Subject: RE: Material Witness PA

From: Subject: RE: Material Witness PA Date: Thu, 18 Jun 2020 13:10:08 +0000 Can you discuss with the attache whether that is a normal approach (refusing to proceed because lack of predication)? All we want to do is ask some questions - do they really refuse to permit that, in an interview that would be happening regardless? Also, before doing that, someone should go back to the Nygaard team and confirm that there is nothing more to say. (I don't have the specifics of what we've already said, so I can't do it - but if you want me to handle let me know.) From: Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2020 9:02 AM To: Subject: FW: Material Witness PA See below on the MLAT. The only issue for you is the Nygard one I raised briefly earlier this week - the Home Office doesn't think we're predicated on Nygard, and unless we provide further specifics about Andrew's knowledge of or involvement in criminal conduct in that case, they are not going to process that aspect of the MLAT. I take it from