www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,1791111,00.html
The Guardian Police at scene of an anti-terror raid in Forest Gate, east London. Photograph: John Stillwell/PA Police at the scene of an anti-terror raid in Forest Gate, east London. Photograph: John Stillwell/PA Senior counter-terrorism officials now believe that the intelligence that led to the raid on a family house last Friday in a search for a chemical device about to be used to attack Britain was wrong, the Guardian has learned. Counter-terrorism officials were under pressure last night after days of meticulous search of the house in east London failed to produce anything to link the two men they arrested to a chemical plot. But a senior police officer said they had been left with "no choice" but to force entry into the house because there was specific intelligence of a threat to public safety.
Advertisement One official, with knowledge why police acted and what had been found from days of searching, said the intelligence had been acted on correctly, but added last night: "There is no viable device at that house. There does not appear to be anything there or anywhere else." As lawyers for the two arrested men continued to protest their innocence, it emerged that the man who had passed the specific information that led to the raid in which a man was shot last Friday was a police informant who had been providing intelligence about the activities of alleged Islamist militants for several weeks. This was despite previous reports quoting police sources that suggested the informant was being handled by the security service, MI5 It was the police who passed the information from the informant to MI5 officers to assess it, the Guardian understands. MI5 and police then agreed the information was specific and credible and made a joint decision it had to be acted upon immediately. It is understood that attempts to corroborate the information were not made because of the perceived need to act quickly. "If there was an immediate risk to public safety, there would not have been time to bug the house," an intelligence source said. A counter-terrorism official said: "If the intelligence was right there was a serious risk to the public. We did not know if it was right or not until we went in." Even if it suggests a 5% likelihood of something nasty, we can't take that risk". But what remains puzzling is the reliance on a single apparently uncorroborated source for information that prompted a high-profile mass raid which, even without the shooting of one of the men, would have provoked a strong reaction. Andy Hayman, the Met's assistant commissioner specialist operations, refused to apologise for the raid yesterday while admitting that so far officers had not found the specific item they were looking for - thought to be a chemical device - in the terraced house in Forest Gate which was the subject of a pre-dawn raid involving more than 250 officers, including armed teams and government scientists. He refused to end the confusion about the raid or clarify how a 23-year-old man was shot during the operation. The Independent Police Complaints Commission is likely to take months to produce a report on the shooting. Mr Hayman said officers had "no choice" but to mobilise a large number of officers and force entry into the house in Lansdown Road at 4am. During the operation Mohammed Abdul Kahar was shot before being arrested with his 20-year-old brother, Abul Koyair. Both men were being held at Paddington Green police station last night, although officers have yet to begin interviewing Mr Kahar because of his injury. "The ideal situation is you have as much time as you possibly can to get the richest of pictures," Mr Hayman said. "The dilemma is in receiving information that is so specific and of a nature that starts to put public safety into question, there is no real decision to be made. You have got to take public safety as an overriding priority. "If you chose not to do that and heaven forbid it was a wrong decision and there was some device or whatever else, you would never be able to live with yourself, that you shied away from deciding to intervene." He revealed that officers would continue examining No 46 Lansdown Road, and the neighbouring house which was owned by the family until at least the end of the week. "We haven't found what we went in there to look for yet but we have still got a number of days." So far officers have removed documents from in the men's rooms and computers. Kate Roxburgh, the solicitor representing Mr Kahar, said: "He is very anti-terrorism. He is very keen on police pursuing their inquiries but obviously he is not happy that they have focused on him. He cannot think of any involvement with anybody - or anybody who might be involved in terrorism." Julian Young, Mr Koyair's solicitor, said: "He continues to deny any involvement in the commission, preparation or instigation of any acts of terrorism."
|