Mayor Boris And The Met Payoffs

The latest from my regular contributor.

There was an interesting short exchange at the Public Accounts Select Committee on 3rd July. The subject under discussion was 'Confidentiality Clauses and Special Severance Payments' - primarily NHS executives' compromise agreements - a.k.a. unpopular large payoffs at public expense.

In amongst questioning there was that little something Hackgate-related, between Margaret Hodge (Chair) and Sharon White, (Director General, Public Services, HM Treasury):

Q123 Chair: Can I emphasise that this is not just the Department of Health? Paul Stephenson, the former commissioner who left because of his relationship and links with the News of the World, got over £176,000 after he’d signed an agreement. John Yates also left after the phone hacking scandal; he got £86,000 on top of his £120,000 salary. It is not just NHS oversight. You will have signed those off.

Sharon White: I don’t know the detail of the cases but there is a general point for the Treasury to take back on the basis of this discussion which is whether and how we might have a system that is more- 

Q124 Chair: I tell you what astounds us, which is why you are getting uniform shock around the table: these are high-profile cases we are talking about. These are not cases where it could well be that Paula Diggle or her officials in the Treasury would not have heard of them. Morecambe Bay is high profile. North Staffs is high profile. The Met Police and phone hacking is high profile. Yet somehow they get signed off through the Treasury. 

Sharon White: In the case of the police, this is not part of our approval process. We would not have signed off those individual cases.

So who DID sign Stephenson's and Yates' payments off? What criteria were used to decide and calculate payments over and above their voluntary resignations? What were the terms and conditions of the relevant compromise agreements? What was the quantum of confidentiality clauses/payments? And why?

Somebody needs to ask similar questions about those settlements as were asked about Gordon Taylor, Clive Goodman, Glenn Mulcaire and Andy Coulson.

The Metropolitan Police Service (MET or MPS) Management Board or Human Resources couldn't conceivably made the Stephenson/Yates agreements without referring them to the very top for approval. Presumably then, they were signed off by the Metropolitan Police Authority (MPA), now known as the Mayor's Office for Policing and Crime (MOPAC). Although to be absolutely fair to the MPA - responsible for scrutiny of MET spending - they didn't know when the MET had spent millions on a fleet of secret aircraft (here).  But the buck now stops with Boris Johnson:

The Deputy Mayor will discharge the vast majority of MOPAC’s duties however the Mayor remains responsible for issuing his Police and Crime Plan, and for the appointment and removal of senior Metropolitan police officers." "...the role of Deputy Mayor for Policing and Crime (DMPC) in London is analogous to that of an elected Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) elsewhere. Although not directly elected, once the Mayor as occupant of MOPAC delegates his authority, the DMPC has all other powers and duties of a PCC.

Prior to Jan 2012, whilst Stephenson and Yates' severance payments were negotiated and approved, the Chair of MPA was Kit Malthouse. It is apparent from Malthouse's evidence to the Leveson Inquiry that he liaised with Boris very closely on appropriate mayoral responses to the News International scandal.

The Telegraph reported:

The London Mayor's deputy for policing, Kit Malthouse, was informed on Sep 10, 2010 that Scotland Yard detectives were looking into new claims made in a New York Times article." Five days later, when asked about phone hacking at Mayor's Question time, Boris Johnson said: "I am almost in continuous conversations with my deputy mayor for policing (Mr Malthouse) about this and other matters. It would be fair to say that he and I have discussed this. The conclusion of our conversation would be obvious from what I have said.... In other words, this is a load of codswallop cooked up by the Labour Party and that we do not intend to get involved with it.

There was apparently at least one accidentally undeclared meeting between Boris and Rupert Murdoch in 2011, and his continuing support for beleaguered News Corp was evidenced by Boris hosting Rupert & Wendi Murdoch's VIP visit to the 2012 Olympics.

It has also been reported that Boris recently accepted an invite to dinner at Murdoch's London home. This drew some criticism as "Johnson also has ultimate, but not operational, responsibility for the Metropolitan Police, the force investigating phone hacking by Murdoch's News of the World and alleged corrupt payments made by Sun journalists.

HOME AFFAIRS SELECT COMMITTEE
Fortunately the Home Affairs Select Committee can, if it chooses, ask Boris more about the huge Stephenson/Yates compromise payments when Boris appears before them next Tuesday afternoon, 9th July:

3.15 pm Wilson Room, Portcullis HouseSir Bernard Hogan-Howe, Metropolitan Police Commissioner
4.15pmBoris Johnson, Mayor of London

Committee Chairman Rt Hon Keith Vaz MP said:

Public confidence in policing in London has been rocked by the devastating revelations that undercover police officers sought to gather information on the Lawrence family in the wake of Stephen Lawrence’s murder. The Committee will ask the Commissioner at what level this decision was taken, and why this information was withheld from the subsequent Macpherson inquiry.
The Committee also welcomes the first opportunity it has had to quiz the Mayor of London since he took office in 2008. It plans to seek his views on how public confidence can be rebuilt...

Keith Vaz sounds as though he is enthusiastic about Boris's first HASC appearance, though it is not known if any questions will be asked about former head of MPA Kit Malthouse - of whom MET Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick told the Leveson Inquiry (pp37-38 here):

I'm conscious that Sir Paul (Stephenson) made mention in his evidence of the conversations that he was having -- I didn't know he was having, actually -- with our then chair of our authority around the phone hacking investigation, Operation Weeting, in the early part of this year -- sorry, early part of 2011. You'll be aware that I was the management board member for that, and the line manager for Ms Akers. On a couple of occasions, Mr Malthouse, I thought jokingly, said to me: "I hope you're not putting too many resources into this, Cressida", and on the third occasion, when he said it again, I said, "Well, that's my decision and not yours, and that's why I'm operationally independent

That operational independence might come under further scrutiny on Tuesday as AC Cressida Dick too has been called before HASC

Tuesday 9 July 2013, Wilson Room, Portcullis HouseAt 2.45pm Cressida Dick, Assistant Commissioner, Metropolitan Police
Commander Neil Basu, Metropolitan Police

Committee Chairman Rt Hon Keith Vaz MP said: 

It has been several months since the Committee last received an update from the Met on its hacking investigations – Operations Weeting, Elveden and Tuleta have collectively been going for more than six years and cost the taxpayer more than £20 million. We intend to explore progress on these operations and ask when they might reach a conclusion. We will also seek a response from the Met on Rupert Murdoch’s claim that the police have been “incompetent”. Furthermore, we plan to inquire about the Met’s role in investigating hacking by private investigators outside of the newspaper industry, following up on evidence the Committee took from the Serious Organised Crime Agency earlier this week.

The MET Commissioner, Mayor Boris, AC Dick, Weeting, Elveden, Tuleta, the secret Murdoch/Sun recording....

Looks like Tuesday afternoon could be action-packed for Hackgate watchers if HASC only ask the right questions - and get some answers.

Related Articles
Project Riverside And The SOCA Report
All Rise - Justice Saunders At Southwark
The Met - Red Flags And Red Tops
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?

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

Elveden - Murdoch's Catch 22

From my regular contributor.

A new investigative strand has opened up in Operation Weeting. Charging decisions from the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) are beginning to roll in Operation Elveden.

It's an opportune time to take stock, reflect on what may be happening with Hackgate, and posit some emerging patterns.

Weeting (phone hacking) arrests and charges have a tendency to be linked in marked clusters. Groups of those arrested or charged tend towards a cluster of accused, with alleged illegalities enabling and functioning around a single 'private investigator'. Three examples - 

• Operation Weeting charges (July 2012) 
• Operation Sacha (sub-investigation of Weeting) charges of conspiracy/perverting the course of justice (May 2012) 
• Operation Weeting arrests (February 2013), the new investigatory strand. Significantly this cluster - NOTW Features rather than News- may relate to a different and as yet unidentified 'private investigator' 

Each relates to alleged offences at the News of the World (NOTW) - even where those identified previously or subsequently worked at other titles.

But Operation Elvedon is very different.

• It is the only hackgate Metropolitan Police (MET) operation supervised by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPPC). An operation 'supervised' by the IPCC is not freestanding or completely independent. Neither is it 'managed' closely by the IPCC. It is lower level and pretty much hands-off - where the investigation is "carried out by police Professional Standards Departments under their own direction and control. The IPCC will set the terms of reference and receive the investigation report when it is complete." (IPCC) 
• Elveden arrests and charges, as yet, do not cluster in the same way as Weeting. Its charateristic pattern tends to a single police/prison service/ public official allegedly leaking confidential information to one or more press contacts - whether for money or not. Here are two examples where it is accepted no payment was involved: one conviction, and one recent arrest. 
• Elveden charges of police/public officials are to date 'Misconduct in Public Office' or conspiracy to same. The issue at the heart of a misconduct offence is the public trust - NOT whether payment was offered, paid or accepted. There is however a whistleblower-type, public interest defence on motivation if the accused can demonstrate they had 'reasonable excuse or justification' (Misconduct in Public Office). Misconduct offences can carry more severe penalties than Weeting conspiracy to intercept voicemails, up to and including life imprisonment. 
• Elveden arrests and charges also include instances where payment IS alleged. For example, £6450 specified (here), £3350 (here), and £1750 (here). We don't know if these are selective, specimen charges and whether, hypothetically, there are other instances to remain unprosecuted where sensitive confidential information was leaked. Now then, now then - speculation is neither use nor ornament. 
• Weeting largely Involves the defunct NOTW but Operation Elveden applies mainly (but not exclusively) to the Sun. With the exception of a selected senior few, arrested NOTW employees are getting no support from News International for legal defence. Conversely, arrested Sun employees are having their legal costs paid by News Int. 

The very specific amounts noted in some charges are enlightening. They indicate MET/CPS/IPCC confidence in their evidence that must therefore include specific audit trail. In each case, the information leading to arrest is acknowledged to have come from News Corporation's contraversial Management and Standards Committee. Much of that evidence provided by the MSC comprises the mammoth Datapool 3 email archive. Despite court order, News International were forced to make "limited admission” that senior managers tried to conceal the voice-mail interception scandal from police by destroying e-mail archives...new searches that could reveal more damaging evidence before a trial... "They are to be treated as deliberate destroyers of evidence,” Vos J said of London-based News International at the hearing." Further "secret e-mails were disclosed in December by Paul Cheesbrough, News International’s chief information officer since 2010...The names of the people who sent and received the messages are secret because of the ongoing police probe....News International spokeswoman Daisy Dunlop declined to comment on the computer searches."

Paul Cheesbrough was later promoted from News Int to a more senior role working for News Corp, as was Daisy Dunlop, and MSC member Will Lewis - so some key News Int personnel being defensively withdrawn from Wapping stateside to News Corp. 

From the sustained efforts put into its attempted destruction, it seems clear the Datapool 3 emails (see here) are the ticking 'bombs under the newsroom floor'.  Most of the Elveden case-building is reliant on Datapool 3 as admissible evidence.  If one case falls then the others may fall over like dominoes - it could be argued the stakes are far higher in defending Elveden than Weeting.  Paying legal costs for arrested Sun journalists may be an altruistic drain on News Int's bottom line, but it does mean accusations of 'conflict of interest' have been levelled: 'Arrested Sun journalists are between a rock and a hard place'.  What Rupert Murdoch fears most is both UK and US authorities making further inroads into prosecuting corporate charges (Telegraph).

UK corporate charges were first announced as a possibility by Sue Akers in evidence to the Leveson Inquiry.  Home Secretary Theresa May also confirmed US investigations in her evidence (Exhibit TM-1):

FBI Department of Justice - (are) conducting an investigation into allegations that News Corporation tried to hack into mobile phones of 9/11 victims and claims that Murdoch publications paid inducements to police officers and others.  News Corporation, a US company which trades in the US stock exchange as a parent company, can be liable for the acts of foreign subsidiary companies (News International/News of the World etc).

The MSC has proved very, very expensive to the parent company, News Corp.  However, the MSC is necessary for News Corp to demonstrate voluntary cooperation with police investigations.  The only way for Rupert Murdoch to mitigate possible US offences under (FCPA) Foreign Corrupt Practices Act or (RICO) Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act is to be seen to be cooperating with investigations - hence the MSC.  Yet there are clear signals of a sea change in MSC cooperation from May 2012 (see here).  In addition, News Int is pulling up the drawbridge on its out-of-court settlement scheme for victims. It will cease on April 8th.


The logical imperative for News Int is to defend Elveden aggressively through pre-trial legal argument, objections on admissibility of evidence, case and plea management strategies and so on.  Each and every trial holds the prospect of more and more evidence emerging of illegal modus operandi.  For News Corp the priority is the necessity of continuing a gesture of voluntary cooperation. Murdoch has to orchestrate a delicate game of keeping everyone on side and playing conflicting loyalties - police, courts, US authorities, plus employees who may be under pressure to implicate senior executives.

The upshot is the internecine spectacle of News international paying millions to defend against evidence provided by News Corporation - with Sun journalists as mere collateral damage.


Related Articles
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
Hackgate - "Newsdesk Here, Kelvin Speaking..."
Hackgate - Andre Baker - A Hackgate Footnote?
Hackgate - Ten To Watch For

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

"Snakes And Ladders" At The Met

The latest from my regular contributor.

At her final appearance before the HASC - Home Affairs Select Committee - (4th September 2012), Sue Akers was asked how the three main Hackgate investigations were organised and what was the chain of command:

- Q54 Michael Ellis: "What about the rank of the officers involved? Do you have a number of officers of senior rank or are most of them detective constables and sergeants? Can you say something about that?"
- Sue Akers: "Yes, I can. I have a detective superintendent in charge of each strand, so there are three of those, one dealing with the phone hacking, one dealing with corrupt payments and one dealing with the Tuleta offences. They each have a detective chief inspector and a small number of detective inspectors." [The witness later clarified: Operation Tuleta does not have a DCI - only Weeting and Elveden]  The rest are sergeants, constables and a fair number of police staff... I have a detective chief superintendent who oversees or hovers above all three of the detective superintendents."
- Q55 Michael Ellis: "So he is your deputy, is he, a detective chief superintendent?"
- Sue Akers: "He is my deputy."

As well as these details of her team subordinates, HASC showed an understandable interest in MET arrangements for replacing Akers when she retired in October 2012:

- Q82 Chair: "Who will take over? Who will take your job?"
- Sue Akers: "Another ACPO officer has been identified and he will-"
- Chair: "Sorry, who is that?"
- Sue Akers: "DAC Steve Kavanagh."
- Q83 Chair: "Where is he at the moment?"
- Sue Akers: "At the moment he is in territorial policing but will-"
- Chair: "So he is at the Met at the moment, is he?"
- Sue Akers: "Yes, but he will be moving to a position where he is able to oversee...we will be moving towards case building and trials, and there will be no need for the amount of scrutiny and oversight that I have had to put in"

Giving evidence to the Leveson Inquiry (p3 6th February 2012), she was also asked about chain of command upwards:

- MR JAY:  "Owing to the size of these operations -- and you're going to tell us in a minute the number of staff who are dedicated to each of them -- your role is one of oversight."
- A.  "Yes."
- Q.  "And you report to the Deputy Commissioner?"
- A.  "My -- who I report who has changed.  I started by reporting to the Assistant Commissioner.  Then, when we had a change at the top, I reported to the Acting Deputy Commissioner, and then another Deputy Commissioner and now an Assistant Commissioner again."
 - Q.  "Of course"

Robert Jay's understated response "Of course" quietly underlined the seismic changes at the top of the MET as a result of the phone hacking scandal.  Chief of these were the resignations of the Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson and Assistant Commissioner John Yates.  In addition to high profile resignations, the MET has undergone senior management restructuring too during this period. Small wonder then that HASC showed concern:

- Q81 Chair: "You have a huge amount of expertise in this. Who is going to take over? We clearly do not want somebody absolutely new who does not know what is going on."

From this evidence above, the chain of command was fairly clear.  For the three main Operations (Weeting, Elveden and Tuleta), there are a number of constables, sergeants, detective inspectors, detective chief inspectors and detective superintendents. Then at senior level, a designated Detective Chief Superintendent oversees all three investigations.  He reports to a Deputy Assistant Commissioner, who in turn reports to an Assistant Commissioner.

So who are these three key senior officers?  And what IS their familiarity with Hackgate?

THE DETECTIVE CHIEF SUPERINTENDENT - GORDON BRIGGS

The first conviction of Hackgate was on 10th January 2013.  Detective Chief Inspector April Casburn, a serving MET police officer in Counter Terrorism Specialist Operations (SO15) was found guilty of misconduct in public office (see here for background).  BRIGGS was the public face of the MET response to Casburn's guilty verdict.  He faced a throng of print press, broadcast news, and freelance photographers. (video).  From the Guardian

Det Chief Supt Gordon Briggs, who oversees Operations Weeting, Elveden and Tuleta, said: "It is a great disappointment that a detective chief inspector in the counterterrorism command should have abused her position in this way. There's no place for corrupt officers or staff in the Metropolitan police service... In this case DCI Casburn approached the News of the World, the very newspaper being investigated, to make money.

January 25th 2012, BRIGGS wrote to the Culture, Media and Sport Select Committee (CMS) as deputy to Sue Akers. He politely and firmly declined to provide CMS Chair, John Whittingdale, with required information as "To disclose the names of such individuals would require us to disclose private information concerning third parties without their consent."  Whittingdale had requested the names of all MPs and peers thought to have been hacked by the News of the World. (here)  The impasse was later resolved by CMS member Tom Watson MP negotiating with Sue Akers for the numbers of MPs and peers, without disclosure of individual names.

Further back in September 2010 (and coincidentally at the same time as Casburn's leak) NOTW was making news for other reasons:  "Two people have been found guilty of trying to sell an 11-month-old girl as a slave. A 48-year-old man and 29-year-old woman, from north-east London, were exposed offering the child in return for £35,000 in a News of the World sting...with an undercover reporter from the paper."  On their conviction BRIGGS, then heading MET child abuse investigations (here) said

This was an appalling case where individuals have attempted to sell a vulnerable child for their own personal gain and with no consideration whatsoever for her safety and future. We thank the News of the World for bringing this case to our attention and we are indebted to our partners in Newham social services who joined us in a fast-moving operation to recover the victim and remove her to safety.

Even further back, in 2004, BRIGGS attended senior Management Board meetings in his then capacity as Staff Officer to MET Deputy Commissioner/Acting Commissioner Sir Ian Blair. Also present was Commander Andre Baker (see here).

THE DEPUTY ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER - STEVE KAVANAGH 

September 2010 was an challenging month for Steve KAVANAGH at the MET. On September 1st, the New York Times published its exposé on phone hacking - triggering yet more criticism of MET refusal to re-open the investigation. 6th September, under intense public pressure, John Yates, Assistant Commissioner Specialist Operations (ACSO) launched a scoping investigation into the New York Times claims. It was designated as Operation Varec. "John Yates (JY) explained that he wished to maintain the lead for phone hacking within SO (Specialist Operations)." Yates would therefore command 'Gold Group' oversight for Varec. Designated lead at "Silver Group' level for Varec was Commander Steve KAVANAGH.

The first Gold Group operations meeting was the next day, September 10th 2010.  It was some of the information discussed at this meeting which Casburn subsequently leaked to News of the World. Casburn was Detective Chief Inspector in SO15 (Counter Terrorism, Specialist Operations) - Counter Terrorism Command was headed by Steve KAVANAGH (see here).  A week later on September 17th, another substantive Varec Gold Group meeting was called, and later the same day, the MET were alerted to a potential terrorist plot just prior to the Pope's visit to London (p12 here):

At 0317 Commander Steven Kavanagh (a rank equivalent to Assistant Chief Constable in other police forces) was briefed. He reviewed and approved the plans for arrest... At 0340 the options were reviewed at a Gold Group meeting chaired by Assistant Commissioner for Special Operations (ACSO) John Yates.  As ACSO, Mr Yates is responsible for SO15...

In January 2011 Operation Weeting began.  The investigation was taken out of Yates' command, arguably to distance it from criticism and placed instead in the Special Crime Directorate under Sue Akers. 

KAVANAGH'S  hard work paid off as in March 2011 he climbed the ladder and gained promotion to Deputy Assistant Commissioner (here and p3 organisation chart):

...with John Yates, Acting Deputy Metropolitan Police Commissioner, and Catherine Crawford, MPA Chief Executive, acting as advisers to the panel... Acting Deputy Commissioner John Yates, said: 'I´m extremely pleased that two such strong candidates have been successful at the board.' 

One of DAC KAVANAGH'S first duties was to deputise for Yates at a House of Commons Select Committee.  (column 8)

By July 2010 however, the MET was suffering severe reputational damage over its handling of the NOTW scandal. On July 17th Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson stepped down, the following day John Yates resigned too.  DAC KAVANAGH soon faced an even bigger challenge - coordinating the MET's operational response to the London summer riots.  Meanwhile, Operations Weeting, Elveden and Tuleta gathered pace under Sue Akers.

THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER - MARK ROWLEY

Police in-house magazine 'The Job' saw a need to help the confused. (p6 The Job April 2012)

Over the past year, there’s been a lot of reorganisation at the top of the Met. We have a new Commissioner and Deputy Commissioner, and two new Assistant Commissioners. It can be hard to keep track, so here's a chart of who's doing what.....

Akers is shown directly reporting to Assistant Commissioner Mark ROWLEY, Specialist Crime and Operations.  ROWLEY was appointed MET Assistant Commissioner in December 2011.  Prior to this, ROWLEY was Chief Constable of Surrey Police.  Before leaving Surrey, ROWLEY had had to admit on behalf of Surrey Police to the Home Affairs Select Committee that Surrey Police had known about the NOTW hacking of Milly Dowler's phone when it had happened in 2002. (Daily Mail) He was appointed Chief Constable of Surrey Police in 2008, succeeding Bob Quick.  ROWLEY'S Deputy Chief Constable was Craig Denholm.  At time of writing, Denholm is still being investigated for his alleged failure to act on his knowledge of the Dowler hacking for almost a decade.(Guardian)

The resulting IPCC Report is due shortly, though may be in redacted form so as not to prejudice ongoing trials.  Interestingly, ROWLEY had first joined Surrey Police in 2002 as Chief Superintendent, and subsequently was Senior Investigating Officer for 5 years of Operation Ruby - the investigation into the murder of Milly Dowler. It is not known whether or not Denholm informed ROWLEY on his knowledge of the Dowler hacking.

[UPDATE: Brown Moses added this pertinent 2011 observation in the Guardian from 2011]

If hacking's the problem, the Met has hired the right man... The last Met commissioner headed for the exit. Still, others survive and thrive. And that includes Mark Rowley, former chief constable of Surrey, now reborn as an assistant commissioner at the Met. Rowley headed Surrey's investigation into the murder of Milly Dowler [He took overall command for the investigation in 2006]. The News of the World first 'fessed up to hacking Milly's phone that same year. What happened next? Not much. Rowley quite reasonably told MPs no hacking investigation occurred because the murder itself was a priority. Still, it does have the potential to embarrass. Because if you looked at his official biog in July, it revealed that 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". Appraised of the facts, he would have realised that what the News of the World was doing wasn't legal. By the time of his move to the Met last month, his Surrey biog had been redrafted. By then, there was no reference to his telephony expertise at all.

(Hugh Muir, Guardian)

It must be difficult for the MET, from its small pool of senior officers, to identify an investigation command structure which might offer a clean break from any Hackgate baggage.  Which is why it is surprising to see yet another shift since Akers' retirement.  Tracing labyrinthine MET re-structurings is tortuous,but Operations Weeting, Elveden and Tuleta -together with DAC KAVANAGH - seem to have migrated back to Special Operations reporting to Yates' successor Assistant Commissioner Cressida Dick.  (Dec 2012 organisation chart here)

Past criticisms of the original phone hacking investigation questioned the wisdom of homing it with counter-terrorism, royal protection and so on.  Given the controversial and compromised history of Specialist Operations re the 2006 Goodman/Mulcaire Operation Caryatid, failures to notify victims, Yates "crap" cursory re-visit of 2009, Operation Varec leaks to the press etc  it's curious to find these high profile investigations right back where they started.


Related Articles
Hackgate - April Casburn's Conviction - Myths And Misconceptions
Hackgate - Varec Revisited - Dissent In The Ranks
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

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