-- with his murder, such that in 2002, many years later, the police decided to issue a fresh appeal for information in connection with his murder.
If you turn to paragraph 34 of your statement onwards, this is where you deal with this. You explain that your then husband, David Cook, who was then a detective chief superintendent, was tasked with being the public face of the Inquiry by appearing on Crimewatch. He duly made the appeal in June 2002 and you say that after the appeal was transmitted, the police received intelligence that one of the suspects had been discussing your husband's involvement in the enquiry and intended to make life difficult for him.
You explain that at this time, a police panic alarm was installed in your house, along with additional security, and you were placed under the umbrella of the witness protection unit. Again, paraphrasing, you also say, paragraph 35, that during this same period an email was received at the Crimewatch production office suggesting that you were having an affair with a senior police detective. I make it clear that was completely untrue, but it obviously caused you some concern, you say, because someone was trying to stir up trouble and damage your reputation.
Just going through the course of events chronologically, you explain at paragraphs 36 and 37 that two vans were spotted outside your home. It looked as if the vans were following your husband, and it became clear to you that your husband was being placed under surveillance.
I'm trying to paraphrase quite a long story, but you essentially find out, paragraph 37 -- the police make enquiries and it becomes clear that the vehicles were leased to News International and that you and your husband had been placed under surveillance by News International.
Paragraph 38, you explain that this series of incidents caused you great anxiety. You set out there some of the steps that you had to take and how you felt about being placed under surveillance at this time.
Before we turn back to the impact on you, please, I just want to complete the story. You tell us at paragraph 39 that Dick Fedorcio, who was the head of the MPS directorate of public affairs at the time, spoke to Rebekah Brooks, who was then the editor of the News of the World -- so prima facie the person responsible for placing you and your husband under surveillance -- and as I understand it, she didn't deny that you had been placed update the surveillance but she said that the explanation was that you and your husband were under surveillance because they were investigating suspicions that you were having an affair with each other.