Thread by @copscampaign

Next up at the #SpyCopsInquiry this afternoon, Peter Skelton QC giving an opening statement on behalf of the Metropolitan Police Commissioner.

Live-tweeting in a thread under this, or watch it yourself on live stream:

Skelton: The first Met opening statement at the Inquiry last year looked at what went wrong & what the value of undercover policing is. This one is just about the topic in hand, #SpyCops 1973-82.

We reiterate the #SpyCops were intel gathering, so we need to be wary of how we assess the work. We must judge by the standards of the time, not today. We don't have all the reports from the time, nor fresh memories. Also, remember some it was intended for MI5.

SDS 1973-82: Work was in response to what government & public thought important - need to preserve public order & state security. There was Angry Brigade firebombing, Bloody Sunday, IRA bombings in England, 1972 miners & dockers strikes resulting in a state of emergency

1973 a one-day near-general strike. There was the 2 year Grunwick strike. 1978 Ford industrial action leading to the Winter of Discontent. Clashes between National Front & antifascists, inc deaths of Kevin Gately & Blair Peach [who were KILLED BY POLICE]

The inquiry must properly understand all this context & explain it otherwise it risks unfair judgments. Evidence from people may be selective & biased so Inquiry should rely on expert historical evidence.

Evidence would need to be scrupulously neutral and factual with no contentious assertions. This was done in the Litvinyenko inquiry & Birmingham bombings inquests. We say it would be even more use here.

In the era considered, the SDS had 9-12 #SpyCops aimed at Trotskyists, Maoists, anarchists, anti-nuclear & Irish nationalist groups. We can only see if it was justified when we have the full picture, & that evidence -eg public order policing files - may not be available.

As well as the SDS annual reports, there's other evidence that unit management appraised the continued value of the unit. It said it should continue, emphasising the importance of 'negative intel' eg that an event is not going to take place. MI5 found this valuable.

SDS contact with MI5 was frequent & productive. It saw MI5 as a customer, which exercised some influence over the placement of #SpyCops.

SDS used identities of dead children (HN298 in 1971 used a real ID, though not a dead person). It came to be standard practice. Earlier deployments were shorter - a few months, but this extended as it seems intel quality improved after longer time.

SDS needed their ID to withstand scrutiny. eg getting flats, specially bought cars, all helped. They couldn't insert a fake birth register entry, so stole real ones. [Skelton says 'use', but this is clearly identity theft by any definition]

The Met apologises to families of people whose dead relatives' ID was 'relied upon in this way'.

Sexual relationships: #SpyCops should never have had any while in undercover persona, no matter how brief. It was not justified in this era & the Met apologises unreservedly. We need to find what managers knew.

#SpyCops interactions with the criminal justice system - 'Michael Scott' was arrested & convicted on an anti-apartheid demo. But what inferences we can draw about managers is unknown until we hear from them in Phase 3 next year

'So-called blacklisting' - police got material from beyond #spycops so we need to check why we think it might've been spycops

Spying on Blair Peach's loved ones. The CPS says no further investigation is possible, & the Inquiry is not investigating it. Though We know spycops were on demos & at the funeral.

SDS reporting has a lot of personal info of people spied on. But it was often asked for by Special Branch and MI5. Some info might not've been justified to record, eg social events & family members.

Met acknowledges that it's 'more detail than necessary', but some seemingly innocuous info can be connected to useful things later. In this era, the concept of 'collateral intrusion' on family members wouldn't have been considered.

The Met notes that outdated language shouldn't be judged if it was uncontroversial at the time, unless it was discriminatory or gratuitously insulting or with no purpose

Officers describe a wide range of effects of deployment on themselves and their families, and the support given by the Met.

The Met engages with 'a willingness to learn and too improve'

Chair, Sir John Mitting, asks about miscarriages of justice: We may see this described in these hearings. If there are grounds to believe it, I will refer it to the review panel set up for it. I will not wait for testimony from managers next year as I doubt they'll change things

Skelton responds: The Met may have no problem with it, but may put in written submissions after these hearings in 3 weeks time.
Mitting: the sketchy conviction I'm talking about was 49 years ago, the people are old & I'm not going to wait for the end of the Inquiry

With that, the session ends. There will now be a 15 minute break, we return at 3.10pm with Oliver Sanders QC representing #SpyCops.

@threadreaderapp unroll