Two “extremely related” items of intelligence obtained by MI5 within the months earlier than the Manchester Area assault weren’t shared with their companions in counter-terrorism police, the inquiry has heard.
On two separate events within the months earlier than the assault, intelligence was obtained by MI5 of which the importance was “not absolutely appreciated on the time.”
It was assessed on the time to narrate to “potential non-nefarious exercise” or to “criminality” on the a part of Salman Abedi, however, on reflection, was “extremely related to the deliberate assault”.
Nonetheless, the inquiry was advised that the knowledge was not shared or analysed by counter-terrorism police.
MI5 additionally did not share particulars that the bomber had been in contact with a topic of curiosity who had a “earlier affiliation with an extremist group in Libya.”
Labelled “Topic of Curiosity C” for the inquiry, Abedi was in contact with the person in 2015, two years earlier than the bombing, the inquiry heard.
Sir John Saunders, the inquiry chairman, has dominated that there’s “centrally vital materials” related to the query of whether or not MI5 might have prevented the assaults that can not be revealed to the general public.
In consequence, for the primary time in an inquest or inquiry since 9/11, some hearings will happen behind closed doorways.
The small print emerged after the pinnacle of Counter-Terrorism Policing in Manchester spoke of his remorse at failing to cease the assault on the world.
Detective Chief Superintendent Dominic Scally was head of intelligence for the North West Counter-Terrorism Unit on the time of the bombing and now heads up Counter-Terrorism Policing North West (CTPNW).
As he started two days of giving proof to the inquiry, Mr Scally supplied his “deepest sympathies and respect for the households of those that died and everybody affected” by the bombing.
He added: “On behalf of my colleagues within the North West Counter-Terrorism Unit, I wished to say that we work arduous every single day to guard our communities from terrorism.
“I do know it’s a supply of nice remorse that we failed to forestall this assault.”
Nick de la Poer QC, for the inquiry, mentioned he wouldn’t “press you on solutions or in any other case problem” his solutions as a result of they might maintain additional secret classes over the subsequent three weeks.
After the assault, the parliamentary intelligence and safety committee (ISC) reported “cultural variations” and incompatible IT programs between the organisations and famous “an imbalance within the relationship between MI5 and police (perceived or in any other case)”.
However, requested if he recognised the outline, Mr Scally mentioned: “That isn’t my expertise.”
The inquiry heard that the household of the bomber have been stopped by police on quite a lot of events as they travelled in and overseas.
Salman Abedi’s father, Ramadan, was topic to quite a lot of “port stops” in 2011, when the Western-backed Libyan revolution was in full swing.
On “a minimum of one event” Salman Abedi was with him, the inquiry was advised.
Mr Scally was requested if the police have been conscious of alleged hyperlinks between Ramadan Abedi, and the Libyan Islamic Combating Group (LIFG) however mentioned: “Our data of Ramadan is just not one thing I can talk about right here.”
In September 2015, Ismail Abedi, the bomber’s older brother, was stopped as he returned from his honeymoon and extremist materials discovered on his units.
He prompt it ought to have persuaded the counter-terrorism unit to refer Salman Abedi, who had been the topic of an investigation the yr earlier than, to the Stop de-radicalisation programme.
Mr Scally mentioned he couldn’t speak about what “sits outdoors” the port cease however added: “You’ve got adults with extraordinarily disagreeable materials, disgusting materials on their telephones.”
However he mentioned they might solely be referred to Stop if there was a “vulnerability” that could possibly be addressed.
“Tens of 1000’s maintain extremist views, it’s a matter for us the place is the thresholds for saying that this particular person is vulnerable to being drawn into terrorism,” he mentioned.
The inquiry continues.