Thread by @copscampaign

and we're off!
Today's evidential hearing is just starting - this morning we are due to hear from #spycop 'HN329' - aka 'John Graham'

David Barr QC checked that HN329 had indeed supplied two witness statements to the #spycopsinquiry - one dated 11/04/19 and a supplementary one on 27/08/19

He asked him some questions about joining the #spycops unit - did he volunteer and was he volunteered? HN329 doesn't recall volunteering, he thinks he was requested to join the new unit (in 1968)

He had spent two years in the police force before joining Special Branch, and (as was common at the time) spent his first year at SB working in the 'naturalisation enquiries' section

This meant he had plenty of practice filling in reports - the naturalisation reports went to the Home Office, who were "very stringent about what to include and what to leave out"

He was able to 'transfer' this experience to general Special Branch reporting. His reports would always be checked over (and edited, to ensure nothing 'irrelevant' was accidentally included) by a more senior officer

He explained that he would include whatever details he thought were relevant - he wasn't given any formal training, or guidelines, and he does not recall being told not to include certain info

He explained that his time in Special Branch had already given him a good idea of what was expected, and what kind of information Speical Branch would have been interested in collecting -

Yes, they would have been interested in people's personal details, any distinguishing features, and yes he would have included info about the dynamics of the group he was reporting on, and any analysis that he thought useful.. He left any 'filtering' to someone else

Barr asked HN329 about any training received. He also asked if he was ever provided with definitions of words like 'extremist' or 'subversion', and read out a description of the aims of Special Branch -

"gathering intelligence on activities that sought to undermine the status quo, the Government of the day and the political Establishment"

Special Branch's Terms of Reference - from April 1970 - were shown on screen, and paragraph 2 read out loud

HN329 explained that there wasn't much of a difference at first in terms of attending political meetings. As part of the 'general enquiries' section of Special Branch, he would attend in plain clothes. Once he joined the SDS , he would just wear 'non-descript clothing'.

He said that sometimes people who were dressed smartly might be regarded with suspicion (and asked to leave a meeting) but "if you were scruffy.. nobody bothered you".
Although he prepared a cover name - 'John Graham' - nobody ever asked him for his name.

HN329 infiltrated various VSC branches in NW London - as far as he knows it was just divided up in this way - and attended meetings in Camden, Hampstead, Kilburn, Willesden etc.
The Camden group was "considered prominent as it contained Geoff Richman"

He confirmed that Chief Inspector Conrad Dixon sometimes attended these VSC meetings too. But most of the time, he was alone. If more than one SDS officer was in the same meeting, they would play it by ear, and maybe not even acknowledge each other
He said the groups were "fluid"

The next exhibit was from a publication called 'Red Camden' - HN329 had no recollection of writing it, but said it was possible that it had been written by Dixon or another #spycops colleague, and his name added to it.

HN329 recalled attending meetings at Conway Hall.
The next exhibit [MPS-0738583] was from a meeting at Conway Hall on 17th September 1968 - Barr noted that this was attended by at least 6 members of the #spycops unit

As well as HN329, this list included Conrad Dixon (head of the unit); DI Saunders, DS Wilson, DS Creamer and DC Moss. Why so many?
"There was nothing else on" and people "felt they ought to do something"

HN329 also explained that this might have made it easier for the #spycops to remember stuff (as they couldn't make any notes during the meeting) and to identify attendees (who were numerous)

HN329 was asked if he and the other #spycops would take part in ballots at meetings - and therefore influence the results?
"Was this on your mind?" asked Barr.
"Not really, it was just putting your arm up"

The next meeting mentoned was one of the Anti-Imperialist Solidarity Movement. HN329 was asked why he felt the need to record the ethinc origin of attendees, or use the word 'coloured' to do so? It was common at the time.

after a short break, Barr asked HN329 about attending a much smaller meeting, of the VSC 'working committee' - by this time he had been embedded in the group for many months, and so was able to access these less public discussions, that took place in private homes

HN329 claims not to recall much about his participation in these meetings - said that he probably just went along with the majority opinion ("sensible and safest tactic")

He was asked if there was any formality or process followed regarding #spycops meetings in private homes, or in travelling outside of the Met's jurisdiction, but could not recall any

He atteended a meeting in Sheffield in May 1969. When asked if it was common for SDS officers to travel to other areas, he said he had "no idea" as “everyone was working separately in their groups”

There was a torch-lit demonstration on Xmas eve, organsed byAnti-Imperialist Solidairty to celebrate the anniversary of the NLF: did you attend?
“No, I don't think so, don't remember anyway”

on 11/01/69, ANZAW (Australians and New Zealanders Against the War in Vietnam) organised a meeting at Australia House then marched along the Strand to the Savoy hotel, where the Australian PM was staying.
HN329 *does* remember this event...

.. as he was punched in the ribs by a security guard while being ejected.

Can you expand on what you did? “Yes... " the rest of the group had got up to shout in defence of one guy who was being ejected from the building, so HN329 felt he had to join in to maintain his cover

"I thought I better get to my feet and I remember saying 'let him speak' "
He was grabbed and dragged out, and recalls that he "pretended to resist", a little.

The next questions were about HN329 inviting a woman activist out to dinner - why did you do this? how long had you known her? HN329 said he couldn't remember.
Were you hoping to form a relationship with her in order to obtain information?

Was there any sexual temptation involved here?
"Not at all"
Did you tell your wife about this?
"My wife has never been interested in what I did for a living."

HN329 is then asked if he can recollect more about receiving help from the SDS back-room staff; about whether his colleagues followed the same practice as him; about the volume of reports that he produced; telephoning intelligence into the SDS office or other parts of the police

When asked about the possibility of signing his name to any reports which he hadn't written,which had in fact been written by another #spycop, HN329 asserted "I wouldn't have signed anything I didn't know to be true"

He was also asked how much he knew about HN135, 'Mike Ferguson', who infiltrated the Anti-Apartheid movement, incl the anti-Tour protests

More was asked about the 'ethos' iof the SDS - "were you open with each other or secretive with one another?"
HN329: "In the main I suppose we were open"

Were you concerned about the lack of formal welfare arrangements?
Did you feel that help would have been available had you needed it?
Did you find it stressful, pretending to be someone else?
HN329 seemed pretty blase; he doesn't seem to have found his deployment stressful

It was suggested that because HN329 lived 'at home' with his family -apart from that one trip to Sheffield - he was quite 'grounded'.

When asked for his view of those early days of the #spycops HN329 said they were the "finest representatives of Special Branch"; "excellent officers who did exactly the proper job

Rajiv Menon QC then asked the Chair for permission to ask some some additional questions of HN329.
Mittng responded:
“You have already submitted your questions to Mr Barr, I think, have you not?"

Menon patiently explained that yes, he had followed the protocol laid down by the Chair, he had submitted his questions *a full seven days in advance*, but for some reason, David Barr had not addressed them all, hence his bringing them up now

He wanted to ask the witness more about:
1) the political motivations of the VSC in those early days;
2) the selection & targeting of the VSC, and some more detail about what HN329 was told to do;

3) the general methodology of the SDS, and what happened at these near-daily or daily meetings at the unit's 'safe house' (somewhere the #spycops must have they spent much of their days - as the political meetings they spied on tended to take place in the evenings)

4) what information HN329 collected that made a difference, resulting in a lower level of public disorder in October 1968 than there had been in March;
5) the use of 'Box 500' (how much intelligence was passed to the security services)

6) finally, some questions in relation to one of the documents already exhibited - the meeting attended by 9 #spycops

Menon: "I notice we have plenty of time before we are to hear the statement of Ernest Tate read at 2pm"

Mitting:
"That may be so but I have to keep order in these proceedings...

. and ensure.. that this witness is not troubled by questions that have already been adequately covered by Mr Barr..."
Mitting point blank refused him

"and also that this does not set a precedent for future such requests"
(whereby core participants actually get to ask questions about the evidence they're seeing/ hearing now for the very first time)

Mitting: "Of the seven topics you have given me ...only one can rightly be posed to this witness”
Menon said he didn't understand, but Mitting cut him off and snapped:
"You may ask your question or you will be silenced”

The only question that Mitting was prepared to allow was the one about the VSC meeting when a vote was taken about the route of the 27th October march.

Menon asked HN329 about the voting that took place at this meeting. His explanation (earlier on) was that if he hadn't voted, he would have stood out like a sore thumb. So he must have put his hand up, but has no recollection of it.

Was this vote discussed later on, back at the flat?
HN329 claimed not to remember how he'd voted, or any discussions with other #spycops afterwards about how they had voted.

He said that they would have all gone off on their separate ways, and that Saunders , Cremer & Fisher wouldn't usually have come to the flat anyway.

He couldn't remember much about being debriefed by senior officers.
He said that the info the #spycops gathered would have made it into Dixon's reports, and the rest of the officers "would have assisted at some stage with identifying people".