Thread by @MarkWatts_1

1. Day 11 of Westminster hearings at #CSAinquiry – my round-up in 12 tweets.

A wasted morning on the wrong witness from Home Office review. And Tim Hulbert, Home Office whitsleblower on funding by his old department of PIE, objects to being made to feel like the accused...

2. Michael Box, head of secretariat at Home Office for review by Peter Wanless and Richard Whittam into claim that dept gave funds to PIE told #CSAinquiry thrice that he could not answer specific questions about review…

3. A typical answer to #CSAinquiry from Michael Box was: “I can't answer that question. That's a matter for the reviewers.” That one in answer to whether a specific former civil servant was potentially an important person for the Wanless-Whittam review to contact...

4. But #CSAinquiry has not called either Peter Wanless or Richard Whittam who could, unlike Michael Box, answer those specific questions about their review of claim that Home Office helped fund PIE.

5. Tim Hulbert, former consultant to Home Office’s Voluntary Services Unit, told #CSAinquiry how he found out that dept gave five-figure sum to PIE, and that this was to help Special Branch monitor the pro-paedophile group.

6. Brian Altman, counsel to #CSAinquiry, asked Tim Hulbert about his comment in a statement for Home Office review that he had a “hazy recollection” of seeing a spreadsheet that showed a grant for PIE...

7. Tim Hulbert told counsel to #CSAinquiry: “It does feel, from where I am sitting, as if… you're developing your usual style, I understand, of examining defendants in murder trials rather than examining a witness independently and neutrally.”

8. In my view, Tim Hulbert’s accusation against Brian Altman, counsel to #CSAinquiry, was valid for his style of questioning witnesses whose evidence he does not like, esp the few police whistleblowers called and Don Hale, and in contrast to Met/IOPC/MI5 corporate witnesses...

9. Having said that, in my view also, the question by Brian Altman, counsel to #CSAinquiry, to Tim Hulbert about his comment on his “hazy recollection” of the entry on the spreadsheet was entirely reasonable.

And Hulbert answered it strongly...

10 In essence, Tim Hulbert, on the question of whether the Home Office gave funds to PIE, told #CSAinquiry: “I was sure then, and I’m sure now.”

11. Tim Hulbert told an ex-HO colleague by e-mail that a #CSAinquiry lawyer was looking into his claim re PIE funding, inquiry heard. “Don’t hold your breath, however, as he certainly didn’t seem impressed. Of course, he’s an ex-Home Office lawyer!”

12. And, at the end of his evidence session this afternoon, Tim Hulbert, Home Office whistleblower, had this heart-felt message for Alexis Jay, chairwoman of #CSAinquiry: