DC Paulette Rooke
New Scotland Yard
8/10 The Broadway
London SW1H OBG
(Tel: 0208 )
29 January 2013
CC Gerald Howarth MP
Keir Starmer (DPP)
Dear DC Rooke,
As we have not been able speak as yet I will try to expedite matters by ensuring that you have the basic details and by describing what I would like to happen.
The crimes committed
The evidence I have supplied leaves Piers Morgan and Jeff Edwards with no wriggle room. There is the letter from Morgan to the PCC admitting that he received information from the police in circumstances which can only have been illegal; Edwards as the writer of the Mirror article must have been the recipient of the information and both Morgan and Edwards objectively committed perjury by denying receiving information from the police illegally whilst under oath before the Leveson Inquiry. Det Supt Curtis is condemned by his wilful refusal to interview Morgan, Edwards or anyone else at the Mirror after my initial complaint. (I have him on tape promising to interview Morgan et al during my initial meeting with him).
The political dimension
The complaints I have submitted to Elveden are part of a larger scandal which has deep political ramifications. The general scope of these can be seen from the Early Day Motion put down on my behalf by Sir Richard Body on 10 November 1999:
CONDUCT OF THE RIGHT HONOURABLE MEMBER FOR SEDGEFIELD 10:11:99
Sir Richard Body
That this House regrets that the Right honourable Member for Sedgefield [Tony Blair] attempted to persuade the Metropolitan Police to bring criminal charges against Robert Henderson, concerning the Right honourable Member’s complaints to the police of an offence against the person, malicious letters and racial insult arising from letters Robert Henderson had written to the Right honourable Member complaining about various instances of publicly-reported racism involving the Labour Party; and that, after the Crown Prosecution Service rejected the complaints of the Right honourable Member and the Right honourable Member failed to take any civil action against Robert Henderson, Special Branch were employed to spy upon Robert Henderson, notwithstanding that Robert Henderson had been officially cleared of any illegal action.
This motion is now part of the official House of Commons record – see http://edmi.parliament.uk/EDMi/EDMDetails.aspx?EDMID=16305&SESSION=702
I bring this to your attention because it was the political dimension which prevented me from getting any redress for complaints I made to the police following the publication of the Mirror story. My experience from 1997 to 2007 when Blair retired was of being in a Kafkaesque world in which, despite being subjected to harassment which ranged from death threats and an internet campaign which incited violence against me by posting my address on social media sites to regular interference with my post, I was unable to get the police to investigate meaningfully any of the complaints which arose from the Mirror’s involvement and the harassment which followed. You have a classic example in the failure of Jeff Curtis to investigate the Mirror despite having Morgan’s letter admitting to receiving police information.
That my complaints caused considerable concern to the police because of their political nature can be seen from the number of senior officers who got involved in complaints of crimes, most of which would normally be investigated by a Det Sergeant or a Detective Inspector at most. At various times I dealt with the following:
Det Chief Supt Tony Dawson – The Met’s Internal Investigations Command
Dept Supt Jeff Curtis
Chief Supt John Yates
Chief Supt Eric Brown
Supt Cliff Hughes
Supt Alex Fish
Chief Inspector Julia Wortley
Chief Inspector Ian West
Det Chief Inspector Stephen Kershaw
Despite their involvement no one was ever charged, unsurprising as no complaint was meaningfully investigated. I also met with the same obstruction from the CPS.
Documents passed to Holborn police
The documents I passed to PC G James 423EK and PC L Scully 471EK from Holborn police station were:
1.Piers Morgan’s Letter to the PCC date 16 October 1997 in which he admits receiving information from the police in circumstances which can only have been illegal.
2. A copy of the Daily Mirror story about me dated 25 March 1997 which produced the complaint to the PCC which caused Morgan to write the letter in which he admitted receiving information from the police in circumstances which can only have been illegal.
3. Copies of the then director of Presswise Mike Jempson’s correspondence on my behalf with the PCC relating to the Mirror story dated 23 December 1997, 9 January 1998, 20 January 1998, 18 February 1998, 2 March 1998.
4. My evidence to the Leveson Inquiry of Morgan ’s perjury dated 23 December 2011
5. My evidence to the Leveson Inquiry of Edwards’ perjury dated 25 March 2012
6. My original submission to the Leveson Inquiry dated 25 November 2011
7. Sir Richard Body’s Early Day Motion 10th November 1999 which dealt with the general context of the events surrounding the Mirror story with the role of the Blairs at its heart.
8. A copy of my Wisden Cricket Article Is it in the Blood? (from the July 1995 edition). It was my gross mistreatment by the mainstream British media after the publication of the article that led me ultimately to write to the Blairs asking for their assistance after all other available avenues of redress had failed me .
9. A copy of my final letter to Det Supt Curtis dated 2 December 1999, Det Supt A Bamber’s reply to that letter 13 December 1999 and the PCA’s letter dated November 1999 refusing to investigate further
10. A letter addressed to the new head of Operation Elveden Deputy Assistant Commissioner Steve Kavanagh dated 21 January 2013. A copy of this is below.
I attach copies of 1,4,5,6 and my final letter to Jeff Curtis (see 9) in digital form.
What I would like to happen
The first step would be for the two of us to have a long talk about this. Because of the political ramifications I would also like to meet DAC Steve Kavanagh .
Flag this messageOPERATION ELVEDENMonday, 25 February, 2013 11:10
From: “Paulette.Rooke@met.police.uk” <email@example.com>View contact detailsTo: firstname.lastname@example.org
I write out of courtesy just to let you know that I am still looking into your recent correspondence with this office.
I hope that you will receive a reply in the next couple of weeks.
DC PAULETTE ROOKE
JUBILEE HOUSE PUTNEY, 230-232 PUTNEY BRIDGE RD, London SW15 2PD
Internal 58526 External 020 8785 8526
Mobile 07771 553043 (office hours)
DC Paulette Rooke
New Scotland Yard
8/10 The Broadway
London SW1H OBG
John Whittingdale MP
George Eustice MP
Gerald Howarth MP
Keir Starmer (DPP)
26 February 2013
Dear DC Rooke,
Thank you for your email of 25 February. It is now a month since I passed my complaints to Operation Eleveden. I really do think an early meeting between you, me and a senior officer from Operation Elveden (preferably Deputy Assistant Commissioner Steve Kavanagh) would be fruitful.
I have provided Operation Eleveden with conclusive evidence of Piers Morgan and Jeff Edwards’ receipt of information illegally from the police and of their perjury before Leveson. Consequently, most of the investigatory work needed to bring charges has been completed. Apart from the admin involved in getting the cases to court, all that remains to be done is to interview Morgan and Edwards and to inspect the Mirror’s records and Morgan and Edwards’ private papers to see if information relating to payments for the information exist. I really cannot see what obstacle there is to proceeding with an investigation.
Morgan will not be able to deny the offence because to do so would put him in the absurd position of saying he had not written the letter, that he had no knowledge of it being sent and that the whole thing was done by someone else. That would be ridiculous if it was just a letter sent without any outside stimulation, but this letter is sent in response to a letter from the PCC. Morgan would have to argue that a correspondence initiated by the PCC had proceeded without his knowledge even though the Mirror side was made in his name.
Even without the letter it would be clear that the police had illegally passed information to the Mirror. Information in the story could only have come from the police. In addition Jeff Edwards’ story contains this: ‘A Scotland Yard source said: “By sending letters in a very unpleasant tone the writer has committed an assault. ’ Special Branch, who organise protection for MPs have been informed of the situation”. Just for the record my letters were deemed entirely legal by the CPS within hours of their receipt. It was a try-on by the Blairs.
I have spoken to Edwards once. That was on the morning of the publication of the Mirror story. When he discovered who he was speaking to he panicked immediately. I think there is a good chance that when confronted with the evidence of Morgan’s letter he will simply come clean. I have never spoken to Morgan, but I would draw your attention to the fact that he has behaved recklessly and dishonestly in the past, most notably in his fabrication of a photos of soldiers when Mirror editor , something which caused his sacking. (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2004/may/14/pressandpublishing.iraqandthemedia). Reckless people tend to be careless and impulsive. Always a plus when an investigation is under way.
My complaint against Det Supt Jeff Curtis is also straightforward. The fact that he did not interview anyone at the Mirror despite having Morgan’s letter to the PCC can be verified by checking the Met’s case notes.
If the Mirror received information from the police illegally in my case, it is not unreasonable to suspect that this was a widespread practice within the Mirror group. Investigate my complaints and you will almost certainly find evidence of other instances. There is also the advantage for the Met in investigating the Mirror because it shows they are not merely concentrating on the Murdoch papers.
I would greatly welcome a meeting in the near future.