Thread by @copscampaign

The #SpycopsInquiry will be starting again soon.

This afternoon we are due to hear from 'HN340' - who infiltrated various groups - including the International Marxist Group (IMG), North London Red Circle & Irish Solidarity Campaign.

He was deployed between 1969-72, and is now known to have used the cover names 'Alan Bailey' & 'Alan Nixon'.
More about him: powerbase.info/index.php/Alan…

Ms Hummerstone is asking the questions from the @ucpinquiry today.
She will be referring to this afternoon's witness as 'HN340' but understands that he used the cover name 'Andy Bailey' [nb: not Alan]

@ucpinquiry He joined the police in the 50s and was trained at Hendon. He can't remember much about the first two years of probationary training, or anything much about ethics or standards.

@ucpinquiry He then joined Special Branch in the 1960s. There was a written exam. He said that he was not required to do any undercover work prior to joining the #spycops unit.

@ucpinquiry Occasionally Special Branch officers would go along to Speakers Corner, in their normal clothes, but he never went to any 'closed meetings'.

@ucpinquiry He confirmed that he received no training in undercover work

He was invited to join the SDS by Phil Saunders

@ucpinquiry He was told it would involve weekend working but said he couldn't remember being told much about the work itself.

The unit wasn't well-known. He said he knew “basically, nothing” about the SDS before joining it.

@ucpinquiry Special Branch operated on a 'need to know' basis - “you didn't need to spell it out”

@ucpinquiry HN340's witness statement recalled a conversation with Mike Ferguson, who advised him to get a cover name, cover address and cover job.

@ucpinquiry Mike had already been deployed in the field.
[This conversation took place at Scotland Yard, allegedly, but this is a bit confusing as supposedly those who were working undercover never visited the Yard.]

@ucpinquiry HN340 didn't create any kind of back-story or 'legend' for himself, and in retrospect admitted that this might have been useful “later on”.

He claims not to have known much about Mike Ferguson's role in the Stop the Seventy Tour (STST) campaign, or his position in the anti-apartheid movement
“I wouldn't have any idea, no” denied HN340.

He doesn't recall other former or waiting-to-be-deployed undercovers being in the back office at the same time as him.
[Slightly contradicting his earlier written statement, according to Hummerstone].

Asked what his back office duties were, he said
“probably typing up reports and checking out various bits & pieces...”

This gave him an idea of what would be expected from him when he went out in the field.

He doesn't recall much preparation on his part.
He was told by Ferguson to 'play it by ear'
“I was hoping he might have given some pearls of wisdom but as I said once you're out there nobody knows exactly what's going to turn up next and you've got to be prepared for anything”

Hummerstone: Your statement said that you “were trusted to use your common sense and good judgement”

HN340 was a Special Branch officer for nearly 5 years before joining the #spycops

His reports would routinely include details of the group's plans and events, and personal information, including identifying information, about the individual people he met.

He would go the SDS flat each day and write up his report of the previous evening's political meeting.

His reports would be typed up by back-office staff.

Would Special Branch files have been available to you while you were deployed?
HN340: “I would imagine if necessary” but couldn't remember specifically

Did you see any reports after they'd been typed up?
He cannot recall
But did you see them to sign them?
He still doesn't recall for sure.

HN340 expressed his surprise that “even some” of these reports are still in existence 50 years later.
He thinks the Inquiry has only found a fraction of his reports:
"there are certain little incidents that I do have vague recollection of, which aren't contained in the bundle.."

pressed further, HN340 asked if he could get some help from his friend/ tech support/ lawyer

<the masked man seen sitting behind him in the room>

He remembers the explosion at the Post Office tower, for example.

He had attended a 'function' (with members of the Irish Solidarity Campaign) nearby that evening.

Later, senior officers asked him if he had any information that would help their enquiries. However he had left the area when the pubs closed and “it must have occurred after that”.

His role was to gather intelligence about forthcoming events, pickets and demonstrations, in order to prevent public order problems.

His statement says that Special Branch had no role in counter-subversion.
But did collect info about people who were “unfriendly towards the State and its institutions ands might use criminal methods to undermine it”.

He was not given any explanation or training in what 'subversion' meant

The #spycops worked weekends; HN340 often sold the Red Mole outside Archway tube station.

He estimated that he only went to his cover accommodation 2 or 3 times a week, and only slept there “very rarely”.

He visited the SDS flat almost every weekday afternoon, as did most of the other #spycops at that time
They would write up their reports in the flat.
Did this also give them some 'downtime', a chance to socialise with other people doing a similar job? asked Hummerstone.

He claimed that the #spycops didn't really discuss their experiences of deployment with each other, not even in a 'sanitised' way.

Managers regularly visited the SDS flat but HN340 claimed not to remember being given many specific instructions by them, or directed to infiltrate any specific groups.

Hummerstone: we know that they did step in to give you some direction twice – and told you not to attend the Red Europe conference or become a member of the IMG.

However he also said he was given a 'strong suggestion' to attend a meeting at Conway Hall?
“I must have been told because I wouldn't have gone off wandering off to Red Lion Square just off my own initiative” he responded to this.

We know that HN340 approached and spoke with both Tariq Ali and Vanessa Redgrave at that meeting. They had both spoken at the meeting, he didn't know anyone else, so did what Ferguson had recommended (play it by ear) and went over for a chat.

Tariq Ali invited him to attend the next meeting of the North London Red Circle.

How did the SDS managers view the North London Red Circle. HN340 thinks they must have known of its existence but nothing more about them.
“If they'd thought it was a waste of time I'm pretty sure they would have said 'don't bother' “ he said.

It was thought that attending Red Circle meetings would provide useful intelligence about “potential flash points”.

We saw a document [MPS-0740414] suggesting that his deployment was very open-ended – and he could be 're-tasked' as necessary.
So it was a 'follow your nose' sort of approach? asked Hummerstone.

We know that some reports were sent to the Home Office, and to the Deputy Assistant Commissioner, who seemed very happy with the work being done by the #spycops
HN340 does not remember receiving or being told about such praise.

SDS #spycops were given a lot of discretion as to how they operated. How much oversight was there? Were the managers paying attention?
HN340 reckoned that if they had a problem with something an undercover was doing, they wouldn't have hesitated to say so.

We moved on to looking at the North London Red Circle in more detail..

This group was described as a “recruiting ground for the IMG” in HN340's witness statement.

They held discussion meetings, with speakers, and would debate all sorts of subjects: the 4th International, the situation in the Middle East...

“I can't remember attending anything that involved Israel” said HN340. He couldn't remember much about the contents of the document. “Sorry about that”.

Another report was about a meeting on the topic of women's liberation. The speaker talked about attempts to form a union for women night cleaners.
Was Special Branch interested in women's liberation and trade unions?
HN340 doesn't think he can speak for Special Branch as a whole.

He agreed that this report was a good example of him writing down every thing that might possibly be of interest, and leaving it to the back-office to decide what to include in the final typed-up version.

His other reports of the Red Circle mention other struggles that were going on at the time:
the National Union of Mineworkers, Upper Clyde Shipbuilders' dispute,, anti-racist campaigning, talks about unemployment and South Africa.

The final report concerned a talk by Pat Jordan: 'The Russian Revolution'. Was Special Branch interested in Stalin vs Trotsky?
< there was laughter in the hearing room at this idea>

There was then a 15 min break

We started again - looking at evidence [0000008916]
27th August 1971 report about a Red Circle meeting in July, with an unusually large crowd (of 24 people) – the discussion was about Ireland – a talk by a Provisional sympathiser followed by questions.

He said that if the IRA did commence terrorist activities in England, they considered it the “duty of all revolutionaries to render whatever assistance was asked”.
Did HN340 think that some Red Circle attendees agreed with this view?
He can't remember.

The next report [0000008944] concerned a Red Circle meeting in
Feb 1972 – attended by 30 people.
Bob Purdie spoke about Ireland in place of a scheduled talk about Spain.

He talked about the republican movement, explaining that the split was due to tactical differences rather than political ones.

Purdie said, in answer to a question afterwards, that to extend the struggle to England would be politically wrong
but if the Irish movement's leaders called for assistance, then the IMG line was that revolutionary groups on the mainland should support them.

Although HN340 admitted that the name Bob Purdie rings a bell, he cannot remember much more.
From what I remember I can't think of any of them now that I would consider to be tending towards any kind of violence”.

Next up was a (very faint) report from April 1972
The planned speaker (about Cuba) didn't turn up, so instead they had a spontaneous talk on the subject of Ireland.
A number of French comrades were present, and began debating events at Trafalgar square.

The Red Circle “was a talking shop” said HN340's statement. “It did support a revolutionary agenda and was subversive to the extent that it advance the overthrow of the established political system in the UK, albeit never took any concrete steps.”

“Violence would have been the last thing on many of their minds” it went on to say.
HN340 became the 'tea club secretary' on his own initiative – in order to learn the names of group members.

Echoing another of the #spycops he explained that it was best to gather as much info as possible, in case it became useful later.

The Irish Civil Rights Solidarity Campaign (ICRSC) was also infiltrated by HN340. His name appears on a report on the group's activities filed in September 1970.

According to HN340, he attended their meetings “almost as a co-opted member, of the North London Red Circle” but he is now struggling to explain why.

Was he tasked to attend these ICRSC meetings by his managers?
He said that if the back-office had objected, he wouldn't have attended these meetings. But doesn't remember being 'tasked' as such, it was more a case of chance.

This resulted in him attending the founding conference of the Irish Solidarity Campaign, in October 1970. This took place in Birmingham.
Did he have to seek approval from his managers to travel outside of London like this?
He can't remember.

Did this mean they endorsed you spying on the ISC?
HN68 also attended the ISC conference. He and HN340 tried to avoid any contact - “there was no reason that we should know each other, so we didn't”.

HN340 admitted that he probably was aware that HN68 would be at the conference as well.
A report was produced afterwards, with both their names attached to it.
Did they collaborate in its production?

HN340: “I have no idea” and explained “It seems as if it would have been inconceivable that we hadn't discussed it” at the flat.

“I can't imagine we wouldn't have done but at the same time I can't remember anything specific”.

The report contained along list of all the groups (and 'fraternal delegates') who attended the conference.
He explained this: “They were there and so I reported it; it was then down to the back officer to do their filtering, vetting, or whatever you call it.”

Adding “I must have slept somewhere overnight... but quite honestly I can't remember where we stayed”

Hummerstone read out the six main aims of the ISC as laid out in Appendix D of [MPS-0738150]. Would that information have been of interest to Special Branch?
HN340: “At the time I may have thought so, but...”. he tailed off.

Appendix A of the same report was entitled 'perspectives for the Irish Solidarity Campaign'.
HN340 was asked if this would be of interest to his managers.
HN340 said that finding out what numbers might turn up to a demo was useful information.

Hummerstone detailed some of the demos that took place and asked HN340 if he did some kind of risk assessment before reporting on these?
He left this to the back-room staff to do, by the sound of it.

The next doc was from January 1971, a report from the central London branch of the ISC.
There was mention of tarring & feathering incidents, and the speaker was very critical of the Republican leadership at the time.

The next doc was from the following month: February 1971
-featuring a talk on 'people's democracy & the civil rights anti-apartheid movement Northern Ireland'.

Gerry Lawless = “one of the very few names that I remember from then, because he was so active” said HN340.

Gerry was described as an active figure in the ISC, someone who was involved in the IMG and sometimes attended Red Circle discussion meetings.

'Why the provisionals' was the topic discussed later in 1971. HN340 could not remember what the Red Circle attendees thought of the speaker's views.

Finally on this theme, the next report [0000008500] dated back to March 1972, a week or two after the bomb explosion at Aldershot which killed 7 civilians.
The ISC slogan at the time was 'Victory to the IRA'.

HN340 was asked if he had any contact with the police investigating this bomb.
He said “there's no way any of us would have had contact with a non-Met police force”

Did he have any contact with Special Branch's B Squad?
“They dealt with Irish matters” he explained.
“I had no contact with any -that I know of anyway- any officers directly involved in B Squad”.

Current and former members of the ISC had their homes raided a few weeks later. Was this connected to his reports on these ISC members?
HN340 professed not to know.
He said that he only had contact with the SDS back-room staff, nobody else.

Another incident mentioned in HN340's witness statement was the bomb going off at the Post Office Tower. HN340 was at a 'function' with ISC members nearby; it ended shortly before the bomb went off. He agrees that this might just have been a coincidence.

He could not recall ISC members taking part in any acts of violence, or any public disorder at demos organised by the ISC
“I'm sure something like that would have stuck in my memory and it definitely doesn't”.

His reports would mention whether or not events were attended by Bernadette Devlin MP. HN340 told us that he just reported on what happened and what happened to that info afterwards “was not my concern”.

According to him, “if she was known to be going to attend any meeting or demonstration or whatever, then of course that would increase the likelihood of more people arriving at the demonstration”

His reports also contained a rather “unflattering portrait of Irish solidarity groups”; a report of a conversations between Eamonn McCann and others, and of Eamonn turning up late at a meeting.

Interestingly, one of the files suggests that there was not yet a Special Branch file opened on Bernadette Devlin at this time.

HN340 said he cannot remember attending any meetings of the Vietnam Solidarity Campaign, although his name is attached to several reports on the VSC.

He said he couldn't comment on whether #spycops would have been more likely to attend a meeting that Tariq Ali attended.

He couldn't remember if he already knew the name Piers Corbyn in 1971.

HN340 reported on anti-racist groups, including the Black Defence committee.

He does not recall receiving any guidance about entering private addresses, and did attend some meetings held at activists' homes.

Were SDS officers often asked to help identify individuals from photographs?
He was asked if it was common for other police branches to seek this kind of help?
He doesn't recall contact with any branches of the police outside of the Met.

HN340 attended the 'Red Europe' conference – this entailed travelling abroad, for which he received permission from his managers.
He said there was no direct contact between him and the other #spycop who attended that conference.

HN340's deployment came to an end after concerns that his identity had been compromised.
The SDS managers had directed him to decline an invitation to join the IMG, and it is thought this made the group more suspicious of him.

Why was he told not to join?
Because it was a more formal organisation, “recognised as more of a political party”?

HN340 spent around two years in the unit. Despite guidance suggesting that deployments should be last for a maximum of 12 months.

His reaction: “I don't know how many officers only did 12 months, but I can't imagine there were very very many, unless something dramatic happened.”

Did he provide any guidance or assistance to new recruits in the back-office who were waiting to be deployed?

After he went to work in the back-office, he didn't return to the SDS flat.

He suffered from headaches and nosebleeds, thought to be caused by stress. Did he feel supported properly by his managers from a welfare point of view?

“Add migraines to that as well, on a regular basis” he said. He said these things weren't really discussed in the macho world of the #spycops
“You got with it. You got on with it” he repeated himself.

Today's hearing ended after this. Transcripts and the documents mentioned should be available at ucpi.org.uk/hearing/eviden… later today

Alteranatively, have a listen to the @out_of_lives version at