Person interviewed: Michael John Smith
Place of interview: Paddington Green Police Station
Date of interview: 10th August 1992
Time commenced: 20:19 Time concluded: 20:47
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: Detective Superintendent Malcolm MacLeod, Special Branch, New Scotland Yard.
Beels: And you are sir …
Smith: Mr Michael Smith.
Beels: And you are sir …
Jefferies: Richard Jefferies, Solicitor from Tucker’s Solicitors.
Beels: We are in Interview Room No. 2, at Paddington Green Police Station. At the end of this interview, Mr Smith, I will give you a form explaining your rights of access to a copy of the tape. The date is the 10th August, and the time is 8:19 pm. I must caution you, Mr Smith, that 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 that?
Smith: I do understand.
Beels: Do you agree that the tapes were unsealed in your presence?
Smith: I do, yes I do.
Beels: Your solicitor is present, and you know that you’re entitled to free legal advice?
Smith: Correct.
Beels: This is a continuing investigation into suspected offences under the Official Secrets Act. You understand, that’s the nature of the enquiry?
Smith: Ok. I understand that.
MacLeod: Right, let’s begin Mr Smith. Perhaps you can tell me, are you in the habit of keeping large sums of money at home?
Smith: We, I thought we already, er, I do keep money at home, yes.
MacLeod: What sort of sums are you talking about?
Smith: Not enormous. I’d, er, in the region of, er, a £1,000, that sort of amount.
MacLeod: A £1,000. What at home?
Smith: My wife also keeps money. We, it’s sort of emergency funds.
MacLeod: Right, well, I see. It’s money that you accumulate, is it? I mean, it’s money you just have, you just add to from time to time, is it?
Smith: Yes, to, to keep, er, a certain balance. As I said before, I mean, I’m, I’m quite in the habit, if I want to buy something ...
MacLeod: Um, um.
Smith: …to try and do a cash deal. I mean, er …
MacLeod: So a £1,000 is quite normal for you to keep around the house, roughly?
Smith: I wouldn’t say normal, in the, er, full time. No, it goes up and down.
MacLeod: Well, we found £2,000 in cash, in £50 notes, in your house when we searched it.
Smith: Well, that doesn’t surprise me.
MacLeod: So, can you tell me where that came from?
Smith: Well, it’s money I’ve, I’ve withdrawn from my account.
Beels: In what sort of quantities?
Smith: In, in £50 notes.
Beels: On one particular occasion, on separate occasions?
Smith: I’d say separate occasions.
Beels: And approximately, how many separate occasions?
Smith: I don’t remember all this.
MacLeod: So, this is quite normal, for you to, sort of, go to the bank and draw cash, and have something like £2,000 lying around the house?
Smith: I wouldn’t say, it’s, it’s not normal, in the sense that, er, I would do it in one go, or at one time, no.
MacLeod: So, I mean, we are not to be too surprised that you’ve got £2,000 in cash in a drawer, um, in a table in your bedroom, in your bedroom in a drawer. Is that quite normal then?
Smith: Well, I think it is, yes.
MacLeod: So, that was the money, that was brought up over a period of, how long would you say you, sort of, accumulated that sort of amount of money?
Smith: Well, it doesn’t take all that long, I, I get a reasonable wage. Er, I had, er, a tax rebate a couple of years ago …
MacLeod: Um, um.
Smith: … which gave me quite a lot. I’ve just had a redundancy payment. I mean, I …
MacLeod: Yeah.
Smith: If I find …
MacLeod: But they wouldn’t pay you cash in redundancy payment, would they?
Smith: No, but I, I, I just pay that money into, into my account.
MacLeod: Sorry, I’m not clear. You paid what money into your account?
Smith: My redundancy cheque.
MacLeod: Oh, you paid that into …
Smith: It only, it only came a few days ago.
MacLeod: How much was that for?
Smith: £1,435.
MacLeod: Fourteen thirty-five?
Smith: Pounds.
MacLeod: So, what you’re saying is that some of that money might be your redundancy money?
Smith: Er, I’m not sure if that’s included, no.
MacLeod: So, are we are talking about another sum of money, another …?
Smith: Well, I … I said before, the way I do my accounting, run my finances, is, is rather chaotic. I mean, you’ll probably find that if you look at my bank statements, I, I go up and down in balance. I withdraw large amounts when I want to, and it’s, it’s just the way I, I live.
MacLeod: Yes, I find it quite interesting the way you live, in fact, that you have this amount of money lying around.
Smith: Well, no. The fact is, my wife and I, um, we run our affairs separately to a large extent financially. We have a joint account, which, er, pays for the bills. As I say, we have a fairly low mortgage, which does help to, to allow us to buy the things we want.
MacLeod: Right. So, what we’ve got here, is an envelope containing £2,000 in £50 notes, that you’ve put together over a period of, what?
Smith: I didn’t say over any period. No, I’m not, I’m not …
MacLeod: Oh, well, well, just, just for arguments sake, I mean.
Smith: Well, I’ve, I’ve only started to want to, to, to want to deal in cash more …
MacLeod: Uh, uh.
… with, em, when, when there’s been these high interest rates, and, er, credit cards, um, being questioned sometimes when I’ve, I’ve tried to do a deal in a shop, and the guy said, well you know, “I’d rather you not pay with credit card, because we have to pay a certain amount so”. I’ve, I got this habit from my father-in-law, who, who finds he can save quite a bit of money by ...
MacLeod: By shopping around and getting a discount?
Smith: By shopping around, and getting, getting the discount on cash. I mean, I, I thought this was, er, an accepted way of bartering, in, in ...
MacLeod: But, I mean, what sort of things would you go out and buy?
Smith: What, just everyday things that I might need in the house, or ...
MacLeod: So really, this £2,000, we ought not to be surprised then, that this is ...?
Smith: I don’t see why. I mean, it’s, it’s not, I mean, when you say large amounts, I mean to me ...
MacLeod: So it’s not …
Smith: I, I don’t. I, as I said before, I’m a bit of a hoarder. I don’t really feel that that amount of money bothers me.
MacLeod: So, really, what I’m saying is, that amount of money, that £2,000 I’m talking about, is money that you’ve sort of put together from your, your savings?
Smith: Yeah, yes.
MacLeod: Over just a period of, you know, time. So, you didn’t, you didn’t take that out of your bank in one large, in one single sum. It wasn’t one withdrawal, is that what you’re saying?
Smith: I would say it’s not one withdrawal, no
MacLeod: Well you are lying.
Beels: How many?
MacLeod: You are lying. You’re lying through your teeth, because the bank notes were serial. The serial numbers …
Beels: The serial numbers are sequential.
Smith: Well I don’t think they’ll all be sequential.
MacLeod: Well, I’m telling you they were. So how do you account for that?
Smith: I can’t account for that.
MacLeod: I think you’d better start thinking how you can account for that.
Beels: You’ve just said it’s an accumulation.
MacLeod: You’re lying.
Beels: Over a period of time, and yet these bank notes run in sequence, and 2 separate amounts in sequence.
Smith: I can’t account for that, I’m sorry.
MacLeod: Well, we will be able to account for it, because we should be able to find out when and where that money was withdrawn, and we will see what you have to say about that. Why are you lying about it?
Smith: I’m not lying about it.
MacLeod: You’re sitting there. You told me, to begin with, that you, it was money that you had accumulated and, you wouldn’t commit yourself as to how long it took you to put that together.
Smith: I did not say that.
MacLeod: You said it was, you said it wasn’t a single withdrawal from the bank, and then, when faced with this incontrovertible evidence where the serial numbers were sequential, £2,000 in £50 notes, and you’re telling me, you, you don’t understand how that’s happened. I’ll tell you how it’s happened, because that was a lump sum payment,
a lump sum payment, paid to you by the KGB.
Smith: That’s not true.
MacLeod: It is true, you know it’s true. I know it’s true, and that’s why I’m calling you a liar, and if I’m wrong you, you prove me wrong, tell me where I’m wrong, correct me. I don’t call people liars unless I’m absolutely on firm ground. You are a liar, and I’ll keep repeating this as long as it takes to get the message through to you, you’re lying.
Smith: Well you can accuse me of lying if you like.
MacLeod: Right, well.
Smith: It’s, it’s your prerogative to call me what you like
MacLeod: Well, I’m calling you a liar in front of your solicitor, just to make the position absolutely and unequivocally clear. Right, so we don’t get very far with that lot. Found in the same envelope with the money, there was a, a letter from somebody called Williams. Can you tell me, have a read of that letter and tell me who that is. I produce exhibit JS/40, and I’m showing it to Mr Smith now, and it’s an A4 size single sheet of paper.
Smith: I remember a letter coming for me - I think this must be it - sometime ago, which was confusing to me, it wasn’t the
letter, it was the envelope that bothered me, because the address was wrong on it, and ...
MacLeod: So, if the address was wrong, how come they got the Christian name right, and it reads "Dear Mike, a lot of water has passed under the bridge after our latest appointment, I am sure we should have a chat in the nearest future. I would be happy to meet you, as previously, at the recreation in October. With best wishes, Yours sincerely, Williams".
Smith: Yes
MacLeod: And you’re telling me that that is something that wasn’t written to you?
Smith: Well, it’s …
MacLeod: I suppose, I suppose …
Smith: … I didn’t say it wasn’t written to me. I received a letter, which I think this must be this one that you’re presenting here. The reason I, I’ve kept it, is because it was, er, something which I didn’t understand at the time. [MacLeod laughs] I don’t know why you’re laughing …
MacLeod: You, you didn’t understand it, and you kept it, and I suppose that’s where you got your £2,000 from as well, was it?
Smith: No, there was no mention of money there.
MacLeod: No, there was no mention of money, but it was in the same envelope as the money.
Smith: I don’t believe that’s true.
MacLeod: Well, I’ve got evidence that it was true, because before we removed that from the drawer where it was contained, we had it photographed, and items were photographed as they were removed, and are you going to tell me that’s wrong. Explain it?
Smith: I can’t explain ...
MacLeod: Explain it?
Smith: … what you’re saying, what I’m, I’m explaining this letter. A letter arrived for me, which I did not understand. I did not understand.
MacLeod: There’s a lot of things you don’t understand. You get strange phone calls that you don’t understand, you’ve got people standing outside your front address apparently.
Smith: I was trying to explain that to you earlier. That I, I had …
MacLeod: Who is Williams?
Smith: I do not know who Williams is.
MacLeod: You must take us for being idiots.
Smith: I had a friend at EMI Electronics called Williams, er, Dave Williams, maybe it was him. I, I don’t, I doubt it. The, the …
MacLeod: I doubt it too.
Smith: The letter that came was in an envelope, which as I say had an incorrect address on it. I was, er, I didn’t recognise the handwriting, and I found it rather puzzling. I mean, I would have thrown it away, but I, I ...
MacLeod: You kept it out of curiosity did you?
Smith: Out of curiosity, yes.
MacLeod: Uh, uh.
Beels: How was the address incorrect?
Smith: It was, I think they had the wrong road name, or something.
MacLeod: Well how …?
Smith: There was something odd about it, which ...
MacLeod: Well, how did it find its way to you then, if it had the wrong address?
Smith: Because, I wondered how it got to me, that’s why.
MacLeod: I’m sure you did. And it was addressed to you, Mr Mike Smith, was it not?
Smith: I don’t remember that, I’ve not seen the envelope for sometime.
MacLeod: I’ll show you the envelope in the next interview. Explain it, this is consistent with the kind of contact, you know, and I know, that the KGB make when trying to re-establish contact.
Smith: I do not know that, I’m, I’m afraid to say.
MacLeod: Yes you do. Yes you do.
Smith: If I had any worries about that letter, I would have thrown it away.
MacLeod: Where is your credibility, where is your credibility man. You get a letter from somebody that you don’t know?
Smith: Well, there’s no address on it, so I couldn’t, I couldn’t contact anybody about it. So what’s, what’s the point of you ...
MacLeod: How come that was found in the envelope with the £2,000, and some other notes that I’ll produce in the next meeting, once we’ve had a chance to look at them. Notes that appear to be quite interesting, regarding arrangements for rendezvous.
We’ll pay that a little bit more attention in the next interview. But let’s take one step at a time. Here we have £2,000 cash, £50 notes, serial numbers running sequentially. Here we’ve got a letter from a man named Williams, who clearly you had some recent contact with.
Smith: No.
MacLeod: And arranging to meet you again at the recreation.
Smith: I do not know ...
MacLeod: What is the recreation?
Smith: I do not know anybody called Williams
MacLeod: Where’s your credibility?
Smith: Well, where is his first name. I mean, Williams is a surname... as well?
MacLeod: Well, even I can work that out.
Smith: As I say, the only Williams I’ve, I’ve known is a man called David Williams.
MacLeod: Look, don’t take us for idiots.
Smith: I didn’t say …
MacLeod: You know as well, I’m not interested in your David Williams, you know that that’s probably a pseudonym for one of your KGB contacts.
Smith: I, I can’t answer that, because I don’t know who this man is.
MacLeod: I’m surprised you’re telling me that you’ve never seen that before.
Smith: I didn’t say I’d never seen that before.
MacLeod: Well, I, that’s what I’m saying, I’m surprised you’re not saying that.
Smith: Well, why should I?
MacLeod: Because it’s, it’s only when you’re faced with irrefutable evidence that you have to admit.
Smith: Well, well, I would not, em, say I hadn’t seen that. When you raised the point before about the, er, TSC document, I say I hadn’t seen it before, because I, I truly believed I hadn’t seen it before. You, you showed
me this, and I say yes, I have seen it before. I, I kept it because it was …
MacLeod: Yes, you’ve seen it before, but you’re denying that it is intended for you.
Smith: I didn’t deny it was intended for me. What, what I’m saying is, it came through the post. I was trying to understand who might have sent it.
MacLeod: So, you’re, you’re not denying it. It may have been, it was intended for you.
Smith: No, I didn’t say, er, I deny it, it was intended for me. I …
MacLeod: So you’re saying it was intended for you?
Smith: I don’t know.
MacLeod: It’s addressed to you. You’re Mike. You’re the only Mike at that address.
Smith: That’s correct. Well, what do you want me to say. I …
MacLeod: Well?
Smith: I saw this.
MacLeod: I’m not pursuing that line of questioning any further, because I see I’m not going to get very far.
Right, have you seen that note before. I’m going to produce exhibit JS/8, which is an A4 piece of paper with some manuscript writing on it. I’m going to show this to Mr Smith. Have you seen that before?
Smith: Yes, I think it was some, er, something I was doing at work. It was probably part of this documentation I said I walked off with on the last Friday I was there.
MacLeod: Well, talk me through it, tell me what it means, go on.
Smith: These were, um, I think they were numbers, related to contracts that we were dealing with at the company, at Hirst Research Centre.
MacLeod: Well, can we just go through them one by one. Let’s look at this top line here. Have you anything you can recall about what this relates to?
Smith: I, I, I can’t give you any factual information about these. These were contracts which came up in the course of my work, I, er, when I do my audits, have to check, er, sometimes the contracts which are in place in, in a particular, er, project group, and look up, um, the, the documentation to say which, um, - I’m trying to think of the word – which contract, which order is involved with that group. So that, when I audit them, I can ask them questions about particular contract requirements, and these, these are areas that I have actually covered in the last year or so.
MacLeod: So, what are you doing with these references in your possession?
Smith: I, I don’t know why I kept them. They should not have, um, they’ve, they’ve no relevance to me now.
MacLeod: Well, it, maybe a bit of relevance to somebody else, is that not true?
Smith: No, I don’t think so. I mean, because, because they’re purely ...
MacLeod: Purely what?
Smith: But there’s no information there, if, if you look. They’re purely, um, numbers, and, and areas, um, within the company.
MacLeod: Well, how come this was underneath the, the mat in the front of your car?
Smith: The mat in my car?
MacLeod: Yes, underneath your car mat, but at the driver’s side in your car.
Smith: I find that hard to believe, why it should be there.
MacLeod: Well, you, you find it hard to believe?
Smith: Well, well, the …
MacLeod: We found that this morning.
Smith: I had, I had a leak in the bottom of my car. I put something under there to stop it, er, making the mat wet. Maybe that was ...
MacLeod: What, you put that …
Smith: I’d, I don’t …
MacLeod: It strikes me that …
Beels: It’s bone dry.
MacLeod: It’s not the kind of leak …
Beels: There’s no water stain.
MacLeod: It’s not the kind of leaks that we’re interested in Mr Smith, I think you should concentrate, and tell me why that was under the, the mat at the front of the driver’s side of your car. That was secreted, that was a document which was intended ...
Smith: I wouldn’t say it was secreted. I …
MacLeod: If it’s under a mat, it’s got to be secreted. It wasn’t intended to be found, was it? And you’re telling me you put it under the mat?
Smith: Well, why should I put it under the mat? I didn’t …
MacLeod: Because, didn’t you say, because there was a leak under the car? I don’t know what.
Smith: I don’t know why that was there. I, I’m, I’m
MacLeod: No, I’m sure you don’t, but I’m at a bit of a loss why we put a, a document, containing those kind of references ...
Smith: Well, I, I put, er, a plastic bag under the mat, to stop it.
MacLeod: Oh, I see. Well how did that find it’s way under there then?
Smith: Maybe it was in the bag when, when I put it there. I don’t know. I, I do, I can’t …
MacLeod: But we didn’t find a plastic bag from the ...
Smith: I cannot give you an explanation, because I, I don’t know how long that has been there for, for one thing. We would have to check those contracts, and see when they actually, um, were being worked on.
MacLeod: Well, well, it strikes me that that’s a fairly, er, clean piece of paper. Does it strike you as being a clean bit of paper?
Smith: Well, it looks a bit scrappy to me, I mean.
MacLeod: Scrappy, but it’s, none the less, there’s no water marks, there’s no stains on it. It’s been handled a bit, granted, but it doesn’t appear to have been under there for a very long time. Do you agree?
Smith: I, I can’t give an opinion on that, I’m afraid.
MacLeod: Well, is it not obvious?
Smith: Well, it could have been there for 5 years, for all I know.
MacLeod: Come, come, look at it. It will be interesting to see if, what your company has to say about t