No, sir, he was fully aware.

Witness protection programme, access to government ministers, access to military, right across. There were lots and lots of concerns, yes, including the witness protection issues, yes.

I had conversations throughout May, June, July and August in terms of the investigation. I had conversations August, September, October, November with regards to the various drips of information that were coming through, and briefed those up.

Yes, and the officer from the witness protection unit was best placed to take whatever remedial action needed to be taken in regards to that. In terms of the provenance of the information, that also concerned me, yes.

I knew it was the case on some of them because it was quite obvious it was the case.

Yes. It was brought to my attention that some names here within this document may well have been from the witness protection programme. What I instructed DS Maberly to do was to contact the witness protection unit, get them to come across to our office, show them the document, get ...

No, I can't. All I can suggest is that the task has been handed to the officer from the Department of Professional Standards by one of the exhibits officers within the counter terrorism command, DC Hills, who has made various assumptions and briefed on that basis. That's all ...

Yes, I have seen it and it does relate to a number of computers, not just one.

Yes. I think it was delivered to us either the week the two defendants, Mulcaire and Goodman, pleaded guilty or the week before they pleaded guilty. It was somewhere around 20 November 2006.

I accept that.

Yes.

No. On the first issue, I accept the organisation could have taken a different tactic, if you like, and tasked to go to a number of persons of interest -- I won't term them victims -- persons of interest, if you like, and inform them of that.

With regard to the ...

Yes, that was a solution that I was putting forward. As I'd already documented in my decision log earlier in the proceedings, I think around May time, 31 May, from memory, I proffered that as an option/opportunity. Again in the latter part of the investigation, September/October time ...

I don't recall putting together a briefing note as such. And I don't know whether that decision was based upon a verbal briefing delivered or whether it was delivered in a written format. I don't recall doing the written format. I certainly remember having conversations with Phil ...

With regards to August/September time or --

No, it was my view that they weren't co-operating.

As I've already said, I was fully aware of the vast resource requirements on the counter terrorism command at that time with regard to the 72 investigations. I was aware of that because I was leading a number of those, and involved in a number of others. Had I ...

I can't recall being at a meeting. I think the decision was subsequently communicated to me.

Yes.

Not specifically, but it would have been end of September into October of 2006.

In terms of the strategy that was set at that time, yes.

I was very clear on the victim definition at that time, and that was where there was some evidence that somebody other than the individuals who legitimately ring into their DDNs had rung into their DDNs. If I go to the Blue Book, the examples of that would be where ...

Can I just follow up on that one point? I know now that some of them didn't do that. O2 I know did do that.

I know now that they didn't do that.

Yes, I accept that. With the benefit of hindsight, 2012, I think everybody in the Metropolitan Police might accept that. There was a communication strategy which was devised in 2006 and it was multifaceted. It dealt with the information that was put out for offer. Two people had been arrested ...

I accept that. In terms of the Blue Book and in terms of the document that was produced later, which was a document produced as a result of the analysis of the electronic media, which I think came to us on 23 November 2006, in relation to both those documents ...

Most of the conversations were greeted with shock, incredulity and surprise. I can't remember specifically whether one person said something or another person said something else. It resulted in me asking them whether they would support an investigation, ie supply a statement to me to say that, "I didn ...

I can't remember exactly the extent of the conversations we had at this particular time, which would have been around the late September/October time of 2006, but certainly having had the Blue Book compiled and having had the documents that were gone through and the information with regard ...

Absolutely. But if I can potentially -- or if I can add something to that -- I need to stop saying "potentially" -- if I can add something to that, yes, I would have liked to have done that, but I was an SIO on a number of terrorist investigations, I was part ...

Absolutely right. I know he was supplying journalists with his product. The issue was whether or not those journalists knew how he was obtaining that product and, knowing how he was obtaining that product, were either tasking him or receiving it, or whether they were simply blindly receiving product.

Potentially, yes.

Probably during the weekend and the days after when the Special Branch officers I'd tasked to go through the 11,000 or so sheets of paper had been completed.

We had some discussions in court around that and the answer to that question is yes, I was disappointed.

Broadly, yes. What I was seeing here was an investigator. In terms of the extent of illegal activity, so for instance was his whole week 100 per cent spent in illegal activity? I don't know. I think a substantial amount of his time was spent in illegal activity, and ...

It was into his HSBC bank account, yes.

I think from memory he was on a wage of £100,000 plus per year, and I saw a number of other invoices, if you like, we found from his address where I think he was individually paid for stories. I saw at least one for 7,000, and I ...

No.

Yes, and I think I phrase that in my decision log:

"It is clear from the documents recovered from the searches conducted that Mulcaire has been engaged in a sustained (years) period of research on behalf of News International. This assumption is based on the fact that News International have ...

Yes.

That is correct, yes.

I know the News of the World hub number was ringing into DDNs in treble figures, ie hundreds of times, yes.

No.

As I explained right at the beginning, it's very difficult because I didn't have telephone numbers to actually start point at.

I think from memory that is likely to say either Goodman or Mulcaire in terms of those accesses. So that's telling me either Goodman or Mulcaire has done that nine times.

The top of the book, if you go back to page 1 of the book, look at the very badly copied tab at the top.

Yes.

That is the telephone company is telling us that somebody had gone into the DDN of that particular person nine times.

No, it's the two columns that are on the right. It's the far right column and the one in from the far right column. So the first time you see a number appearing is number 9 on page 2.

Yes. But indeed through the days and weeks following this that was done in various guises, because as I said where you see the numbers in this Blue Book on the right-hand side in the columns to the right, those numbers, if you like, have been added as a result ...

Yes, and this comes back to an earlier conversation where I was explaining perhaps very badly the process that we had to go through to establish that evidence. To establish a full picture as to whether individuals have been intercepted and the amount of times, the airtime providers would need ...