A POLICEMAN accused of passing on secret details about an IRA bomb attack to a Manchester Evening News reporter appeared shocked when he was told of the leak, a court heard.

The jury was told Special Branch detectives investigating the Manchester bombing in 1996 were ''devastated and shocked'' and felt betrayed when the information was passed on to the journalist.

And the head of the inquiry team, Det Chief Insp Gordon Mutch, who was later arrested and charged with passing on the information, seemed just as shocked as everyone else, Manchester Crown Court was told.

''The impression he gave was one of genuine shock and he seemed as anxious as I was to find out who was the source,'' added Det ''Ben'', who was giving evidence under an assumed name.

The officer was a prosecution witness in the trial of DCI Mutch, who pleads not guilty to a charge of misconduct in a public office. The Crown alleges DCI Mutch made phone calls and even met reporter Steve Panter at an hotel in Skipton after a decision was made by the Crown Prosecution Service not to arrest and quiz a prime suspect in the bombing.

It is claimed he passed on sensitive information, which led to Mr Panter writing a front-page story naming the suspect as 31-year-old Declan McCann from South Armagh.

Det ''Ben'' said he and DCI Mutch had several discussions about the involvement of the M.E.N.

He told the court the detective chief inspector always gave the impression there was ''no way'' an officer from Special Branch had leaked the report.

''We spoke about the possibility the leak was coming from the CPS at York, and wasn't in the police,'' he told the court.

''Mr Mutch gave the impression he was as anxious as I was to find out the source of the leak.''

He said Mr Mutch admitted he knew the reporter and had ''many dealings'' with him, but never mention he had met him at the Yorkshire hotel or had been in recent telephone contact with him.

Another officer called by the prosecution, Det ''Roger'', was questioned by defence counsel Peter Wright QC. He described Mr Mutch as a ''very dedicated'' police officer and said he seemed disappointed about the publicity, which he said had undermined the inquiry.

Deputy Chief Constable David McCrone, in evidence, told the court about an ''agreement'' reached between GMP, the RUC and a senior Special Branch officer not to pass a file of evidence about the bombing to the Crown Prosecution Service.

But the agreement had lapsed in July 1998 and it was possible to pass the file to the CPS. However, he was told later by the senior Special Branch officer that the CPS felt there was insufficient evidence for a conviction and therefore insufficient grounds to arrest the suspect.

The GMP decided not to take any specific action at that stage.

Mr McCrone went on: ''But in February 1999, it was brought to my attention that the Manchester Evening News had obtained access to information which had been in the hands of GMP, in particular the report to the CPS.''

He said he met M.E.N. editor Paul Horrocks on February 25, together with the Chief Constable and the senior Special Branch officer.

Asked for his reaction at learning about the leak to the M.E.N, he told the court: ''It was one of absolute dismay. First of all because the information was in their hands, and secondly I was dismayed because of the possible consequences of that information being made public.''

Mr McCrone said that during the meeting with Mr Horrocks, it was agreed the paper would not include ''certain matters'' of which it had been made aware and also agreed not to publish the story at that stage.

Those ''matters'' were sensitive and could have damaged future operations.

After the meeting, it was decided to hold an investigation into the leak, headed by Det Supt Alan Boardman.

Subsequently, Mr Horrocks asked for another meeting at police headquarters. At this meeting, he made it clear he felt ''under increasing pressure'' about the information and feared other publications could get hold of it.

Mr McCrone said Mr Horrocks felt he had to publish because it was of public interest.

''He gave the impression he was going away to consider, but overall I formed the view he would be likely to publish in the future,'' he said. ''We did not consider taking legal advice to avoid publication.''

Proceeding

Tweet