§ Mr. HeppellTo ask the Secretary of State for the Home Department (1) what assessment he has made of the adequacy of compliance with the present Home Office guidelines in relation to police informants; [597]
(2) when he was informed of the entry into the United Kingdom of Eaton Leonard Green; [1048]
(3) what action he proposes to take against Scotland Yard staff in respect of the Eaton Leonard Green case; [1044]
(4) if he will list (a) the charges brought against Eaton Leonard Green and (b) the charges for which he was prosecuted; and what role his Department played in determining which charges should proceed to prosecution; [1050]
(5) which senior officer or officers had responsibility for the close supervision of Eaton Leonard Green in accordance with Home Office guidelines; [1042]
(6) what factors underlay the admission of Eaton Leonard Green into the United Kingdom on 12 February 1991; [1049]
(7) when he received the first and second internal inquiries carried out by Scotland Yard into the Eaton Green case. [1043]
§ Mr. MacleanThe use of informants is an operational matter for the police. It is for each chief constable to ensure that there are proper procedures for handling informants in his force. It is also for each chief constable to take whatever action he considers appropriate if he believes one of his officers has acted improperly in handling an informant.
Eaton Green was admitted to the United Kingdom on 13 February 1991. The immigration officer who dealt with him was satisfied that he was coming to this country as a visitor and give him leave to enter for six months. Ministers were not aware of police interest in him or of his role as a police informant until after his conviction was reported in the press.
Eaton Green was charged by Nottinghamshire constabulary of:
- (i) conspiracy to commit grievous bodily harm, contrary to section 1(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977;
- (ii) conspiracy to rob, contrary to section 1(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977;
- (iii) possession of a firearm whilst committing an indictable offence—viz; robbery, contrary to section 18(1) of the Firearms Act 1968;
- (iv) possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life, contrary to section 16 of the Firearms Act 1968.
Count (i) was varied on the indictment to;
218W
- (v) conspiracy to cause actual bodily harm, contrary to section 1(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977.
Green was acquitted of charge (v) by direction of the judge. He pleaded guilty to charges (ii) and (iv) and also pleaded guilty to causing grievous bodily harm, contrary to section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. The prosecution did not proceed with the other charges, given his guilty plea.
The Home Office played no part in determining what charges should be brought against Mr. Green or what charges proceeded to prosecution.
A former detective chief inspector at Brixton police station was the senior officer responsible for controlling Eaton Green as a police informant.
The two initial inquiries in relation to this case were internal to the Metropolitan police. The report of a third inquiry is being prepared, a copy of which will be sent to my right hon. and learned Friend.