Continuing after the lunch break, HN1434 Linda Holden — a senior Metropolitan Police officer who oversaw the Stephen Lawrence murder investigation — is cross-examined by Counsel to the Inquiry about Special Branch surveillance of the campaign groups and visitors around the Lawrence family, and about the covert use of Special Branch/SDS assets to identify suspects from the May and October 1993 Welling demonstrations. She repeatedly says she was never informed of, and cannot recall, liaison between the murder squad and Special Branch, while accepting that documents disclosed by the Inquiry show such liaison took place and that race shaped perceptions of the groups supporting the family. The session closes with her account of recommending that Duwayne Brooks's case be referred to the CPS for a charging decision, before the hearing moves into private session.
00:20:01 Good afternoon everybody. The first part of this afternoon's proceedings will be transmitted on the live link uh but only after 15 minutes have elapsed. Uh those
00:20:12 after 15 minutes have elapsed. Uh those with um mobile telephones may use them to report what they hear in the hearing room, but only after 20 after 15 minutes have elapsed since the event that they're reporting. They may not be used
00:20:24 they're reporting. They may not be used for recording or photography. There will be a private session towards the end of the day.
00:20:30 the day. Thank you, sir. Mr. Thank you for coming back. [clears throat] You say at paragraph 9.2 two of your witness statement that on receipt of information regarding the groups and visitors to the
00:20:42 regarding the groups and visitors to the Lawrence family home that you took no action as you did not consider this relevant to the investigation. Is that right?
00:20:49 right? Yes.
00:20:50 Yes. And in terms of your involvement um you didn't disseminate this information to other areas of the MPS including special branch who personally didn't do that. That's correct. Having seen the messages that we saw
00:21:01 Having seen the messages that we saw before lunch. Yes. Do you accept that there was liaison between the murder investigation team and special branch that you were not aware of at the time? I wasn't aware of any.
00:21:15 And was this the type of special branch liaison you would have expected to be consulted on? I would have been informed on. Yes. If if Brian Weeden, the SIO uh had
00:21:28 If if Brian Weeden, the SIO uh had information about special branch, he would have mentioned it certainly at the office meetings that we had
00:21:36 and also having seen these messages that you weren't aware of at the time, would you also accept that there could have been requests from special branch to the investigation team that you were not aware of at the time?
00:21:48 aware of at the time? I don't know.
00:21:52 Do you also accept it's possible that information relating to the Lawrence family and individuals and groups supporting them could have been passed to from the investigation team to special branch and you were just simply
00:22:03 special branch and you were just simply not aware of it? I wasn't aware of any of it.
00:22:11 If information obtained by the family liaison officers from the Lawrence's family home regarding the visitors had been transmitted to special branch, would you consider this to be usual or
00:22:23 would you consider this to be usual or unusual in a murder investigation? Well, in general speaking, I I would have thought it's unusual. They would they would have to uh get the
00:22:34 They would they would have to uh get the the they wouldn't do it themselves. It would go through to the uh investigating officer.
00:22:41 officer. the senior investigator sir and uh he would make a decision. And in general terms from your experience of murder investigation would this type of liaison be considered appropriate?
00:22:57 Um if they well I I would have thought if if they thought it was necessary to send it special if special branch needed it. But the thing is what would have
00:23:08 it. But the thing is what would have happened it would go the uniform branch would deal would deal with public order. We wouldn't deal with public order. Um were you aware at the time that part
00:23:20 Um were you aware at the time that part of Mrs. Lawrence's concern about the family liaison officers were that she felt that they were suspicious of her family when they were asking about the visitors to the home and about Steven's
00:23:32 visitors to the home and about Steven's background. Do you recall that? No.
00:23:38 And that was part of the reason why she objected to the family liaison asking questions about her family. Do you recall being told that that was part of the difficulty with the liaison?
00:23:49 the difficulty with the liaison? No, I think I think you're asking me the wrong question. The s the SIO would be the person who would be who would be in involved in that. I was just o overseeing things. I wouldn't I wouldn't
00:24:02 overseeing things. I wouldn't I wouldn't know what was going on. Sure. I think my question to you is that whether you're told any of this information because you've um been made aware you you've explained in your statement that the issues about the difficulties for family
00:24:14 issues about the difficulties for family liaison were raised with you and you've explained so far that you understood this to be the groups uh making it difficult to liaz with the family liaison officers. So I just wanted to
00:24:26 liaison officers. So I just wanted to check
00:24:27 check that's what I've been told. I understand. And in relation to what you were told about the difficulties, do you also recall that the family, the Lawrence family were concerned because
00:24:38 Lawrence family were concerned because they were providing the FLOS with names for investigation and they felt they weren't getting investig information from the investigation team about updates and
00:24:51 investigation team about updates and they were also frustrated due to the lack of arrests and those matters also fed in to the difficulties of the liaison with the family liaison officer. Do you recall that? There might have been, but I don't know.
00:25:03 There might have been, but I don't know. I can't remember. Do you recall Chief Superintendent Philpot ever offering to provide family liaison officers with training with
00:25:14 liaison officers with training with ethnic minority individuals? Do you recall that? No.
00:25:21 Could we please have up UCPI 39313? This is Brian Weeden's witness statement to the inquiry. Okay.
00:25:30 Okay. Page five, please. Paragraph 3, A2.
00:25:42 And here he sets up his observations on the McFersonson report. And firstly, you can see at paragraph 3350 of McFersonson, he notes that he drafted a
00:25:53 McFersonson, he notes that he drafted a briefing note for Mr. Melish in which Mr. Khn was described as closely linked to ARRA. Within hours of the murder, he interposed himself between the Lawrence family and the police has sick turn the
00:26:06 family and the police has sick turn the case into a political bandwagon. Mr. Weeden accepts he drafted this note and then goes on to comment on paragraph 26.27 of McFersonson saying, "Furthermore, DC Holden felt that Mr.
00:26:18 "Furthermore, DC Holden felt that Mr. Kahn was interposing himself between the family and the family liaison team. So that this in itself created some kind of barrier
00:26:27 barrier and he says um he thinks this is likely to be information that form part of his briefing note. Do you recall this being the perception of Mr. Khn uh by the
00:26:38 the perception of Mr. Khn uh by the leadership of the investigation team at the time?
00:26:42 the time? No.
00:26:43 No. Do you recall that the concern was about Mr. Khan being the issue and liaison with the family rather than the groups? Do you recall that? I don't. No.
00:26:58 I asked you a question earlier and it may be that um [clears throat] you uh didn't fully understand my um question or I didn't explain it very well. So, I'm just going to ask it
00:27:09 well. So, I'm just going to ask it again. I was asking you about um the groups and whether there was a perception that the Lawrenes were being exploited by those groups.
00:27:20 exploited by those groups. And my um question to you was whether this suggestion of the groups exploiting the family and that they needed
00:27:32 the family and that they needed protection from those groups. Was this because they were a black family and a white family would not need such protection? Did that have anything to do with it?
00:27:44 Did that have anything to do with it? Well, the fact that they were they were a black family and obviously there was a lot of publicity and the anti-racist groups were were coming out, that was it. I I I assume in in a white family if
00:27:55 it. I I I assume in in a white family if there had been similar types of issues, uh we would have dealt with it in the same way as the black family. Thank you.
00:28:10 I'm going to move on to a slightly different point. Um thank you. I want to ask you about your knowledge of the identification of uh Mr. Dwayne Brooks at the 8th of May 1993 Welling
00:28:21 at the 8th of May 1993 Welling demonstration. Yes. [snorts] Uh firstly, do you recall having any involvement in the policing operation prior to andor on the day of the 8th of May 1993 Welling demonstration?
00:28:34 May 1993 Welling demonstration? Well, the only thing I I I can think of are you talking about the uh my meeting with special branch? So your meeting with Rashbart, which I will come to in a moment.
00:28:44 moment. Sorry.
00:28:44 Sorry. Um appears to be dated in relation to the October 1993, right?
00:28:49 right? Um demonstration. I I'm asking if you recall having any involvement in the policing operation around the 8th of May demonstration? No.
00:28:58 No. Uh you don't recall or you weren't? I don't recall. Do you recall having any involvement in the deployment of PC Fisher, who we were talking about earlier, the FLO and
00:29:10 talking about earlier, the FLO and racial incident officer to that de demonstration? I've never heard of PC Fisher, so I don't know. uh
00:29:20 uh do you have any view on the appropriateness uh in general terms of an FLO or or an officer acting in the role of an FO and a racial incident officer being deployed
00:29:33 a racial incident officer being deployed to that protest undercover um which happened as a result of the murder. Do you have any view on whether that was appropriate or not? No, I don't. Uh, as I said, all we were
00:29:44 No, I don't. Uh, as I said, all we were concentrating on was the murder investigation. Public order was not within my brief. Could we please have MPS 0749351
00:29:55 Could we please have MPS 0749351 tab B2? So, now turning to the 8th of October 1993 demonstration.
00:30:03 And we can see here, this is a minute sheet, uh, and includes special balance reports relating to that second Welling demonstration. Yes.
00:30:13 Yes. And it's right, isn't it, that you'd not seen this document prior to it being disclosed to you by the inquiry. Is that right? Absolutely. Yes. So, we can see here on page one, SB
00:30:24 So, we can see here on page one, SB report concerning the serious disorder which occurred during the unity march in Kent on the 16th of October. And then if you look down next to number five, DCI HN86 to C. Do you see that?
00:30:37 HN86 to C. Do you see that? Yes.
00:30:38 Yes. And as you are now aware, HN86 was the DCI in the SCS at the time. Are you now aware of that? No.
00:30:47 No. Ah. Um, but you certainly weren't aware of H86 at the time. Is that right? That's correct. If
00:30:54 If we can go please to page 11.
00:31:02 Um, and this is the meeting, as I understand it, that you recall attending. And we see in the first paragraph, Thursday, the 31st of October,
00:31:15 Thursday, the 31st of October, a meeting was being held to explore the strateies strategies available to a special squad set up to investigate offenses relating to the anti-racist march in Welling on the 16th, says 19, presumably October 93. Yes.
00:31:29 presumably October 93. Yes. Um, you can [clears throat] see there you were one of the attendees. Do you recall the meeting? Yes, I do. And at paragraph 11 of your witness
00:31:40 And at paragraph 11 of your witness statement, you would say you attended the meeting to discuss setting up a major incident room at Sachuk to identify perpetrators of the disorder at the Welling demonstration on the 16th of October. Is
00:31:52 demonstration on the 16th of October. Is that right? That's correct. Yes. And was this wholly separate to the murder uh Steven Lawrence murder investigation? Totally. Yeah. It was public order. Yeah.
00:32:02 Yeah. You say at paragraph 9.3 of your statement, you don't recall discussing anything to do with the Steven Lawrence murder investigation with any members of special branch during this meeting. Is
00:32:14 special branch during this meeting. Is that right? That's correct. Yeah. Do you recall mentioning anything to do with the anti-racist group supporting the Lawrenes at this meeting? I can't recall.
00:32:25 And you also say that this is the only meeting that you recall having with special branch during the Steven Lawrence murder investigation. Is that right?
00:32:33 right? That's correct. We can then look at paragraph two, please, including the sub paragraph one. If you just have a read of that.
00:32:59 Yeah. So, appears to be a discussion about whether or not information from any assets that SO2 have have could be accessed and in what manner. If we could then please go to page two, paragraph
00:33:11 then please go to page two, paragraph three.
00:33:29 Sorry, could you come out of that a second? I think I might have the wrong paragraph number. It's page uh apologies. Could you go to page 12? My mistake. [snorts]
00:33:42 There we go. Paragraph three.
00:33:47 So the author of the report says, I explained that it should be possible to access the S so 12 assets on a mutually agreed basis when this becomes necessary.
00:33:59 becomes necessary. I further say that the matter of disclosure would need to be discussed with officers of a more senior rank within SO2. Yeah. Could we please also then look at MPS0749353
00:34:10 tab B3.
00:34:28 So these are [clears throat] minute sheets regarding the unity march in Welling on the 16th of October. And again, is it right that you hadn't seen this document before it was disclosed to you by the inquiry
00:34:39 you by the inquiry until today? Yes. Now, um I think you have talked about it in your witness statement. Um if we could just look at the first paragraph, we see
00:34:50 just look at the first paragraph, we see special
00:34:52 special report reel requirements of special branch in the investigation of criminal offenses following the demo on the 16th of October.
00:35:01 October. Yeah. We then look at the next paragraph please
00:35:05 please and we can see this is to superintendent 61 and it's from Edmonson. You will be aware that we are continuing to lays with three area on this matter. DI
00:35:16 with three area on this matter. DI redacted will speak with the SIO and most of the queries raised will be dealt with during that liaison. If we can go down then to minute two. Um so just at the bottom. So to DC
00:35:30 Um so just at the bottom. So to DC adminson
00:35:32 adminson with reference to point one of DS redacted report. So that's the report we have just looked at previously. The process of identifying persons involved has already begun with DCI HN86
00:35:44 involved has already begun with DCI HN86 having a copy of the DPA video of newcasts.
00:35:49 newcasts. Do you have any recollection at the time of being aware of SO12 resources being utilized to identify suspects from the 16th of October 93 demonstration? Well,
00:36:02 Well, I'll try and make it clear. I I was asked to go to a meeting with special branch.
00:36:09 branch. Um, that obviously came from area headquarters. Must have come from the DAC or the Kuma. Uh they wanted an instant room, a spare instant room for these demonstrations and they wanted us
00:36:21 these demonstrations and they wanted us to man it or even though it was public order, they wanted us to man it. Obviously it had been okayed by uh the area. Um and could I provide an incident
00:36:33 area. Um and could I provide an incident room,
00:36:34 room, which I did. I said, "Well, we got a spare one at Savoc, so you can have that one and an SIO." And then one of the superintendent um was was manning it and obviously
00:36:46 um was was manning it and obviously there'll be a few few of our officers there and they would look at any information that had come from the uh the march photographs or videos or
00:36:57 the march photographs or videos or whatever uh and try and identify them and and that was my whole issue with it. I had no other dealings with it at all. I never went to the incident room so I
00:37:08 I never went to the incident room so I wouldn't have known what was going on and that's really what had happened. So the heights of your involvement in this was this this meeting uh and providing the incident room.
00:37:19 providing the incident room. That's right. And providing a bit of staff which which they wanted which was obviously okay because this as I said this would been a a uniform matter but
00:37:30 this would been a a uniform matter but they asked us to to help them basically. Thank you. And [clears throat] just to be clear, you say at paragraph 12 of your statement that you were not aware at the time of Peter Francis identifying
00:37:42 at the time of Peter Francis identifying Mr. Brooks as being present at the May 1993 demonstration at the time. I've never heard of Peter Francis until he he was shown on television in 2013, I think it was. And you also accept in your witness
00:37:53 And you also accept in your witness statement, paragraph 11.1, that these documents strongly suggest that special branch assets were utilized to identify suspects from the 16th of October
00:38:04 suspects from the 16th of October demonstration. Yeah. Yeah.
00:38:05 Yeah. Yeah.
00:38:07 Yeah. And now you know that the SDS was a covert unit within S special branch. Do you accept that given the reference to HN86, the DCI of SDS at the time that
00:38:18 HN86, the DCI of SDS at the time that this could be a reference to an SDS UCO reviewing the material? Well, it wasn't under the cover. Uh well, as far as I was concerned, they were just identifying people who had uh
00:38:29 were just identifying people who had uh who'd been on the march and were committed crime.
00:38:34 And given your experience of working in a cover unit, I'm not asking for any specifics, but given your experience of working in cover in the 90s, would it be usual for there to be no paper documentation of a special branch
00:38:45 documentation of a special branch undercover asset in assisting with such arrests or prosecution? Uh, special branch was totally different to the way that was done in in in the uh
00:38:56 to the way that was done in in in the uh in in in the in the in the usual form. uh covert operations uh within the Metropolitan Police were were dealt with for criminal activities.
00:39:08 were dealt with for criminal activities. The as far as I I was aware special branch dealt with um um public order instances and it was intelligence gathering. Mhm.
00:39:18 Mhm. That was it. In terms of um [clears throat] can you comment at all on the fact that if there was an undercover special branch asset use that there's wouldn't be paper documentation of that? Can you comment on that at
00:39:30 of that? Can you comment on that at all? No, I can't. I don't know. Um and do you also uh agree that given that there were special branch assets or appears to be special branch assets looking into reviewing
00:39:41 looking into reviewing uh suspects in the October 93 demonstration, the same could be possible for the May 1993 demonstration? Honestly, I don't know. It's something I can't answer.
00:39:58 From your experience of murder investigations, if a witness in the investigation was going to be the subject of special branch resources, would it be usual for
00:40:10 branch resources, would it be usual for this to be communicated to the murder investigation team? Well, it wasn't wasn't in my experience. You don't recall that ever happening in the murder investigations you were
00:40:21 the murder investigations you were involved with
00:40:25 in Mr. Brooks's case, given that he was Steven's friend and the surviving victim of the racist attack?
00:40:33 attack? Yes.
00:40:33 Yes. Would this have made it a more compelling case for the murder investigation team to be informed of the use of special branch resources, or can you not say? I can't say. I don't know.
00:40:48 You say at paragraph 12 of your witness statement that you were asked by a detective superintendent whose name is redacted.
00:40:55 redacted. Yes.
00:40:56 Yes. For your opinion on whether Mr. Brooks should be charged or if the file should be sent to the CPS for a charging decision.
00:41:02 decision. That's correct. [snorts] Um do you recall why you were asked for your opinion on it? Well, I remember him coming to me and saying, "We've got uh some video or or
00:41:14 saying, "We've got uh some video or or we've got evidence that uh Mr. Brooks uh was smashing up cars on the demonstration. You know, what should we do? Should should we charge him or what?" I said, "No,
00:41:26 what?" I said, "No, send it to the CPS and let them decide what to do." And that's basically my whole involvement in it. It was just to give give him some advice. Do you know if there was any reason why you in
00:41:37 if there was any reason why you in particular were asked to give that view? Well, was his senior officer. And in any way, do you think you were asked because of your link to your role supervising the murder investigation?
00:41:49 supervising the murder investigation? No.
00:41:52 You were ultimately recommended that Mr. Brooks's file should be sent to the CPS for a charging decision. Yes. And you've explained that you what you were told about the CC what was on the CCTV and in
00:42:04 about the CC what was on the CCTV and in your statement you explained it as an informal discussion with limited information. Yes.
00:42:09 Yes. Was there any other factors you considered when recommending Mr. Brooks's file to be sent for a charging decision?
00:42:15 decision? No.
00:42:22 So those are all my questions. I've dealt with all the rule 10s that were sent over the lunch period. Yes. So I'm not aware if there's any re-examination. Do you want me to rise to see if there
00:42:34 Do you want me to rise to see if there are any more rule 10 questions? Um I wonder whether it may be helpful for 10 minutes given that there was further evidence after lunch. No, I'll do so briefly. Sir, thank you.
00:47:55 Yes. So, as I understand it, there are no further rule 10 and no re-examination. Thank you. Thank you for attending. Um, it's rare that I have a witness who is even older than me. I'm [laughter]
00:48:07 even older than me. I'm [laughter] Thank you. Right. Uh, we are now going to have a private session. Um, tomorrow's uh open hearings will resume as usual at 10:00 with I anticipate Lord
00:48:20 as usual at 10:00 with I anticipate Lord Condan giving evidence.