A senior MI5 officer says the Manchester Arena bomber could “conceivably” have revealed his plans.
Image source, Family handouts
The authorities would have been led to “the bomb” if they had followed the Manchester Arena attacker on his return from Libya, an inquiry has heard.
Giving evidence, a senior MI5 officer agreed if Salman Abedi had been trailed when he returned to the UK, he could “conceivably” have revealed his plans.
The Manchester Arena Inquiry previously heard it was an error not to question him on 18 May 2017.
Abedi detonated a device at the venue on 22 May 2017, killing 22 people.
The MI5 officer, referred to as Witness J, has been giving evidence as the public inquiry looks into what was known about Abedi before the bombing.
The hearing was told that, following his arrival at Manchester Airport on 18 May, the 22-year-old took a bus a very short distance before getting a taxi he had ordered with a new sim card purchased at the airport.
The taxi took Abedi directly to a car that had been used to store explosives.
Pete Weatherby QC, representing families of those who died, asked if Abedi had engaged in “anti-surveillance” techniques following his arrival at the airport.
“You could clearly draw that inference,” Witness J said.
The killer would “have taken you the bomb” had he been followed, Mr Weatherby said.
“Conceivably, yes,” the witness replied, but he added that it would have taken a “high priority operation” to have detected what was happening.
The inquiry previously heard Abedi was not stopped at the airport or investigated after he arrived in the UK.
Chairman Sir John Saunders asked the witness how MI5 had concluded that a port stop – where someone is questioned and searched – could not have prevented the attack, given it cannot be known what would have been found.
Witness J said that was the view of internal MI5 experts, which he agreed with.
Image source, Greater Manchester Police
Duncan Atkinson QC, representing other bereaved relatives, said a search of Abedi’s phone could have shown recipes for explosives, images of the target or discussions of the plot.
He added that the mere act of searching and questioning him could have prevented the planned attack.
Sir John said that “on the face of it”, stopping Abedi at the border might have “caused a different result”, as could a faster internal MI5 process for reassessing people who had previously been investigated by the service.
The witness refused to say whether MI5 had asked for an associate of the Abedi brothers to be questioned at Manchester Airport on 23 March 2017.
The man, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was stopped trying to leave the UK and his phones were downloaded. He then left the country the following month.
He was travelling on a one-way ticket, carrying three phones, a large amount of cash and camouflage clothing, the inquiry heard.
One phone was later found to contain evidence showing the man ordering sulphuric acid on behalf of the Abedi brothers, which they used to make explosives.
Messages from the man to the bomber’s brother Hashem Abedi were read out in court, in which he used the word “oil” to refer to the acid, which Mr Weatherby said “undermined” any innocent explanation for his involvement.
One text said “the oil has arrived to your delight” and another “God bless you in the end and in salvation”.
Witness J told the inquiry he could not discuss “in open” what MI5 knew or did not know about the phone evidence.
Mr Weatherby also said it was a “rash statement” for MI5 to say its current assessment is that only Salman and Hashem Abedi were knowingly involved in the attack plot, given the evidence relating to other people and the fact there are formal outstanding suspects in the case.
Following the two days of evidence from the MI5 officer, John Cooper QC read out a statement on behalf of several bereaved families.
It said that it seemed clear to the families “that there have been significant failings by MI5 that need to be addressed”.
From Monday, there will be three weeks of closed hearings during which MI5 will be questioned by the inquiry’s lawyers in the absence of the families and their barristers.
Addressing Witness J directly, who was shielded from the families by a wooden box while giving evidence, he continued to read the statement.
“We are not able to part of the closed session, but we urge you on behalf of those that were murdered on that night to fully co-operate,” it said.
It added a plea for MI5 to be “humble, accountable and fully open with the inquiry legal team”, adding: “Do not fail us again.”
The inquiry continues.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.