Hackgate - The Met - Red Flags And Red Tops

The latest from my regular contributor.

Looking back at the early 'red flags' of corruption and the tabloids is instructive. This post will look at warning signs at the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS or MET) in the period, roughly 2000-2005. It's a convenient timespan as it coincides with three top level rank constants -

Commissioner - John STEVENS
Deputy Commissioner & Director of Professional Standards (DPS) - Ian BLAIR
Director of Public Affairs (DPA) - Dick FEDORCIO

Indeed the senior ranks charged with anti-corruption responsibilities read like a succession of a Who's Who name-checked at the Leveson Inquiry.  Or perhaps a tortuous biblical genealogy in which Andy HAYMAN begat Bob QUICK who begat John YATES who begat Peter CLARKE etc.  Other less senior and lesser known names also recur, providing evidence of knowledge continuity of dangerous red flags at the MET - who knew what when - Shaun SAWYER, Andre BAKER, Dave COOK, David ZINZAN, Maxine de BRUNNER, Dean HAYDON, Brendan GILMOUR, Tony FULLER and so on...

Three significant MET investigations should have raised red flags in 2000-05 - Operations Abelard1, Motorman and Glade. Three more red flags were raised by key extracts from (unrelated) Reports highly critical of professional standards and press office/public affairs at the MET. These high profile criticisms were  the Virdi Inquiry Report, Damilola Taylor Review and the Morris Report.

BACKGROUND to 2000
The late 1990s had seen well publicised anti-graft initiatives at the MET, keeping Anti-Corruption Command (formerly CIB, Complaints Investigation Bureau) very busy, such as the Rigg Approach investigation led by Shaun SAWYER (here).

A parallel anti-corruption investigation was underway under John YATES - Operation Russia (here).  Also at Anti-Corruption Command was Dean HAYDON (here), later to become Staff Officer to John YATES and head ed Operation Varec (here).

A third relevant investigation was the linked Operation Nigeria/Two Bridges (here) probing police corruption, press 'dark arts' and the murder of Daniel Morgan (here) - under the command of Andy HAYMAN at Professional Standards (DPS). Andre BAKER was then senior homicide detective for South East London. On the team too at Anti-Corruption Command was then Detective Superintendent Bob QUICK. Operation Nigeria uncovered very serious red flags re newspapers, for example, a leak from the 1999 murder of Jill Dando which resulted in a detective's forced resignation. (here)

QUICK was so concerned about the intelligence uncovered that he submitted a report to HAYMAN in 2000

highlighting the role of journalists in promoting corrupt relationships with, and making corrupt payments to, officers for stories about famous people and high profile investigations in the MPS...I proposed an investigation of these newspapers/officers on the basis that I believed that the journalists were not paying bribes out of their own pockets but...the newspaper organisations were aware of the reasons for the payments and were themselves complicit in making corrupt payments to police officers.

THE VIRDI INQUIRY REPORT 2001
An investigation which scrutinised processes and policies relating to a contentious grievance, disciplinary and racism case.  In particular, the Report red flagged HAYMAN'S Directorate of Professional Standards (DPS) and FEDORCIO'S Directorate of Public Affairs (DPA).

The Report (here) included two letters from Andy HAYMAN - the first said, sadly, DCS BAKER was unable to locate relevant search procedure notes as none were kept. The other letter (Appendix 13b) said he was willing to allow the Virdi Inquiry access to the press file only under very stringent conditions.  In the event, that didn't happen

This Inquiry has repeatedly requested an opportunity to view the DPA press file and associated papers on Police Sgt Virdi. Regrettably, at the time of writing, the MPS Directorate of Public Affairs has not produced these papers.

Virdi's view was

that the MPS appear to have a close relationship with particular journalists, providing them 'misleading information' as well as leaking 'details of our solicitor's confidential letter'... (and) proves the collusion of certain officers of the MPS and the Daily Mail... No-one has been disciplined on this matter.

Additionally in 2001, the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) ratified its ethical Editors' Code of Conduct, Glenn Mulcaire signed his first lucrative contract with NOTW, Dick FEDORCIO became a full inner sanctum member of the MET Management Board and - in Plymouth - Operation Reproof started scoping into police corruption and illegal data harvesting (here).

ABELARD1 2002-3
Operation Abelard1 was launched by DPS Intelligence Development Group (IDG) - reopening the investigation into Daniel Morgan's murder.  Shaun SAWYER had become head of Anti-Corruption Command after HAYMAN joined Norfolk Police as Chief Constable. Abelard1 was led by David ZINZAN and fronting the public appeal for information was David COOK, working under Commander Andre BAKER. At that time, Brendan GILMOUR transferred from South East London Murder Investigation Team to the DPS - firstly to the Intelligence Development Group (IDG), then Anti-Corruption Command.

As the public face of the murder enquiry, COOK was allegedly targeted for surveillance by NOTW and Morgan murder suspects.  COOK confronted Rebekah Brooks face-to-face - the meeting facilitated by BAKER and Dick FEDORCIO (see here)

DAMILOLA TAYLOR REVIEW 2002
The Damilola Taylor Investigation Review Report into the 10yr old schoolboy's murder was published. (here).  It castigated press coverage, especially "the unauthorised disclosure of one piece of critical evidence found during the post-mortem examination of Damilola..." A tabloid newspaper published "the detail after the suspects were charged and evidential difficulties arose as a result... It is possible that the leak did in fact come from within the police service." Yet another red flag.

Despite known difficulties with substantial newspaper rewards being offered in high profile murders, the Daily Mail put up £50,000 - reluctantly endorsed by the MET: "Benefits and difficulties were identified, not least the desirability of witnesses emerging as a matter of principle rather than recompense." (p22)  That is exactly what happened; the prosecution case failed in court through the unreliable evidence of 14yr old girl (witness 'Bromley') alleged to have to been motivated by the reward money.  (Daily Mail)

Immediately the case collapsed, child witness 'Bromley' and her mother were stashed in a hotel in Blackheath where it had been arranged with the MET press office they would meet reporters from the News of the World and the Mail on Sunday. A deal was agreed with "the senior press officer at the Metropolitan Police, to pay £45,000 for the Bromley interview." (Guardian)

Yes. Yes, that's correct.  A senior press officer from the FEDORCIO'S Directorate of Public Affairs was acting as agent and broker in a tabloid bidding war - for an exclusive interview with a vulnerable 14yr old girl, in a hotel paid for by the News of the World.

Why?  And on whose authority?

Reneging on their bid agreement lost NOTW their exclusive and incurred a costly employment tribunal, heard amongst acrimonious allegations of police corruption and NOTW leverage deals with the MET to suppress embarrassing stories.  Even that leverage deal was reneged on. It wasn't until more than a year later, in an apparently unrelated incident, the same MET press officer was reportedly suspended on suspicion of the disclosure of unauthorised information to journalists. (Guardian)

OPERATION MOTORMAN 2002-3
It led on from Operation Reproof. It was an Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) investigation into 'industrial scale' Data Protection infringements by private investigators, via corrupt public officials, for a large number of national newspapers. (for background see here).

In March 2003, Rebekah Brooks (then Wade) admitted paying police officers fo information (Culture, Media & Sport Select Committee 2003)

OPERATION GLADE 2003-4
Briefed on Operation Motorman's extensive seizures by ICO Senior Investigating Officer Alex Owens, in May 2003 the MET Department of Professional Standards started its own Operation Glade.  It was an  (p3 here)

investigation into the unlawful disclosure of confidential Police National Computer (PNC) records, in the form of criminal record office (CRO) histories and registered keeper details of privately owned vehicles... passed in to the national press in exchange for monetary payment. 

Glade was led by Det Superintendent Tony FULLER, with Brendan GILMOUR as Investigating Officer. Early in 2004, seven journalists were interviewed under caution but none were prosecuted.  A civilian police worker, ex-MET police officer and two private investigators were subsequently convicted for conspiracy to commit misconduct in a public office and data protection offences.  Operation Glade was clearly yet another red flag.

THE MORRIS REPORT 2004
'An Independent Inquiry into Professional Standards and employment matters in the Metropolitan Police Service'  Its focus was how the MET treated its own officers when they were investigated for alleged misconduct and/or criminality.  The inquiry looked at issues such as accountability and scrutiny of DPS and recommended a fundamental overhaul under the personal direction of the Commissioner.  Now under Dep Asst Commissioner Stephen Roberts, criticism was made of poor practices (p142)

I strongly believe that DPS is not properly regulated and that they think they can do as they please without fear of an investigation into their own activities.

They "did not record all the important decisions on the cases... there can be no confidence that the necessary rigour has been brought to bear... It also makes it difficult to track the thought processes and reasons for decisions made, which is vital." (p161)

Disclosure was refused "just 3 weeks prior to the hearing, citing that some of the documentation was subject to a Public Interest Immunity and could not be disclosed. Why did it take DPS 4 months to respond to the original disclosure request?” Another said the DPS "simply ignored the requests.”  (p171)

Leaks and negative briefings to the press

We asked the MPS to comment on some of the issues arising out of the evidence, in particular the question of information which some officers felt had been leaked to the press. Mr Fedorcio outlined the MPS’ procedures as follows: 'Where we believe unauthorised information has been given to the media the press officer will bring this to the attention of the investigating officer

We have received evidence that suggests that unofficial press releases or comment is made about individuals. The MPS denies this.

I was ordered by my senior officers not to talk to the media in my own defence and...the MPS did nothing "to counter the stream of largely false and damaging articles.

- (DAC Brian Paddick) p170

Arguably these failings echo those of the later investigation Operation Caryatid into phone hacking by Goodman and Mulcaire. Is it at all credible that no-one made any connections? Yet Brendan GILMOUR asserted to Leveson "In 2003, the concept of the national newspapers routinely using police employee to source sensitive information was still relatively unknown. On this basis I believe the MPS response was appropriate." Surely even by then there were more than enough red flags to make bunting for Scotland Yard?

Sir John STEVENS stepped down as Commissioner of the Metropolis in 2005.

Related Articles
Hackgate - Issues For The Burnton Inquiry Into The Murder Of Daniel Morgan
Hackgate - The IPCC and Surrey's "Collective Amnesia"
Hackgate - Alex Marunchak - Presumed Innocent
Hackgate - Springwatch
Hackgate - Elveden: Murdoch Or King Cnut?
Hackgate - Elveden - Murdoch's Catch 22
Hackgate - April Casburn's Conviction - Myths And Misconceptions


You can contact the author on Twitter @brown_moses or by email at brownmoses@gmail.com

Hackgate - Issues For The Burnton Inquiry Into The Murder Of Daniel Morgan

The latest from my regular contributor.


Home Secretary Theresa May gave evidence to Leveson plus a wealth of additional material.  Exhibit TM1 includes a detailed list of 27 concurrent 'Inquiries/Enquiries/Reviews re Phone Hacking', as at October 2011 (pp 433-4).  No 4 on her list is:

Operation Tuleta - police investigation into hacking in general terms and so far involves consideration of hard drives, and other documentation seized in historic Operations (including Ops Glade, Motorman, Millipede, Abelard 2, Nigeria, Two Bridges, Abelard 1 and Russia).

Five of those eight named police investigations relate directly to the savage murder of Daniel Morgan (see here).  It is also striking that ALL EIGHT of those Operations named by May can potentially be linked to Southern Investigations (here).  The lesser-known Operations are (from Time Line of events and linked investigations, Appendix A, Operation Abelard 2 Review)

- 1987 - Operation Russia - A covert investigation into police corruption particularly in South East London

- 1997 to January 1999 - Operation Nigeria - MET assessment and commencement of covert police investigations

- January 1999 - Operation Two Bridges - Additional MPS covert investigation examining police corruption and the murder of Daniel Morgan. Enquiry revealed information pertinent to the murder investigation. Charges brought in connection with an unrelated matter.

- May 2002 - Operation Abelard 1 - MET launched a fresh covert investigation into the murder of Daniel Morgan. Led by the Directorate of Professional Standards.

Also linked to these investigations, and with overlapping oversight, are 3 senior MET officers - Andy Hayman, Andre Baker, John Yates.

HAYMAN

Hayman was MET Commander focusing on anti-corruption during Operations Russia, Nigeria, and Two Bridges. On return to the MET from service as Chief Constable of Norfolk, Hayman was MET Assistant Commissioner Specialist Operations (ACSO) with overall responsibility for Operation Caryatid - the original phone-hacking investigation into NOTW (News of the World)'s Goodman and Mulcaire.

BAKER

Andre Baker has not received the same levels of public scrutiny as Hayman or Yates -  see here for more depth.

Baker was Head of Homicide for London in 2002 at the time of the Operation Abelard 1 investigation into Daniel Morgan's murder. Detective Superintendent David Zinzan led operations, with Detective Chief Superintendent Dave Cook fronting the Crimewatch appeal for new information - his immediate superior was Baker. Ultimately the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) determined there was insufficient evidence for a prosecution. Following the CPS decision on the Zinzan-Cook investigation, all eight suspects arrested were released (see here).

That 2002 Crimewatch appeal allegedly prompted Daniel Morgan murder suspects to instigate NOTW surveillance of DSC Cook and his wife, Jackie Hames. That Cook-Hames surveillance jn turn led to an infamous confrontation meeting between Rebekah Brooks, Dick Fedorcio, DCS Cook and his boss Andre Baker (see here).

From January 2006, Baker was Deputy Director of SOCA (Serious Organised Crime Agency) - ie throughout investigations Operation Caryatid (phone hacking) Operation Millipede (computer hacking) and Operation Abelard 2 (the fifth investigation into the murder of Daniel Morgan).

YATES

John Yates was Detective Superintendent in MET Anti-Corruption Command and led during part of Operation Russia at the time of Operation Nigeria/Two Bridges investigations of Southern Investigations - in which NOTW were implicated.  In 2006, Yates was appointed Assistant Commissioner for MET Professional Standards, then all Serious Crime, then from 2009 Specialist Operations/Counter-Terrorism. 

This means Yates had SIMULTANEOUS overall responsibility for BOTH the NOTW-tainted Operation Abelard 2 (2006-11 Daniel Morgan's murder investigation) AND the controversial re-evaluations (2009-11) of Operation Caryatid (NOTW phone hacking).

CRITIQUING YATES

Two Parliamentarians raised pertinent issues in the House of Commons:

Gordon Brown, Kirkcaldy and Cowdenbeath, Labour  (Hansard 13 July 2011, c402)

No action from the head of the first police inquiry, Andy Hayman, whose next job just happened to be at News International; no action from his successor, who had overall responsibility for two inquiries—Mulcaire and Abelard, or what is called Southern Investigations—each with vast but unexamined archives exposing criminality on a huge scale.

Tom Watson,West Bromwich East, Labour (Hansard 11 July 2011, c46)

As head of Operation Abelard, John Yates would be aware of paperwork showing convicted private investigator Jonathan Rees discussing the use of covert surveillance techniques, including computer hacking, with a close associate of Rebekah Brooks, Mr Alex Marunchak. Rees, while serving time in prison, discussed his contact with reporters from The Sunday Times. Far from this scandal being about wrongdoing at the News of the World, it is a story of institutional criminality at News International. John Yates’ review of the Mulcaire evidence was not an oversight. Like Andy Hayman, he chose not to act. He misled Parliament. 

ALTERNATIVE OPTIONS

Yates was apparently very keen retain Gold Group oversight, and not to relinquish evaluation of phone-hacking evidence outside his own Specialist Operations/Counter-Terrorism command. He of course had the alternative to recuse, and request that the Commissioner allocated the task of establishing the facts of Operation Caryatid to another MET command.

A different Command may not have lacked expertise and experience in bringing offences of blagging and hacking to successful prosecution. For example, at the same time as the Operation Caryatid investigation, is the 2006 case of private investigators Sharon and Stephen Anderson - blaggers of bank, tax, utilities and telephone accounts (see here).

Or (as yet unlinked to Hackgate) the network uncovered by Operation Barabatus in 2006-7. it exposed a criminal chain of former police officers-turned-private investigators hacking computers, using Trojan viruses, and illegally accessing the Police National Computer (PNC) data via serving officers. Eight men were convicted. (here)

So it appears there was no lack of appetite from other parts of the MET to pursue similar cases - with similar modus operandi.

ABELARD 2

March 2006 - the fifth Investigation into Daniel Morgan's murder is launched under AC John Yates, Commander Shaun Sawyer and with Dave Cook as operational lead (seconded from his then post at SOCA). [David Zinzan of Abelard 1 and Shaun Sawyer of Abelard 2 are now respectively Deputy Chief Constable and Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall Police.]  Abelard 2 arrests followed in 2008 but, by March 2011, the case collapsed under the weight of disclosure obligations and allegations of police corruption (see here).

COOK

Dave Cook was arrested on 10th January 2012. Despite being an alleged victim of NOTW surveillance and civil litigant, Cook himself was suspected of making unauthorised leaks to a journalist and, to date, remains un-charged on bail. (Guardian)

He was arrested after the IPCC was passed information in mid-December by Metropolitan police detectives working on Operation Elveden, which is investigating alleged payments to police officers by newspapers.  Investigators working for the police watchdog have powers of arrest when carrying out an independent investigation. It is not clear why the Met did not carry out the arrest and instead passed the inquiry on to the police watchdog. A spokesman for the Met would not comment.

Cook's arrest by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) rather than the MET is indeed curious - as is this nugget from John Yates witness statement to the Leveson Inquiry:

I should add that I have been asked by the IPCC to provide a witness statement whether I authorised former Detective Chief Superintendent David Cook to provide specific information to a named journalist for specific operational reasons relating to the reinvestigation into the murder of Daniel Morgan.  I am happy to confirm that I did and will provide to the IPCC a witness statement to this effect.

Curiouser and curiouser.

In mid-May 2013, Yates wrote a lengthy article for the Independent on Sunday (here) about the Daniel Morgan murder investigations and the announcement of the Burnton Panel inquiry:

I had overall responsibility for the case from 2006 until the collapse of the last trial at the Old Bailey in March 2011... the panel will also pay particular attention to the role played by Detective Chief Superintendent Dave Cook...an extremely able and committed detective...Disturbingly, he provides an astonishing link between Southern Investigations, the News of the World and phone-hacking when, in July 2011, it was revealed that the paper had used the detective agency to tail Det Ch Supt Cook and his wife at the height of his involvement in leading the murder investigation.

If Yates found this "astonishing" and a revelation to him when it "emerged" in 2011 then you have to wonder who (for more than a decade) was providing him with the selection of press cuttings relevant to his rigorous investigations - the News of the World?

THE BURNTON PANEL INQUIRY
Home Secretary Theresa May said:

The horrific murder of Daniel Morgan and subsequent investigations were dogged by serious allegations of police corruption. Several criminal investigations failed to bring those responsible to justice and this independent panel will leave no stone unturned to find out why.  I am delighted Sir Stanley Burnton has accepted the responsibility of chairing the panel. He brings an enormous amount of expertise from a long career at the top of the legal profession.  The terms of reference under which the panel will operate were also announced today.

And

Importantly, the Panel’s work will put Mr Morgan’s family at the centre of the process and the approach to this issue has the support of the MPS Commissioner and the Independent Police Complaints Commission... the Panel will seek to address the questions arising, including those relating to:
• police involvement in the murder;
• the role played by police corruption in protecting those responsible for the murder from being brought to justice and the failure to confront that corruption;
• the incidence of connections between private investigators, police officers and journalists
at the News of the World and other parts of the media and alleged corruption involved in the linkages between them. 

Those are three very weighty aims that clearly cover many of the issues being investigated by Operation Tuleta - and more.

Whilst the Burnton Panel "will ensure maximum possible disclosure of all relevant documentation, including information held by all relevant Government departments and agencies and by the police and other investigative and prosecuting authorities", no more details are so far available. Yet to be announced is the list of Panel members, and there is no indication on whether the Panel can compel witness evidence or only hear from willing witnesses. Neither is there an indication that evidence sessions will be public.

The timing of the Burnton inquiry is a little sketchy.  It is intended to take 12 months to Report, but mirrors the dilemma of Leveson Inquiry (Part 1) if it is unable to address the required specificity should that risk prejudicing ongoing criminal investigations or trials.  Yet anything less than a full, independent, forensic inquiry would betray assurances to Daniel Morgan's family and further damage public trust.

That is, unless the Home Secretary anticipates charges, trials and convictions soon under Operation Tuleta - or even Operations Russia, Two Bridges, Nigeria, Abelard 1, Motorman, Glade, Caryatid or Abelard 2.

Seems like a tall order.


Related Articles
Hackgate - The IPCC and Surrey's "Collective Amnesia"
Hackgate - Alex Marunchak - Presumed Innocent
Hackgate for Beginners - The Murder of Daniel Morgan
Hackgate - Springwatch
Hackgate - Elveden: Murdoch Or King Cnut?
Hackgate - Elveden - Murdoch's Catch 22
Hackgate - April Casburn's Conviction - Myths And Misconceptions
Hackgate - Varec Revisited - Dissent In The Ranks


You can contact the author on Twitter @brown_moses or by email at brownmoses@gmail.com

Hackgate - The IPCC and Surrey's "Collective Amnesia"

Published in late April '13, the Independent Police Complaints Commision (IPCC) Commissioner’s Report entitled 'IPCC independent investigation into Surrey Police’s knowledge of the alleged illegal accessing of Amanda (Milly) Dowler’s mobile phone in 2002' runs to just 6 scathing pages.  Its key observation is that

former senior officers at Surrey Police were 'afflicted by a form of collective amnesia' in relation to the force’s failure to investigate an allegation in 2002 that the voicemail of Amanda (Milly) Dowler had been hacked by the News of the World (NOTW).

The relevant documents in the public domain consist of a letter from Surrey Police to the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee (CMS) on Surrey's own investigation (Operation Baronet), evidence read-in to the Leveson Inquiry from the Metropolitan Police Service (MET), as well as that IPCC Commissioner's Report.  The latter specifically focused on the referrals of Maria Woodall and Craig Denholm for potential recordable conduct.

MARIA WOODALL

Then: In 2002, Maria Woodall was Detective Sergeant and Action Team Manager of Surrey Police's investigation Operation Ruby into the abduction of missing teenager Millie Dowler. She appears to have been frank with the IPCC that the hacking of Millie's mobile phone by NOTW was known by several on the investigation team - for example, DC John Lyndon's 23rd April '02 log entry (p14)

...in light of the News of the World revelation that they or a third party has accessed the voicemail it is possible that the messages had previously been listened to by unknown persons and deleted.

Millie's mother Sally recounted to the Leveson Inquiry (p14) her own suspicions that NOTW had intercepted family phones to get a particularly intrusive story for publication ('The Longest Walk').

Woodall's referral to the IPCC  however was not about 2002. She was investigated for allegedly failing to pass on knowledge of NOTW's hacking later during the investigation which led to the convictions of Clive Goodman and Glenn Mulcaire (p4):  

The case against her rested on her actions and knowledge in 2007, when the first phone hacking convictions took place. It is clear that at that point she accessed the HOLMES system to view documents from 2002 associated with phone hacking.

Though the IPCC investigation "concluded that there was no case to answer for misconduct."  From 2006, Operation Ruby's Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) was Detective Chief Superintendent Mark Rowley. It is not known if Woodall informed him of her HOLMES searches.

Now: Temporary Detective Superintendent Woodall is about to leave Surrey for a new job with the City of London Police.

STUART GIBSON

Then: Detective Chief Inspector Gibson was the initial appointed Senior Investigating Officer (SIO) when Millie Dowler disappeared in March 2002.  It has been alleged that Gibson was one of the Surrey officers who met with NOTW senior journalists and were told of the hacking. (here)

Documented evidence of his meeting(s) with NOTW are missing.  Within a few weeks, Gibson was removed from Operation Ruby. The conclusions from a progress review by Sussex Police undertaken in the summer of 2002 are here.

At the same time, there was adverse criticism from the press - one "describing the investigation under DCI Gibson as 'rudderless' and this media coverage has since been described by (then Deputy Chief Constable) Peter Fahy as 'a factor in replacing the SIO for [the investigation]".  (p9)

Now: Stuart Gibson is retired.

The IPCC Investigation also states that amongst senior officers interviewed were those at Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) level.

CRAIG DENHOLM  (ACPO level)

Surrey Police's evidence to the CMS Committee and the Leveson Inquiry came from Assistant Chief Constable Jerry Kirkby. Normally, both might have warranted the attention of the force Chief Constable.  However, Surrey's Chief Constable Mark Rowley had just left for a new post with the MET and Temporary Chief Constable Craig Denholm was himself implicated as the focus of Operation Baronet.

Then: In 2002, Detective Chief Superintendent Denholm (Head of Crime) was Overall Officer in Charge (OOC) of Operation Ruby - the immediate superior officer to SIO Stuart Gibson.

The case against Denholm "rested on his claim to have had no knowledge about the alleged hacking of Milly Dowler’s phone before this was revealed publicly in 2011. Given the extent of knowledge within the investigation team, and Surrey Police as a whole, and the fact that this was referred to in documents which he is known to have received, the investigation found it hard to understand how he, the officer in charge, could not have been aware of the alleged hacking. But despite detailed examination of all extant documents and interviews with all relevant witnesses, the investigation was unable to find any witness or documentary evidence that contradicted Mr Denholm’s own repeated assertions to the IPCC that he did not know, and had not made the relevant connections. In view of that...there was insufficient evidence to support a finding of a case to answer for gross misconduct."

Now: Denholm has just been appointed Deputy Chief Constable of Hampshire Police. Its Chief Constable Andy Marsh said: "Craig is an experienced and very capable DCC with a good track record of leadership and delivery of excellent policing services to the public."

MARK ROWLEY (ACPO level)

Then: Rowley joined Surrey in 2002 as Chief Superintendent to command West Surrey Basic Command Unit.  Previously (Guardian)

as a detective superintendent at the National Criminal Intelligence Service, he 'led on the national deployment of covert techniques to combat organised crime such as telephone interception' 

Rowley became Surrey Assistant Chief Constable from November 2003 and assumed the role of OOC for Operation Ruby in 2006.  He was appointed Chief Constable in 2009. Following the conviction of Levi Bellfield in 2011 for Millie Dowler's murder, Rowley iniated Operation Baronet under AC Jerry Kirkby.

Now:  Rowley is Assistant Commissioner at the MET. For some time he was direct superior officer of DAC Sue Akers command of Operations Weeting, Elveden and Tuleta.  Responsibility for these investigations was subsequently transferred to AC Cressida Dick.


PETER FAHY  (ACPO level)

Then: Throughout 2002, Fahy was Deputy Chief Constable of Surrey Police under Chief Constable Denis O'Connor. Fahy left Surrey in Dec '02 to become Chief Constable of Cheshire Police.

Now: Knighted in 2012, Sir Peter Fahy is currently Chief Constable of Greater Manchester Police.

DENIS O'CONNOR  (ACPO level)

Then: In 2002, O'Connor was Chief Constable of Surrey Police. In all available evidence, O'Connor has been very keen to distance himself from the NOTW phone hacking in 2002.  Instead, he has consistently emphasized his heavy reliance on Peter Fahy's responsibility to have informed him:

You will understand that as a discipline authority, not everything reaches the Chief Constable, who must sit in judgment of things. So I may have been partially safe from it, but I would have expected and, you know,my sort of --my concern with the mission of policing and its credibility, that people would have drawn -- my senior staff, my professional standards department -- if there was anything significant, they would have told me... Particularly my Deputy Chief Constable at the present (sic) time, Peter Fahy, I had absolute faith in his integrity. I thought he would make the right judgments

Lord Justice Leveson did however challenge O'Connor on this strategy of continuing, unsighted insulation (pp 98-100).  His witness statement added (1st witness statement, p7):

I am not fully sighted on the details of the alleged contact between the News of the World and my staff during the Amanda Dowler investigation (I have deliberately limited my contact with Surrey Police pending current investigations) so cannot comment on the specifics of this issue.

Now:  Knighted in 2010, Sir Denis O'Connor is currently Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary.

And STILL there are inconsistencies emerging on the hacking of Millie Dowler. Note the investigation of Maria Woodall "rested on her actions and knowledge in 2007, when the first phone hacking convictions took place. It is clear that at that point she accessed the HOLMES system to view documents from 2002 associated with phone hacking."

Yet it is debatable just how much documentation was on the second generation HOLMES (Home Office Large Major Enquiry System) in 2002... or even in 2007. The - redacted - Sussex Review of September 2002 made Operational Recommendations:

Recommendation 56
That Surrey Police in general ensure that sufficient analysts are trained on the HOLMES 2 system.
Recommendation 57
That Surrey Police formulate an appropriate policy regarding the typing of at least the most significant 'other documents' onto HOLMES 2 during any enquiry.

Were those Sussex Police recommendations ignored? Or if significant 2002 Dowler phone hacking documents were in the HOLMES system, were they still there when Woodall looked in 2007? Had some disappeared by the time of the 2012 Operation Baronet?  Given that one of the aims of HOLMES is to facilitate crucial information access across force boundaries, was cross-force access to HOLMES 2002 documents volunteered by Surrey to Operation Caryatid (the MET 2005-6 investigation into Goodman and Mulcaire)? If not, why not?  Alternatively - following the high profile convictions of Goodman and Mulcaire in 2007 - Woodall may have tried to access cross-force MET HOLMES databases on NOTW phone hacking.

There were none. The MET did not enter details of the key Mulcaire Archive into HOLMES during the Operation Caryatid investigation in 2005. Or 2006. Or post-conviction in 2007.  It was only in July 2009, following intense criticism, that the MET's John Yates ordered the phone hacking data entry into HOLMES to enable victim notification. It was costly, protracted, and poorly executed.

The IPCC confirms "widespread knowledge uncovered in this investigation, we consider that it is scarcely credible that no one connected to the Milly Dowler investigation recognised the relevance and importance of the knowledge that Surrey Police had in 2002...There is no doubt, from our investigation and the evidence gathered by Operation Baronet, that Surrey Police knew in 2002 of the allegation that Milly Dowler’s phone had been hacked by the News of the World. It is apparent from the evidence that there was knowledge of this at all levels within the investigation team  ...former senior officers in particular appear to have been afflicted by a form of collective amnesia about this"

All this is highly reminiscent of the (contagious?) 'omerta' culture at the News of the World. Surrey Police seem to have demonstrated the self-same collective amnesia and willful blindness of NOTW senior executives, the plausible deniability of Andy Coulson, the trusting reliance on subordinates of Rupert Murdoch, the inability to read a log/email chain of James Murdoch, the document preservation abilities of News International's Datapool 3 team, and the reputational management skills of Colin Myler.

To date, six have been charged with conspiracy to intercept the voicemail messages of Millie Dowler in April 2002 - Rebekah Brooks, Andrew Coulson, Stuart Kuttner, Greg Miskiw, Neville Thurlbeck and Glenn Mulcaire.  Unless all six defendants plead guilty, these charges will have to be defended in open court. So there is much more evidence yet to emerge on the Dowler hacking, including the potential for former senior officers of Surrey Police being called as prosecution witnesses.

The short IPCC Commissioner's Report is a much-truncated and redacted version. The full IPCC formal Investigation Report "contains full details of the evidence supporting the findings and conclusions and the report into this case is not being published at this time at the request of the Crown Prosecution Service, in view of ongoing criminal proceedings."

This sorry Surrey saga is not over yet.


Related Articles
Hackgate - Springwatch
Hackgate - Elveden: Murdoch Or King Cnut?
Hackgate - Elveden - Murdoch's Catch 22
Hackgate - "Snakes And Ladders" At The Met
Hackgate - April Casburn's Conviction - Myths And Misconceptions
Hackgate - Varec Revisited - Dissent In The Ranks
Hackgate - Sue Akers' Swansong

You can contact the author on Twitter @brown_moses or by email at brownmoses@gmail.com

Hackgate - Varec Revisited - Dissent In The Ranks

The latest from my regular contributor.

Operation Varec is a little fuzzy round the edges.  It has its own formal 2010 inception date and terms of reference, but in some senses, it pre-dates that and grew out of John Yates' response to The Guardian article on the News of the World (NOTW) phone hacking, published July 8th 2009. This was Yates' 'Ratner moment' - undertaking a hasty fact-finding, presenting a same day, televised press statement, and later pronouncing on his own actions as "crap".

Lord Justice Leveson took the view that Yates could have, perhaps should have, excused himself from quasi-review of the phone hacking investigation - given his longstanding friendship with former NOTW executive, Neil Wallis.  Yet, even though his premature 'no new evidence, no re-investigation' press announcement was dismissive, should Yates accrue a little more credit?  After all, he didn't just let it drop there.

A series of meetings was convened by Yates over the next few months to establish if there were still skeletons in the closet of that original 2006 Goodman/Mulcaire investigation (Operation Caryatid).  Amongst those attending were DCS Phil Williams and DS Keith Surtees (investigating officers from 2006 operation), Steve Kavanagh (now sucessor to Sue Akers overseeing Operations Weeting, Elveden, Tuleta), DS Dean Haydon (Staff Officer to John Yates) and Sara Cheesley (Specialist Operations Press Desk, MET Directorate of Public Affairs).  The minutes of many of these are included as Exhibits to John Yates evidence to the Leveson Inquiry.  They seem characterised by a hyper-defensive mindset and a focus on presentational issues rather than evaluating the 2006 investigation.  Much effort was dedicated to developing responses to criticism of the Met from victims, government departments and Select Committee - reputational risk priortised perhaps at the expense of a more rigourous scrutiny of Operation Caryatid.  There is extensive background here in Sara Cheesley's witness statement to the Leveson Inquiry.

Recently, insights into those meetings have emerged which show a distinct lack of agreement on what action was needed - dissent in the ranks.  Tom Watson MP (3rd Dec 2012) raised this issue in the House of Commons:

May I draw his attention to a very late submission to the Leveson inquiry from Detective Chief Superintendent Surtees, which appeared on the (Leveson) website this week? He states that in July 2009, he argued internally that there was enough intelligence to warrant reopening the investigation into phone hacking. The hon. Gentleman will know that at no point was that raised with the Culture, Media and Sport Committee during its inquiry. That might be something that he and the Committee want to look at.  

Surtees 2nd Leveson witness statement (here) clearly spells out his trenchant view that the phone-hacking Investigation SHOULD be re-opened.  He says that he also suggested that Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) be called in.

Surtees assertions are echoed by Phil Williams (here).

Both submissions appear to be tardy attempts to mitigate criticism of the investigating officers contained in the Leveson Report. Presumably, these MET-sanctioned statements were prompted by Section 13 letters.

On 1st September 2010, the New York Times published their exposé ' Tabloid Hack Attack on Royals, and Beyond'.  On the face of it, the article included new information, new informants, and new victims of phone hacking - including Andy Coulson who was then Director of Communications at 10 Downing Street.  Obviously, a disinterested and objective consideration of NOTW phone-hacking was again necessary.  This was a crucial point at which John Yates had another chance to step back, recuse himself, and request that the Commissioner task a different senior officer team without the baggage and closeness to NOTW.  However, Yates chose to have oversight of the new enquiries - Operation Varec - himself.  His own Staff Officer, Dean Haydon, was appointed Senior Investigating Officer (SIO).  Haydon had been closely associated with the 2009 scrutiny as a member (and minutes taker) of the Gold group meetings.

Started formally on 2nd September 2010, Varec's primary objective was

To assess whether allegations being made in the media since 1st September 2010 provided any new evidence of criminal offences, namely unlawful interception of communications, at News of the World, in 2005/6 

It has been alleged that, within ten days of Varec commencing, a senior MET officer contacted NOTW offering to supply information. (Daily Telegraph) The media stories addressed by Operation Varec covered the New York Times story, Guardian follow up, and the Channel 4 Dispatches October 2010 documentary 'Tabloids, Tories and Telephone Hacking'.  When Dean Haydon contacted The Guardian for information, Alan Rusbridger replied in a scathing email

Nick Davies was further able to reveal incontrovertible evidence of the involvement in phone hacking of other NoW reporters and executives: the material is sitting in your own files,... Seeking to obtain evidence from the Guardian should, it seems to us, be a matter of last resort for the police... But the fact that three separate news organizations have been able to uncover this story must give you hope that you, too, could get to the bottom of it without too much trouble   

Twenty one strands of inquiry by Operation Varec were followed, including:

• Asking the New York Times to supply names of their anonymous sources.  They declined.
• Interviewing ex-NOTW's Sean Hoare.  Contraversially, he was interviewed under caution and so refused to answer any questions. Another ex-NOTW journalist simply refused to speak with the police - let alone attend an interview.  
• Other NOTW executives and journalists were questioned about Operation Caryatid and refused to answer, denied any knowledge, or (on legal advice) submitted pre-prepared written statements.
• Anonymous allegations were received by the MET, implicating three NOTW journalists in phone hacking. Each was written to by Operation Varec requesting information. None of the three responded.
• Colin Myler, NOTW Editor, was asked to provide a list of journalists still employed since 2006 (in addition to those above).  Myler did so.  Every one of the list of 19 journalists was individually written to by Varec to ask for cooperation and interview.  Not a single one of the 19 even replied.

Unsurprisingly, Operation Varec came to the conclusion that they were unable to obtain any admissible evidence to warrant re-investigating phone- hacking at the News of the World. For details of the 21 investigatory strands, see here.

The genesis of Operation Varec still leaves some key questions unanswered:

• On the first opportunity to recuse himself from the 2009 quasi-review, why did John Yates not do so?
• On the second opportunity to recuse himself from the 2010 investigation, Operation Varec, why did John Yates not do so?
• Given the obduracy, obstructiveness and disregard shown by such a large number of former and serving NOTW journalists, why did the MET continue to collude with News International's thin veneer of cooperating with the police?

Assistant Commissioner Yates resigned on 18th July 2011.

Related Articles
Hackgate - Dacre's Dodgy Dossier - War Of Attrition 
Hackgate - Sue Akers' Swansong
Hackgate - "Newsdesk Here, Kelvin Speaking..."
Hackgate - Andre Baker - A Hackgate Footnote?
Hackgate - Ten To Watch For
Hackgate - Dear Surrey Police


You can contact the author on Twitter @brown_moses or by email at brownmoses@gmail.com

Hackgate - Dacre's Dodgy Dossier - War Of Attrition

The latest piece from my regular contributor.

What on earth could have brought about The Mail's scatter-gun 'Dodgy Dossier'?  For a start, it's not even news...

13th July 2011
Way back, in the dim distant days before the Leveson (yes, there really was a time before Leveson...), Prime Minister David Cameron announced he was setting up a judge-led inquiry into press practices. Lord Justice Leveson was appointed to report to the Home Secretary and the Secretary of State for Culture, Media & Sport. 

20th July 2011
The Prime Minister announced the Terms of Reference and appointment of “a panel of experts” to assist the Inquiry.  He named each of them and observed (Hansard, 20 July 2011, column 918): “These people have been chosen not only for their expertise in the media, broadcasting, regulation and policing, but for their complete independence from the interested parties.”  Ed Miliband too welcomed the Inquiry "and, indeed, the panel members chosen by the Prime Minister". Cameron praised cross-party agreement which had “worked well over the judicial inquiry, the panel, the terms of reference". (Hansard, 20 July 2011, column 918 onwards)  So it is clear that the Assessors were Prime Ministerial appointments, in consultation with two Secretaries of State, and with cross-party agreement. They were not appointees in Leveson's gift.

At that time, News International might have been the most apprehensive about the forthcoming Inquiry. Yet, arguably, Paul Dacre and Associated Newspapers Ltd (ANL) have proved the most challenging to Lord Justice Leveson. The Inquiry would hear evidence on ANL's past record with the Press Complaints Commission (PCC) when confronted with criticism - allegedly approximating string it out, object, delay, object some more, delay, go missing, too busy, fail to respond, object again.  Leveson may well have reflected later that this obdurate strategy was mirrored in ANL's dealings with him - the self-same modus operandi in macrocosm.

28th July 2011 
Leveson held an initial session and press conference to introduce himself, Assessors & Terms of Reference etc.  He also drew attention to the Inquiries Act, and its provision that any objections on Assessor appointments could be made within 14 days. None were made.

Summer 2011
Coordination, planning and procedural sessions continued on a variety of topics, including deciding who would have crucial Core Participant status. For example,
"Mr Mathieson of RPC repeated his position, identified in correspondence, that Associated Newspapers Ltd were minded to ask for core participant status but said that he was not in a position to do so in the absence of the Editor in Chief.  On other issues, he was without instructions." 

Pre-evidence discussion Seminars were scheduled  Mindful to include a range of experience and opinion, Leveson invited Paul Dacre to chair one of the Seminars: "I did ask him to participate. Unfortunately, on 6th October he cannot, and I am waiting to hear from him about the 12th, I understand."

26th August 2011
ANL wrote to Leveson, questioning the role and remit of the Assessor function, and challenging three of the six Assessors - Sir David Bell (here), George Jones (here), and Elinor Goodman (here).

In addition, ANL complained that the panel of Assessors lacked balance as none had tabloid or mid-market newspaper experience (oddly overlooking Elinor Goodman's freelancing for ANL's own Mail on Sunday).  Written exchanges continued with ANL adding concerns about Inquiry strategies they considered political partisanship for good measure.  Letters, submissions, maneuvering rumbled on all summer, delaying and distracting from the main business of the new Inquiry, leading to this revealing exchange:

MR CAPLAN: I am sure you will understand that Associated Newspapers, whom I represent, do not in any way wish to be confrontational with the Inquiry, but you will also understand of course --

LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: The letters didn't quite read like that.

 Leveson made a salient point about ANL's argument that long experience of working with tabloids should be the prime criterion for balance of Assessors.  If so, he suggested, it "would have been open to them (the Ministers) or to me to appoint, for example, Mr Mulcaire.  He has expertise."  (ANL Oral Arguments)  Far from being swatted away dismissively, Leveson mustered the patience of a saint to give ANL's objections due consideration.

17th October 2011
Leveson's formal Ruling reiterated any appeal against Assessors would have needed to be promptly addressed to the Ministers who appointed them not Leveson himself, and that he was satisfied with their relevance and integrity.  By this point, it should be remembered, the Inquiry evidence Hearings hadn't even begun. Finally in mid-November the Evidence Hearings started. But by Day 2, ANL's Opening Submission again set an uncompromising tone.  There were three main issues raised: the absolute necessity of press self-regulation, objections to anonymous witnesses, and - red rag to Dacre's bull - ANL's asserted innocence re Operation Motoman. (for background see here)

21st November 2012
Hugh Grant gave evidence.  That evening, "Paul Dacre, the Associated Newspapers editor-in-chief, had a hand in the drafting of the Daily Mail publisher's statement accusing Hugh Grant of "mendacious smears" (Guardian) 

Who can forget the interminable arguments in Court 73 twixt ANL and Mr Sherborne..?

2nd December 2011
Leveson held a closed session with Core Participant counsel to discuss the general treatment of Operation Motorman materials. A consensus was reached that there was prima facie evidence of newspaper 'bulk users' illegalities.  On condition of that collective consensus, Leveson proposed not to make the Motorman files public.

2012 dawned. Perhaps New Year's resolutions would bring peace and goodwill...

13th January 2012
Application for Judicial Review

High Courts of Justice, Case No: CO/11362/2011:
Before LORD JUSTICE TOULSON, MR JUSTICE SWEENEY and MRS JUSTICE SHARP
 Between: (Claimant)
THE QUEEN ON THE APPLICATION OF ASSOCIATED NEWSPAPERS LIMITED
- and -
(Defendant) THE RT HON LORD JUSTICE LEVESON (AS CHAIRMAN OF THE LEVESON INQUIRY)

In short, ANL applied for permission of overrule Leveson on allowing anonymised witness evidence from those fearful of victimisation.  ANL opined that Leveson would thereby be trampling on natural justice, risked causing them reputational damage, and trangressed their section 10 Human Rights.  Mr Justice Toulson declined...

...to micromanage the conduct of the Inquiry by the Chairman... (I) refuse this application for judicial review. For the future,...protocol will be matters of detailed consideration for him, which should not foreseeably give rise to further requests for judicial interference.

Mr Justice Sweeney: I agree.   

Mrs Justice Sharp:  I also agree.

The week scheduled for evidence from Editors was inconvenient for Dacre - again.  Robert Jay reported, ...

some people may be wondering why Mr Paul Dacre is not on the list for today. The answer is he's not available for the rest of this month, and indeed for today, but we have lined him up, as it were, for 6 February

6th February 2012
Dacre's first appearance. Duly sworn-in, Leveson welcomed him: "Mr Dacre, I thank you, as I've thanked the editors of other newspapers who have allowed me to visit their newsrooms. I know you weren't there at the time but I'm grateful to you for allowing me to do so"

Asked by Robert Jay if complainants to the PCC were commonly worn down by a protracted ANL 'war of attrition', Dacre categorically denied it (p45).  When questioned closely on Motorman and use of Steve Whittamore, Dacre became obstinate and combative.  He refused to accept ANL's titles might have been complicit in illegality so Leveson called a short break to allow him to consult Counsel.  On return Dacre was hardly pacified, asserting that whilst Whittamore may have done illegal acts ANL journalists had demonstrably not. (p57)

Because of the spat over Hugh Grant and the 'mendacious smear' allegation - Leveson directed that Dacre return for a second appearance.  Mr Caplan QC first argued against Dacre having to appear again, and then seemed to prevaricate as to whether Dacre would even comply. The exchanges are interesting:

LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: We, of course, as you know, fitted in to Mr Dacre's timetable....  We WILL find some short period of time for this to be the subject of further evidence and we shall do that this week. And there it is.
MR CAPLAN: Sir, I obviously will have to make enquiries of --
LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Yes.
MR CAPLAN: I have no idea of Mr Dacre's whereabouts.
LORD JUSTICE LEVESON: Mr Caplan, I'm very sorry. I know that Mr Dacre is busy. We have worked very hard to fit ourselves around his commitments. I cannot believe that in the next three days it is not possible to find a few minutes. We shall fit ourselves around him to such extent as we can but I beg you not to ask me to go further. 

(for more, see The Motorman Files and Dacre's Dilemma)

9th February 2012
Required to give that encore appearance (and clearly there grudgingly), yet another Dacre robust defence was prompted re Grant's "mendacious smears" - and a testy 11 page Supplemental Statement.



14th June 2012
ANL's counsel wrote to the Inquiry and, arguably, reneged on the consensus understood to be have been reached that the Motorman files demonstrated prima facie offences by press journalists.

18th June 2012
The Mail splashed its story alleging that Leveson had threatened to resign, was stifling free speech, and had clashed with Michael Gove's right-minded defence of press liberty.


19th June 2012
A seeming Motorman-related Submission from ANL on 'Standard of Proof', challenging Lord Justice Leveson. (here)

In ANL’s submission the issues to be considered are as follows:
(1) Whether it is open to the Chairman to express concerns based on suspicion?
(2) If so, in what circumstances, including, whether the grounds giving rise to the suspicion must be reasonable grounds or whether a lower standard of proof is acceptable, having regard to the duty of fairness?
(3) Whether it is fair or appropriate when dealing with allegations of a criminal or quasi-criminal nature for the Chairman to state that he finds such allegations proved on the civil standard?

10th July 2012
Leveson's measured response, via written Ruling - addressed solely to ANL - was that he considered "it would not be appropriate to reach a conclusion about the Whittamore material that one of the most significant core participants (and one of the largest users of Mr Whittamore’s services) wished to challenge without deploying that evidence in public" (p8)  So, Leveson was being very clear that he could and would put selected Motorman evidence into the public domain. As just ANL were recanting, he was prepared to arrange that only Motorman files exclusively linked to ANL titles would be made public.  To reinforce the point, he was happy to order the necessary additional public Hearings in August.  It did not sound as though Leveson was making an empty threat.

13th July 2012
ANL backed down by apologising for any misunderstanding: "It was not our intention to resile from the position confirmed on a confidential basis to the Inquiry in December 2011." (see here)

Lord Justice Leveson and Mr Jay QC must have given sighs of relief.... prematurely.

20th July 2012
ANL Closing Submission, (p41)

ANL also remains concerned that one of the Assessors who will be assisting the Chairman in his task is the former chairman of the Media Standards Trust, whose proposals for regulation - opposed by ANL and other publishers - include a proposed regulatory "backstop"

23rd July 2012Future Directions Ruling (here).  Amongst other observations, Leveson returned to Operation Motorman.  One outstanding issue he identified was "concerning the attitude of Associated Newspapers Ltd to the evidence revealed in the documentation seized from the private detective Steve Whittamore."  He reported back publicly ANL's letter apologising for any misunderstanding on the Motorman evidence.  Leveson also reminded that Mr Sherborne (Counsel for Core Participant Victims) was in the process of collating information on journalists named in the Motorman files who were still in continuous employment with the relevant titles. This exercice was to determine if those journalists had been rewarded by promotion or had perhaps retained data obtained from Whittamore.  Once presented, Leveson required responses from the newspapers by 10th September.  at time of writing, only one of those responses has been made public on the Inquiry web site - from ANL.

7th Sept 2012
Two days before the deadline, ANL sent the Inquiry 'Witness Statement from ANL re Steve Whittamore data'.  It suggested that the Inquiry misunderstood the organic, perhaps haphazard, nature of working journalists collection and retention of people's personal data that they procured.  ANL considered it disproportionate to search for and collate this "low grade" personal information, failed to name any journalists, and said they did not realise that Leveson actually required a response to his request made to Dacre as the Inquiry team had omitted to remind them.

16th November 2012
Safely past the cut-off date which may have risked another Leveson admonishment, Dacre launched his 'Dodgy Dossier' fusillade. Obviously unused to not getting his own way, the 'Special Investigation' targeted Leveson's questionable associates, raising "disturbing questions"  of the "quasi-masonic nexus" of "an elite" of "People-Who-Know-Best". (Dossier here)

What could have provoked Dacre's itchy trigger finger?  Well, there is one thing left out of our timeline as we don't know the 'if' or 'when'.  It is a requirement that Lord Justice Leveson write, giving notice and inviting response, to anyone he intends to criticise in his Final Report.

Hmmmm.... could it be that Dacre's Mail have had a Section 13 letter from Lord Justice Leveson? 

Related Articles
Hackgate - Sue Akers' Swansong
Hackgate - "Newsdesk Here, Kelvin Speaking..."
Hackgate - Andre Baker - A Hackgate Footnote?
Hackgate - Ten To Watch For
Hackgate - Dear Surrey Police
Hackgate - The John Boyall Files

You can contact the author on Twitter @brown_moses or by email at brownmoses@gmail.com

Hackgate - Sue Akers' Swansong

The latest piece from my regular contributor.

Metropolitan Police Deputy Assistant Commissioner Sue Akers (Retired) has now delivered her FOURTH - and final - witness statement to the Leveson Inquiry.  Dated October 31st and 'taken as read', Akers' Hallowe'en missive updates Leveson, as promised, with current developments in the multiple MET investigations into phone and computer hacking, corruption of police and other public officials and so on.  No doubt with some sense of relief, she reminds the Leveson Inquiry

However, on 31 October 2012 I will be retiring from the MPS and will be handing over responsibility for Operations Weeting, Elveden, Tuleta and all related investigations to DAC Stephen Kavanagh. 

In her 15 page statement, Akers has much to say of interest and includes  (either explicitly or by omission) some developments in those intriguing 'related investigations' or  'sub-operations' are implied.

The MET continue to liaise closely with the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) on which charges are most appropriate and have the most chance of advancing successful prosecutions.  Both MET and CPS will be acutely aware that each and every one of their charging decisions, and indeed their liaison process, will come under intense public scrutiny given the criticisms and consequences of the 2006-7 Operation Caryatid investigation into phone hacking by the (NOTW) News of the World's Clive Goodman and Glenn Mulcaire. Neither MET or CPS can afford any more reputational damage or suspicions of lack of backbone in confronting alleged offences by the press. Unsurprisingly then, Akers reveals that both individual and CORPORATE charges are under consideration.

Operation Weeting:  She sets out the known charges brought so far against 7 former NOTW journalists and executives, plus one non-journalist - see CPS statement here, with a provisional trial date set for September 2013.  All eight are now on court bail.  Also, of  "the 17 arrested, six individuals have been released from police bail with no further action being taken. The remaining three individuals remain on police bail until November and December 2012. All three are on bail for offences relating to conspiracy to intercept communications."  The 1 non-journalist above plus another non-journalist are also awaiting charging decisions in relation to associated money laundering allegations.  Lastly, six others previously arrested under Weeting have been released from police bail with no further action to be taken.  Weeting sub-investigation, Operation Sacha, has so far resulted in seven individuals charged with conspiracy to pervert the course of justice: "A hearing for defendants’ applications to dismiss is scheduled for 12-13 December 2012."  One for the diary.

The large proportion of Weeting police resources which had to be devoted to notifying possible victims is almost complete. Those number contacted is at present c. 2,500.  The number of officers tasked is now being scaled back to 12, from a peak of 40.

Operation Elvedon:

...52 arrests consisting of 27 current or former journalists, six police officers, 12 current or former public officials and seven individuals who acted as conduits for corrupt payments. Files have been submitted to the CPS to advise on appropriate charges for three public officials and four journalists (current and former). One police officer has been charged with misconduct in public office and an offence under the Official Secrets Act 1989.

The misconduct charge of this last individual has been reported as being in connection with Operation Varec.

Elvedon charging decisions are now being considered under a range of offences:

• corruption under the 1906 Prevention of Corruption Act
• conspiracy to corrupt
• misconduct in a public office
• conspiracy to commit misconduct in a public office
• aiding and abetting misconduct in a public office
• money laundering contrary to s328 Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 
• bribery contrary to Section 1 Bribery Act 2010

The last is intriguing - it means offences being considered must therefore include allegations which post-date 2010.

Kelvin Mackenzie, amongst others, may belatedly realise that not all of the offences being considered jointly by MET and CPS have a public interest defence. Whilst re-acquainting themselves with the law, Kelvin and his ilk should note that the CPS have overhauled their guidance on what may be held to constitute 'public interest' in evaluating potential charges (see here) and provided a very handy guide to 'Criminal Offences Most Likely To Apply To Be Committed In Cases Affecting The Media', with maximum penalties spelt out clearly.

Akers states that Operation Elvedon is pursuing evidence realting to News International, Daily Mirror, Sunday Mirror, Daily Star and Sunday Star.  Express Newsgroup seem to be more amenable to MET investigation than Trinity Mirror does.

Operation Tuleta:

is conducting an assessment of 142 complaints of data intrusion, including allegations of phone hacking, computer hacking and improper access to banking, medical and other personal records... a vast quantity of data across 70 storage devices is being searched for evidence to support or contradict allegations made... MPS counter corruption databases and relevant HOLMES databases are also being searched. 

Counter-corruption databases?  Must be some joined up thinking going on.  Seventeen individuals have so far been arrested, plus one interviewed under caution on suspicion of offences re the Computer Misuse Act, handling stolen goods (alleged to be mobile phones), and/or perverting the course of justice.

And that's it for Tuleta....  A screechingly abrupt halt on page 10.

But sharp-eyed readers will remember that Sue Akers submitted a 15 page witness statement.  That's easily explained - page 11 REDACTED,  page 12 REDACTED, page 13 REDACTED, page 14 REDACTED, and page 15 REDACTED.

So, presumably for operational reasons and ongoing enquiries, Tuleta's sub-operation Kalmyk is off-limits (for background see here). As are any speculative links to any other past police investigations.


So it's hello to Steve and so long to Sue....

Enjoy your retirement, DAC Akers - "Thank You & Goodbye".


Related Articles
Hackgate - "Newsdesk Here, Kelvin Speaking..."
Hackgate - Andre Baker - A Hackgate Footnote?
Hackgate - Ten To Watch For
Hackgate - Dear Surrey Police
Hackgate - The John Boyall Files
One Rogue Email And The Indestructible Archive  


You can contact the author on Twitter @brown_moses or by email at brownmoses@gmail.com

Hackgate - Ten To Watch For

The latest piece from My Regular Contributor, looking at ten things to watch for in the ongoing Hackgate saga

1  Hole-in-the-Wall:  Steve Coogan told the Leveson Inquiry how the minutiae of his life was intruded on by Glenn Mulcaire.  Coogan was shown Mulcaire's notes (p14):

I saw a redacted copy, which had information about money I'd withdrawn from a cash machine,...the precise amount of money I'd withdrawn from a cash machine, which would suggest someone was looking over my shoulder when I was doing it.

Shoulder-surfing is only one explanation. A case cited in the 2008 Serious Organised Crime Agency report ('The Rogue Element of the Private Investigation Industry') is clearly Glenn Mulcaire. Following a description of his modus operandi, is this curiosity (p5, SOCA 2008):

The investigator also managed to intercept the landline of an Automated Telling Machine at a local shop to distance himself from his calls to the voicemail boxes.

Mulcaire is known as a former footballer, not telecomms technician.  Did he have that expertise himself?  Or was technical expertise recruited from amongst a wider private investigator network?  What kinds of ATM info interception were feasible?

2  Tracking: UK parent company of News International, News Group Newspapers (NGN), does not dispute that it commissioned Derek Webb to do surveillance on targets for stories.  Ex-policeman Webb was variously designated as private investigator / freelance journalist depending on when it was considered politic for him to hold an NUJ card.  But NGN has also admitted (p8 para 31, Admission of Facts) that information, unlawfully obtained by its own journalists from Mulcaire, was used to enable un-named "private investigators employed by News of the World to monitor, locate and track individuals to place them under surveillance."  It will be interesting to know what tracking and surveillance technology was deployed, and by whom.

3  Safety First: And on the subject of security technology, this small nugget from Mary-Ellen Field's evidence to Leveson is intriguing - the last time she ever spoke to celebrity client Elle McPherson after acrimoniously parting company:

I received a call out-of-the-blue from Elle asking me who the security people were who checked her house, office and car.  Elle did not explain why she wanted this information -- however I provided it to her.  It occurs to me now that it is likely that she needed that information following contact from the police in relation to phone hacking, having arrested Mulcaire.  I know now that Clive Goodman's column in the NOTW was cancelled the previous week.

If accurate, it is interesting to note police interest in how celebrities are willing to pay elite private security companies to safeguard their privacy.  For example, one such specialist company - Brookmans International - were very supportive in providing protection and security technology to Kerry Katona. Sadly, their best efforts did not prevent stories about Katona's private life appearing in newspapers.

4  Still on the topic of technology:  Operation Tuleta will soon be back in the news as awaited charging decisions are due.  The ongoing Operation Tuleta investigation includes Operation Kalmyk, focusing on alleged computer hacking related to Northern Ireland.  Outgoing MET DAC Sue Akers was asked about computer hacking at her final appearance before the Home Affairs Select Committee in early September

Q You mentioned computer hacking in the course of your remarks. What can you tell us about the progress of investigations on that, please?
Akers: It is difficult for me to go into any detail, obviously, because it is an ongoing investigation, but there are seven people who are on bail in relation to computer hacking.
Q  I know it is difficult for you but are you able to tell us generally what the nature of the allegation is in those cases, the general character?
Akers: You will have seen, maybe, the Panorama programme. There are inquiries in connection with that. It is difficult for me to go into much more detail.
Q  Are you able to say anything about the characteristics of the seven people who are under investigation, what category they might fall into?
Akers: I suppose the general category you would say is private investigator, some of them ex-police.
Q  Are there files with the CPS in relation to those matters or not?
Akers: Yes.

5  Weeting: There are still charging decisions outstanding under Operation Weeting.  Eight have already been charged:  Rebekah Brooks, Andrew Coulson, Stuart Kuttner, Glenn Mulcaire, Greg Miskiw, Ian Edmondson, Neville Thurlbeck and James Weatherup.  However the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) Principal Legal Advisor announced at the same time that three others arrested would have no further action taken and

There are two suspects in relation to whom the police have asked me to defer making a decision whilst further enquiries are made. For this reason I do not intend to give their names or say anything further about them at this stage.

6  Andy Coulson - is still waiting for his Appeal over News Group Newspapers refusal to pay his legal fees.  In essence, Coulson argues NGN are contractually obliged tp pay his legal costs accrued as a result of his time in employment at NGN, whilst they argue their contractual obligation does not apply to illegal acts he may have undertaken. At the time of his unsuccessful hearing in December 2011, Coulson had been arrested by both Operation Weeting and Operation Elvedon.  Since then he has additionally been arrested once more (Operation Rubicon) and charged twice (Operation Rubicon and Operation Weeting).  Coulson is therefore clocking up massive legal fees for which he is, pending Appeal, personally liable.  The Appeal Hearing should be instructive.

7  DCI April Casburn - suspended from her MET job in Counter Terrorism Command (Specialist Operations), is due back in court, at the Old Bailey on November 2nd.  She is charged with offences which include an alleged offer to supply News International with insider information on Operation Varec - a sub-investigation of Operation Weeting.  Arguably the most significant aspect of Casburn's Old Bailey appearance is that she "must enter a plea to the charge"  - the first defendant to do so since the News of the World scandal erupted.

8 ICO:  There may be more charges to come, but this time by the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO).  Asked about the future sequence of events which might, in time, signal the closing stages of Hackgate, DAC Akers told the Home Affairs Select Committee that it would be necessary to involve the ICO in charges to be laid.  The ICO has its own powers to take action in relation to the Data Protection Act, in addition to any police/CPS prosecutions -

the Information Commissioner must get involved where there is not quite such serious criminality but, nonetheless, there are breaches of privacy.

Given the criticism of the ICO's failure to achieve convictions under Operation Motorman, they would doubtless be glad of the opportunity to take action on data protection offences.  And who is to say that potential prosecutions might not result, belatedly, from Operation Motorman itself?

9  Will Hackgate spread further?  Possibly

Home Affairs Select Committee  Q49 Mr Winnick: In your evidence to the Leveson inquiry, you said that Trinity Mirror, News International and Express Newspapers were being investigated for corrupt payments to officials. That is what you said?
Sue Akers: Yes.
Q50 Mr Winnick: Are there other organisations now involved in the investigation, apart from those?
Sue Akers: Those are the organisations that I have said publicly, and I think I should not go any further than what is in the public domain.
Q51 Mr Winnick: When you say you do not want to go any further, I do not want to press you when you consider that it would be inappropriate, Deputy Assistant Commissioner, but you have mentioned companies already to the Leveson inquiry. You are saying, in effect, if I understand you, that there are other companies but for some reason you do not want to mention them today.
Sue Akers: I am certainly not ready to say anything in the way that I did about the Mirror Group and the Express Group because our investigation is still continuing.
Mr Winnick: If that is the position, I will not press you further. Thank you.

10  Sue Akers' replacement - is MET Deputy Assistant Commissioner Steve Kavanagh, so his name will become familiar to Hackgate watchers.  His face may already be familiar from his press conferences during the London riots in 2011.  There is already one Hackgate gig awaiting him at the Leveson Inquiry. In addressing Future Directions, Leveson said

As I have just made clear to DAC Akers, it is important that my report is based on what is then the most up to date information about the progress of the criminal investigation.... I make clear that I will issue another request under s. 21 of the Inquiries Act 2005... Notice of a hearing will be provided in good time to all core participants to Modules 1 and 2 

Unless Lord Justice Leveson decides to accept a substitute written statement, Steve Kavanagh could be back in front of the cameras soon in Court 73.

So, plenty still to watch out for....

Related Articles
Hackgate - Dear Surrey Police
Hackgate - The John Boyall Files
One Rogue Email And The Indestructible Archive 
John Yates And Neil Wallis - A Mutual Understanding
Alex Marunchak - Presumed Innocent

You can contact the author on Twitter @brown_moses or by email at brownmoses@gmail.com