Thread by @copscampaign

Day 12 of this set of #spycopsinquiry hearings is starting now

Today is devoted entirely to the evidence of one former undercover officer, HN304, aka 'Graham Coates'.

He has a lot to say about his time in the #spycops unit, the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS).
(1)

The hearing began at 10am - and you will be able to watch an exciting moving transcript of what is said on Youtube, with a ten-minute delay -

(2)

Or follow proceedings on Twitter - @tombfowler will also be tweeting live from the Amba hotel room in central London, and hosting occasional short FB live sessions, with non State core participants & other observers giving their reactions to the evidence

@tombfowler The Inquiry has prepared a lengthy summary of HN304's #spycops work, and you can read this on pages 191-206 of the Counsel to the Inquiry's opening statement: ucpi.org.uk/wp-content/upl…
(4)

@tombfowler HN304's full witness statement can now be downloaded from: ucpi.org.uk/publications/f…

It appears that he joined the SDS in late 1975. Before this, he had spent time working in various parts of Special Branch ('B' 'C' and 'E' Squads).
(5)

@tombfowler He says he was asked to attend a political meeting & report back by Detective Inspector Creamer (who headed the #spycops at the time) & shortly afterwards invited to join the secret unit.
In his written witness statement, he recalls “an element of pride at having been asked”
(6)

@tombfowler 'Graham Coates' was deployed to spy on the Hackney branch of the International Socialists (IS) in the summer of 1976. He began reporting on anarchist groups (incl the Zero Collective and Anarchy Collective) in 1977.
(7)

@tombfowler He also spied on Persons Unknown, and the Croydon branch of the Socialist Workers Party (SWP) towards the end of his deployment
(the IS changed their name to the SWP in 1977).
(8)

@tombfowler He was asked when he knew about the existence of the SDS?

He said he didn't know about it while in B Squad, but did while in C Squad. At some point he realised that he was looking at intelligence which had been collected by these #spycops
(9)

@tombfowler He says DI Creamer didn't tell him much about the new unit. That first meeting that he was asked to attend was at a polytechnic in central London.
(10)

@tombfowler After carrying out that assignment, HN304 was asked to present himself at Room 1818 – when he got there he remembers the suggestion that he join the SDS. He can't recall the name of that interviewing officer.
(11)

@tombfowler At that time, the SDS was part of S Squad, and its office was on the top floor of New Scotland Yard.
(12)

@tombfowler He was asked if he was married or in a stable relationship. He wasn't told specifically why this mattered, but had the idea that this was a sensible policy to avoid problems arising.
(13)

@tombfowler He was told that his undercover deployment would last for four years

Like many others, he received no formal training for the role, “just loose and unwritten guidelines”, and spent months based in the SDS back office...
(14)

@tombfowler – & accompanying managers to some of the regular undercovers' meetings at the safe house - before being sent out in the field.
(15)

@tombfowler Who typed up the reports in those days?
He says there was a dedicated typing pool, but struggled to recall more.
(16)

@tombfowler Barr drew his attention to the Registry File (RF) numbers and asked
Who obtained the RF details for incorporation into these reports?
HN304 confirmed that this was the sort of admin work he would be tasked with during his months in the back office.
(17)

@tombfowler During this time, he visited the SDS safe houses several times a week. He has stated that the undercovers were asked for their opinions of these new recruits
.(18)

@tombfowler “I imagine that they were looking out for somebody who would not stand out in any way as obviously being a serving officer.”

Asked for his personal opinion he said it was the same as that.
(19)

@tombfowler What was he told about spycops being arrested?
And what about relationships and sexual activity?
(20)

@tombfowler In his written statement, he describes that the advice, if any, was to “be very careful” if you were going to get involved in people’s private lives, especially if you were going to engage in a sexual relationship.
(21)

@tombfowler He doesn't remember much about that advice, other than it would have been before he was deployed, and in person/ orally.
(22)

@tombfowler What did he take 'very careful' to entail?

“this is not something we would advise, but if you have to, take all precautions of all kinds that you can imagine necessary”.
(23)

@tombfowler Does this mean it was left to the individual #spycops ? Yes, said HN304

He clarified that he meant contraception but also “common sense preservation of an identity of an individual, of a group of individuals", & "of the risk... if the whole system became exposed”
(24)

@tombfowler He says that he avoided getting involved sexually with anyone as 'Graham Coates'.

Asked why not he said “I found the whole business of operating as an undercover officer stressful enough
(25)

@tombfowler Asked if he had any moral views on this,
he said that his views had taken “more definite shape” over the years.
He felt that it was wrong for an undercover officer to have a relationship of this kind with a member of the public.
(26)

@tombfowler He was asked more about his position in the IS – he was not instructed to avoid taking up a formal officer position in the group.
(27)

@tombfowler He defined 'subversion as something “likely to cause disruption to an established system of government”

Was this the system of parliamentary democracy, or the government of the day?
“I think it was probably both”
(28)

@tombfowler He talked about aims and means – and said that Special Branch would take an interest in any group with subversive aims, even if they did not have the means to make anything happen.
(29)

@tombfowler Did you feel properly prepared for your role?
If Barr had asked him this four decades ago, he “may have got a different answer” Graham retorted.

He gave an emphatic “No”.
(30)

@tombfowler He went on to say that he “just had a feeling that the management of the day really expected potential officers to fully understand all of the ramifications of such a posting” - he now wishes that he had asked more questions, but was not actively encouraged to do so.
(31)

@tombfowler He thinks more formal training would have helped
(32)

@tombfowler Like many other #spycops, HN304 was instructed to visit Somerset House and steal the identity of a dead child in order to build his 'legend'.
(33)

@tombfowler He was advised that the “person should not have died very old” because an older child would have “much more history that could be checked”
This offered “more scope to create a story that could not easily be contradicted” he says
(34)

@tombfowler He found a birth certificate in the name 'Graham Coates' – he used that name and the date/place of birth to construct his false identity. At one time, he made a detour (on his own volition) to visit that place of birth
(35)

@tombfowler Did he carry out any kind of risk assessment (even just in his head) about the the possibility of being compromised, or confronted with a death certificate for Graham Coates?
He said he may have considered that “fleetingly” but quickly discounted it an extremely unlikely.
(36)

@tombfowler His managers didn't test his cover identiity in any way – they trusted the #spycops ability to create a solid enough identity.
HN304 says he wasn't warned that activists might try to test his identity – he may have thought about that fleetingly as wall.
(37)

@tombfowler Did he have any qualms about using a deceased child's identity? No.
Was this issue ever discussed amongst the #spycops officers?
Not frequently, if ever
(38)

@tombfowler He says the idea that his identity might be discovered. “became more and more of an incubus to me”.
(39)

@tombfowler He said that he “chose not to be prominent” within the group he infiltrated, and how he chose to present himself was connected to how he felt it might affect his safety.
He says that he unconsciously probably kept what we would now “regard as a Covid 19 distance from them”.
(40)

@tombfowler Barr took us back to the safe houses –

Were there always two during his deployment? Yes – he explained that one of them changed during this time but there were always two.
(41)

@tombfowler He called it a “large flat”.

According to his statement, #spycops could go into another room for a private chat with managers – how often did he do this?
“Seldom, if ever”
He suspects that his colleagues were no more likely to do this than he was.
(42)

@tombfowler He kept a diary. It was used to “convey in the broadest strokes the daily activities of the UCO, commencing from phoning in to start work,... meeting informants at such and such a hostelry.., until the early hours of the morning when you finished work”

(43)

@tombfowler The #spycops were paid for their 'overtime' and expenses.
(44)

@tombfowler He recalled the regular #spycops meetings at the flat. There was no formal agenda. There was light-hearted discussion, refreshments, sometimes lunch, trips to the pub afterwards...

(45)

@tombfowler The kind of discussions he remembered included for example what was defined as on and off duty. Barr asked him about this, and HN304 said it was to do with the overtime claims.

(46)

@tombfowler His were never challenged, so he assumes they “fell within acceptable limits”.
Boundaries were never set by the SDS managers.
(47)

@tombfowler Did they set any boundaries about other issues?
HN304 couldn't remember this ever happening.
(48)

@tombfowler The undercovers also discussed the demonstrations they attended – what happened, who was there, numbers, police behaviour etc.
(49)

@tombfowler Were the politics of the groups being spied on discussed in the safe house?

He says he had the feeling that the politics were “not disregarded but belittled”

And that this belittling was not deliberate, it's “just what happened”.

@tombfowler He says some UCOs used these meetings as an opportunity to discuss welfare concerns.
A problem shared is a problem solved?
Does he remember any examples of such issues? No
(51)

@tombfowler How common was it for the #spycops to “mock the plans and organisational skills of the groups being infiltrated?
Relatively common”
He agreed that he got the general feeling that many of the groups did lack organisational skills.
(52)

@tombfowler He describes his relationship with his fellow #spycops as a “working friendship”. He could relax with them. The group contained a wide range of personalities.
They would joke together, and he remembers banter, which the managers would join in with.
(53)

@tombfowler In his written statement, he described “informal banter” at the #spycops safe house, about women these officers had encountered while undercover, and “jokey remarks” about sexual encounters made in the presence of managers. This behaviour was never challenged.
(54)

@tombfowler HN304 states that Rick Clark (HN297) had a reputation for being a ladies man and was subjected to jokes regarding a sexual encounter

(55)

@tombfowler He recalls that HN300 ('Jim Pickford') had a reputation for chasing after women and was widely known as a philanderer.
A third officer, whose details he didn't recall, also behaved in this way.

(56)

@tombfowler In his statement, he says the unit's managers “must have known it was almost bound to happen with certain individuals who had a predilection for chasing women (before during and after their time with the SDS...."
(57)

@tombfowler It went on to say:
"....Indeed single men were generally not admitted to the SDS and I understood this was partly about avoiding relationships”
(58)

@tombfowler He is well aware that this kind of behaviour and language would not have gone down well with feminist women in the 1970s, or with a much wider swathe of society now.
(59)

#InstitutionalSexism

@tombfowler He then admitted that the Branch's 'humour' would have been considered offensive by many even back then.
(60)

@tombfowler He was asked about Richard Clark (HN297, cover name 'Rick Gibson')
and he told us about a situation when Rick was worried about his identity being compromised – the managers arranged some kind of meeting in a pub

Was there a risk to Rick's safety?
Yes I think there was.
(61)

@tombfowler It turned out he thought the managers were more concerned about the safety of the deployment continuing, rather than officer HN297's personal safety.
"although they would deny that wouldn't they" he adds
(62)

@tombfowler The SDS managers obviously didn't want to lose this valuable source of intelligence

HN304 added “if one brick falls out of the building maybe others will became unstable, or will be discovered to be unstable”.
(63)

@tombfowler He says the managers were “apparently quite” security conscious. They were very concerned to keep the unit out of the public eye.
(64)

@tombfowler What else can he recall about Clark?
“What I heard left me in no doubt that the management were aware of that officer's behaviour”

By this, he means sexual relations. He doesn't know if this referred to one-night stands or more serious/ long-term relationships.
(65)

@tombfowler He says the senior officers (like DI Craft) “could not have failed to have drawn the obvious conclusions from the comments that were being made”.

(66)

@tombfowler Graham is extremely clear and very emphatic that there is no way anyone working in the SDS office at the time could have been unaware of Clark's exploits.
(67)

@tombfowler He explained that the comments being made were “of a gross nature” that would not have left anyone in any doubt as to the nature of the relationship.
“It was made quite plain with jokes and banter”.
(68)

@tombfowler Pressed for details of the “gross comment” he mentioned earlier, he reluctantly shared one example with us:
“he'll have made her bite the blankets again last night!”
(69)

@tombfowler Asked again about HN300, Jim Pickford, he said:
“anybody who knew that officer, at any stage of his service, would very quickly have known what his propensities/ proclivities were in that regard”.
(70)

@tombfowler No 'zip-mouth' - “he really didn't keep anything very secret”
He was known inside and outside of S Squad as a philanderer.

HN304 told us that Jim routinely and frequently “tried it on” with women.
(71)

@tombfowler He says he didn't know about HN300 going on to marry a woman he's met while working undercover.

He doesn't see how the managers could have missed the safe house banter that went on about HN300's sexual relationships.
(72)

@tombfowler Barr asked him if he could recall a few other incidents:
including an anecdote circulating in the safe house about an activist woman who could lactate on demand.
Graham couldn't remember this.
.
(73)

@tombfowler Neither could he remember any gossip about HN106's sexual relationship while undercover
(74)

@tombfowler He said any banter about 'Phil Cooper' (HN155) tended to be about financial matters (the size of his expense claims that anything else. He does not remember anything Phil having sexual relationships with women, but states he would not be surprised to hear it happened.
(75)

@tombfowler Why unsurprised?

Because he was a “very charming, easy-going, light-hearted individual”
who found it easy to strike up friendships & acquaintanceships

...and probably wouldn't have had any qualms.
(76)

@tombfowler Does he recall 'Vince Miller' ('HN354')? Yes, now, said HN304.

He can't remember how much time they spent together.
(77)

@tombfowler He doesn't think much consideration was given to the possibility of these women finding out

He confirmed that his written statement's comments
were in reference to HN300 and HN297 rather than other #spycops officers.
(78)

@tombfowler He said the managers never openly criticised or expressed disapproval of the unit's 'banter', and they took part in what was a “low level of communal humour”.
HN34 accuses the managers of being “deliberately blind” to these sexual relationships.
(79)

@tombfowler Prospective UCOs should be schooled for far longer, and in greater breadth for all considerations of the work they were about to undertake” says HN304 now.
(80)
@out_of_lives

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Should they also have been screened? Barr asked (to exclude those with a prediliction for chasing women)

It strikes him that perhaps officer having deep/ sexual relationships produce better intelligence, so this could be why it suited the managers to ignore this happening.
(81)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Barr says that it is known that the majority of SDS officers were married, or in a long-term relationship. Did the unit ever socialise with their partners? He didn't.
(82)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives He was also asked – if sexual relationships had been clearly prohibited , and this issue covered in training, would this have made a difference?

In his opinion, some of the #spycops he met would have done it anyway.
“i don't think it would have any effect”
(83)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Would it have caused them to be less open about what they were doing? Barr asked

“Yes”
(84)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives He believes that thee women's liberation movement came up in discussions amongst the #spycops – he thinks they thought in the same way as many other men – that feminists were 'a bunch of angry women that could be ignored”
(85)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives He reckons that “if every officer told the truth” (!)
...they would have to admit to probably developing some sympathy for the ideas and tenets of the groups they spied on.
(86)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Barr moved on to ask HN04 more about reporting.

HN304 understood that his role was to gather information & that “no scrap of information was ever rejected as irrelevant”.
(87)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives According to his statement, undercover officers were expected to “take information in through the skin”

You can't ignore things – they might turn out (years later) to be “the missing piece of the jigsaw” he explained today
(88)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives He said it was normal within Special Branch for senior officers to decide what was included in final reports.
Saying “it's not for us” (the reporting officers) to make such assessments.

(89)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives However, he admitted to doing some filtering himself – he said he would use his own judgement and relied on his conscience as well as his experience to do so.

(90)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives There are some reports in the witness pack that were produced by 'Graham Coates.
He isn't sure how complete the reporting that has been recovered is – he says he is surprised there isn't more.

Barr asked if he could identify any categories of missing report? No.
(91)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Special Branch employed covert photographers. He was often shown these pictures and asked to identify people in them.

He didn't photograph any activists himself.

(92)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives ucpi.org.uk/publications/s…

[UCPI0000011265] is an image of an anarcha-feminist (redacted) – he is asked if this is a typical example of such photos? Yes.
He explained the significance of the cropping – it looks like it was done in-house (within the Yard).

(93)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives He was tasked to infiltrate the Hackney International Socialists (IS) by (he thinks) DC Neale.

He found it easy to infiltrate the group – he hung around Dalston and got into conversation with some of them – they recruited him to help sell papers and invited him to meetings.
(94)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Reports attributed to HN304 go back to a meeting (of the Tower Hamlets branch of IS) in May 1976. There are more reports from him that summer – many of the meetings he spied on took place at Centerprise...
(95)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Centerprise was a cross-cultural community hub in Dalston that combined a bookshop and coffee bar, providing advice and resources, and meeting space for all kinds of groups.
(96)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives You can learn more about the fascinating history of this project at
hackneycitizen.co.uk/2013/09/12/cen…

hackneyhistory.wordpress.com/2011/06/27/cen…

ahackneyautobiography.org.uk/about.html

ahackneyautobiography.org.uk/uploads/The_Li…
(96)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives ucpi.org.uk/publications/s…

These included one meeting of the North East London Workers’ Action Support Group [UCPI000009764], and regular (members-only) meetings of the Hackney IS group

@tombfowler @out_of_lives ucpi.org.uk/publications/s…
The next report was [UCPI0000010659] dated 13 July 1976;

These meetings were very small. How did he deal with this?
How did he pitch and calibrate his level of contribution?
HN304 says he retained a sense of caution throughout.

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Did he take part in any voting?

He would try to minimise how often he voted, and abstained as often as he judged he could.

@tombfowler @out_of_lives How hard did he try to sell Socialist Worker papers?

@tombfowler @out_of_lives ucpi.org.uk/publications/s…
Can socialism come through parliament?
The title of a meeting held by Hackney IS in August 1976
[UPI0000010831]
Coates is listed as speaking for 20 mins on the subject of the Labour Party.
Why?
(101)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives ucpi.org.uk/publications/s…

This report [UCPI0000010756] is of an August 1976 meeting at Earlsmead School in N15.
Paul Foot “spoke on the spectre of racism.”
Why did he report on an anti-racist meeting?
(102)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives ucpi.org.uk/publications/s…
[UCPI0000017759] is a report of a meeting which discussed the case of the 'Islington 18'.
Did the SDS tend to report on such justice campaigns as part of their 'any info is fair game' approach or did they take a particular interest?
HN304: The former
(103)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives HN304 says he was not made aware of any need for sensitivity around spying on those kinds of groups.

He was asked what he knew about Celia Stubbs (who was a member of Hackney IS at the same time as him) or her partner Blair Peach?
(104)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Asked about attending a demo in Southall on 23rd April 1979, he asked if Barr meant Grunwick.

He was reminded that this demo was the one when Blair Peach received fatal injuries/ was subsequently killed.

(105)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives He does not recall any discussion of this, or the subsequent campaigning for justice.

(106)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives ucpi.org.uk/publications/s…
As this report [UCPI0000010769] shows, the National Front frequently turned up at their opponents' events, and sought to intimidate and physically attack people who didn't agree with them (as well as those who were Black/ Brown)
(107)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives There were often clashes on Brick Lane between the far-right and anti-fascist activists.
ucpi.org.uk/publications/s…

[UCPI0000011139] reports SWP member attacked by racists at Brick Lane who had some teeth knocked out.

He says this was typical of the NF's violence at the time
(108)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Another report [UCPI0000011244] refers to Column 88 and the threats they made against another SWP organiser: ucpi.org.uk/publications/s…

@tombfowler @out_of_lives ucpi.org.uk/publications/s…

This report [UCPI0000010659] includes reference to a “negress” in the audience talking about the West Indian Defence Committee in Brixton, who were engaged with knives and coshes ready to meet physical racialism with physical attacks.

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Was it true that self-defence groups were forming, and arming themselves against right-wing attacks at this time? Yes.

(111)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Although the NF and other right-wing groups were extremely violent, they weren't being spied on by the SDS in the way that anti-fascists routinely were.
(112)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives ucpi.org.uk/publications/s…
We went back to [UCPI0000009764] - somebody who spoke at this meeting is reported to have said that
“the only reason that the anti-fascist demonstrations appeared to attack the police and not the National Front..."
(113)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives "was because the police actively supported and protected the NF and therefore any such confrontation was an anti-fascist action.."
going on to say they "would always be mischaracterised by the capitalist press”
(114)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Graham explained that this view (that the police always sided with the right-wing groups) was prevalent, in his experience

(115)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives The final report of the morning session was
ucpi.org.uk/publications/s…
[UCPI0000021460] about Brent Trades Council and others organising a picket outside an HF meeting being held in Burnt Oak Library in Edgeware.

(116)

@tombfowler @out_of_lives Was this typical of the reports that he and other #spycops submitted?
HN304 agreed that it was.

We then stopped for a lunch break.
(117)