Order No. S / 0906
IN THE CENTRAL CRIMINAL COURT
Old Bailey,
Thursday, 23rd September 1993
BEFORE:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BLOFELD
- v -
MICHAEL SMITH
_____________
MR D. SPENCER Q.C. (Solicitor General)
MR J. NUTTING and MR J. KELSEY-FRY
appeared on behalf of the prosecution.
MR R. TANSEY Q.C. and MR G. SUMMERS
appeared on behalf of the defendant.
_____________
Transcript of the
palantype notes of D.L. Sellers
(Official Shorthand
Writers to the Court)
CROSS-EXAMINATION OF
MRS C
Thursday, 23rd
September 1993
MRS. “C” continued
Cross-examined by Mr. Tansey
MR TANSEY: Mrs C, when you gave your evidence, were you trying to be fair and
impartial?
MRS C: Yes, I hope I was. I mean that was certainly my intention.
MR TANSEY: I ask you this, so far as Oporto is concerned, and you say that these
crosses which we can see or have seen -- I think you and I have looked at them
quite often but the jury very recently.
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: These crosses are what?
MRS C: I have said they could be interpreted -- could be interpreted.
MR TANSEY: Right. Have you considered the possibility that they could be in
themselves totally innocent?
MRS C: Yes, yes.
MR TANSEY: When you went to
MRS C: I think so. I visited those sites. I have looked to see whether there
might be something there that would be of interest to a tourist, perhaps -- and
apart from one of them I could see nothing. They were streets in which there
were offices, shops, cafes, nothing of immediate tourist interest. I am simply
saying that this could be interpreted in that way. There may be other
explanations.
MR TANSEY: Because the three crosses in question that we find -- the top part if
I can describe it that way -- you accept, do you, that they in fact are bus
stops?
MRS C: Yes, there are bus stops on those sites, yes.
MR TANSEY: You have not told us much if anything about page 3 of this bundle.
MRS C: Which is?
MR TANSEY: Sorry the map of the Parque de Campismo da Prelada.
MRS C: Oh, the camp site.
MR TANSEY: It is exhibit 46, sorry.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: As we look at it, we can see at the top in various languages
“Welcome” and the Parque de Campismo da Prelada.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: This is the camp site?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: A significant camp site?
MRS C: Yes, I visited there. I went there.
MR TANSEY: It is a large camp site, is it not?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: It is about, would you agree, 5-6 kms from the camp site to the town
centre?
MRS C: I would think about that. I mean, I didn’t measure it, but it’s that sort
of - it’s on the outskirts of
MR TANSEY: For example, if you take a taxi from the camp site to get into the
centre ----
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: ---- that would take you around 15/20 minutes?
MRS C: Probably.
MR TANSEY: One thing you have not told us about is this. Do buses run from that
camp site?
MRS C: I have no idea. They probably do. I would think of a camp site you would
expect there to be buses into town.
MR TANSEY: Did you bother to find out?
MRS C: I didn’t enquire specifically.
MR TANSEY: Did you not notice with your expertise and training that, as you come
out of the exit from the camp site and turn left, there is a bus stop which has
a number of bus numbers on it?
MRS C: There may have been.
MR TANSEY: But you did not bother to find out?
MRS C: There was no reason for me to find out. I had visited the camp site and
looked at the markings. In my opinion they seemed to have no intelligence
significance.
MR TANSEY: I do not think the camp site -- because that is where the defendant
was staying, was it not?
MRS C: Yes, as I understand it.
MR TANSEY: Yes, that is where he was staying for several days.
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: And so, if one in fact wishes to get from the camp site into the
centre of
MRS C: Yes, yes.
MR TANSEY: You did not notice the bus numbers when you went in May 1992? Let me
assist you: the bus numbers for the bus stop immediately outside the camp site
are numbers 6, 50, 54 and I think it is 87.
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: Do you know where those buses go to from the camp site?
MRS C: No, but I would imagine that they certainly would go to the -- there are
a lot -- the main bus stops, many of them are in the -- where the top left-hand
cross and the central one are both -- the top three crosses -- the central one
and the left hand one are I won’t say bus stations but there are a large number
of bus stops there. So I think it very likely that they would go to those
points.
MR TANSEY: Let me just put this to you as well: did you enquire and find out
that the number 6 bus from the camp site stops at a certain time and other buses
take over, I think 50 or 54?
MRS C: No.
MR TANSEY: Did you know that the number 6 from outside the camp site runs into
the centre of
MRS C: No.
MR TANSEY: Did you know that the numbers 54 -- when I say the centre, I think --
I hope we all understand the point, but the centre piece of the plan, where we
can see one cross and an arrow and then another cross -- those there, that is
for the centre of Oporto, is it not?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: The one to the left is the Praga da Lisboa, is it not?
MRS C: Yes, which is by the university where the long distance buses -- a lot of
long distance buses go.
MR TANSEY: That is where the long distance buses now stop at a certain point?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Did you know that the numbers 54, 85 and 87 from the camp site
actually stop at the Praga da Lisboa?
MRS C: No, but I wouldn’t dispute that; I would expect them to stop there.
MR TANSEY: You would expect them to stop there, would you, terminate there
possibly?
MRS C: Possibly. One accepts that these are bus stops, that there are buses from
the camp site that may stop there.
MR TANSEY: You have not mentioned that before, not until I put it to you. You
did not mention this. That is why I asked you: are you being fair? I suggest you
are not. You see, do you accept, this looking at the marking -- the one we just
referred to, the one on the acute left the Praga da Lisboa -- that is where
buses from the camp site going into or towards the centre stop and, I believe,
possibly terminate?
MRS C: I will accept that.
MR TANSEY: The cross on the bottom -- it is very hard to see but in the middle,
where it has the Praga da Liberdade, it is very hard to see, but I think you
know the one I am referring to.
MRS C: The centre one, yes.
MR TANSEY: Which has an arrow going to the right?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Did you know which buses stopped there from the camp site?
MRS C: No.
MR TANSEY: It is number 6, number 50 and number 54; did you know that?
MRS C: No.
MR TANSEY: That if one went to or came back from the camp site -- I am not sure
which one it is; it is my mistake -- that is where you either get off the bus or
get on it to the camp site?
MRS C: Yes, I will accept that.
MR TANSEY: Likewise, when we come to the arrow which you will see, the arrow and
the cross to the right, the Rua de Sa da Bandeira; do you see that?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: There is a bus stop there, is there not?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Can you please tell us: is it not right that the buses from the camp
site stop there?
MRS C: If you say so. If I may say that the reason I did not look at the buses
is that, when I looked at this map and the relevant portions of the questioning
of the defendant, when he was talking about his trip to
MR TANSEY: Sorry, I do not think that is right actually but we can check.
MRS C: That is all right, yes.
MR TANSEY: I want to check one point before I say you are wrong.
MRS C: It wouldn’t preclude obviously that they caught buses, but it was my
understanding that they had a car with them.
MR TANSEY: Yes, they had a car.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: You would agree, would you not, from your having been to
MRS C: Yes, it’s difficult.
MR TANSEY: It is a nightmare.
MRS C: Yes, it is.
MR TANSEY: So nobody in their right mind would really bring their car into
MRS C: Probably not.
MR TANSEY: If you could catch a bus very easily. So you would accept therefore,
would you, that each of these crosses here are bus stops from where the
defendant could either have got off the bus from the camp site or caught the bus
to return?
MRS C: I will accept that. I have always said that there could be other
explanations. It looks like it is -- it could be for intelligence purposes this,
but there could be ----
MR TANSEY: Sorry.
MRS C: That is all right.
MR TANSEY: But of course, to be fair, the one thing you would find out is what
are the bus numbers that come from the camp site and where do they stop. Why did
you not do that, if you were trying to be fair?
MRS C: Because I was looking at this as a possibility of it having an
intelligence purpose.
MR TANSEY: You would agree now, would you?
MRS C: Of course.
MR TANSEY: That in fact it could well have an utterly and totally innocent
explanation?
MRS C: All of these things could be capable of other explanations.
MR TANSEY: But this one, bearing in mind the camp site, the bus stops to and
from are strongly suggestive, are it not, of an innocent explanation?
MRS C: Well, I wouldn’t put it as strongly as that. I mean, it is -- I have said
all along it’s capable of other explanations, and that is one of them.
MR TANSEY: But you would agree that what is marked here is what somebody might
get marked down if they said, “Tell me, please, where I get the bus” etc, “which
way”, you know, “where they stop”?
MRS C: But there are no bus numbers. You have said some buses go one way and
some the other. You would expect to put the cross and number 6 or 54 or whatever
it is, so that they knew which bus to get at which stop.
MR TANSEY: Because at the bottom here the centre one, da Liberdade, and the one
at the Rue de Sa da Bandeira ---
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: ---- they are all clearly marked at the bus stop. You can see it
clearly. Likewise the ones at the de Lisboa, exactly, as clear for anyone to
see.
MRS C: Yes, but if this -- if the explanation is that someone was saying, “This
is where the bus stops are”, they might -- you might expect them to actually put
the numbers of the buses by the crosses.
MR TANSEY: You might do but in fact, if you know the buses, if they told you the
bus to look for and they marked them there, that is perfectly good enough, is it
not?
MRS C: But as you say there are a number of buses, and they might wish to be
reminded of the numbers.
MR TANSEY: Did you not pick up any literature of any kind at the camp site to
assist you?
MRS C: The small map that is here, the one, you know, with the welcome in
different languages at the top. They still produce that same one, and so I
looked and saw that they are still producing exactly the same map, but that was
all.
MR TANSEY: You see, when you went in May 1992 ----
MRS C: I don't think ----
MR TANSEY: Was it May 1992?
MRS C: No, I think it was October. It was in the autumn, September/October I
think, I visited.
MR TANSEY: I do not think the date matters too much.
MRS C: No, but it was certainly in the autumn.
MR TANSEY: Did you not pick up a leaflet which said this part of it gives the
details about the place, transport to the centre of town, a bus opposite it and
the numbers 6, 50, 54 and 87? Did you not bother to pick that up?
MRS C: No, I saw that. I mean, I looked to see that the same leaflets that you
have got here were still being produced by the camp site.
MR TANSEY: Moving on from that, I suggest you have not been fair in how you have
selected the evidence that you have given; that you did not bother to check the
key point about the buses, where they came from and to. But I want to ask you
about the other one. Can we now look please at exhibit 46, the first page of it,
where we have the O Fado.
MRS C: Which is the restaurant which is in the square where the bottom left-hand
cross is.
MR TANSEY: That is where it is.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Did it cross your mind that it might be a place where in fact
tourists would be rather keen to go?
MRS C: It didn’t cross my mind. It is a place where tourists would go and it’s
quite clearly -- I mean whether -- quite how it happened -- whether the camp
site recommended it as a place or whether it was asked, you know, “Can you tell
me where it is?” I don’t know, but it is a place -- I mean the whole of that
square, as I said in my evidence, is a place where tourists go. There is a
museum there; there is the O Fado restaurant, and there is a little bar/pub. I
mean -- and it’s going down towards the river where there are a number of
tourist sites.
MR TANSEY: And in fact the restaurant extends quite a little bit?
MRS C: What?
MR TANSEY: Extends.
MRS C: Well yes, except it was closed for refurbishment when I was there, so you
could only see the outside of it.
MR TANSEY: Marked at the outside of it it has “tipique restaurant”, does it not,
typical restaurant?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: And if we look at this card here -- read what it says -- it says “O
Fado the restaurant” etc., restaurant typique. Then if we look to the right of
it, we can see Fado folk dances.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Typical songs?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Portuguese food?
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: The very sort of things that any tourist, or many tourists would be
interested in doing?
MRS C: In what I said in my evidence, I said that this was a tourist place with
a restaurant and museum and an area that was frequented by tourists.
MR TANSEY: Yes, of course. So therefore, when one looks at all the evidence to
which I have referred so far as this is concerned, it is all totally consistent
with an innocent explanation of a tourist being in
MRS C: Exactly. I mean, I have said that it is capable of other explanations.
MR TANSEY: It is not merely capable but it is very reasonable to say that this
is a totally innocent explanation, is it not?
MRS C: Well, I won’t -- I mean, you may say it’s reasonable. I’m saying it is
capable of -- that is one explanation that it is capable of. There are others.
MR TANSEY: I want to ask you about a slightly different matter. You have given
us a history, a potted history -- I appreciate it is a potted history -- of the
events in
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: But I am going to suggest to you that it has been highly selective
one indeed. I want to ask you therefore just few questions to see if you can
assist us upon it.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Do you accept that in October 1989 the Warsaw Pact abandoned the
Brezhnev Doctrine and pledged non-interference in each other’s affairs.
MRS C: Yes, it was the beginning of the break-up of the Warsaw Pact.
MR TANSEY: That was October 1989?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: In November 1989 ----
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Hold on, you have no doubt a great deal of experience in
Russian/Soviet Union history. You must not assume the jury have. I think we
probably all know what the Warsaw Pact is, which is countries behind the Iron
Curtain that had a pact to support each other. The Brezhnev Doctrine leaves me
cold. Perhaps the jury have it at their fingertips.
MR TANSEY: Yes, Mrs C, would you ----
MRS C: You mentioned it. It’s not -- I’m interested in the effect. I mean, my
job, prevention, whatever you like to call it, is to look at what’s happened in
the intelligence security services. Obviously they are affected by the break-up
of the Warsaw Pact, and I’m more than happy to talk about that, but the Brezhnev
Doctrine you must explain to the jury.
MR TANSEY: Well, the Brezhnev Doctrine, you know, in fact was a doctrine by
which the
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: So in October 1989 it abandoned that doctrine.
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: In November 1989, is it right that the East German Government
resigned?
MRS C: That’s right, and the Berlin Wall came down.
MR TANSEY: And the Berlin Wall came down in November 1989. Is it correct that on
1st December 1989 President Gorbachev, as he then was, made the first visit of a
Soviet leader to the
MRS C: Yes.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: 1st December 1989?
MR TANSEY: Yes. (To the witness) Was there a summit meeting in December
1989 between Mr Bush and Mr Gorbachev announcing the end of the Cold War?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: The Cold War between, if I put it this way, Warsaw Pact and NATO,
basically between East and West?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Is it correct that in February and March 1990 the
MRS C: Yes. I don’t remember the exact date but certainly that was agreed, yes.
MR TANSEY: I am going to ask you about this: the
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Remove troops by what date?
MR TANSEY: July 1991. (To the witness) Now, in June 1990 there was a
meeting of the North Atlantic Council, June 1990?
MRS C: I mean, if you say so.
MR TANSEY: And do you recall -- may I put to you and see if it jogs your memory
-- that Mrs Thatcher gave this speech? I am going to put part of it to you: “Now
the landscape with which we became so familiar” -- my Lord I will read it and I
can arrange copies; it is about seven lines -- “Now the landscape with which we
became so familiar as we looked eastward is changing radically. Communism has
crumbled.”
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: “It has lost all credibility.”
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: “Even amongst its nominal believers.”
MRS C: That’s right.
MR TANSEY: “The countries of
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: This is the material part. “We no longer think of them as potential
enemies or as part of a wider threat to our way of life. They are friends in
need of help, wanting to return to their rightful place in
MRS C: Yes, would you like me to comment on that?
MR TANSEY: Firstly may I say ----
MRS C: I accept it, yes.
MR TANSEY: You are perfectly entitled to comment. May I put this to you first.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: This was in June 1990.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: She ----
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Speaking to whom?
MR TANSEY: At the NATO Council.
MRS C: And talking of the Warsaw Pact as a whole, not just talking about
MR TANSEY: Oh, yes, because her language there was “the countries of
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Margaret Thatcher was then the Prime Minister of this country.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Speaking on behalf of this country.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: To NATO.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: And she described them as being no longer potential enemies.
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: Is she not entitled to speak on behalf of the nation?
MRS C: Of course.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Now you want to make a comment?
MR TANSEY: Of course, yes. I do not want to stop you, please.
MRS C: No, what I was going to say was all of that is perfectly true, and there
-- no doubt there’s been considerable change, certainly in fact since Gorbachev
came to power, and indeed since the fall of the Berlin Wall, which precipitated
the break-up of the Warsaw Pact, but my and my service’s interest is the effects
of that on the intelligence and security services, and it was different in each
of the countries. The countries of Eastern Europe, if I may talk of that -- not
the Soviet Union, the others:
The same did not happen in the Soviet Union and indeed, up until the coup in
August 1989, er 1991, there was virtually no change in the intelligence security
services of the
So I am not denying there have been changes and very significant changes in
Eastern Europe, in their attitude and activities towards the West, but it has
not -- the espionage threat has not disappeared altogether and indeed, as I said
in my evidence, Yevgeniy Primakov in public statements has made this absolutely
clear, that they need their intelligence services and it will continue to work
against the West. I mean I’m trying to be as fair as possible about it. I am not
denying the changes at all.
MR TANSEY: So the June 1990 speech of Mrs Thatcher, “We no longer think of them
as potential enemies”, you say ----
MRS C: I’m sure that means in the military sense. My -- and that is true in a
military sense -- and that is what I’m sure that means. I mean, I don’t know
what was in the mind of her or the person that wrote the speech, but certainly
at that time the military threat had receded considerably.
MR TANSEY: It was not merely military. The way she phrased it was, “They are
friends” -- there is no enemy there; “they are friends.”
MRS C: Well, certainly in June 1990 the intelligence security services of the
MR TANSEY: Just as Margaret Thatcher, the then Prime Minister, said in June
1990, “We no longer see them as potential enemies”, that was also, was it not,
likewise put by the President of Russia, President Gorbachev? It was exactly the
same approach, was it not?
MRS C: Well, we have throughout -- and even in this period we would obviously
wish -- it is in everyone’s interest that the Soviet Union, or
MR TANSEY: But Margaret Thatcher was no softy, was she?
MRS C: No.
MR TANSEY: If she says of people that they are our friends, that is what she
means: not our enemies; they are our friends.
MRS C: Well ----
MR TANSEY: That you say covers the whole of
MRS C: Well, if it -- yes.
MR TANSEY: But she also made a major speech, when she was awarded the Aspen
Institute statesman award, when she spoke on shaping a new global community, in
MRS C: That is perfectly true. There is no doubt that the Soviet Union from 1985
onwards has been moving towards a more democratic system, and certainly this
country and other western countries have done a lot to support them in that. But
the fact is that their intelligence security services have been much slower to
reform.
MR TANSEY: Well, just consider the words: “We do not see this new
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: And she was saying -- and the date is important.
MRS C: Because it’s before the coup.
MR TANSEY: It is August 1990.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: The Cold War is over.
MRS C: Well, I’m sure everyone would mark the end of the Cold War with the fall
of the Berlin Wall. There is no doubt that that is the significant date, and
that is the start of all the changes in
MR TANSEY: And it is right, is it not, that on 31st March 1991 the Warsaw Pact
was disbanded?
MRS C: That’s right.
MR TANSEY: And in June 1991, only a month before the coup, which only lasted
four days, I think?
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: The West offered substantial economic assistance to the
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: That is right is it not?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: In fact at 31st July 1991 there was a treaty signed, the START
Treaty?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: The coup occurred on 19th August.
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: Four days later Mr Gorbachev was restored to power as President?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: So the position clearly was, as stated by the government at the time
in August 1990, that the
MRS C: I have seen reports of that in the newspaper. I have no first-hand
knowledge of it.
MR TANSEY: Did you seek confirmation of it one way or the other?
MRS C: It is not the
MR TANSEY: Is it true to your knowledge?
MRS C: I know what I read in the newspapers; I have no first-hand knowledge.
MR TANSEY: Is it correct
MRS C:
MR TANSEY: And a friend?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: And its secret service is spying allegedly upon American companies?
MRS C: So the newspapers allege.
MR TANSEY: Is it correct that this year, at the Paris Air Show, the big aircraft
manufacturer Hughes refused to go because of its fears of French government
spies secreting its secrets?
MRS C: Again I have read that in newspapers. I have no first-hand knowledge of
whether it’s true. It’s certainly what’s reported in newspapers.
MR TANSEY: Tradecraft or spycraft which you have given evidence about ----
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: ---- has been around for many many years.
MRS C: Absolutely. I mean, it changes and it grows up over the years, to change,
to fit particular circumstances, but yes.
MR TANSEY: It is used by many persons, many groups?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Who wish to maintain a relationship but concealing it from others?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: That is one of the key things?
MRS C: That is one of the key things.
MR TANSEY: So there is nothing special about it, nothing unique?
MRS C: No, well, different services use different methods but there are
similarities between all of them.
MR TANSEY: And it has been referred to in many spy fiction stories.
MRS C: Yes, usually exaggerated.
MR TANSEY: In fact has there not been a book written for children, published by
the Usborne publishing company, the Know How Book of Spycraft?
MRS C: I have no idea.
MR TANSEY: First published in 1975.
MRS C: I’m aware of Usborne as a children’s publishers.
MR TANSEY: Indeed much of what you have been telling this court as being KGB
tradecraft -- all the principles are set out for children in this book.
MRS C: Yes, well, that may be true but it does not alter the fact that that is
how the KGB operate and have operated for years.
MR TANSEY: Everybody operates this way, do they not?
MRS C: Not all exactly the same and certainly not in the
MR TANSEY: Well, let me just put this to you then: the carrying of secret
messages?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Pretty common, usual technique; is that right?
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: The use of containers with false bottoms, that sort of thing?
MRS C: Yes. I mean, it’s all pretty old-fashioned stuff this, but yes, it has
happened.
MR TANSEY: Page 6 of this book for children: the spy finds a message pushed into
a crack in the wall.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: The dead letter box.
MRS C: Dead letter box, yes, again it’s ----
MR TANSEY: The spy picks up an umbrella; takes it home; when he is alone he
unscrews the handle and finds a message inside the secret container?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Then codes.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Lots of codes set out; spies equipment; invisible writing. It is all
there, is it not?
MRS C: Yes, so you say. I don’t know this book but I will take your word for it.
MR TANSEY: And quick disguises, trapping spies, silent signals -- very
important. You say it is part of KGB tradecraft?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Very important in Usborne for children.
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: Let me read this bit to you. “If you and your contact can see each
other but cannot speak or get close enough to pass a message, signal with the
silent alphabet. Silent hand and leg signals: one hand in pocket means yes; two
hands in pocket means no.”
MRS C: Just because it’s in a book does not mean to say that it is not still
being used.
MR TANSEY: No.
MRS C: But ----
MR TANSEY: I am saying everybody knows about it -- well, not everybody but ----
MRS C: Anybody.
MR TANSEY: Lots and lots of people know about it.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: And spy language -- the back page -- I want to ask you about this.
This book was published in 1975, then republished in 1989. Can I give you a
copy.
MRS C: It’s obviously -- I mean, as everybody knows, the public has an eternal
fascination with spies.
MR TANSEY: Absolutely.
MRS C: I’m not in any way surprised.
MR TANSEY: I want you to look at the back page as well of this. Spy language: we
have contact, courier, dead -- just read out what it has for dead.
MRS C: “Viktor is dead” means Viktor has been caught by the enemy.
MR TANSEY: Then come to ill.
MRS C: “Viktor is ill” means Viktor is being watched by the enemy.
MR TANSEY: Is this a coincidence, Viktor in Usborne in 1975?
MRS C: Well, Viktor is a common -- certainly a very common Russian name, and I
would imagine it was picked for that reason.
MR TANSEY: Would you agree with me it is the third most popular name in
MRS C: I would agree with you. There are lots of people in
MR TANSEY: So we can put the book down -- and that is for children. Then we look
at the many spy novels -- and there are many of them -- and would you agree that
every item that you refer to is pretty well set out in each of these novels?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: You would?
MRS C: As I have said, there is an eternal fascination with spy, spies and
spying. It’s clearly a very lucrative area of books, and obviously over the
years these sort of things become known. It does not alter the fact that they
are still used.
MR TANSEY: John Le Carre -- he was an ex-security service man, was he not?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: And he has written novel after novel. I have just extracts.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: He sets it all out, does he not?
MRS C: Yes. I have never said that there is anything secret about the
tradecraft.
MR TANSEY: What I am saying is: this tradecraft that you describe -- anybody
reading novels could pick it all up so easily.
MRS C: They could, but it is the necessity of using it, if Russians particularly
need to use it, because they are in a hostile operating environment. You don’t
need to use these things unless there are reasons not only to keep secret what
you are doing but that you believe that if you don’t you are likely to be
discovered.
MR TANSEY: So I think we agree -- this may save a lot of time -- all this
material here in the exhibits that we have, the document you have looked at,
nearly all of that in fact is clearly set out in novels?
MRS C: But it does not alter the fact -- yes.
MR TANSEY: Can you say yes or no and then ----
MRS C: There are -- I won’t say the particular things. I don’t know that the
particular documents and notes are actually in novels, but certainly a large
number of spy novels contain details of tradecraft, Russian tradecraft. I mean
there is no doubt about that.
MR TANSEY: Can you tell me any of them in this case, in the exhibits we have,
which have not been in novels?
MRS C: I haven’t really -- well, first of all, I have not read every single spy
novel that there is, so I would not know. I really do not know whether they have
been in novels or not. Certainly many novels talk about dead letter boxes and
contact arrangements and things like that, but it’s not something I’m either
qualified or -- indeed I simply don’t have the information to say whether all
these are in novels or not.
MR TANSEY: But would you accept that it is more than likely -- let me put it
this way: is there anything in the documents exhibited in this case -- in other
words the tradecraft that you have referred to -- is there anything in the
tradecraft which we would not expect to find anywhere in any of these novels?
MRS C: I think that is just ----
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: It is a little difficult for any witness, you know, to
answer that because she says she has not read ----
MRS C: I haven’t read every single novel. I don’t know.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: She has said tradecraft generically is used. You can take
anything we have seen: a mark which is a vertical mark for “danger”, and
horizontal mark for “come again later” or whatever it is. Whether you -- you and
your learned junior, may have avariciously read novels and you can point out
details and put them, but I do not think you can expect the witness to have
exhaustively read all the literature.
MR TANSEY: I was hoping to shorten it.
MRS C: As I say, I’m sure there’s been much tradecraft written about in all
sorts of books so ----
MR TANSEY: But from your general knowledge ----
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: ---- of what is in the literature etc ----
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: From your general knowledge, is there anything that you can think of
in this tradecraft here that I could not read in a novel, that you can think of,
that springs to mind?
MRS C: The only thing that immediately springs to mind is the instructions to
follow a particular route to a meeting. Many books have things about meeting in
certain places and indeed the signals and those things, but the instructions to
follow a particular route is not something that I can recall having seen in a
book. But, as I say, I have not read every single one.
MR TANSEY: I know it is in there.
MRS C: Are you looking at -- which exhibit is that?
MR TANSEY: Oh no, sorry.
MRS C: Oh, you are looking at a book?
MR TANSEY: I am talking about the novels. What you are saying is that following
a certain route to allow counter-surveillance ----
MRS C: And anti and counter – it’s not something that I personally have actually
read in a book but then, as I say, firstly I have not read them all, and
secondly I may not have remembered because, to be perfectly honest, reading
books about spies is not necessarily something I really wish to do, unless there
may be something that would be of particular interest.
MR TANSEY: It is like lawyers reading books about law, exactly the same, so we
understand that.
MRS C: Exactly.
MR TANSEY: While that is being sought out, the precise novels in question, would
you agree from your knowledge that the CIA uses exactly the same techniques?
That is the Central Intelligence Agency.
MRS C: Yes, I do know what the CIA is. I wouldn’t say they used exactly the same
techniques. They may use -- as you have already said, intelligence services
operating in what is a hostile environment may well use many of the same
tradecraft, because obviously if you are operating in a hostile environment you
need to protect yourself and your agent so that ----
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Well, you say they do not use exactly the same techniques
but techniques which are reasonably similar?
MRS C: Yes, all intelligence services who are operating in a hostile environment
need to take precautions to protect themselves and their agents, and obviously
they are going to be similar.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Yes.
MRS C: If not exactly the same. And I am not really prepared to comment on what
the CIA -- I mean, my service looks at hostile intelligence services and their
methods and techniques against the United Kingdom; and our sole purpose is to
counter those operations, and we are not going to study the methods and
techniques of a service of a country with whom we have friendly relations. I
mean, that is outside our responsibilities.
MR TANSEY: Is it right that after the Second World War MI5 assisted the CIA in
their intelligence techniques?
MRS C: To say we assisted them I think is perhaps a little strong. I mean, after
the Second World War, we assisted many friendly countries in setting up their
security services, because our service has been in existence longer than many
others, and they looked to us for advice. But to say that we actually assisted
them with operations is something quite different. We may have helped them set
up the CIA, have given them advice; helped them is probably too strong. We have
worked very closely with the forerunner of the CIA, the
MR TANSEY: What really happened -- I think it was after the Second World War; it
may have been during it; but basically the western powers as we know, NATO
basically, came to each other’s help and assistance in many ways.
MRS C: Of course, of course
MR TANSEY: One of which was advising each other on tradecraft, that sort of
thing.
MRS C: I wouldn’t say advising themselves on tradecraft. Many of those countries
following the First World War did not have a security intelligence service and
therefore they looked to us as having that, and having one of very
long-standing, to help them set up their own, to look to how it was structured,
not necessarily methods.
MR TANSEY: So, Mrs C, is there any difference therefore -- can you point to any
difference at all between the tradecraft that is there in the exhibits in this
case and that used by western security services?
MRS C: First of all, we are talking about a security service -- this tradecraft
here is indicative of an intelligence service, which is a quite different thing.
My service is a security service. We are looking to counter the operations and
activities of foreign intelligence services in our country. Intelligence
services ----
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Pause there. This tradecraft is indicative of intelligence?
MRS C: Intelligence-gathering service and indeed many other
intelligence-gathering services may use similar techniques, but I come from a
security service which is a counter-espionage service. We are looking at how to
counter the operations of foreign intelligence services, and to do that we need
to be aware of how those services operate, and obviously study them. We do not
study friendly foreign intelligence services. It is not within our remit and not
something we would do.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Can I interrupt. There is something that is puzzling me; I
want to try and follow it. I am not getting involved with the enemy situation
that Mr Tansey has been asking you about, but at that time your security service
at any rate regarded
MRS C: In the espionage sense, yes.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Now, they had people in this country who were, as you
thought, members of their intelligence-gathering service?
MRS C: Yes, under cover in the embassy as diplomats.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: They had special rules including rules, you said, that they
could only go within 25 miles of their embassy?
MRS C: Of
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: One of the difficulties you mentioned is that they wanted to
try and recruit agents and then to pass on and get information from them without
being under surveillance?
MRS C: Yes.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: From your security service.
MRS C: Yes.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: May I go on, please; would you forgive me.
MRS C: I don’t -- yes, of course, yes, I’m sorry.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Does that suggest that, rightly or wrongly -- I am going to
call them the Russians.
MRS C: Yes.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: The Russians suspected if any member -- if they are KGB
agents and it is probably accepted that they would be -- they would be likely to
be known to your security service.
MRS C: Yes.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: If he went for a jaunt from
MRS C: Yes, well yes.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Therefore he would have -- I am saying he rather than she.
MRS C: Yes, yes.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Would have a thought in his mind that if he met an agent who
was getting information for him that agent might be identified and spotted.
MRS C: Yes, and would also result in him being caught and expelled.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: I follow that. What I just want to know, dealing with other
powers, not Warsaw Pact powers ----
MRS C: Yes.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: ---- which were also intelligence-gathering services, from
people that in an espionage sense you thought were potentially hostile.
MRS C: Non-Warsaw Pact?
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: For instance, Mr Tansey is dealing with whether it is
French,
MRS C: No, you see, you have to decide which countries are potential enemies, in
an espionage sense, and are a potential risk to the security of the
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: That is as far as I want to go.
MR TANSEY: So because the French might not want to lose their good relations,
they might disguise things to make them look as though they are somebody else?
MRS C: They might. Again this is a very common tradecraft technique of the
Russians. Indeed, they are using it more these days of pretending to be some
other nationality. That is another tradecraft technique, called a false flag
technique, which is indeed quite common.
MR TANSEY: It is quite common across the whole of
MRS C: I don’t know about
MR TANSEY: What is the false flag technique?
MRS C: That is where the Russian intelligence officer will pretend to be some
other nationality, something which is perhaps -- because after all some people
might be quite nervous about being in contact with a Russian. They might not
want to have -- particularly if you are talking in the time of the Cold War,
they would see some danger in it. And so the Russian intelligence officer will
pretend to be South American, some other nationality which is not perhaps
immediately so dangerous.
MR TANSEY: And so, vice versa -- you say the Russian posing as somebody else --
vice versa ----
MRS C: Well, maybe again I can’t comment on that.
MR TANSEY: But coming back to the question that I asked you some time ago ----
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: ---- when we look at the tradecraft here ----
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: ---- in these exhibits would you agree ----
MRS C: Yes, you are agreeing those are tradecraft notes, are you?
MR TANSEY: I am saying they have the hallmarks of tradecraft. I accept that.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: That those are tradecraft notes; that is referring to what you call
the red and the green etc.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Those are in fact across the board for all intelligence agencies or
anybody practising intelligence across the whole of Europe and the
MRS C: May well -- other services may well use similar things. I have seen no
evidence of it in the
MR TANSEY: There is nothing therefore in this tradecraft which points to it
necessarily being the KGB. It could be but it could be others.
MRS C: It certainly -- yes, it could be. It certainly has all the hallmarks of
the KGB tradecraft in the
MR TANSEY: Well, this is what I want to -- this making a further jump. What I am
saying to you, looking at the tradecraft itself, the actual the green, the red
----
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: ---- all that; that is the tradecraft.
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: That could be done by any agency from any country throughout the West
or
MRS C: That is.
MR TANSEY: Looking at the tradecraft itself.
MRS C: Yes, it could be. I have no doubt all services use similar tradecraft
because, if they are in a hostile environment, they need to protect themselves
and their agents. My point is that we are talking about the
MR TANSEY: Yes, but I’m asking ----
MRS C: Yes, and I agree with what you are saying, yes.
MR TANSEY: So there is nothing in there which points to its being exclusively
KGB, nothing in the tradecraft itself.
MRS C: Well, I do beg to differ on this.
MR TANSEY: I ask you to point to the particular tradecraft point.
MRS C: Well, particular trade -- these are -- this is happening in this country.
MR TANSEY: Yes, I appreciate that.
MRS C: If there was no reference to meetings in Horsenden, Roxeth and
MR TANSEY: You are saying that because it is in the
MRS C: Certainly that is very important because, I mean, I’m not denying that
other intelligence services may use similar techniques. They clearly need to if
they are operating in a hostile environment.
MR TANSEY: Right. I am going to come to other activities as such, but what you
are saying is it is KGB because it is operating in this country; that is what
you are saying, is it not?
MRS C: I think that is why one can be more certain that it is KGB or Russian/KGB
because of that. I mean, certainly I, my service, have no reason to believe that
other services such as the ones you have mentioned would be operating in this
way in the United Kingdom.
MR TANSEY: Well, I shall come to the question of espionage by other countries.
You are aware that industrial espionage is a major problem throughout the whole
of western Europe?
MRS C: I am well aware that industrial espionage -- but it’s not a matter for
the security service. Industrial espionage does not affect the security of the
MR TANSEY: Is it correct that, when employees of the security services finish
their work employed by their government department etc., they frequently obtain
work in firms dealing with security?
MRS C: They may do. I don’t know about frequently. I mean, clearly people who
have worked in security have an expertise that may well be -- but we are talking
about security people, people who, if they do use that expertise, are using it
to protect. I mean, the security service is concerned with protecting the
security of the
MR TANSEY: It might be useful to somebody else as well to work the other way?
MRS C: But again you are -- you see, I suppose it’s very easy for me to say this
but there is a great difference between a security service and an
intelligence-gathering service. I come from the security service.
MR TANSEY: Yes, I appreciate that.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: I appreciate the difference, and one is talking about intelligence
and espionage.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: And one of the aspects that is of great concern is industrial
espionage.
MRS C: Absolutely, yes.
MR TANSEY: In this country, by company against company.
MRS C: Yes, again -- I mean, as I say, it is not a subject that professionally
is of any interest to us, but anyone reading the newspapers can see that that is
a big problem.
MR TANSEY: Well, I shall come to that, but it is a very big problem in this
country, is it not?
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: Because there have been, in fact not just the
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: There have been major cases of industrial espionage of a very major
nature?
MRS C: All major industrial countries, I think, have this problem.
MR TANSEY: That is right. We know of some minor ones.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Virgin and B.A.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: National Car Parks.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: British Petroleum.
MRS C: Yes but, as I say, this is not a matter of any concern to the security
service. It’s between the companies concerned. It is not -- that sort of
espionage is not a threat to the
MR TANSEY: No, I appreciate that, but I am saying to you that espionage,
industrial espionage takes place on a significant scale in this country.
MRS C: Yes, according to what one reads, that is so.
MR TANSEY: Were you aware that James Woolsey -- do you know who he is, the head
of the CIA?
MRS C: Oh, the present -- the new head, yes.
MR TANSEY: He took over from Robert Gates.
MRS C: He took over from Robert Gates, yes, but he’s a political appointee. He’s
not a career CIA officer.
MR TANSEY: Were you aware of what he said at the select committee, that one of
the greatest concerns of the
MRS C: Yes I’m aware that the Americans -- that Americans are very concerned
about it.
MR TANSEY: What they are saying is that they are concerned about industrial
espionage by the intelligence services of friendly powers?
MRS C: But again -- the American agencies have a different charter to the -- to
my service, and they may well be allowed, by their rules, to actually look at
industrial espionage. It is not something that my service is concerned about.
MR TANSEY: What I put to you ----
MRS C: Yes, I mean, I am aware that they are very concerned about it.
MR TANSEY: What they are concerned about is the intelligence services in fact
indulging in illegal intelligence-gathering operations against friendly --
against their companies.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: So friendly governments in fact wage war economically against each
other.
MRS C: So the Americans believe. We have no evidence of it here.
MR TANSEY: The defence industry is a major competitive industry throughout the
whole of Western Europe and the
MRS C: Yes, but not everything that the defence industry does is classified.
MR TANSEY: No, I appreciate that that is a different matter. In fact the costs
involved in those industrial operations are immense.
MRS C: So I believe.
MR TANSEY: Are you aware of operation Ill Will in the
MRS C: No.
MR TANSEY: You are not aware of that?
MRS C: No, but I’m sure you will tell me.
MR TANSEY: I am sorry, I am told it is Ill Wind.
MRS C: Again ....
MR TANSEY: Bribery on a large scale in respect of
MRS C: There are many of those sort of cases in the
MR TANSEY: Is it correct that the CIA has expressed its concern about the
intelligence services of
MRS C: They may have done. I really do not know. There is no reason why I should
know that. I mean, what -- the CIA will have its own concerns, own targets,
priorities. They don’t make the British Security Service privy to all their
things, Indeed there is no reason why they should.
MR TANSEY: Do you monitor industrial espionage at all?
MRS C: No. As is public knowledge, the security service is concerned with the
threats to the security of the
MR TANSEY: So if a secret service intelligence-gathering operation of a friendly
country was taking place here, it would not concern you in respect of industrial
operations?
MRS C: It depends. If what they are doing is no threat to our security -- I
mean, it is a very narrow responsibility that we have, that we are looking at:
threats to national security. If a company is being targeted by a foreign
intelligence service and the information they are getting is not classified, is
simply commercially valuable, that is no threat to the security of the
MR TANSEY: Now, I am going to move onto a different matter. One of the important
matters, from your knowledge of the KGB, is that it tells its agents/spies not
to keep notes, does it not?
MRS C: To say that, they would justly -- it is an important thing in handling an
agent that you are concerned about his security, and therefore it would be
sensible advice that they did not keep anything that is incriminating. However,
one knows from any number of OSA prosecutions that agents do not always obey
that, that they do keep things and they keep incriminating evidence.
MR TANSEY: The one point that a KGB operative would point out strongly to the
person: do not keep notes.
MRS C: They would. If they were a good intelligence officer, they would
certainly give that advice.
MR TANSEY: Secondly, is it one of the important practices to try and avoid
meets, meeting if possible?
MRS C: Well, not to avoid them if possible, because that would be really very
difficult, to run an agent with no meetings at all. Obviously again every case
will be different, but you are concerned about your own security, the agent’s
security, and therefore you will make sure that such meetings that you do have
-- that arrangements are made that hopefully will mean that you will not be
detected; and hence the sort of elaborate arrangements we have had here.
MR TANSEY: So you have things like dead letter boxes to avoid meetings?
MRS C: Dead letter boxes, if you have actually got things to pass over; again
it’s one method.
MR TANSEY: It is certainly a very secure method.
MRS C: It’s perhaps more secure than a personal meeting. But if you are
actually, you know, running an agent, you need to have a good relationship, to
maintain that relationship with him or her, and you therefore need to meet them
occasionally to have face to face meetings. It’s part of looking after an agent.
MR TANSEY: But you do it as rarely as possible.
MRS C: You do it not necessarily as rarely as possible but in as secure
conditions as possible.
MR TANSEY: I want to ask you, because you referred already, in your evidence
yesterday and this morning as well, to other cases with which you were concerned
-- you referred to two in particular.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: I just want to ask you about them. The case of Prime.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: 1982?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: I think it was 1982 when he was tried.
MRS C: Round about then, yes.
MR TANSEY: G.C.H.Q.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Is it correct that he had a Minox camera?
MRS C: I believe he did have a camera, yes. It’s again -- many many spies do.
MR TANSEY: Can you explain -- it is a special type of camera, is it not?
MRS C: Well, it’s a camera that I think can take very small photographs.
MR TANSEY: It is ideal, if I put it this way, for photographing documents?
MRS C: Well, in one respect it’s ideal but in another respect it is -- again, to
have a Minox camera might well draw attention to yourself, and certainly, you
know, you need to be very careful, if you have that, and it could be a danger.
It is much -- and taking a camera in and out of a government building could draw
attention. It isn’t necessarily the best thing to use. I mean ----
MR TANSEY: Oh no. Would you just tell us how it works, please, so that we know.
MRS C: I couldn’t possibly tell you how a Minox camera works.
MR TANSEY: No, what it actually does then.
MRS C: It takes very small photographs.
MR TANSEY: It takes very small photographs, yes. But at the end of the number of
photographs you have taken, how big is what you are left with? Is it the normal
size?
MRS C: No, I mean, it’s many years since I have seen one of these, but they are
very -- they are really just very small photographs.
MR TANSEY: And in fact they were used, were they not, significantly by Prime?
MRS C: Prime certainly had a camera.
MR TANSEY: He did not merely have it; he used it.
MRS C: He used it, yes.
MR TANSEY: Significantly. Let me just remind you: he told the security services
that he used 15 minute films each with 36 exposures. This is just on one
occasion 76/77.
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: What is the advantage of having photographed the document using a
Minox camera?
MRS C: Well, you have -- you can photograph a lot of documents, and they will be
very small and they won’t take up a lot of space; and of course, if you are then
going to have to pass them over to someone else, I mean, they are easier in a
way too if they are very small than if you have got a lot of things of this
size.
MR TANSEY: That is right, yes.
MRS C: So it is -- again it is a facility for passing information. But it still
has dangers attached to it.
MR TANSEY: What it means as well is ----
MRS C: It’s absolutely accurate.
MR TANSEY: Having photographed you can then return or destroy the document in
question, can you not?
MRS C: Yes, and of course you have got an accurate thing, but again the dangers
of -- there are all sorts of dangers attached to that.
MR TANSEY: If you keep it. I mean, if you walk into a government department,
that would be stupid.
MRS C: Indeed, since Prime, many departments do not allow their staff to take
cameras in.
MR TANSEY: But if you wish to photograph documents, for example at home, it is
the ideal thing.
MRS C: At home, yes, but presumably, if you were in a position to take documents
home, which most people are not who have access to classified information ----
MR TANSEY: You can take them and return them.
MRS C: That’s right.
MR TANSEY: Then, when the film is finished, you hand it over to whoever it may
be.
MRS C: But this is -- I mean, other people will copy things and take them out,
or remember things and take them out; again less incriminating than having a
camera. I mean, there are various methods by which people take classified
information, not just a camera.
MR TANSEY: So he had the Minox camera. Is it right the film is about the size of
a thumb nail?
MRS C: Yes, it is really very small.
MR TANSEY: It is so small so that, if anybody came along to approach you, you
could either hand it over without hardly being seen or dispose of it without
being seen?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: And the camera is a very small camera as well, is it not?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Can you tell us, show us.
MRS C: Well, it’s about like an old-fashioned matchbox, I suppose, a little
camera.
MR TANSEY: Like a Swan Vesta?
MRS C: Yes, that sort of size.
MR TANSEY: There was no such camera found with Mr Smith, was there?
MRS C: No, but then not everybody has a camera. As I say, it’s quite a
particularly -- I mean, there’s been a lot of publicity about Minox cameras. I
mean, it is almost incriminating to have one. They are known by many people as
the spying camera.
MR TANSEY: Prime was trained in secret writing, was he not?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Was there any evidence of secret writing?
MRS C: Not as far as I’m aware.
MR TANSEY: Prime was trained in radio transmissions; he had a transmitter, did
he not?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: There are no radio transmitters here in this case?
MRS C: Not as far as I’m aware.
MR TANSEY: Prime knew the skill of microdots, of making microdots, did he not?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: There is no evidence of microdots in this case?
MRS C: No, not as far as I’m aware.
MR TANSEY: Prime had a black briefcase with a secret compartment. There is no
such briefcase ----
MRS C: Not as far as I’m aware.
MR TANSEY: ---- of any kind in the case of Mr Smith; is that right?
MRS C: Not as far as I’m aware.
MR TANSEY: And one assumes you would be aware.
MRS C: Yes, I would.
MR TANSEY: Moving on to the case of Douglas Britten.
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: Who was in 1968.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: When he made his statement, when he was interviewed -- I am referring
to that because that is the document given to me -- in his case he had the
camera, Minox camera referred to.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: But is it right that he also had a number of containers which had
false bottoms?
MRS C: Yes, I believe he did, yes.
MR TANSEY: He had two Tennents beer cans with false bottoms; is that right?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: A piece of water conduit pipe, and the device unscrewed in the
middle?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: There was no such thing found in this case?
MRS C: No. I mean, these are the ways in which, if I may say, a lot of
tradecraft has moved on and changed over the years, because those sort of
things, as a result of many of these cases, have become very incriminating
things to have: cameras, containers and such. It is -- the less people have, the
less they are likely to be detected.
MR TANSEY: Are you aware that the floorboards of Mr Smith’s house were taken up?
MRS C: No, I wasn’t aware of that.
MR TANSEY: But Britten had a magnetic container, again with a false bottom.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: There was no item of any kind in Mr Smith’s possession with a false
bottom, was there?
MRS C: Not as far as I’m aware. I mean, when I drew similarities between the
cases, I was not saying that they were identical in every way. I mean, one is
simply saying about the particular tradecraft here that it was used in other
cases.
MR TANSEY: I am pointing out to you, putting to you the equipment which the KGB
gave their persons.
MRS C: Yes, and this is a way in which I think tradecraft has moved on. The KGB
realised that these -- this kind of equipment was very incriminating.
MR TANSEY: So let us look at the next thing then. Let us look at the case of
Houghton, Lonsdale, Crowder.
MRS C: Which is even older, probably one of the most famous cases ever, 1961.
MR TANSEY: In that case microdots.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Equipment for making microdots.
MRS C: Yes, radio transmissions and a Russian illegal who posed as an American
-- I mean, you have everything in that case, but it is now 30 odd years old.
MR TANSEY: Yes, but I am going to come to the more up-to-date ones with you.
There was a Ronson lighter with a concealed space?
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: One time pads -- what is a one time pad?
MRS C: For radio transmissions; its a code, enabling the person to decode radio
transmissions.
MR TANSEY: There was nothing like that found with Mr Smith?
MRS C: No.
MR TANSEY: Under the lino in the kitchen of one of the men was a trap-door, was
there not?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Underneath that there was a wireless transmitter?
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: There were torches with false bottoms; is that right?
MRS C: Yes, a range of concealment devices.
MR TANSEY: Money hidden in the loft, under the glass insulation fibre in the
loft?
MRS C: Yes, money is often hidden in cases.
MR TANSEY: Often hidden; in this case it was in the drawer.
MRS C: Yes, but it was certainly there. I mean, it was ---
MR TANSEY: Not hidden, was it?
MRS C: No.
MR TANSEY: False passport?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: There was no false passport in Mr Smith’s case?
MRS C: But of course -- I think it was Lonsdale and the Crowders who had the
false passports, who were of course not British. I mean they were not the
agents; they were the controllers.
MR TANSEY: Likewise they had a Minox camera as well.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Then finally the case of Hambleton which was 1982.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: He had a radio transmitter.
MRS C: Yes, he did.
MR TANSEY: He had specially treated paper on which you can write a message.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: There was no such paper was found in Mr Smith’s possession, was
there?
MRS C: No.
MR TANSEY: Hambleton had the one time pad.
MRS C: Which went with the radio transmitter. If you have got the radio
transmitter, the chances are you will a one time pad as well.
MR TANSEY: He had a minox camera.
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: He was trained in the art of secret writing?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Is there any evidence of secret writing here?
MRS C: Not as far as I’m aware.
MR TANSEY: So therefore, when we consider what has been the paraphernalia of the
person working for the KGB, if you look at secret place, secret hiding place in
the house, it is not here.
MRS C: Usually that is for a radio, which is not featured in this case.
MR TANSEY: Well, you can do that to hide anything you want to, can you not?
MRS C: Yes.
MR TANSEY: No Minox camera?
MRS C: No.
MR TANSEY: No items with false containers found at all in Mr Smith’s possession?
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: No microdots found?
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Can I discourage you from -- once you have said it two or
three times, we have all got the point. You are now repeating questions you have
asked already.
MR TANSEY: Yes.
MRS C: I would just say that all -- what you say is perfectly true but
tradecraft has moved on. Although some things are the same, they do -- it does
change in changing circumstances; and those things are very incriminating and
have been proved to be incriminating, and therefore one would not be surprised
if they were not used, if they were not really necessary.
MR TANSEY: Just help us then, please, with how has it changed.
MRS C: Well, it has changed because these things are now seen to be
incriminating. If an agent is caught and he has all these things, this spying
equipment if you can call it that, it is going to be very incriminating. The
less they have -- I mean, it’s almost the same thing as not writing notes: the
less you have the less likely you are to be incriminated by it.
MR TANSEY: So what does a person have in tradecraft?
MRS C: As little as possible. I think indeed if people can even avoid writing
notes, can remember things and perhaps write them down and pass them on and
destroy them, it’s -- I think it’s just simply the less you have that can
incriminate you has got to be better.
MR TANSEY: You have just said it has moved on.
MRS C: Hmm.
MR TANSEY: I am just asking you what has replaced the Minox camera?
MRS C: Perhaps just somebody’s memory. I’m -- certainly not the Minox camera. I
mean, we will perhaps get -- people will have computers and pass it on, be able
to -- that is a possibility. But certainly I’m not aware of a Minox camera being
used for some years.
MR TANSEY: The secret hiding place in the house, what replaces that?
MRS C: I have no idea. Perhaps -- I mean, you can still have a secret hiding
place, but again if – it’s things; what’s in the secret hiding places is the
important thing, is it not? You can have a secret hiding place but if it’s
empty, it does not matter, does it?
MR TANSEY: What has replaced the briefcase with the secret compartment?
MRS C: But what I’m trying to explain is, if people don’t actually have
anything, any incriminating evidence, what one -- what should really be the
situation -- then you don’t need all these containers and briefcases and secret
hiding places; and so what I’m trying to say is that it’s replaced with perhaps
a growing realisation that you shouldn’t give people these things which will
encourage them to keep things they ought not to be keeping.
MR TANSEY: What has replaced microdots?
MRS C: Well, again microdots is only a method of communication.
MR TANSEY: Yes; what has replaced it?
MRS C: I’m not certain that it needs to be replaced. I mean, if you are
communicating information to somebody and then leaving no trace of it, you don’t
need microdots.
MR TANSEY: What has replaced specially treated paper on which you can write an
invisible message?
MRS C: I’m not certain anything has. Maybe that could still be used. If you were
writing a letter, you could write on the paper, and it could go and you wouldn’t
have any trace of it left with you.
MR TANSEY: These or some of these items are what one might expect to have found,
are they not?
MRS C: Not necessarily.
MR TANSEY: Not all of them?
MRS C: No.
MR TANSEY: Some of them?
MRS C: You might have done, but it’s not surprising that one hasn’t. Not every
case has all of those things.
MR TANSEY: But certainly, for a person who is acting as a spy in this way, one
could well expect to find some of these items?
MRS C: One’s found the notes and money and things. Some of the things have been
found. The fact that they weren’t secreted in false bottomed briefcases or
containers is not necessarily relevant.
MR TANSEY: You said that the security services keep a good surveillance on the
KGB.
MRS C: On?
MR TANSEY: Watch them carefully.
MRS C: On known intelligence officers.
MR TANSEY: Is it correct that there are no sightings of this defendant ever with
Viktor Oschenko?
MRS C: First of all, I can’t answer that and, secondly, I’m not certain that I
should, in that it relates to the time that he was in the
MR TANSEY: Do you have any photographs of his meetings with Viktor Oshchenko?
MRS C: I don’t no.
MR TANSEY: Not you personally, your service.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Mr Tansey, I am not ruling against you but, if you are going
to go into what happened between 1972 and 1979, and you want to know what
happened to Mr Oshchenko, at the moment Mrs C is saying she cannot answer this.
I am not certain if she meant she could but does not feel she ought to for
security reasons, but I mean then you are opening up a particular ----
MR TANSEY: All I want to say is: are there any photographs?
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: You cannot open up part of a chapter without risking the
whole of the a chapter coming out. I just warn you, if you want to open up a
chapter, you do so, but you cannot pick out the plums. It may be there is
nothing against you but you cannot just pick out plums and say you cannot have
the rest, if there is a rest. So you must make a choice. Maybe you would like to
think about it. Move to something else and come back to it, if you want, after
the adjournment.
MR TANSEY: My Lord, yes. (To the witness) In 1990, is it correct that the
Russian economy was near to collapse?
MRS C: The Russian economy has been near to collapse for a long time, and I
think in 1990 it was no different to any other time.
MR TANSEY: It was in a very ----
MRS C: Yes, very parlous state, yes.
MR TANSEY: Its industry, including its military industry, was in a very very
run-down condition, was it not?
MRS C: I don’t know specifically. Certainly industry generally was run-down.
There was a great shortage of money.
MR TANSEY: Is it within your knowledge that in fact there was no demand for
information in 1990, 1991, 1992 because they had no use for it, because they had
no money and no industry to use it?
MRS C: I am not aware there was no demand for it. I’m aware that they had very
little money though certainly, as far as I’m concerned, the demand was
continuing. Whether they had the money to actually exploit information is
another matter. The demand, as far as our information goes, for scientific and
technical information particularly with a military application has never gone
away and indeed, as I have said, they are still saying that this is what they
need. Whether they had the money and the resources to exploit it is quite
another question, and that is not within my knowledge to be able to comment on
it.
MR TANSEY: Is it correct that in 1990 the information that they received was
such that in fact it was all piling up; there was nobody using it? Did you know
that?
MRS C: No, it’s not within my -- I mean, I know -- as I say, one knows the
demand for it was still there. What happened to it when it arrived is another
matter.
MR TANSEY: The government departments there and the industry was in chaos.
MRS C: That I believe is true. It’s one of points I made earlier, that there
were severe financial constraints on all Russian government departments. This
did not happen to the security intelligence services until late in 1991/92. They
survived that with their resources intact, and even now they have not had the
same constraints put on them that other government departments have. It’s a
measure of the importance that their leaders place on them.
MR TANSEY: Is that because of their internal needs as well?
MRS C: No, it applies to both the internal and the external service. There have
been some cuts made. They have had some constraints put on them, but not to the
same extent that other government departments have.
MR TANSEY: Did you ever read John Le Carre’s The Honourable Schoolboy?
MRS C: Not The Honourable Schoolboy, no. I read some of his early books but I
found, after the first one or two, that they were largely repetitive and
becoming more and more convoluted and difficult to follow. So I have not read
The Honourable Schoolboy.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Instead of reading out chunks ----
MR TANSEY: I was trying to avoid that.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: If you are saying -- I imagine you are going back to putting
at any rate the instances of tradecraft -- there are a whole variety of spy
novels.
MR TANSEY: Oh, yes, I think that is been accepted. There is one particular
matter.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: I was going to say that, if you want to emphasise that by
selective passages, if you think there is a point to be gained, may I advise
some I hope relative brief document which can be agreed and placed before the
jury. What I am a little anxious to do -- it may be that the jury and I are
going to have a read a children’s book but we do not want to have to read a lot
of spy novels.
MR TANSEY: I had them available, but the point seems to be conceded so it
therefore is not a particular issue. It is one particular matter which Mrs C
referred to about the surveillance.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: You ask about it.
MR TANSEY: Yes.
MRS C: Which I’m quite prepared to believe is in a number of novels. It’s just
that I haven’t personally read one.
MR TANSEY: So to save me reading anything then, to make life simpler for
everybody, would you accept then that all the tradecraft without exception is in
novels?
MRS C: I’m sure it is. I don’t see it really is particularly relevant because --
but if you wish to make the point, fine.
MR TANSEY: Yes, my Lord, now it is conceded it saves having to read this
passage.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: This witness says she has not seen it; she is simply
accepting what you are putting to her, but I expect it is.
MR TANSEY: I could read out a short passage.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: I am sure you can deal with it with the Crown. If in fact
there are short passages, I expect it can be done a different way. I am rather
discouraging endless passages being read out to this witness. If that is the
only way of doing it, maybe Mrs C can be brought back, when you have the
passages and you have got them on a sheet of paper, and she can come and go
through them and say yes. I expect a police officer could say yes.
MR TANSEY: That certainly is an attractive way of dealing with it, may I say.
Subject to two matters, my Lord, that will be the end of my cross-examination.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Would you like me to rise for five minutes so that you can
think about them, because I would like to get on, and I expect the Crown would
rather re-examine after you have completed the whole of your cross-examination.
MR TANSEY: There is one matter on which I am not yet fully able to
cross-examine.
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Members of the jury, would you like to go and have five
minutes to stretch your legs, even though it is near lunch. Once you have gone I
expect Mrs C can be taken to a room. That way I do not think there is any harm
-- because we are in camera -- in your walking across the mouth of the court.
Once the usher has dealt with the jury, she can come and tell you where to go.
(Discussion in the absence of the jury and witness)
MR TANSEY: Mrs C, there is just one more matter to put to you regarding what was
put to you this morning. Is it right that there were no sightings of Viktor
Oshchenko with this defendant?
MRS C: That’s right, during the time -- in his time in
MR TANSEY: That is right, yes.
MRS C: Yes, that’s right.
MR TANSEY: My Lord, subject to one other matter which, if I may reserve
cross-examination at this stage....
MR JUSTICE BLOFELD: Yes.
MR TANSEY: Those are all the questions I have to put to Mrs C.
(The witness withdrew)