Note: Elveden’s decision(see first email down) to review their refusal to act is a decidedly interesting development which suggests they or the CPS are starting to get worried. Both have every reason to do so.

There is evidence and then there is evidence. Much, probably the large majority, of evidence of criminal behaviour carries with it an element of doubt. That allows for wriggle-room if the police do not want to investigate or the CPS to prosecute.

The problem for the police and the CPS is that the evidence I have supplied is completely devoid of doubt. It is simply an objective statement of what is and was.

The Mirror story contains information which shows that the Mirror’s then Chief Crime Reporter Jeff Edwards received information from the police; the tape recording of my interview with D-Supt Jeff Curtis proves he promised to interview Morgan et al at the Mirror, the police have my personal testimony that Curtis told me when closing the case that no one had been interviewed at the Mirror, something they can check with the file on my original complaint and the evidence given under oath by Morgan and Edwards at the Leveson Inquiry is simply a matter of record.

Most dramatically, there is Piers Morgan’s letter to the PCC in which he admits receiving information in circumstances which can only have been illegal. That is the most toxic item for the police and the CPS because it is a beautifully simple piece of evidence. Anyone would understand it immediately they read the words “The police source of our article (whose identity we have a moral obligation to protect…” That cannot be argued or finessed away.

I suspect that the reason the police have decided to review the original decision not to investigate is down to the CPS effectively instructing them to do so. If so, the Morgan letter will probably be the reason which persuaded them to do act. It cannot be gainsaid.

Not yet cause to get over-excited, but the fact that there is any movement from Elveden is distinctly encouraging.

Robert Henderson 30 7 2013

———————————————————————————————————————

– Forwarded Message —– From: “ Daniel.Smith3@met.police.uk” To:  anywhere156@yahoo.co.uk Sent: Monday, 29 July 2013, 15:24 Subject: RE: Operation Elveden are refusing to investigate stone-dead certain crimes

SCO12 AC Private Office & Business Support

2.211

Jubilee House Putney

230-232 Putney Bridge Road

London SW15 2PD

Telephone: Facsimile: Email:  Daniel.Smith3@met.police.uk  http://www.met.police.uk

Your ref: Our ref: Op Elveden

29th July 2013

Dear Mr Henderson

Thank you for your emails dated the 4th and 25th July 2013. I was away from work for the first two weeks of July so I apologise for the delay in responding to your email dated the 4th July.

I am able to inform you that the matters raised in your emails have been forwarded to Detective Chief Superintendent Briggs. He has asked the Department of Professional Standards conduct a review of the original investigation to establish whether or not there are any additional lines of enquiry that can be progressed. I will ensure you are informed of the progress of that review and will write to you again four weeks from now accordingly.

ours sincerely,

Detective Inspector Daniel Smith

SCO/12

Jubilee House, 230-232 Putney Bridge Road, Putney, London, SW15 2PD Mobile 07825 606 501 Office 0208 785 8924 Switchboard 0300 123 1212 email:  daniel.smith3@met.pnn.police.uk

———————————————————————————————————–

Detective Chief Supt Gordon Briggs

Senior co-ordinating officer for Operations

Weeting, Elveden and Tuleta,

Metropolitan Police

New Scotland Yard

8/10 The Broadway

London SW1H OBG

Cc

Keir Starmer (DPP)

Alison Saunders Chief Crown Prosecutor (London)

Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe (Met Commissioner)

Commander Neil Basu (Head of Operation Elveden)

Detective Inspector Daniel Smith (Operation Elveden)

John Whittingdale MP

George Eustice MP

John Whittingdale MP

Sir Gerald Howarth MP

 mark.lewis@thlaw.co.uk

30 7 2013

Dear Mr Briggs,

I have DI Daniel Smith’s email of 29 July in which informs me that you have arranged for the Met’s Department of Professional Standards (DPS) to conduct a review of my various complaints to Operation Elveden. I do not have any contact details for the DPS, so please copy this email to whoever is in charge of the review. In addition, I ask you to read not only this submission, but my correspondence with Elveden so that you are aware of the exceptionally strong evidence which is being ignored . The complete correspondence is included below.

Mr Smith tells me that there will be “a review of the original investigation to establish whether or not there are any additional lines of enquiry that can be progressed.”

It is not clear to what he refers when he writes of “the original investigation”. If he means the sham investigation conducted by Det Supt Jeff Curtis, then the matter is clear: D-Supt Curtis promised me that he would question all those involved at the Mirror (definitely Morgan and Edwards plus anyone else whom the investigation turned up). He broke his word. Neither Mr Curtis, nor any other officer, questioned anyone at the Mirror or sought to examine their accounts for evidence of payments being made to the police officer in question. I know this because he admitted it to me in a telephone call. You can also check this fact by looking at the police file relating to my original complaint. I supplied Operation Elveden with a tape recording of my meeting with Jeff Curtis on which he made his promise to me. The recording was made with his knowledge and agreement.

As to why the original investigation was sham, the answer to that is very simple. My complaints involved not merely a powerful man and organisation in Morgan and the Mirror, but the Blairs. Everyone who should have acted honestly in the matter acted dishonestly; the police, the CPS, the DPP and the Police Complaints Authority. I could not even get my MP to look at the matter because as luck would have it he is Frank Dobson, who was then a member of Blair’s Cabinet. It was a classic who shall guard the guards scenario leading to a shameful corruption of justice.

If “the original investigation” refers to an investigation conducted by Elveden, that is a misnomer because no investigation has been made. Indeed, it has been a very rum business to date because the entire matter has been conducted in writing, despite my repeated requests for meetings with Operation Elveden officers and to give a formal statement.

The evidence I have supplied to Elveden is exceptionally strong. I would be willing to put a great of money on Morgan’s letter to the PCC being the only letter from a Fleet Street editor admitting receiving information from the police illicitly the Met has received in its entire history. That piece of evidence alone should be enough to start a proper investigation into Morgan and Edwards behaviour. The facts of Jeff Curtis’ failure to act when he has cast iron evidence of a serious crime are clear and simple. The perjury allegations against Morgan and Edwards follow from those facts.

Almost certainly the Mirror’s police informant was paid. Proving that is not necessarily a lost cause. It is 16 years since the event, but in 1997 we were already well into the digital age. It is quite possible that electronic records of the Mirror’s accounts of the time still exist. In addition, I spoke to Edwards on the day the Mirror story was published and he went immediately into a flat spin. Consequently, I think there is a sporting chance that he would go to pieces and admit everything if he is placed under investigation.

Yours sincerely,

Robert Henderson

From: robert henderson [mailto: anywhere156@yahoo.co.uk] Sent: 25 July 2013 20:45 To: Kier Starmer Cc: George Eustice; John; Basu Neil – SCO12; Gerald Howarth; Mark; Smith Daniel – SCO12;  alison.saunders@cps.gsi.gov.uk Subject: Operation Elveden are refusing to investigate stone-dead certain crimes

——————————————————————————————————-

Keir Starmer (DPP)

Rose Court

2 Southwark Bridge

London

SE1 9HS

Tel: 020 3357 0000

CC

Alison Saunders Chief Crown Prosecutor (London)

Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe (Met Commissioner)

Commander Neil Basu (Head of Operation Elveden)

Detective Inspector Daniel Smith (Operation Elveden)

John Whittingdale MP

George Eustice MP

John Whittingdale MP

Sir Gerald Howarth MP

 mark.lewis@thlaw.co.uk

25 July 2013

Dear Mr Starmer

I have been copying you in to a complaint I submitted to Operation Elveden in January this year. I have done this because my previous experience with the Met persuaded me that they cannot be trusted to behave honestly when complaints involve those with power, wealth and influence. I enclose below my complete correspondence with Operation Elveden for your convenience.

There is a considerable scandal in the way Operation Elveden has responded to my complaints. Put simply they have been rejected without any investigation despite the evidence I provided being exceptionally strong.

The complaint included a cast-iron case against Piers Morgan when editor of the Daily Mirror of receiving information from the police in circumstances which can only have been illegal. The evidence I provided was just about as conclusive as you could wish: a letter from Piers Morgan to the PCC . In it he writes “The police source of our article (whose identity we have a moral obligation to protect…” I attach a copy of the letter in facsimile.

There is also conclusive evidence against the Mirror’s erstwhile Chief Crime Reporter of having received information from the police illicitly and prima facie grounds for believing Morgan and Edwards committed perjury under oath at the Leveson Inquiry when they were questioned about receiving information from the police illegally. Finally, there is the complaint against ex-Det Supt Jeff Curtis of Scotland Yard for perverting the course of justice and misconduct in a public office by failing to investigate the Mirror when the complaint about Morgan and Edwards’ illegal receipt of information was first submitted to the Metropolitan police. This again is open and shut because Curtis failed to question Morgan and Edwards or examine the Mirror accounts for evidence of payments to the police officer who supplied the information referred to in Morgan’s letter to the PCC. He did this despite promising me that he would be interviewing Morgan and Edwards – provided Operation Elveden of a tape recording of Curtis making this promise.

The full details of my complaint to Elveden can be found in the next document down which is addressed to the Deputy Assistant Commissioner Steve Kavanagh on 21/1/2013. Operation Elveden’s refusal to act (written by Detective Inspector Daniel Smith) and my response to that are the two last pieces of the Operation Elveden correspondence below.

I am writing directly to you because this is a who shall guards the guards situation. There is no point in my going to the Met to complain because they are the organisation about which I am complaining.

Nor is there any point in my making a complaint to them about criminal behaviour arising from the failure of Operation Elveden to investigate the clearest evidence of serious criminality. Consequently, I ask you to intervene to ensure that my original complaints and the criminal aspect of Operation Elveden’s refusal to investigate are properly investigated.

This has already been dragging on far too long so prompt action please.

Yours sincerely,

Robert Henderson