Thread by @copscampaign

We are about to start the 4th day of 'evidential hearings' at the #SpyCopsInquiry
This morning we have a former officer, HN336 (who used the cover-name 'Dick Epps'), giving evidence, so there will be a ten-minute delay.
Watch the transcript via

Counsel to the Inquiry David Barr started by asking N336 some questions.

Barr: Your general police training, pre-Special Branch – did it cover entering private dwellings?

HN336: yes. it covered search warrants etc.

Barr: what about training once you joined Special Branch?
HN336: No, there was nothing specific about attending political meetings
He did this before joining the SDS & like other SB officers learnt 'on the job'

This included how to write up reports – he was expected to record who attended meetings (if he could identify them) and admitted that just attending a meeting was enough for someone to be included in a report.

He couldn't recall making a separate report about any individual person, but did talk about how someone might draw attention to themselves at a meeting and this would be recorded

HN336 described it as a "fundamental requirement" that #spycops report on a group's plans, activities, discussions and interests.
"I think part of a policeman's kit-bag is his attention to what's around him and his awareness..."

He then spoke about those days being different, and commented that 'political correctness' hadn't been invented yet.

He said that his superiors were always curious about the content of his reports, but didn't give him much feedback. Reports would be altered and 'tweaked' by the SDS office staff so they matched the 'style' used by the unit.

Was he given any training or explanation about 'extremism' or 'subversion'?

HN336: "I think I had an understanding of what subversion might be..."

asked what that was, HN336 replied:
"My feeling was and is that we existed within a very sophisticated political system that's evolved over many years and there is an order to the way that system might be changed. As a parliamentary democracy it's through a ballot box..."

"And there were those who seek to overturn that balance of matters and subvert the system by other means. And that would be, in the broadest terms, my understanding of 'subversion'."

He was then asked what he meant by distinguishing (in his written statement) between "peaceful genuine protest" and that which was "divisive or venomous" – is that a personal distinction or an official one?

According to HN366 his time in Special Branch taught him what kind of groups would be of interest, but once he joined the SDS he began to "fully understand some of the influences"

He was asked how secretive the SDS was within Special Branch - he thought that in the early days some people within the Branch knew of the new unit's existence, but many did not. "you didn't ask questions"

There was no formal training or 'induction', no training manual.
He was given verbal instructions, and provided with general support by his colleagues
"We were all being thrown in a maelstrom and seeking to find some sense of what we were trying to do" he said.

He admitted that there was no actual training or briefing about the groups that were being spied on.

He has also claimed that he was never actually 'targeted' into any specific group himself, but just went out 'fishing' to see what groups he could latch onto.

Conrad Dixon came across as a "chancer" and "brash" (in HN336's written statement he also used the words "devious" and "clever")

The first group that HN336 spied on was the Britain Vietnam Solidarity Front'. They met weekly at a pub, and the meetings were large enough (20-25 people) that a new person wouldn't stand out too much

HN336 protested that "infiltration is too strong a word - I attended the meetings"
"I wanted to learn what their view points were and glean anything that might take me elsewhere in time..."

He said the BVSF provided him with a useful introduction to political nuances and the various factions that existed at the time.
and he hoped it would act as a 'gateway' to other groups

Asked how long it took him to become 'established' in the group, he replied frankly:
"I don't think I was ever established within that group, I can say that quite firmly"
He thought that he became "an accepted part of the furniture on a Sunday evening" though

He saw his task as keeping tabs on people who were seeking to disrupt the status quo.

He was asked about Tariq Ali and Abhimnya Manchanda, who he described as "prominent individuals". He wasn't given any briefing about either man by his managers, but would report back on them.
He said he never met Ernest Tate.

Barr: HN135 (aka 'Mike Ferguson') spied on the BVSF at the same time but you say you did this independently of each other. How come there are so many reports bearing both your names?

HN336 explained that he was “a new boy” and this was an opportunity for him to “learn a trade, learn a skill that I was going to find useful”

"We would not sit down together and compile a report, no" he denied any "collusion" with 'Ferguson'.

He said that he used his "policeman's antennae' to help him decide what info would be useful and therefore should be included in his reports

He admitted that a 'normal' (suit and tie-wearing) SB officer would have attracted suspicion at these meetings.

"I think the fact that your face was known made it possible to sort of glide in and slide into the grouping rather than stand out as a total stranger" he said.

He said that his reports would include personal details of any 'new faces' he met at these meetings - and said he had no idea if this info was used for vetting or not.
(But he had worked within Special Branch for years before joining the SDS and knew that most forms went to MI5)

He tried to stress that
"It was a hotbed at that time, of street activity - some of it was very reasonable, some of it was really, really violent"
(directed at property as well as the police)
"so there was a need to protect, in a wider sense..."

Another nickname for the #spycops unit emerged - he called them "the Hs" (short for "the Hairies").

One of his reports from a BVSF meetin included details of two forthcoming marches, one about Palestine and another about women's equality. HN336 was at pains to tell us that his focus was the group, not these issues.

The next report was from a BVSF conference in April 1969, which was attended by about 50 people, almost all Maoists. Part of his job was to identify attendeees and take note of what was said.

Appendix B of that report includes a speech given by Manchanda:
"Before coming to power the proletariat & the other revolutionary people should adhere to the principle of making revolution by violence, by smashing the old state machine and seizing political power by armed force”

Barr: "From what you could see of the BVSF and its members, was it a violent organisation?"
"No, not compared with other groupings at the time, no" admitted 'Epps'.

After some time with the BVSF, 'Epps' moved on to other groups. Next was the Camden branch of the VSC.
Asked why he left the BVSF, he explained that it "got to a point where I felt uneasy"

"there was never finger-pointing, or a moment where any accusations were made" but he felt that Manchanda was suspicious of him, and read it as the time to move on.
In his own words, he had gained some credibility so decided it was “time for pastures new”.
l

There were lots of interesting groups in North London, and places like Camden Market were a good place to encounter radicals

Barr: "Was it difficult to get access to the Camden VSC?"
HN336: “Not at all”

Another question concered the contents of yet another report, in which a young woman activist's personal appearance & attractiveness is mentioned.
Barr asked him: was that kind of judgement acceptable in SB at the time?
HN336: “Yes I think it was”.

After a short break, Barr took us back to discussing a VSC demo on 25th Jan 1970 – mentioned in a report of a VSC meeting the following week [UCPI0000005803]

Supposedly incohesion, indecision and uncertainty had allowed the police to move in and split the demo at Downing Street.

The meeting decided to send a call-out to all SVC supporters nationwide to turn the Vietnam war into an 'election issue' by targetting any meetings where (Cabinet and Shadow Cabinet) politicians were due to speak.

Barr: Did the upcoming general election cause any changes in the #spycops reporting?

HN336 did not recall any.

He was asked about a VSC 'working committee' but said he could not remember anything about this, “I can't even remember being on the committee, I'm sorry”

He said he was “unable to assist” with any of Barr's questions

In his witness statement, HN336 said that Conrad Dixon had become a “figure of fun” and was remembered by the Camden VSC members for wearing”a yachtsman's outfit” - he had a “big sailor type beard", a "jaunty" cap and a smock.
"slightly out of place in Camden, dare I say"

“I wouldn't say I got very close to them at all”
He described the Camden VSC group as “loose-knit and very friendly" - with "wide ranging views” – he got the impression they “had a Communist party leaning” and they referred to him as a 'Trot' (ie a reformist)

“The whole point of the penetration of what was going on was to provide your individual credibility”

He had very few memories of the Kentish Town branch of the VSC. He said he thinks he was hoping to “move on to another grouping” at this time.

He went on to infiltrate the British Campaign for Peace in Vietnam (BCPV).
This entailed attending meetings that were held in a private house.
He does not recall any reaction from his managers to this.

His witness statement mentioned regularly going out for drinks with members of this group throughout the six months that he was infiltrating the BCPV.
One of the members was a woman
He made sure to tell us that:
“It was never anything beyond an ordinary conversation”.

According to him:
neither of us conveyed a desire to develop a relationship or friendship
He believes going out for drinks with her aided his acceptance & credibility.

He also infiltrated the Stop the Seventy Tour (STST), having been introduced to this campaign by a member of the BCPV.

“There was a lot of passionate revulsion” towards the apartheid regime, he recalled.

His witness statement mentioned two incidents – digging up the pitch at Lords and pouring oil over the wickets - but Barr explained that the UCPI had been unable to find any press coverage of such an event during the STST's campaign.....

However they did find “historic media coverage a few years later in the context of a protest about a man who was alleged to be a bank robber”

<you couldn't make it up!>

“You surprise me” – HN336 was adamant that “it's been long-held in my mind that that was a situation that either existed or had been proposed.”

What the STST group actually did: they would rush the pitch, with the aim of getting the match delayed or postponed.

He recalled being with a group of
30 or 40 STST activists.
Upon a signal, they tried to “push the police around”
He says he found it difficult to see punches being thrown at the uniformed officers.

Barr: you described 'Mike Ferguson' as “Peter Hain's right-hand man”
If you were unaware of him having an official position within STST what do you mean by that?

HN336: "I don't think I was a very successful undercover officer"

he went on to explain that he lacked the “drive or nous” to be able to do what some of the other #spycops did

Why would it have been useful to record the names of members of the new NW London STST committee?

Said he had no idea how the info he gathered was used but presumed it was forwarded to the “appropriate point of interest”.

In one his reports, he wrote about a member of the group:
“a somewhat immature naïve person and it would seem she was made secretary of the group because of her clerical experience”

He described her as having a “well-developed bust” and a “slightly Jewish appearance” - Barr asked him to explain this, and suggested that many of these reports were written subjectively rather than objectively, and were based on stereotyping

“Can I say that's a modern day interpretation” retorted 'Epps'.

He was asked more about the STST campaign's plans
This included a suggestion that they hold a torchlit midnight procession. Why did the police need to know about an entirely peaceful demo?

According to 'Epps', street demos are "still something that the police should be aware of"

Epps said that he didn't get to know members of the STST very well, he “drifted in and out”

He does not remember how he first got involved with the International Marxist Group (IMG).

They were possibly targeted because they “took part in every demonstration going”.

He admitted that he didn't remember any IMG members being violent or disorderly at demos but claims “they were much more busy than other groups” (!)
Barr then asked:
Why did he not attempt to infiltrate the anarchist groups?

Epps responded with some reminiscing about some “spontaneous moments by hair-brained bunches” including “a dozen or so cars set alight in the vicinity of Claridges” when Ronald Reagan visited London in the 1980s.

Barr tried bringing him back to the question – why not infiltrate the anarchists if they were the source of the trouble?
HN366: "I don't think it ever occurred to me that this was a route I might find useful”

He “didn't feel drawn to that sort of group”, who he also called “over-excited”.

He was instructed by his managers to make a copy of the IMG's office keys using plasticine.
He recalled being at an IMG meeting, they were looking for someone to help by locking up at the office at 8.30pm, he 'reluctantly volunteered' for the task, and so had access to these keys

He said that he lost a lot of good friends as a result of taking part in the TV documentary, 'True Spies', even though this was authorised by the @metpolice

@MetPolice He said he was “still at a loss to understand” why they were so upset,
and was disappointed “that some seemed to take such exception to rather frivolous comments..."

@MetPolice Barr: Do you think your colleagues were upset because they were concerned you had compromised the operational security of the SDS or did they regard you as a whistle blower?

@MetPolice “I don't think they viewed me as a whistle blower” replied 'Epps'.
“I think it was just a short-sighted thing... on my part.. and maybe they were right in that respect”.

@MetPolice Epps described his 'exit strategy' as just drifting out, "nothing dramatic or lengthy"
"I had reached the end of my time, I knew that. It was time to pull away".

@MetPolice He described his #spycops colleagues as a "committed bunch of individuals and people I have great admiration for"

@MetPolice He was asked if he ever reported on people who were associated with the IRA (who he encountered in pubs around Kilburn)?
He said no.

@MetPolice He repeated his assertion that he wasn't very good at undercover work, at 'gliding' into groups, and more suited to regular police duties.

@MetPolice He also worked in the 'Industrial section' of Special Branch – the same as the 'Industrial desk' five guys working together in an office.
He covered engineering, and has described the concerns of Russian infiltration of that industry.

@MetPolice To his knowledge, SDS officers had nothing to do with the Economic League.

Recalling an induction lecture at Special Branch, “I remember being quite alarmed by the man's assessment of the infiltration of British groups...” by 'the Russians'”

@MetPolice HN366 claimed that “people would come to us” - suggesting these were trade unionists who were “not tainted by communism”

@MetPolice Barr checked: that while at the Industrial desk, HN366 would have access to Special Branch records.

If the SDS had reported on someone's trade union activities, that report would have been available to you, on the Industrial Section of Special Branch?

@MetPolice 'Epps' claimed “there was no overlap, anything held within the SDS would remain there.
I can't conceive of any situation where SDS intelligence information would leak into the normal pool of SB records activity”

However he also agreed that it was "reasonable to assume" that many of his reports went to MI5

He has no recollection of fellow #spycops being involved in bringing criminal prosecutions, or using informants.

In the past, HN336 has attended SDS reunion events.
He claims not to have heard about any sexual relationships between #spycops and their targets, not until these stories came out in the press relatively recently.

Ruth Brander (appearing on behalf of non state core participants) was permitted to ask him a question: How is it you remember that name after all this time?
“I can remember a lot of things” he replied

<including the name of a woman he had a drink with once, fifty years ago>.

Brander apologised for not submitting this question in advance, but pointed out that the non-state core participants were only provided with a redacted copy of the report in question, so did not know it was a female activist he went for the drink with until today.

Asked by Owen Greenall (also appearing on behalf of non state core participants) about the dates of his deployment, and about the STST's actions at Twickenham, 'Epps' said he didn't make any written record of these events.

Mitting had a few questions for the witness...

[NB: this is the first time he has personally questioned any State witness so far]

On 19th July 1975, the Headingley cricket pitch was dug up by the 'free George Davis' campaign, but we have not found any evidence that the pitch at Lords was dug up, as your witness statement suggests....

“Is it possible that you're muddling up the two incidents?” asked the Chair

After some bluster, HN336 admitted: “Clearly I'm mistaken and I accept that”.

Mitting also asked if he was infiltrating the IMG and STST at the same time or not?
HN336 doesn't remember the exact timing but remembers the IMG incident was towards the very end of his deployment, so thinks it wouldn't have overlapped.

The last evidence of HN336's involvement in STST date back to May 1970, and it appears his undercover deployment ended after this.

The morning session ended here, and the #spycopsinquiry took a break for lunch.

if you're really keen to read the full transcript it's available at

if you'd rather have it read out to you - thanks to @out_of_lives - check out