Kate Wilson

The judges are asking what value SOCA actually has - who did they interview? what questions did they ask? Perry: The problem with SOCA was that it was to be a public facing document so it is couched in somewhat general terms.

It is worth noting at this point that the SOCA report was never actually was published, probably because it was so damning. We, and even it seems the judges, have only been given a few extracted and redacted sections even now. #spycops

The police seek to rely on MK's own words to the HASC. That's rich considering they just totally threw him under a bus, and also pretty ridiculous as he is known to have lied in that interview, as well as talking about Mark Stone in the 3rd person and seems utterly mad. #spycops

The police claim is quite mad. Yes, MK lies. But those lies are in his best interests. Where he says that he didn't tell his managers it is not obvious what his interest is so the Tribunal should assume that it is true. #spycops logic at its best.

Judge: Is there any evidence, and I mean evidence in the broadest possible sense, of any officer every being subjected to disciplinary action for having engaged in a sexual relationship whilst undercover? Perry: No, there is not.

Perry: "MK did not report any romantic or sexual advance by the claimant towards him whilst he was deployed." Judge: Mr Perry, is that really how you want that point to be recorded? Apparently, yes, it is ! #spycops

It seems the police point is MK did report a sexual advance by someone else. So #spycops Cover Officer could assume anything untoward that happened with anyone else (such as me) he would know. (Note: my relationship had been going on for 10 months by then)

For anyone who wants to read the totally bonkers interview with MK that the police are heavily relying on in this case you can read it here: https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmhaff/837/130205iv.htm … #spycops