Person interviewed: Michael John Smith
Place of interview: Paddington Green Police Station
Date of interview: 9th August 1992
Time commenced: 14:08 Time concluded: 14:38
Other persons present: Detective Superintendent Malcolm MacLeod
Detective Sergeant Stephen John Beels
Richard Jefferies (Duty Solicitor)
Beels: This interview is being tape-recorded. I am Detective Sergeant Stephen Beels, Special Branch, New Scotland Yard. The other officer present is …
MacLeod: I am Detective Superintendent Malcolm MacLeod, also from Special Branch at New Scotland Yard.
Beels: Other persons present are …
Smith: Michael Smith.
Beels: And you are sir …
Jefferies: My name is Richard Jefferies, Duty Solicitor, from Tuckers Solicitors.
Beels: We are in Interview Room number 2, at Paddington Green Police Station. At the end of this interview I will give you, sir, a form explaining your rights of access to a copy of the tape. The date is the 9th August, and the time by my watch is 2, 8 minutes past 2, in the afternoon. I must caution you Mr Smith. You do not have to say anything unless you wish to do so, but what you say may be given in evidence. Do you understand?
Smith: Yes I do.
Beels: Do you agree that the tapes were unsealed in your presence.
Smith: No comment.
Beels: You are entitled to free legal advice, and you have your solicitor here with you. Is that correct?
Smith: That’s correct.
Beels: I understand you’ve been asked if you wish to have refreshments, something to eat, whilst in custody since yesterday, and today sir, you declined. Is that correct?
Smith: No comment.
MacLeod: Mr Smith, you’ve obviously had time to reflect on the interviews that took place yesterday. I’m aware that you did exercise your right to silence on certain points, and I would like, just very briefly, to go back on one particular, on one particular point for clarification. I was asking you yesterday about the telephone call, that you had in the morning from a man named George. You told me that it was a mis-directed, a mis-routed telephone number. Is that still your answer?
Smith: No comment
MacLeod: Right. I’m now going to play for you a tape recording, that will prove that the answers that you gave me yesterday, to that very question, will prove that you were lying. I am going to enter this as exhibit SB/1.
Beels: SJB/4 sir.
MacLeod: SJB/4
Beels: I am taking a cassette tape out of its box, and putting it into a machine which is in front of the four of us. I’m now switching it on. (Telephone conversation commences).
PAMELA SMITH: Hello
CALLER (GEORGE): Hello, is it Michael Smith?
PAMELA SMITH: Er, he lives here, who’s calling?
CALLER: This is George.
PAMELA SMITH: Who?
CALLER: George.
PAMELA SMITH: Just one moment.
MICHAEL SMITH: Hello.
CALLER: Hello, is it Michael Smith?
MICHAEL SMITH: Yes.
CALLER: Hello, I am George speaking. I am colleague of your old friend Victor. Do you remember him?
MICHAEL SMITH: Yes.
CALLER: Ok, that’s good. Now listen. It is very urgent for me to talk to you.
MICHAEL SMITH: Yeah.
CALLER: You understand?
MICHAEL SMITH: Yes.
CALLER: Ok, Ok, but I think maybe we do this another way.
MICHAEL SMITH: Ok.
CALLER: You understand?
MICHAEL SMITH: Yeah.
CALLER: Ok. I think there is telephone at the corner of Durlston Road and Cardinal Avenue. You know this?
MICHAEL SMITH: Yes, yes.
CALLER: Ok, you can maybe be there in 15 minutes?
MICHAEL SMITH: Ok.
CALLER: Yes,
MICHAEL SMITH: Yes.
CALLER: Ok. This is corner of Durlston Road and Cardinal Avenue.
MICHAEL SMITH: Ok.
CALLER: 15 minutes, very important.
MICHAEL SMITH: Ok.
CALLER: Ok. I ring you there. Bye, bye.
MICHAEL SMITH: Bye
Beels: I am removing the tape from the recorder, and I will be producing this as, I said before, as exhibit SJB/4. I will sign the tape seal now, and as part of the sealing process, Mr Smith, I would ask you would you sign.
Smith: No, I’m not going to sign that tape.
Beels: Would you sign it sir.
MacLeod: Right Mr Smith, you’ve had an opportunity to hear that tape. Have you got any comment to make?
Smith: I don’t think I have a comment, no.
MacLeod: But does that not demonstrate, that you clearly lied in your answer to me yesterday afternoon, when I asked you ...
Smith: I do not think that was the case.
MacLeod: You took instructions from a man named George.
Smith: We discussed this yesterday. I don’t know any man named George.
MacLeod: Well you’ve just spoken to him, did you not?
Smith: You’ve got a tape there, I don’t know.
MacLeod: Well that was your voice, that was your wife who answered the telephone.
And he gave you instructions to go to the corner of Durlston Road.
Smith: Well, I explained yesterday, I humoured the guy. I’m not interested in what he had to say. I didn’t act on his instructions, you know quite clearly I didn’t.
MacLeod: It’s blatantly obvious that you knew the nature of the call. You didn’t stop to ask a question, well who is it, or what’s this all about. You immediately responded.
Smith: I’ve got no comments on that tape.
MacLeod: Right, you’ve got no comment. You left your house, and you did go to that telephone box at the corner of Durlston Road and Cardinal Avenue. You entered the telephone box.
Smith: Durlston Road?
MacLeod: Yes, that’s where the telephone box is.
Smith: I didn’t go anywhere near Durlston Road.
MacLeod: I’ve got proof that you did.
Smith: I don’t even know where Durlston Road is. It’s parallel to St Albans Road. It’s nowhere near where I went.
MacLeod: You stayed there for a while inside the telephone box, obviously awaiting a telephone call, I would suggest. After that, you left the telephone box and you began
jogging up to the vicinity of another telephone box on the corner of Latchmere Lane and Tudor drive. You didn’t enter the telephone box, but you remained in the vicinity. Are you saying this happened, or didn’t happen?
Smith: I’m saying that it didn’t happen.
MacLeod: Right, Ok. I’m putting it to you, that this is the field craft that your KGB handler, Victor Oshchenko, taught you.
Smith: We did not talk about Oshchenko, it was called Ochenko?
MacLeod: That is the correct pronunciation is it?
Smith: Ochenko, that’s the name we used yesterday, not Oshchenko.
MacLeod: Well, you’ll forgive, if I haven’t got the correct pronunciation.
Smith: I don’t know what’s it … I remember Ochenko.
MacLeod: Oshchenko. I am telling you that that is the instructions that, during the time that you were trained by the KGB, that is the type of instruction that you received...
Smith: I was not trained by the KGB, as you put it, and I’ve got no comment on this, because I think you are, you’re fabricating this now.
MacLeod: I’ve got no reason to fabricate Mr Smith.
You’ve got every reason to give a satisfactory explanation, as to your behaviour yesterday, and the reason why you lied to me in interviews.
Smith: We had a full discussion on this matter yesterday, and I said no comment on any further discussions on this.
MacLeod: With regard to that particular point?
Smith: That’s correct.
MacLeod: You are aware, from the changes that have taken place in the Soviet Union in recent times, there have been quite a number of former KGB, KGB people, passing information to Western Intelligence, even selling it for financial gain.
Smith: How would I possibly have any comment on that, how would I know that?
MacLeod: Well, it’s in the public domain.
Smith: I don’t ...
MacLeod: Reported by the media. I would have thought, you say that’s not a matter that would excite your interest?
Smith: I don’t think so.
MacLeod: Are you saying that you’re not aware of the changes that have taken place in the Soviet Union?
Smith: How could I possibly be aware of what’s going on in another country?
MacLeod: I’m talking about the collapse of communism. I’m talking about the collapse of the Communist Party in the Soviet Union. You are aware of that, you are an intelligent man.
Smith: Well yes, I’m very much in favour of the way things are going.
MacLeod: And you will be aware also, of the archivage leaks that have taken place over the last number of ...
Smith: I’m not aware of that.
MacLeod: You’re not? Would it surprise you, given the changes?
Smith: It wouldn’t surprise me, no, but I’m not aware of it.
MacLeod: And it wouldn’t surprise you either, that there have been quite a number of defections, people who formerly worked for the KGB?
Smith: It’s pointless you asking me that sort of question, because how would I know?
MacLeod: Well, I think you would know, and I think, and I put it to you that we believe considerable…
Smith: Well, you’ve got to give me the reason, why you think I should know that, that sort of fact?
MacLeod: Well the reason is, and I thought I’d made this clear to you, the reason is that you were recruited by the KGB as an agent back in the early 70’s. Are you saying that’s a lie?
Smith: I’m saying that is definitely a lie.
MacLeod: If it wasn’t the early 70’s, when was it?
Smith: It wasn’t ever.
MacLeod: Are you saying you’ve never met any Russians?
Smith: I’m not saying that, no.
MacLeod: Did you attend a trade union meeting?
Smith: Well, I’m not going to answer any more questions on that type of subject, I’m sorry.
MacLeod: Well, does it cause you some discomforture?
Smith: No, it doesn’t, but I see no point in discussing something that happened that long ago.
MacLeod: Can I put it this way, you’re here on suspicion of having committed a serious breach of national security. I would suggest that, if I’ve got it wrong, or if the intelligence people have got it wrong, then it’s open to you to correct any wrong assumptions that we may have. I’m asking you simple questions about your background, whether or not you ever had any meetings with Russians, perhaps even in an innocent context, but I’m giving you the opportunity to tell me whether you ever did meet a Russian. Did you ever meet any Russians?
Smith: Why are we talking about Russians, why not other people?
MacLeod: I’m talking about the Russians, because this is central to this investigation. I’ll repeat the question. Did you ever meet any Russians?
Smith: I’m sorry, I’d better not comment on that.
MacLeod: You’re not commenting because you can’t remember?
Smith: It’s partly that, but it’s partly because I don’t think it’s right to discuss this until you put more cards on the table.
MacLeod: I thought I’d put my cards on the table, because I told you, that you were ...
Smith: I don’t think. so. We have not yet reached the meat of your case, whatever your case is.
MacLeod: Well clearly.
Smith: I’m sorry, until we get to that point, I think I’d better not comment any further.
MacLeod: You have a duty as a citizen to help the police investigate ...
Smith: That’s why I’m here, I think.
MacLeod: Yes, well, unless you had something to hide.
Smith: I’m not saying I’ve got anything to hide.
MacLeod: Well, I cannot see, for the life of me, why if you had, for example, an innocent encounter or chance meeting or introduction during your trade union days, because we do know of that, to a Russian acquaintance. I would see nothing terribly suspicious about that. Are you saying that that did not happen?
Smith: I’m not going to comment on that.
MacLeod: Are you saying that you were never recruited by the Russian Intelligence Service, in other words the KGB, to work for them?
Smith: I’m not going to comment on that.
MacLeod: You’re not commenting because it’s right, or because it might incriminate you?
Smith: I’m not commenting any further.
Beels: Mr Smith, did you ever meet with a Russian called Victor at any stage.
Smith: No comment.
Beels: Did you ever meet with a Victor, an East European, who you lunched with regularly?
Smith: No comment. I’ve explained the only Victor I know, and he’s a Spaniard.
MacLeod: I have to say, that I’m totally puzzled why a former KGB officer, who has now defected if you like, who is now co-operating with Western Intelligence, and is here
in this country, and co-operating with us directly, why that man should say to us that Michael Smith, a man who formerly worked for Thorn EMI, in a position where he had access to classified material, why would they say, or why would he say that you worked for them, if that wasn’t true? Why should he concoct ...
Smith: You’ll have to ask him.
MacLeod: We have asked him. We have no reason to question the veracity of what he’s saying to us. I’m giving you the opportunity to put your side. Can you say whether you ever met a man called Victor Oshchenko.
Smith: No comment.
MacLeod: Victor Oshchenko, or Vic as you knew him?
Smith: I didn’t know anybody as Vic.
MacLeod: And he referred to you as Mike. You met regularly, did you not, way back in the mid 70’s.
Smith: I’ve never referred to anybody as Vic, and I know that is absolutely true. As I told you before, the only person I ever knew called Victor was a Spaniard, and I call him Victor, because I think it’s more polite.
So if anybody had said I called them Vic, that is definitely untrue, because I do not like the name Vic. I would never call Victor, Vic. It sounds like cough medicine.
MacLeod: However, you addressed each other, this man, a former KGB Intelligence Officer, has accused you of working for them in the mid 1970’s. In fact, I’ll be specific, from about the start of, from May ’76, when you went to work for Thorn EMI. You went to Thorn EMI.
Smith: I did not work at Thorn EMI in May ’76, and that is not true.
Beels: Would July ’76 be correct?
Smith: That’s more correct.
MacLeod: July ’76. Right, I beg your pardon, July ’76. What prompted you to leave your former employment, to go to work for Thorn EMI?
Smith: I’ve got no comment on that.
MacLeod: I mean, that’s a fairly … Was it for career development, promotion, was it for financial ...
Smith: We’ll discuss it later, when the time comes, I think.
MacLeod: Just as a point of clarification. I see no reason in asking you a fairly simple question. I don’t think …
Smith: I’ve got nothing to hide about it, but I don’t see any reason to discuss it now, so I’m not going to comment at this stage.
MacLeod: You don’t want to comment, even though a simple question like that just might help to throw some light on this whole business, as to whether or not there is any substance to this allegation. It would give you the opportunity of putting your case.
Smith: No, I’ll put my case when the time comes.
MacLeod: It’s suggested, that the reason that you went to work for Thorn EMI, was because the KGB had recruited you. They had advised you, they had advised you to sever all links with the CPGB, the Communist Party of Great Britain, to sever all your links with the trade union movement.
Smith: I think you’re wasting your time.
MacLeod: I’m not.
Smith: I’ve got a very good explanation for what happened at that time, but I’m not going to discuss it with you at this time.
MacLeod: Even though that, that might just advantage, be to your advantage at this stage?
Smith: I don’t think it is, because we haven’t yet reached what it is I’m being accused of, so I see no point in beating about the bush on fringe subjects.
MacLeod: Right. Well, it may appear to you to be fringe subjects, but they’re not fringe subjects to me. They’re very much central to this investigation, because what I’m saying to you is that the reason you severed your links with the trade union movement, the reason you severed your links with the CPGB, was at the behest of the KGB who instructed you.
Smith: That’s not true, but ...
MacLeod: Who instructed you?
Smith: But, I’m not going to comment on that.
MacLeod: Who instructed you to adopt a more conservative ‘life style’. They encouraged you to take up tennis.
Smith: Tennis?
MacLeod: Yes tennis, because Vic bought you a, he bought you tennis racket, did he not, do you not remember that?
Smith: No, I don’t remember that.
MacLeod: He told you to start reading the Daily Telegraph.
Smith: I very rarely read the Telegraph, except on a Thursday when the job pages are there, because it’s a good paper for that. I don’t read, I very rarely read any newspapers actually, it’s only when I feel in the mood.
MacLeod: Ok, well, what I’m saying to you is that you changed your life style, you applied for a number of jobs that the KGB had drawn up for you, and one of the companies that was included in that list of companies was Thorn EMI, and that gave you access.
Smith: Look, I say that is untrue. I’ll say it on the record, that is untrue. But I will elaborate further when the time comes.
MacLeod: Well if it’s untrue, now, why don’t you elaborate now, when …?
Smith: We, I am still waiting for you to get onto the subject of why I’m here.
MacLeod: I’ve explained that to you.
Smith: You have not.
MacLeod: Well I’m coming to it now. During the time that you were engaged to Thorn EMI, you were involved in a project which was classified secret, concerning the British nuclear weapon. Is that right?
Smith: I’m not going to comment on it.
MacLeod: In fact, you were, or rather had oversight of what was going on on a particular part of that project, and that concerned … what was known as the XN715 fuze, for the free-fall nuclear weapon WE177. Is that right?
Smith: I can’t even remember that far back. If that’s right, I don’t know.
MacLeod: Do you remember working on that particular project?
Smith: I’m not going to comment on that.
MacLeod: Did you ever discuss your work outside?
Smith: We discussed that point yesterday. I made a full point on that yesterday
MacLeod: Yes, but I still wasn’t very clear on it, whether you did or you didn’t?
Smith: I think it was very clear if you listen to the tape.
Beels: When you say you’ll make no comment, to the fact that you were working on a particular secret project, is that because you can’t remember that particular project?
Smith: It’s not because I can’t remember.
Beels: Or, because you choose …
Smith: I choose not to discuss it with you people. Who I don’t know your, your security clearance, or whether I’m overstepping the mark by discussing it at all. So I choose not to comment.
MacLeod: Can I just put this to your solicitor then, if it is of any reassurance, your solicitor will be able to ascertain that, from somebody other than me, as to whether or not I have got or we have got that security clearance. I can assure you.
Smith: That would help. I don’t know whether, even, if my solicitor should be hearing this. Sorry, I think we’re in very dodgy ground here, and I think it’s better not to comment on it.
MacLeod: So, even if your solicitor was given an unequivocal assurance by somebody in authority, that we have got that clearance, you still wouldn’t be prepared to …?
Smith: Well, the people I’ve dealt with, are in a different department to you. Sorry, I don’t know the relationship between you.
MacLeod: Do you realise the type of work that we do?
Smith: I have a vague idea of what you do.
MacLeod: I’m sure you have. I can assure you we’ve got high security clearance, so I’ll come back to this again. This fuze, for the free-fall nuclear weapon, was something that Victor had tasked you to receive.
Smith: I’ve got no comment on that.
MacLeod: You made a sketch, or you made a mental note and then you made a sketch, and then you photographed the sketch, and then you handed the film to Victor.
Smith: I’ve got no comment on that.
MacLeod: I’m sure you haven’t, because that’s the central thrust of this investigation. That is what Victor is saying about you.
Smith: But if that’s true, you must have this film, and you can show it to us, and we can discuss that. Because otherwise, you’re just dealing with a hypothetical situation, and I want to see the evidence, so we can discuss the evidence, and I will confirm or not what I see.
MacLeod: Can I just ask you when you, um, when it was that you visited Vienna?
Smith: I’ve got no comment.
Beels: Have you ever visited Vienna?
Smith: No comment
Beels: It’s a simple question, Mr Smith. Have you been to Vienna?
Smith: Well, I don’t want to get involved in arguments, discussions about things which are not pertinent to the heart of this case, and that’s what I want to do, I want to get this over as quickly as possible. I want to discuss what it is that I am supposed to have done, and then we can sort it out.
Beels: I think it has now been made clear, has it not.
Smith: No it has not.
MacLeod: This is pertinent to the heart of this case.
Smith: Well, Ok, what you, the nearest we have got to it is you are talking about a film. Now I want to see, this film is obviously very important evidence.
MacLeod: This is only one aspect of the matter which is under investigation, only one aspect.