Classified missile programme information 'leaked by BAE worker in revenge for police mistreatment'

A former BAE Systems worker leaked classified information about a missile programme in revenge for police mistreatment, a court has heard.

Simon Finch, 50, worked on a "highly sensitive" missiles system for Government contractors BAE Systems and QinetiQ from 1999 until he lost his job in February 2018.

Mark Heywood QC, for the prosecution, told the Old Bailey that during the course of Mr Finch's employment with both companies "he obtained a security clearance which allowed him to be privy to some detail as to the design of software for military platforms and weaponry".

The court heard that on October 28, 2018, Mr Finch, of Swansea, allegedly leaked details which he had written down from memory about the missile system that is still in use by the Armed Forces to nine recipients. They included an MP, charities, trade unions and law firms.

It was claimed he did so because he felt he had been tortured by British authorities, claiming his Article 3 rights under the Human Rights Act had been violated.

Reading from an email Mr Finch allegedly sent, Mr Heywood said: "Since the UK has refused me any justice, compensation, or even treatment for these appalling crimes then it has no right to expect my loyalty."

Mr Finch allegedly wrote that it was "particularly foolish to do this to someone who works upon classified systems, particularly if they are somewhat autistic and have a near-photographic memory".

He added that it gave him "great pleasure" to have spent "the last 10 months documenting secret, top secret and codeword information on the wide range of military systems which I have worked upon".

It is claimed that he said the information "has been sent (freely) to a number of hostile foreign governments".

Within the email, Mr Finch is also alleged to have asked: "If the nation does not care for my security then why should I care for national security?"

He called on other nations to neither "share" nor "buy" military equipment from the UK. "Frankly, I hope I cause significant financial damage to the entire nation," he said.

The court also heard that when a criminal investigation was launched into the alleged disclosure, Mr Finch refused to hand over passcodes to his electronic devices to investigating officers.

Mr Heywood said a series of events had led Mr Finch, who he described as a "highly intelligent man" to "“plot a very deliberate kind of retaliation".

He claimed Mr Finch "wrote down" information "that had been gained through his privileged and trusted access to secret information" and then "distributed" it.

Mr Heywood added: "Having been privy to a great deal of highly sensitive information of a kind for good reason covered by the Official Secrets Act (OSA) of Parliament, he began to experience problems – problems in his personal life."

Mr Finch said he had suffered two serious homophobic assaults which "triggered" a deterioration in his health that he claimed went ignored by officers and healthcare professionals.

Reading from the list of complaints written by Mr Finch in the email, Mr Heywood said that in 2013 "the police had failed to respond to two alleged homophobic attacks that he said started his downward spiral, both of which occurred within the space of six weeks".

Mr Heywood added that Mr Finch claimed to have been subjected to "gross indignities" during his detention which included being refused time to "use the toilet such that he had to defecate on the floor".

He added that in January 2016, Mr Finch went out in public having armed himself with a hammer and a machete "because of the history to which I have referred"

Mr Heywood added that Mr Finch said he had attempted to pursue various avenues of redress, without success, and had decided "to release classified and protected information about the particular sensitive defence system that he had had access to in the course of his employment".

"He did so in both the email itself, and in one of the particular attached documents which had a digital file name of, 'Systems.doc'," he said.

"It was a word process which provided a description of the system. His motivations, he said, included that he had been repeatedly failed by the UK state, in other words, this was retaliative, retributive."

Stuart Trimmer QC, defending, said Mr Finch's "sexuality was unclear to others and in doubt to himself". He claimed that as a result "he was abused and insulted" and "when he sought protection he got none".

Mr Finch denies breaching the Official Secrets Act by making a '"damaging" disclosure and recording information which could be "useful to an enemy" of the state.

The trial continues.