frampton. No. No. Right. No. Frampton's name is not being redacted.
01:15:52 redacted. Sorry. Yeah.
01:15:58 Maybe that I can ask some questions and if you need to look at the detail you can just say so. This is generated on the 7th for an action which is going to take place in
01:16:09 action which is going to take place in the early hours of the 8th of August.
01:16:14 Is this reported orally by HN26 or by telephone? Can you recall? No, I I mean the fact that Bernie Greeny is um reporting it I No, I can't recall.
01:16:29 is um reporting it I No, I can't recall. Can you recall speaking to HN26 before she embarked on this action?
01:16:36 No, not No, I can't. Would you have done so? Well, if I if I had been around um at at that point, yes, there's
01:16:50 around um at at that point, yes, there's quite a lot of detail in this report in particular, not just about the planned action to release the mink, but also it
01:17:01 action to release the mink, but also it is said two further operations. one to liberate uh animals in Essex as the ALF [clears throat] would describe it
01:17:10 it and the other um an arson planned arson attack in the Tempame's Valley. Right.
01:17:16 Right. I'm trying to explore whether all of this intelligence comes in suddenly at the last minute from HN26 or whether it had come in um earlier.
01:17:29 or whether it had come in um earlier. It
01:17:30 It I can't no I can't say today. I think obviously at the time um you know Bernie Greeny has developed this
01:17:42 this um
01:17:43 um role with her um it could have been separate reporting could have been I
01:17:54 separate reporting could have been I mean I don't know now I don't know the position is tell me if this Fair summation. Your UCO is going to
01:18:05 summation. Your UCO is going to participate in the release of a large number of mink. The report puts it in the hundreds and
01:18:16 and we know that this activity she's given the go ahead to do. Can you help us with the circumstances in which
01:18:27 help us with the circumstances in which HN26
01:18:30 HN26 is instructed that she can participate in this action? only to the extent that
01:18:41 only to the extent that um I know um the um the DCI authorized it but the
01:18:52 authorized it but the um
01:18:53 um the runup to it I I can't today um call it when you say the when HN58 was your DCI at the time when you say he authorized
01:19:07 at the time when you say he authorized ized. It do you mean her participation in the action? Yes.
01:19:15 Yes. Was were you party to that ad that decision? Well, I provided I was um on duty um I would have been of course. Yeah.
01:19:28 would have been of course. Yeah. And the strategy, if I've understood it correctly, is because you have intelligence to suggest there are going to be two more actions
01:19:39 there are going to be two more actions in the near future. And one of them is of a severity that might lead to a significant custodial sentence. The idea
01:19:50 significant custodial sentence. The idea is for HN26 to participate in the Mink action, presumably if necessary, to participate in the action in Essics with a view to
01:20:05 in the action in Essics with a view to arresting Frampton and any associates as they conspire to commit arson. Yes,
01:20:15 Yes, that has distinct echoes of your own deployment and that of HN1. Can we take it from those similarities
01:20:27 Can we take it from those similarities that HN58 would have had the benefit of your advice in making the decision that he did?
01:20:34 he did? Yeah, at some stage. Yes, of course. [snorts]
01:20:40 [snorts] There was also a decision, wasn't there, not to tell Hampshire police that a Metropolitan Police Service undercover police officer was participating in
01:20:51 police officer was participating in crime on their patch? Yes.
01:20:54 Yes. Who made that decision? Well, that one would have definitely been above my pay grade. Um, so I I can't recall whether it went above
01:21:07 can't recall whether it went above the um the DCI or not. Do you know are you able to give positive evidence that any officer above
01:21:19 positive evidence that any officer above HN58
01:21:21 HN58 knew anything about this in advance? No, not today. Obviously, I would have had a clear understanding at the time. Should
01:21:33 Should not authorization to participate in a crime of this severity
01:21:40 severity have been a question for a much more senior officer than either yourself or DCI HN58?
01:21:51 Um
01:21:56 well I I can see I can see the case for that. I and it may well have it may well have happened. Um
01:22:06 Um again I I I don't know what the uh time constraints were. [laughter]
01:22:15 This is a serious matter, isn't it? This is participation in quite a significant crime.
01:22:20 crime. Yes.
01:22:22 Yes. Is the reality that you and HN 58 were so excited at the prospect of potting Mr. Frampton that you did not consult
01:22:33 Mr. Frampton that you did not consult higher authority. I I honestly can't speak to that. I I don't think that's um I don't think that's the case. or did you think that
01:22:47 that's the case. or did you think that this was uh the level of criminal activity that could be authorized at DCI level?
01:22:55 level? Um I would yes I probably thought that that um it would I would have thought that ordin you know that it would go up the chain
01:23:07 you know that it would go up the chain to some extent.
01:23:11 What was your understanding at the time as to the level of authority required to participate in a burglary which would lead to the release of hundreds of mink?
01:23:25 lead to the release of hundreds of mink? I don't know. I honestly don't know now um what my understanding would have been as regards an authority level in terms
01:23:36 as regards an authority level in terms of rank.
01:23:38 of rank. Would it be fair to say that you and HN 58 seriously exceeded your powers by
01:23:50 58 seriously exceeded your powers by authorizing HN26 to participate in this crime? Well, that wasn't my understanding at the time.
01:23:59 the time. I'm asking you now. Yeah. Um well, no, I think um Okay. Look, I I honestly can't I can't
01:24:10 Okay. Look, I I honestly can't I can't recall enough about can't really recall anything about what I was doing um over this short period. I'm just reading
01:24:21 over this short period. I'm just reading a very detailed report from Bernie Greeny which if nothing else confirms the change in roles that we spoke about
01:24:32 the change in roles that we spoke about this morning. he has now, you know, with all of his knowledge from the place where he worked previously. Um, you know, he's now
01:24:45 Um, you know, he's now taken on that a large part of what previously I would have done. Now whether I was um there I'm sure you know chances are I
01:24:57 um there I'm sure you know chances are I was but um I would have the authorization I thought was um as it should be um if it was if it was just at DCI level then I would
01:25:11 if it was just at DCI level then I would have thought well that was obviously the right thing
01:25:17 was a driving force behind the decision not to tell Hamampshire police that it would give rise to a risk either that the SDS operation would be compromised
01:25:29 the SDS operation would be compromised or that action would be taken to frustrate
01:25:34 frustrate uh the release of the mink. Um it's very difficult. Um I don't know what
01:25:43 what what the thinking would have been at the time. Um pro apart an element of source protection
01:25:54 apart an element of source protection and perhaps a cons you know a concern at that time um that it you know that the intelligence
01:26:06 the intelligence um
01:26:08 um might might not be handled uh correctly. I don't know a risk of breaching the golden rule.
01:26:20 a risk of breaching the golden rule. I don't think that's quite you know does it does this issue uh justice. I mean ordinar you know I can think of cases where
01:26:32 can think of cases where the you know a constabularary would be informed but there we are. It was a a a a judgment call based on the
01:26:44 was a a a a judgment call based on the understanding of what the implications would have been at that time. Could we take the document down now and have up 24777
01:26:56 tab B238? Sir, this is a document uh which bears your initials. It's an update uh dated the
01:27:07 initials. It's an update uh dated the 10th of August. I'll give you a moment to familiarize yourself with the content.
01:27:28 [snorts]
01:27:46 Yes, thank you. And so we can see from that that the in terms of HN26's future, the plan remains as you've described it. she's going to
01:27:57 as you've described it. she's going to uh take part in another action um with a overall end goal of securing the arrest of Frampton and others on
01:28:08 the arrest of Frampton and others on more serious charges in the longer term. Yes. Uh the problem that's occurred in the meantime is that in fact in the early hours of the 8th of August between
01:28:21 early hours of the 8th of August between 3 and 6,000 m had been released and uh they were causing considerable damage both to the local ecosystem and domestic
01:28:35 both to the local ecosystem and domestic pets.
01:28:39 accepting that the numbers actually released were an order of magnitude greater than those anticipated in the report we've just
01:28:50 anticipated in the report we've just looked at. It was foreseeable, wasn't it, that the release even of hundreds of mink into the environment was going to cause serious problems.
01:29:04 cause serious problems. Um, I I'm sure that it it could have been anticipated and probably should have been anticipated and it it should have um been
01:29:18 have um been um it should at the very least have been factored into the decision making process.
01:29:24 process. To the best to the best of my recollection, it wasn't. So it was a an oversight. That blind spot. Was it the result of
01:29:35 That blind spot. Was it the result of essentially the excitement at the prospect of getting Mr. Frampton convicted of a serious crime? I no. Well, I I should have
01:29:46 I no. Well, I I should have I should have noted this earlier. I I don't think excitement really is fair. I don't think that comes into it. You know, this was professional satisfaction. Well, you
01:29:59 professional satisfaction. Well, you know, the the operation and um um nevertheless, it um no, it was simply
01:30:11 you you know really uh unfortunate ignorance of not really not really thinking it through. Um, and
01:30:23 not really thinking it through. Um, and so this came, you know, this came as as quite a surprise, but really it shouldn't have done. So it was a mistake and perhaps an illustration of why
01:30:35 and perhaps an illustration of why senior officers should decide whether or not this sort of action proceeds. Well, you know, they may well have they may well have done. Um
01:30:48 may well have done. Um but um
01:30:52 well there we are. It's um there we are indeed. Can we take that down please? And can we move now to the deployment of Detective Constable Mark Jenner?
01:31:06 Detective Constable Mark Jenner? Can I take you back to the early 1995 and uh preparations in the early days of Mr. Jenner's
01:31:18 in the early days of Mr. Jenner's recruitment and service? Do you recall visiting
01:31:24 visiting Detective Constable Jenner and his wife who we are calling S? Yes, but I I'd be very surprised if I met met them
01:31:36 I'd be very surprised if I met met them on my own
01:31:38 on my own um on when he was um being recruited. Um there would to the best of my recollection
01:31:50 recollection um myself and uh DCI Edmonson we we did did these home visits together. So, uh, we have you, DCTI
01:32:02 together. So, uh, we have you, DCTI Edmonson, DC Jenner, and S at their home.
01:32:07 home. Yes.
01:32:09 Yes. And this was a meeting pre the decision to recruit Detective Constable Jenner, or at least at a point
01:32:20 Constable Jenner, or at least at a point in time when it's not too late for him to back out. Yes.
01:32:27 Yes. You knew by that stage for a variety of reasons, not least your own conduct, that there was a risk of sexual activity
01:32:39 that there was a risk of sexual activity undercover. Yes.
01:32:42 Yes. You didn't raise that risk with S, did you? No.
01:32:49 No. Why not?
01:32:51 Why not? Um, well, it was um, you know, it was deliberate. um deliberate on my part. Um
01:33:02 deliberate on my part. Um so it was
01:33:05 so it was you know it was looking back on it obviously I can see it was um it was wrong and um you know for that
01:33:16 it was wrong and um you know for that reason I should have I could have foreseen it and I probably you know I shouldn't have taken the job on for I I for that reason alone I I wasn't really
01:33:29 for that reason alone I I wasn't really suited Um
01:33:32 suited Um so
01:33:33 so yeah I mean and now I I should apologize to um s and
01:33:42 um s and other
01:33:43 other [snorts]
01:33:44 [snorts] um partners um spouses in in the same in the same way. Is the reason that you didn't tell her
01:33:56 Is the reason that you didn't tell her because you thought it might lead her to dissuade DC Jenner from joining the SDS? I I don't know how far I got with
01:34:10 I I don't know how far I got with thinking I about it. I I literally just um completely, you know, blotted it out. um of my mind
01:34:23 you know, blotted it out. um of my mind and um you know I sought to deal with the interview. I I sought to deal with it
01:34:34 it properly and fairly but of course um there's nothing fair about depriving her of the opportunity to give informed consent.
01:34:44 consent. Well, no, of course. No, I in in effect you duped her. Um yes and I I you know apologize for that. And it shows doesn't it a dismissive
01:34:57 And it shows doesn't it a dismissive attitude to the partners of SDS officers.
01:35:02 officers. Yes. I think so. Who were predominantly female.
01:35:07 female. Yes.
01:35:07 Yes. And therefore it was a form of misogyny. Yeah.
01:35:15 S says that her recollection is that you emphasized welfare. Is that something that you would have emphasized during the meeting?
01:35:27 meeting? Yes, I think so. Um yes. Um
01:35:33 yes. Um and as you know I've said o over the last day or so um you know I I felt at the time that the
01:35:45 you know I I felt at the time that the informal arrangements that we had on the SDS the these regular meetings I felt and I know that uh DCI Edmonson
01:35:57 I felt and I know that uh DCI Edmonson felt that
01:35:59 felt that um it provided added a lot more support than officers,
01:36:07 officers, special branch officers received in other roles. You know, this was um this was on a different level.
01:36:19 was on a different level. When you say that, we're aware that you had some involvement with us when the family had to move. Yes,
01:36:30 the family had to move. Yes, as a result of near compromises, but other than that, Essa's recollection is essentially that she didn't get support from the SDS.
01:36:42 she didn't get support from the SDS. Do you take issue with that? Pardon?
01:36:46 Pardon? Do you take issue with that? She says that she essentially she didn't get the support that she was led to believe that she would get. No. No. Well, look, I I'm not I can't um
01:37:01 No. No. Well, look, I I'm not I can't um I can't disagree if that, you know, um I can,
01:37:08 um I can, you know, I I can imagine Well, I know I know for sure that um um
01:37:16 um um that partners um you know, were were being asked to endure
01:37:24 endure these um you know long absences um with the undercover officer you know being away from home. It was um
01:37:37 you know being away from home. It was um then learning that that absence was because they were living with another woman in Essa's case as uh as things turned out. [snorts] Was the purpose of the initial home visit
01:37:50 the purpose of the initial home visit really about the SDS ensuring that the officer's domestic situation would support the SDS operation?
01:38:01 support the SDS operation? I think that was obviously a large part of it, but I can I think you know um it was in a in our own different ways.
01:38:13 it was in a in our own different ways. It was Keith Edmonson and myself, you know, we were we were offering um
01:38:22 um to be around if ever there was a problem available. Um I guess looking back it it was it was never really
01:38:33 never really going to be sufficient. And yet I and yet at the same time um there would be some
01:38:43 some some partners or spouse um who were you know uh happy uh happy with is what you were really interested in
01:38:54 is what you were really interested in was whether s would support detective constable Jenner. That would be a good a big part of it.
01:39:07 Can we move now to the question of the advice that you gave Detective Constable Jenner? Did you give him any advice about sexual activity undercover? Um, I don't believe that I did.
01:39:23 Can we have up 735326, please? Sir, that's B92.
01:39:31 This is Mr. Jenner's targeting strategy dated the 1st of February 1995. If we look at page six,
01:39:46 did you write this document? Yes.
01:39:49 Yes. Could we go back to page one, please?
01:39:55 On the basis of what information did you produce this document? Sure. Um
01:40:03 Sure. Um um sh can I quickly read please any anything I should please do um I am interested I think probably for these purposes the
01:40:15 the well maybe let's just take it a step at a time let's have 1.1 up first on page one
01:40:25 and this is uh where you're saying that the strategy is against communitybased anarchist activists in northeast London.
01:40:38 anarchist activists in northeast London. Paragraph 1.4. Please,
01:40:45 I'll let you read that.
01:41:00 Yes, thank you. The emphasis there seems to be on anarchy and anarchist groups. Yes.
01:41:06 Yes. What was the basis of writing a targeting strategy targeting Mr. Jenner at anarchist groups? Um well it was uh
01:41:18 Um well it was uh of its time there and at that time there had there was either already um SDS coverage
01:41:29 SDS coverage in that field or or and there certainly had been in the years in over several years leading up to that point in time.
01:41:41 point in time. Did your own deployment inform this document?
01:41:49 I to to a slight extent. Not not Yeah. Not greatly. Did Detective Sergeant Morris's? Um,
01:42:01 it's possible. Yeah. If we could go, sorry, I beg your pardon. No, it's okay. Uh, page two, paragraph 2.3, please.
01:42:13 under a section entitled nature of the target.
01:42:20 Give you a moment to read that.
01:42:37 Yes. Thank you. Mr. Jenna told us that in practice he ended up targeting Mr. Metaf. Was that the practical consequence of
01:42:49 Was that the practical consequence of this strategy is that he ended up targeting an individual rather than a group?
01:42:55 group? Yeah. Um Okay. Yes. Was that planned? It would have I'm sure it would have been allowed for because that was pretty
01:43:07 been allowed for because that was pretty common experience that it was an individual or a group of individuals within
01:43:16 within within a you know a wider group that where that the way that um SDS deployments um tended to
01:43:29 deployments um tended to develop
01:43:30 develop Can you help us with some curiosities in this paragraph? The first is the assertion that Mark Metaf is an anarchist because Mr. Metaf's firm
01:43:43 anarchist because Mr. Metaf's firm evidence was that he's not an anarchist. Yes. Um
01:43:51 well um
01:43:56 you know I can't recall now um but um there
01:44:04 there you know I think put this another way what made you think Mr. Metaf was an anarchist.
01:44:14 Today I can't remember but it would have been
01:44:18 been you know um at the time it would have been clear um well
01:44:28 well if we were to accept Mr. Metaf's evidence that he wasn't and never had been an anarchist it wouldn't have been clear. No, I only meant that it was, you know,
01:44:42 No, I only meant that it was, you know, clear
01:44:44 clear um clear to the SDS at the time. But um I think what I should say is that um there was always um
01:44:57 um there was always um [snorts] you know quite a an overlap um between anarchists and uh others. So it it may
01:45:09 anarchists and uh others. So it it may well be that um and maybe I was wrong. Um the second curiosity is it attributes Mark Metaf to the Hackne Community
01:45:20 Mark Metaf to the Hackne Community Defense Association. Our understanding is that in fact Mark Metaf is associated with the Colin Roach Center,
01:45:29 Center, right?
01:45:29 right? And that it was Dr. Graham Smith who ran the Hackne Community Defense Association. Yeah.
01:45:37 Yeah. Albeit from premises, the Colin Roach Center. Yeah.
01:45:44 Yeah. How did you come to get that wrong as well? Well, I'm not sure that I got got either wrong, but I um if I did, then it would the origins of that um would be in
01:45:58 would the origins of that um would be in intelligence, whether it you know, C squad intelligence um or indeed STS intelligence. Um so I can't say more than that. When did you
01:46:10 can't say more than that. When did you realize that Mark Metaf was not a part of the Hackne Community Defense Association? I can't recall now.
01:46:21 I can't recall now. When did you realize that Mark Metaf wasn't an anarchist? I can't recall now. Can we go to page four and paragraph 3.3, please?
01:46:45 [snorts]
01:46:50 This suggests that suggests that you're using Hackne Community Defense Association as a stepping stone or an oblique approach
01:47:04 a stepping stone or an oblique approach into other groups. Yes.
01:47:08 Yes. In those circumstances, why do we see a lot of reporting from about the Hackne Community Defense Association? In in those circumstances, why
01:47:20 In in those circumstances, why why is HCDA reported on if it is a vehicle to get to another target? I would is it because the reality is it
01:47:31 would is it because the reality is it was also of interest? Well, I think yes, almost certainly.
01:47:42 Why is it then if the initial intention is to use HCDA as a stepping stone that Detective Constable Jenner in fact
01:47:56 Detective Constable Jenner in fact spends so much of his time at the Colin Roach Center and reporting on the Hackne Community Defense Association? Um well if I don't rec if that if that
01:48:09 Um well if I don't rec if that if that was the case then it must have been that um
01:48:15 um it enabled him to infiltrate um groups individuals um that were considered his long-term
01:48:30 um that were considered his long-term um objective as we'll come to. who he did indeed get into some other groups. Uh but he also reports a great deal on the Colin Roach Center and the HCDA. Can I take it from
01:48:43 Center and the HCDA. Can I take it from that that they were of significant interest as it turned out in their own right to the Metropolitan? There was some I can't remember now, but clearly there was some special branch
01:48:55 clearly there was some special branch interest um in in that reporting. Notwithstanding that the initial targeting had completely understood uh the nature of
01:49:08 completely understood uh the nature of Mr. Metaf's political beliefs and the HCDA's
01:49:13 HCDA's indeed identity. Yes.
01:49:16 Yes. Can we move please to the top of page five?
01:49:22 [snorts]
01:49:26 If we look at that paragraph
01:49:33 [snorts]
01:49:43 records advice that you appear to have given to Detective Constable Jenner. Yeah. His profile would receive a significant boost if at his first
01:49:54 significant boost if at his first important meetings he was seen in a company of a friend in inverted commas rather than appearing as a loner. Can you help us with the advice you gave
01:50:07 Can you help us with the advice you gave detective constable Jenner in that regard? Well, in making that that very point. Um and it says no doubt he will have had
01:50:19 and it says no doubt he will have had benefited from advice given by former operatives in this and allied fields.
01:50:27 I think you've adverted to your belief that it wasn't just the animal rights field but also the anarchist field which gave rise to a high incidence of sexual
01:50:38 gave rise to a high incidence of sexual relationships.
01:50:41 Um yes. Were you advising Detective Constable Jenner that it would help him be accepted by a community
01:50:53 help him be accepted by a community group if he got himself a girlfriend? None.
01:51:01 Can we take the document down now please and have up 748092.
01:51:15 This is the start of a pack of documents relating to a visit uh by Chief Superintendent Black and uh
01:51:28 uh by Chief Superintendent Black and uh the AXO
01:51:30 the AXO assistant chief assistant commissioner special operations Vaness visit which took place on the 7th of July 1998.
01:51:42 1998. Uh this is the covering note from HN58. If we go to the next page, we will see the beginning of the document itself. Can you recall who drafted this?
01:51:55 Can you recall who drafted this? Can I recall who drafted it? Drafted? Um
01:52:02 not immediately. Okay. Well, uh let's go then to page nine.
01:52:12 special. And this is a page which has pen pictures
01:52:19 pictures of s then serving officers that for detective constable Jenner is in the second half of the page. Could we have that expanded please?
01:52:53 Yes, thank you. Who wrote that? I I can't recall. Um, it could be myself.
01:53:04 myself. um 95. Um
01:53:09 I you know it's not a lot to go on. it in the word invagled I doesn't seem like one of mine but it could well be um
01:53:23 one of mine but it could well be um could have been um Keith Edmonson or DS but um anyway I I'm you know you're not sure
01:53:34 you're not sure you're not sure no sorry [snorts] while maintaining an inside view of public order events in the hacknik area. The officer has a unique access to a range of anti- police campaigns in
01:53:47 range of anti- police campaigns in London. So, we can take it from this, can't we? That the SDS is trumpeting to Axo Vanesse and Chief Superintendent
01:53:58 Axo Vanesse and Chief Superintendent Black that they have an undercover police officer in the Hackne area reporting on a range of anti- police campaigns. Yes. in the atmosphere at the time that
01:54:10 Yes. in the atmosphere at the time that was regarded as an achievement. Yes.
01:54:13 Yes. And an antique police campaign would be what?
01:54:19 what? It would be an example. Well, what was the definition of an anti- police campaign? Um
01:54:35 I hard to come up with a definition. I I think it's a Can I suggest campaign against the police?
01:54:43 police? Well, yeah. Okay. Of course. Yes. Would it amount to cover any campaign against the police? Yes. Um I Yes. Um campaigns against the
01:54:54 Yes. Um I Yes. Um campaigns against the police. Um sure. What was the reaction of Chief Superintendent Black to that news?
01:55:04 I obviously I well not nec I can't recall his reaction. What was the reaction of Assistant Commissioner Special Operations Vaness
01:55:15 Commissioner Special Operations Vaness to that news? Um, no, I can't recall reactions apart from the fact it, you know, seemed seemed to be
01:55:28 seemed to be it would have well, let's put it this way. I can't recall much about the meeting. I got a vague recollection of it. Um, I'm sure if if a senior officer
01:55:41 it. Um, I'm sure if if a senior officer had expressed any concerns, I'm sure I I would uh certainly that would have been noted.
01:55:49 noted. So, we can be sure that they didn't press the stop button. That's correct. Yes. But as to whether it received positive praise or not, you can't recall. Yeah.
01:55:59 Yeah. Can we have a look at page eight at the bottom, please, whilst we're on this document?
01:56:06 And just to expand it, that's at eight. This is the pen picture for HN26.
01:56:16 26. Yes.
01:56:20 Yes. Uh,
01:56:21 Uh, who we've just been dealing with. Right. Yeah.
01:56:32 The bottom of that it says currently involved in a small Londonbased ALF cell who are engaged in a number of minor actions in the home counties. So you are not being shy here of
01:56:44 So you are not being shy here of broadcasting to the top brass uh that you've got an officer inside an ALF cell.
01:56:52 ALF cell. Yes. And they would be known by any professional police officer to be very small.
01:56:58 small. Yes.
01:56:58 Yes. And very secure. Not necessarily very secure. You would say not secure enough for you. Uh but they are secretive small cells, aren't they?
01:57:09 aren't they? Yes. Yes.
01:57:11 Yes. Yes. Engaged in minor actions. That would be understood, wouldn't it, to mean criminal activity? Yes. Again, can we take it that neither
01:57:22 Yes. Again, can we take it that neither of these senior officers, having been given this paper, press the stop button on HN26's activities?
01:57:35 on HN26's activities? Um, yes.
01:57:37 Um, yes. Can you recall whether there was any positive praise? I can't. No.
01:57:47 So would that be an appropriate time to take the mid-after afternoon break? Certainly. Uh we'll break for quarter an hour.
02:20:29 We look before [snorts] the break, Mr. Lambert, at your targeting strategy for Detective Constable Jenner. One of the observations in that document was that there'd been a gap in the SDS's coverage
02:20:41 there'd been a gap in the SDS's coverage of uh community activism in the Hackne area. Uh would I be right in thinking that the previous officer before that gap was John Dyn?
02:20:54 gap was John Dyn? Um [clears throat] not. I'm not entirely sure. It it must be
02:21:00 be possible.
02:21:02 possible. Uh can we move now to 245928?
02:21:15 This is an event performer
02:21:20 about an event forthcoming event on the 16th of March 1996 organized by the Colin Roach uh center.
02:21:31 organized by the Colin Roach uh center. If you look at the text
02:21:50 Yes, we appear to be back in the realms of uh reporting uh which doesn't engage any realistic prospect of public disorder,
02:22:02 realistic prospect of public disorder, does it?
02:22:03 does it? That's correct. uh and it doesn't involve in this instance
02:22:11 instance uh any far-left political groups rather a a local campaigning group the Colin Roach Center.
02:22:19 Center. Yes.
02:22:21 Yes. And um a poignant moment to mark the death of Trevor Monavville. Would you accept as you have for some of
02:22:32 Would you accept as you have for some of the other reporting we've looked at of a similar vein that this was not appropriate reporting? Um
02:22:42 Um well, it would seem seem that way now. I I can recall at the time it would have been uh considered um appropriate. Um
02:22:57 Mr. Monival was knifed to death on the street by five asalants on the 19th of March 1994.
02:23:08 March 1994. Uh but there had been a campaign on his behalf following [clears throat] uh allegations about his treatment by police on New Year's Eve in 1997.
02:23:20 police on New Year's Eve in 1997. Was the Trevor Monavville campaign perceived as an anti- police campaign? Um,
02:23:30 Um, well, I don't think it should have been whether it was um by by some, but by but by us on the SDS. No, I I don't think
02:23:42 by us on the SDS. No, I I don't think so. Um,
02:23:45 so. Um, why was it being reported on? I think it's wasn't I think the same as we've seen with in respect of other justice campaigns. Um there was value
02:23:58 justice campaigns. Um there was value for
02:23:59 for S squad to receive this information and to be reassured and to um let
02:24:10 um let local police um um
02:24:16 um public order police to be aware that um you know this [clears throat] this this is an assessment and an assessment um from special branch and um
02:24:31 from special branch and um you know subsequent to my SDS deployment I worked uh on area liaison uh as a DI and I had probably had some
02:24:45 uh as a DI and I had probably had some responsibility for that area Stokeington and why does sorry I'm I know I'm digressing but I just wanted to make the point that I know for sure that local police
02:24:58 know for sure that local police um
02:25:00 um and public order police they benefited from a sort of reassuring um obviously it would be they're not going to know it's from the SDS but they
02:25:12 going to know it's from the SDS but they were
02:25:14 were assured that special branch you know generally
02:25:19 generally you know got things right and I I know you've said to me Well, local police can speak directly and and you're not needed, but actually
02:25:30 needed, but actually um there was value attached to this kind of reporting at the time to a gathering [clears throat] of people to remember a man who'd been murdered a
02:25:42 to remember a man who'd been murdered a year before. Yes.
02:25:50 Can we take that down and have 74049, please?
02:25:56 Page two.
02:26:00 This is a report about Celius Stubs, 2nd of May, 1995. Again,
02:26:11 Again, [snorts] an event. It's referring to the Colin Roach Center. Celia Stubs, the veteran left-wing activist and common law widow of the late Blair Peach, is currently involved with the Colin Roach
02:26:23 currently involved with the Colin Roach Center, particularly in its anti- police activities. She is a regular contributor to the thrice weekly advice sessions at the Colin Roach Center, where her
02:26:34 the Colin Roach Center, where her experience of community politics and criminal law are ve are much valued by Mark Metaf and Graeme Smith. Stubs is participating in the recently started self-defense classes organized by the
02:26:46 self-defense classes organized by the Hackne anti-fascist collective. What was the significance of her particular involvement in anti-p police
02:26:57 particular involvement in anti-p police activities? I don't I can't recall today. Um I don't know is it possible just to return to the main page? Uh I just
02:27:10 the main page? Uh I just um
02:27:16 yeah. Um
02:27:21 well there um you know this was special branch as it was then. Um,
02:27:33 special branch as it was then. Um, for whatever reason, Celia Stubs has a a record file started in 74
02:27:44 in 74 and then Colin Roach Cent's got a file. Mark Metaf's got a file. I mean, you know, there would have just been certainly a reasonable understanding
02:27:57 certainly a reasonable understanding that C Squad um would would be interested. Um it seems
02:28:08 it seems it seems inappropriate today, but that's that's how things were. The context of this, of course, is that Blair Peach died at the hands of the police and was
02:28:21 died at the hands of the police and was regarded as a particularly emotive case. Uh, well, that is the context. Yes. Yes. And was one reason why the SDS was
02:28:33 And was one reason why the SDS was interested in Celia Stubs? No. Um, who know? Well, today I can't we can't go to her record file or or
02:28:45 can't go to her record file or or probably any of the other files, but at the time we we would have done and uh it may have had the reason maybe nothing to
02:28:57 may have had the reason maybe nothing to do with
02:28:59 do with the um death of of her late husband.
02:29:09 Colin Roach Center, CRC, formerly the Hackne Community Defense Association. That's another error as far as the inquiry is aware because the Colin Roach Center and the Hackne Community Defense
02:29:20 Center and the Hackne Community Defense Association were two separate entities. Can you assist us as to how that confusion arose? I can't. I think either um
02:29:32 I can't. I think either um either um Mark Jenner or the um DS report writer of the day um would would would
02:29:46 of the day um would would would likely be able to answer.
02:29:52 Was it something that didn't particularly matter to the SDS at that stage? because what mattered to them was having a vehicle to report on these various anti- police campaigns as
02:30:03 various anti- police campaigns as summarized not for the in the documents for the top brass not for the SDS the for the SDS the
02:30:12 the primary purpose was um Mark Jenner's in Mark Jenner's targeting strategy he he was not at all the only SDS officer who
02:30:25 was not at all the only SDS officer who reported did um
02:30:29 um what's the word um on
02:30:33 um on you know on local local um groups while retaining his main focus on his uh
02:30:44 while retaining his main focus on his uh target group. Can we take that down please and have 245152?
02:30:54 This is a prospective report um dated the 2nd of June about a march that is due to take place on the 10th of June.
02:31:05 due to take place on the 10th of June. And this is about the Justice for Brian Douglas campaign. If [snorts] we have a look at paragraph two, please first
02:31:20 give you a moment to read that. But my question is going to be the intelligence is to the effect that the Brian Douglas campaign is capable of pushing back on the SWP.
02:32:00 Okay. Yes, I've read that. Thank you. If we go to paragraph three, please.
02:32:11 The point here you are being told that the meeting was chaired very competently by Mr. Yes, Douglas.
02:32:21 Douglas. And if we go to paragraph four and in particular the second half of that paragraph question is they were the family were insisting on a peaceful demonstration.
02:32:41 Yes, thank you. Page two, please. In the source comment
02:33:16 [snorts]
02:33:20 Um yes, thank you. So can we take it from this report? Justice campaign is organizing a march. It is doing so competently pushing back
02:33:31 It is doing so competently pushing back on the SWP. The family don't want any trouble at the march. The SWP are not seeking trouble at the march, but it is being reported
02:33:42 at the march, but it is being reported on because the police are concerned that it is a uh incendurary issue and are worried about what it describes as I
02:33:54 worried about what it describes as I rate black youth. Um
02:34:00 Um well I I would again put it in this way that um it was being um reported on because
02:34:11 um reported on because um Squad had to prepare a risk assessment on this you know significant public order event. And I think at the
02:34:23 public order event. And I think at the time we we would have been confident that this
02:34:29 that this um would be very useful for that purpose.
02:34:33 purpose. Says there's a general fear and distrust of police among the factions represented at the planning meeting. Are you able to help us with whether or not the Brian the Justice for Brian Douglas campaign
02:34:45 the Justice for Brian Douglas campaign cooperated with the police for public order purposes? Well, I I'm I can't recall, but I I'm I'm sure that would be the case. That's
02:34:56 I'm sure that would be the case. That's the indication here. Um but um
02:35:03 but um and this is a an event which is clearly been made very public. There's no suggestion here of some surprise event, is there?
02:35:14 is there? But if we had um if we'd sort of you know prepared this report and said to a senior officer look we're not you
02:35:26 to a senior officer look we're not you know we're not sure about disseminating this to sea squad so that to help them with their risk assessment I mean we you know we'd have been laughed at. Um,
02:35:39 know we'd have been laughed at. Um, [snorts]
02:35:39 [snorts] it speaks of a general fear and distrust of police. It's right, isn't it, that relations between the police and campaigns like this were strained because of the conduct they were
02:35:51 because of the conduct they were complaining about. Oh, yes, of course. Yes. And surely having an undercover police officer
02:36:01 officer infiltrating their meetings and reporting on them would have done nothing if it had been known at the time to enhance trust and build bridges, would it?
02:36:12 would it? No, that's absolutely true. Can we take that down now, please? Can we have 245187?
02:36:22 This is a report on the uh event. itself. If we could have the first two paragraphs, please.
02:36:33 Give you a moment to read those.
02:37:13 Yes, thank you. This is another example, isn't it, of a potentially difficult situation where much to the credit of the family in question and the
02:37:26 credit of the family in question and the stewards in question, trouble was averted. Yes, if we could go to source comment, please
02:37:35 be over the page. Oh, sorry. Thank you.
02:37:52 That's a very cynical assessment of militant labor. Might it have been that they sincerely believed in the cause and that it was consistent with their
02:38:04 that it was consistent with their political beliefs rather than something uh to be used for cynical manipulation? Um [snorts] sorry I'm bit slow. Copy.
02:38:15 Um [snorts] sorry I'm bit slow. Copy. Take your time.
02:38:26 Um, yes. Okay, I've read that. Yes. Yes. So, my qu my question is essentially it's a cynical analysis of
02:38:37 essentially it's a cynical analysis of militant labor's motives. Might it be that the truth was that a campaign like the Brian Douglas campaign was something that they sincerely believed in and was
02:38:49 that they sincerely believed in and was consistent with their political objectives? Um
02:38:57 I I I think generally the the source comment wouldn't be cynical. It would be based on,
02:39:08 based on, you know, considerable insight and having been there and um having, you know, contacts or um associates
02:39:21 you know, contacts or um associates in amongst, you know, with within militant labor, which presumably this is a
02:39:28 a uh a Peter Francis report. We understand it to be Mr. Janes. Right. Okay. Um, but who whoever's it is, it perhaps doesn't matter.
02:39:39 doesn't matter. No. No. Of course, the phrase an attempt to cash in is cynical, isn't it? Well, not if it's accurate.
02:39:50 What I'm suggesting is the SDS and perhaps part of the wider special branch attitude is very jaded towards these groups. Is it influencing
02:40:02 towards these groups. Is it influencing the tone of reporting?
02:40:07 Um, no. On balance, I I don't think it is like, you know, from this distance, no, I I don't think it is likely.
02:40:22 Could we go to 728967, please?
02:40:34 This is the annual report for the SDS for 1995 to 1996. If we could go to page eight, please.
02:40:45 and a second paragraph with particular emphasis on the last few lines.
02:41:31 Yes, thank you. Can you help us with whether or not this is your drafting or somebody else's? Well, probably someone else's, but um I
02:41:44 Well, probably someone else's, but um I can't be sure. It talks about Detective Constable Jenner's involvement in justice campaigns over
02:41:55 involvement in justice campaigns over the last year and the fact his involvement in those issues, for example, the Brian Douglas campaign at an organizational level produces high-grade intelligence of the aims and
02:42:08 high-grade intelligence of the aims and tactics of generally volatile and outraged
02:42:13 outraged groups.
02:42:15 groups. Is that a reference to the justice campaigns? Um
02:42:31 not you know it's probably it probably includes that but I think it goes goes wider aims and tactics of
02:42:42 wider aims and tactics of uh generally volatile groups but Um I can't be certain outrage they may very well be as a
02:42:55 outrage they may very well be as a result of the incidents which they are complaining about. But can I ask you to concentrate on the phrase generally volatile?
02:43:06 volatile? Was it the view of SDS that black justice campaigns were generally volatile?
02:43:14 volatile? I don't
02:43:16 I don't I'm not sure that SDS uh had a view on that. SDS had experience uh uh obviously in the field. Um so it's
02:43:31 it's not a view, it's it's you know it's a it's an assessment. Um, it's, you know, it's good intelligence.
02:43:45 it's, you know, it's good intelligence. The [snorts] intelligence that black justice campaigns were generally volatile.
02:43:52 volatile. Yes.
02:43:53 Yes. Isn't that more of a sweeping stereotype? Well, it may sound like it today, but it was obviously based on experience um on the streets and, you
02:44:08 experience um on the streets and, you know, from a very
02:44:12 um from a position that gave the officer, you know, real real insight. Well, I've taken you through quite a lot of reports
02:44:23 taken you through quite a lot of reports of this ilk in the last two days and time and again we've seen that the attitude of the family has been very responsible and peaceful and time and again the behavior of the stewards has
02:44:37 again the behavior of the stewards has averted serious trouble. Yes. Yes.
02:44:42 Yes. Yes. Would you accept that the SDS had a stereotypical racist view of black justice campaigns?
02:44:55 racist view of black justice campaigns? No, I wouldn't accept that and I I don't really see any evidence of that in this report.
02:45:05 report. Can we take that document down now? You are managing a number of undercover police officers who are reporting on justice campaigns,
02:45:16 justice campaigns, many of which are campaigns with a racial dimension. Trevor Morris, Peter Francis, Mark Jenner, and HN81.
02:45:28 Jenner, and HN81. They don't all overlap, but at any given time there's usually more than one of them. [snorts] Did you uh get together and speak to
02:45:41 Did you uh get together and speak to the officers reporting on these issues to share knowledge and to discuss tactics? Anything of that kind? I'm sure there would have been tactical
02:45:53 I'm sure there would have been tactical discussions with each of them and possibly with a group of some or all of them. there was a move um
02:46:04 a move um over over let's say probably around about 96 where um a change of office or a change of meeting place meant that on either the
02:46:15 meeting place meant that on either the Monday or the Thursday meeting that smaller groups could discuss um matters of common interest. We I think we called them affinity groups and
02:46:27 think we called them affinity groups and um so that would obvious You know, that would be an example where um those sort largely public order
02:46:39 um those sort largely public order experiences could be uh would be exchanged and um for the benefit of the the field officers and us managers.
02:46:51 officers and us managers. Would you discuss the justice campaigns? Um I'm sure I'm sure that will have come up in discussion. I can't recall it.
02:47:02 up in discussion. I can't recall it. What sort of information was being shared?
02:47:05 shared? Well, the kind of information that we're seeing in these reports or indeed if you like a perhaps on a Monday
02:47:16 like a perhaps on a Monday after a weekend demonstration um on the Monday we might have three um officers that have each been at the
02:47:29 um officers that have each been at the same event and they're producing reports like this And so we would have a you know be even you know before these
02:47:41 you know be even you know before these probably a day before these reports are written up um we'd be discussing them live. So all of these issues we've been
02:47:52 live. So all of these issues we've been reading about they on occasions they would be subject to that kind of uh group discussion under your leadership.
02:48:04 under your leadership. Did you regard it as part of the SDS's role to protect black justice campaigns? Um, it
02:48:18 No, I don't think we had I'm No, I'm pretty sure we didn't and and really couldn't have had that objective.
02:48:30 Can we uh take that document down now, please? I have a 245619.
02:48:41 Uh this is a document on a completely different subject. This is about the Matt Gel support campaign. It's the 27th of October 195.
02:48:52 Uh I'll give you a a moment to look at the content.
02:49:18 Yes, thank you. First of all, can you help us? This this is only about a month after Helen Steel has visited
02:49:30 Helen Steel has visited uh Mr. Dyn's parents, right?
02:49:34 right? Is this opportunistic reporting on the M Liel support campaign or did
02:49:42 or did uh renewed information about Helen Steel's attempts to find John Dyn provoke a renewed interest in the Matt Glyel campaign?
02:49:56 Um I'm pretty sure that it was not that we're talking about Mark Jenner, aren't we? That's our understanding.
02:50:07 That's our understanding. Yes. Yes. Yes. Um and um
02:50:15 I don't you know I looking at it now um
02:50:22 um I would imagine that it arose because some of his target group were were attending. Um
02:50:34 attending. Um I don't
02:50:36 I don't Yeah. I I
02:50:37 Yeah. I I you're reporting on the fact that political activists are attending public legal proceedings. Well, yeah, but the question is
02:50:49 Well, yeah, but the question is um you know, was he
02:50:55 was he directed
02:50:56 directed um by the office to go there? Of course, I can't recall, but I'd be I don't I don't you know, that would have been unusual. I mean he
02:51:07 that would have been unusual. I mean he well I'm I'm asking whether this was an an unusual instance because of I understand events but no I I
02:51:18 events but no I I really don't you know I don't think it think things worked in that way he the priority was for him to go where his
02:51:29 for him to go where his close if you like his inner circle of um people where they where they were going. Now,
02:51:39 Now, um
02:51:41 um that that would probably be the background. It refers
02:51:46 It refers to Mr. Morris saying that it' been discovered that over the years London Greenpeace had been infiltrated on four occasions and revelations about that and some other surprises were going to be
02:51:58 some other surprises were going to be made at the trial. Was that of interest to the SDS? Um,
02:52:12 see bottom of Yes. Oh, right. Yes. Um, quite quite a Well, I mean, yeah, that obviously that would be of interest. Yes.
02:52:24 interest. Yes. What was done with this intelligence? Um, just the usual [snorts] the usual distribution. I mean, it would have gone to C Squad where
02:52:39 have gone to C Squad where um
02:52:41 um Dave Dave Morris had a file, London Greenpeace had a file and so on. Would you have expected it to have been disseminated by special branch to McDonald's?
02:52:52 McDonald's? No.
02:52:53 No. Did the SDS disseminate it to McDonald's? No. Certainly. Certainly not. Could we take that down now, please? Could we have up 246090,
02:53:04 Could we have up 246090, please?
02:53:08 This is the 23rd of March. Uh well, it's a report of the 22nd of March about a demonstration. It's going to be held on the 23rd. It's part of the Ibrahim say
02:53:22 the 23rd. It's part of the Ibrahim say campaign.
02:53:24 campaign. Uh we see in paragraph one,
02:53:31 Mr. Say died in custody in circumstances where CS gas had been used
02:53:42 [snorts]
02:53:45 and uh it's about coordinating a picket. [snorts] This appears, this report appears to be reporting on a black justice campaign at its very
02:53:59 justice campaign at its very inception. And if we scroll out, please
02:54:07 look at the second paragraph.
02:54:18 We will see there's reporting on some of the steps that are being taken to establish this justice campaign.
02:54:39 And then if we scroll out, if you're ready,
02:54:44 ready, uh we'll see reference in the next paragraph to the Socialist Workers Party's involvement. And then if we could go over the page,
02:55:14 would this have been viewed as an anti- police campaign? Yes, I think so. And what was it that was expected of Detective Constable Jenner reporting on
02:55:26 Detective Constable Jenner reporting on this black justice campaign at its inception? Just nothing nothing more or less than in in the rest of his um deployment.
02:55:40 of his um deployment. And so the reporting we saw in paragraph two about Mr. Smith of the HCDA exploring recourse to law. That would have been regarded as perfectly
02:55:51 have been regarded as perfectly appropriate reporting, would it? At the time, yes. And the inquir is being made of Deborah Kohl's at inquest to follow the inquest
02:56:04 Kohl's at inquest to follow the inquest uh regarded as perfectly appropriate reporting at the time. Yes.
02:56:09 Yes. [snorts] If you have go back to that second paragraph,
02:56:19 the reference right at the end to the presence of unpredictable black youth on the street. Is that a reflection of the attitude of the police
02:56:30 reflection of the attitude of the police at the time to young uh black people that they were regarded as unpredictable and a threat to public order?
02:56:42 and a threat to public order? No, I think it's that the uh officers um Mark Jenner's um
02:56:51 um observation based on his experience um on Yeah. based on his experience of of
02:57:02 on Yeah. based on his experience of of this
02:57:04 this um
02:57:06 um this area. And [snorts] there seems to be a suggestion that the NMP
02:57:13 is trying to attract young black people onto the street. There's no suggestion, is there, that the NMP want people to attend this
02:57:24 the NMP want people to attend this demonstration for any other than entirely lawful and peaceable protest, is there?
02:57:29 is there? No.
02:57:30 No. And we've seen other reports showing that they stewarded very assiduously. Yes. Yes. Yes. This was inappropriate reporting, wasn't it?
02:57:42 it? No, I don't think it was. At least at the time we were, you know, perfectly relaxed about um this kind of report
02:57:54 relaxed about um this kind of report where yes, we're, you know, if you like, we're rep clearly reporting on
02:58:03 on um individuals that are behaving scrupulously well. Um and
02:58:14 well. Um and you know no doubt in most cases working uh on a very worthwhile campaign. Um it is just purely for a public order
02:58:27 is just purely for a public order purpose. I think we maintained a complete neutrality in our in our approach. It was um it was public
02:58:38 in our approach. It was um it was public order and and however well stewarded. Um there was always um potential um for
02:58:49 um for um disorder of some level and there was always potential for conflicts between left and right uh
02:59:00 conflicts between left and right uh campaigners. [snorts] If we have 246694 please.
02:59:14 This is another report about the newer monitoring projects work in support of the Ibrahim SE campaign. It's a 8th of October 96 report on a forthcoming
02:59:28 October 96 report on a forthcoming event, a picket due to be held on Wednesday the 16th of October. If we could have the text expanded please.
02:59:52 So we've moved on six months from the death of Mr. Mr. SE. Um the reference there to
03:00:04 Um the reference there to the campaign will have lost much of its impetus and venom over the intervening months. Was this anti- police campaign regarded as venomous?
03:00:18 regarded as venomous? Um
03:00:20 Um I don't believe they were. I think that the officer is
03:00:26 um capturing an aspect of this this particular campaign that um that he you know that that's his
03:00:39 that he you know that that's his description. Um and it goes on to talk about the picket being small in number but loud and excited.
03:00:49 excited. Yes. Were black protesters regarded as excitable? Um, no. And you know, it has to be
03:01:01 Um, no. And you know, it has to be remembered that um um the
03:01:06 um the attendance um
03:01:11 um the attendance would be probably be very mixed. So, he's not here reporting on the behavior of just um the uh black
03:01:24 the behavior of just um the uh black community. Um but more generally, I suspect [snorts]
03:01:30 [snorts] it's a strange word to use, isn't it? Excited about a gathering to mark the death of a man only six months earlier. Um
03:01:42 Um well
03:01:45 excited in the sense of um being you know the the opportunity of course to
03:01:57 the opportunity of course to uh express anger towards the police. Um that I think that would be it.
03:02:07 Can we take that down now and have up 721323,
03:02:11 721323, please?
03:02:18 Page six, please.
03:02:24 This is a report dated the 22nd of March, uh, 1996. And if we expand it, please.
03:02:39 listing people on the steering committee of the anti-Nazi league which meets infrequently and usually in the House of Commons and you will see there the names
03:02:50 Commons and you will see there the names of two members of parliament Bernie Grant and Peter Hayne in the middle and Brian Wilson at the bottom.
03:03:01 We've touched upon similar matters before,
03:03:05 before, but would it be right to assume there were no rules within special branch or the SDS to prevent reporting on political meetings occurring within the
03:03:16 political meetings occurring within the House of Commons? No, I think um I think that's fair. Could we take that down now, please?
03:03:27 Could we take that down now, please? Could we have it an MPS uh report with four zeros and 794?
03:03:39 This is a a report of the 21st of January by Mr. Jenner. It's about anti-fascist action. If we could have the main text
03:03:50 action. If we could have the main text expanded, please.
03:04:00 [snorts]
03:04:19 Yes, thank you. I'm particularly interested in the sentence that begins uh Harold uh which is talking about AFA's reported
03:04:30 uh which is talking about AFA's reported plans to meet up with the Lawrence family and other families who'd suffered racial abuse with the idea of recruiting them into a broad liberal umbrella organization with the legitimate aim of
03:04:43 organization with the legitimate aim of promoting public awareness of racial attacks. something they want to have endorsed by someone of the stature of Jon Snow
03:04:53 Jon Snow or another uh person of some stature who we've made anonymous. The intellectual angle is being delegated to someone from
03:05:05 being delegated to someone from Southampton Red Action who was studying for a doctorate at the university there. Uh this does sound very much, doesn't it, like entirely legitimate anti-racist
03:05:18 it, like entirely legitimate anti-racist campaigning? No, I I think not not in in context. at the beginning of the report. Um,
03:05:29 report. Um, you know, AFA um sees itself having a similar role to that of Red Action
03:05:38 Action to broaden its base and then influence the naive from within. Um, I mean that, you know, really I think it's it's important. I think this shows how
03:05:51 important. I think this shows how um Mark Jenner's targeting you, you know, is is paying off, how the the local campaigning
03:06:05 the local campaigning um fits in with his his central targeting and and you know how a group like um AFA only
03:06:17 you know how a group like um AFA only sees
03:06:18 sees um these
03:06:21 um these legitimate um anti- police or um uh family campaigns
03:06:31 campaigns as opportunities to um recruit. And on top of that, as we know from all of Mark Jenner's reporting, it provides
03:06:44 Mark Jenner's reporting, it provides access to um activists
03:06:50 activists who are violent. Well, is there a suggestion that the doctorate student from Southampton Red Action has a violent underlying agenda?
03:07:04 Action has a violent underlying agenda? I have no idea. I mean, I have no idea today. Um um maybe let's say not. Um but that doesn't al alter what I'm trying to get across. If we go to
03:07:16 If we go to the last sentence, it's fair to say that what this report is portraying is what you are describing. Harold is therefore hoping that this respectable exterior
03:07:27 hoping that this respectable exterior will provide AFA with cover to operate against racist attacks in Tamesme and Southeast London. Yes.
03:07:36 Yes. Can you help us with what's meant by operate against racist attacks? Well, I think um based on the you know
03:07:47 think um based on the you know experience now of being able to read all of Mark Jenner's reporting and of course other officers, but we'll stick with his um
03:08:01 that um um yes, forgive me. Um the question was I know I've got it I haven't lost it nearly. Sorry. Um, operate against
03:08:14 nearly. Sorry. Um, operate against racist attacks. It means to um t tackle
03:08:23 t tackle anti-racist um targets. there. They would, as as we've seen, they um they would identify
03:08:36 they would identify um
03:08:39 um the
03:08:41 the far right groups as being um racist and the enemy. And that's that's often what um Mark Jenner experienced. Well,
03:08:54 what um Mark Jenner experienced. Well, it says operate against racist attacks. That could mean one of two things broadly, couldn't it? It could mean either
03:09:03 either protest legitimately against them. Yes.
03:09:07 Yes. Or take action against them of an illegitimate kind. Yes.
03:09:17 If it's a legitimate route, one can readily see, can't one, how an alliance of various anti-racist groups and campaigns
03:09:29 groups and campaigns might gain some momentum. Oh, indeed. Yes. What I'm struggling with is the other potential interpretation. How would
03:09:41 How would association with entirely legitimate protest groups assist AFA to commit crimes against its political opponents?
03:09:52 crimes against its political opponents? Um because activists uh that Mark Jenner and other field officers were targeting were very adept at um infiltrating legitimate groups of
03:10:08 at um infiltrating legitimate groups of using it as a form of cover um and then you know to to carry out what they thought was important. The two things
03:10:20 thought was important. The two things are not in opposition. The two things when you say they thought important do you mean attacking violently attacking people from the far right or not on on well yes on occasions
03:10:32 on on well yes on occasions how how does associating with the Lawrence family assist anybody to attack fascists? Well, it doesn't, but the two things um from the point of view of one
03:10:46 things um from the point of view of one of Mark Jenner's target group um from their perspective, the
03:10:56 the respectable legitimate work
03:11:01 work um
03:11:03 um of of you know, legitimate organizations. um was, you know, useful and um it would
03:11:14 was, you know, useful and um it would introduce them to being involved to some degree. It would introduce them to potential recruits. I think we see that in all in this report.
03:11:26 think we see that in all in this report. Are you saying the concern is that the anti-fascist anti-fascist action might recruit the Lawrenes? No, it doesn't say that and I'm certainly not [snorts] saying that
03:11:37 saying that this report is dated January 20 January 1998.
03:11:43 1998. that is after the Steven Lawrence inquiry has been announced but before the hearings start is the reality of this reporting that it's because the SDS is interested in
03:11:55 it's because the SDS is interested in what the Lawrence family is doing who it is associating with in the runup to the Steven Lawrence inquiry. No, I'm sure that it isn't.
03:12:06 No, I'm sure that it isn't. How can you be sure? Well, because I've read the report, I can put it into the context that I remember in broad broad terms. Um,
03:12:22 Mark Jenner's reporting. Um, Trevor Morris is reporting. HN81
03:12:32 might is. So, anyway, those those three will do. Um, you know, I I'm confident um that there was never any
03:12:44 any um
03:12:45 um any attempt to infiltrate the uh Lawrence family.
03:12:54 Can we take that down now, please? Can we have uh UCPI5035283?
03:13:00 This is Mr. Jenner's witness statement.
03:13:10 Can we have page 62, please?
03:13:18 Paragraph 130. This is Mr. Jenna's written evidence about um his role within
03:13:30 about um his role within London AFA as its organizer, the London organizer for AFA. Presumably you knew he had this position.
03:13:41 he had this position. Um yes. Yes. Did you explore with him what it involved?
03:13:46 involved? I would have done at the time for sure. Why did you permit it? It seemed um it seemed um appropriate at the time.
03:13:58 it seemed um appropriate at the time. Now,
03:14:00 Now, yes, I think so. Why allowing someone to take on a leadership role? How can that be appropriate?
03:14:13 How can that be appropriate? Um
03:14:17 I think if it was if he conducted himself in the right way it was useful. Did you give him any guidance as to how he should conduct himself as London
03:14:28 he should conduct himself as London organizer of AFA? Um I can't recall today but I'm sure that either myself or another member of the management team would have done.
03:14:41 the management team would have done. Can we have 749473 please? This is tab B 209 sir. [snorts]
03:14:52 And if we could have page 19 please.
03:15:00 If we could expand that please. Thank you.
03:15:33 [snorts]
03:15:35 Yes. Yes. Thank you. Was this the high point so far as potential criminality is concerned of
03:15:46 potential criminality is concerned of Detective Constable Jenner's deployment being invited to join and then joining Red Action? Um I can't recall today. I'm um
03:15:59 Um I can't recall today. I'm um reading the report here that's written by one of the detective sergeants. Um
03:16:10 Um uh but I you know I I recognize the the period. Um I'm um fairly close to leaving the squad
03:16:24 I'm um fairly close to leaving the squad at this time. Um
03:16:28 Um but yeah, I I I mean I can picture um picture the context. Was it a high point? I'm I'm not sure.
03:16:39 high point? I'm I'm not sure. Red Action was notorious because of Pat Hayes in particular, wasn't it? Um, yes.
03:16:48 Um, yes. But Pat Hayes involvement with Red Action predated Detective Constable Jenner's infiltration of that group, didn't it? Yes.
03:17:00 Yes. And as far as you are aware, is it right to say there was no terrorist activity um
03:17:09 um being committed by anyone within Red Action uh whilst DC Jenner was reporting? No. To the best of my recollection, that's that's correct.
03:17:21 that's that's correct. Was
03:17:24 Was any consideration given as to whether Red Action was a group that in the summer of 1998
03:17:35 summer of 1998 justified continued infiltration?
03:17:40 Or was it simply assumed that because of Pat Hayes in the past, even if the group wasn't doing very much in July 1998,
03:17:51 in July 1998, the risk that it might return to such action was so great that it was worthwhile keeping somebody in place just in case. No, I I'm pretty sure that wouldn't have
03:18:03 No, I I'm pretty sure that wouldn't have been the case. I think um the issue would have been um public order in particular uh clashes between um far left and far
03:18:15 uh clashes between um far left and far right.
03:18:18 right. Our understanding is those clashes were there wasn't a great deal of do of that going on by the summer of 1998. Is that your recollection?
03:18:30 your recollection? I don't have a clear recollection. I' I'd be surprised if it I can't if it had abated. I I I'd be surprised.
03:18:41 be surprised. You take that down now, please. We've had some evidence that Detective Constable Jenner used violence. Uh
03:18:53 violence. Uh we've had some evidence in particular uh that he was participating with anti-fascist action in an attack on a pub in Hoburn
03:19:05 pub in Hoburn uh which it was alleged was instigated and led by Detective Constable uh Jenner involving throwing bricks
03:19:16 involving throwing bricks contrary to instructions. Did DC Jenner ever report back to you anything at all about an AFA uh inspired disturbance at a pub in
03:19:29 uh inspired disturbance at a pub in Hoben?
03:19:31 Hoben? Um, no, not that I can recall. Did he ever say anything about throwing bricks?
03:19:37 bricks? No.
03:19:39 No. We've had uh evidence uh that he assaulted a drunken and abusive man who was looking for a fight at an Irish
03:19:50 was looking for a fight at an Irish social which required intervention by Mark Metaf and others. Did DC Jenner report back to you
03:20:02 Did DC Jenner report back to you anything to that effect? No.
03:20:06 No. We've had evidence that at a picket a man sought to cross the picket line wielding a bicycle chain and detective constable Jenner intervened and used
03:20:17 constable Jenner intervened and used force to protect those threatened by the man. Did he report anything of that ilk back to you? I mean, not that I can recall.
03:20:31 S has given evidence uh that detective constable Jenner told her that he had been involved in fights and came home with cuts and bruises. Do you ever
03:20:45 with cuts and bruises. Do you ever recall seeing Detective Constable Jenner with cuts and bruises? Um no, I don't recollect that. Did he ever tell you he had been involved in fights?
03:20:57 involved in fights? Um well, I think I was aware I think we were all aware that um he would he would be
03:21:08 he would he would be involved in clashes with um the far right or in particular. Um but
03:21:21 in particular. Um but our understanding I think was generally that he
03:21:26 that he you know he would be adept at looking after himself um self-defense and um keeping up appearances. He wasn't uh
03:21:38 um keeping up appearances. He wasn't uh frightened to be at risk of harm. But I think um you know he could look after himself. I don't
03:21:49 he could look after himself. I don't think we ever had any information that he had um
03:21:59 he had um you know carried out an actual attack himself.
03:22:06 Can I move on to the question of a potential compromise? This is when DC Jenner uh bumps into a
03:22:17 This is when DC Jenner uh bumps into a man we're calling Kurt. Can you help us um first of all with what your reaction was
03:22:30 to that near compromise and how you planned to mitigate the risk that arose from it.
03:22:43 Yes, I I thought it was a an um you know a close shave. He I think he was um
03:22:54 shave. He I think he was um walking home and he was very close to his
03:22:58 his We know about the compromise. We've had his his evidence about that. I'm focusing on your reaction as a manager. Yeah. Well, you know, my first reaction obviously, you know, listening to the account and my assessment and probably
03:23:13 account and my assessment and probably I'm not sure who who else was involved, but
03:23:17 but SDS management was was really concerned. Uh, this was a close shave. Um, and he handled it
03:23:28 handled it um very well. Yeah. Well, as I say, the focus I'd like is on the management reaction. Perhaps I can assist by calling up 247048 please.
03:23:50 This is uh one of Sergeant Wars, is it? Sorry, Sergeant Webb's um documents from April 97. Operation LFU
03:24:01 documents from April 97. Operation LFU and then the two letters which are Kurt's initials. Uh I'll give you a moment to refresh your memory.
03:24:38 Yes. Um yeah. So, the plan, as I understand it, is put Kurt under surveillance and let's see if we can catch him committing a crime, prosecute him, uh, and have him imprisoned, which
03:24:51 him, uh, and have him imprisoned, which will take him out of the equation. Is that a fair summation? It is.
03:24:55 It is. And Operation LFU, Kurt, the LFU stands for let's up. Yes. And I mean, quite striking. And um, probably I would remember that. I mean,
03:25:07 probably I would remember that. I mean, I I don't know. I don't I don't want to just try and remove my myself from this. Um but I I mean I don't really remember this
03:25:19 I I mean I don't really remember this aspect of it. I'm not you know I'm not mentioned here. It um but um
03:25:31 but um there we are. I was there at the I was obviously the DI but for some reason I don't seem to have been party to this particular you know maybe I was on
03:25:42 particular you know maybe I was on holiday who knows can we take it then that the SDS considered that the operational security of DC Jenner was such that it was worth making specific efforts to catch a
03:25:54 making specific efforts to catch a specific person and have them imprisoned uh in order to uh remove the risk. I well it's it's strange. I've I've um I
03:26:07 well it's it's strange. I've I've um I haven't come across this before. Um so I'm bit surprised but um so I've never come I I can't think of any other
03:26:20 never come I I can't think of any other instance uh along these lines. Do you agree with that analysis of this instance?
03:26:27 instance? Pardon? Do you agree with that analysis of this instance of um
03:26:33 of um is what is going on as I've just described it? Yeah. Yes. Yes. Could we have 527376 please?
03:26:47 [snorts]
03:26:53 Page nine.
03:26:58 And the at section three, this is a document that we understand to be yours and it's a little later. Um,
03:27:16 yes. Well, and it appears uh that the strategy is getting nowhere.
03:27:27 the strategy is getting nowhere. Yes. And it also, you know, I stand corrected clearly um whether whether I um returned to duty or whatever, but by
03:27:39 um returned to duty or whatever, but by this point I'm clearly aware. I So yeah, I forgive me. I I just didn't recall it. Um And is the reality uh the
03:27:51 Um And is the reality uh the plan to have Kurt prosecuted was thwarted because Kurt wasn't offending? Oh, I better sorry. Can you repeat that? Was the plan to up Kurt thwarted
03:28:04 Was the plan to up Kurt thwarted because Kurt wasn't offending? Yes.
03:28:10 Yes. So, would that be a convenient time to stop?
03:28:13 stop? Certainly. We'll resume again tomorrow at 10 as usual.