Tout exposed Mark 'Stone/Kennedy' exposed as undercover police officer

[laptop]

He's took his fucking time hasn't he? Three weeks and change?

I shall expect, at the very least, some seriously polished sarcasm.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I shall expect, at the very least, some seriously polished sarcasm.

Yeah, hopefully it'll be worth the wait

 

[el-ahrairah]

is there any chance that there will anything meaningful to come out of this? i don't want to get my hopes up.

 

[laptop]

is there any chance that there will anything meaningful to come out of this? i don't want to get my hopes up.

It'll be a fucking scandal if he lets the Met get away with that "we can't enter a defence because we won't tell you if the people concerned were working for us so you have to let us off" line.

I have a sudden fear that the answer will be some kind of (partially) closed/secret process.

 

[DaveCinzano]

He's took his fucking time hasn't he? Three weeks and change?

Perhaps the weather's been different where you live

 

[SpookyFrank]

I live in an inner city. Hot weather just makes everything worse here.

 

[DaveCinzano]

It'll be a fucking scandal if he lets the Met get away with that "we can't enter a defence because we won't tell you if the people concerned were working for us so you have to let us off" line.

Certainly those who were there over the two days have expressed how exasperated the judge appeared to be with the heel-dragging, time-wasting and general dog-ate-my-homework, sir-sir-didn't-know-we-had-to-decline-fifth-declension-nouns-for-this-lesson-honest-sir behaviour of the Met's paradoxically expensive and yet so seemingly unprepared lawyers. Based on that, plus (i) the strong case put forward by the women's lawyers, who noted in detail the entirely inconsistent history of the NCND claim (both generally and specifically in terms of the spy cops); (ii) the thin case law and legislative support put forward by the Met's lawyers; and (iii) the frantic ‘Phone A Friend’ moment when a Met lawyer had to leave the court room on the judge's instruction to call her client to find out whether they considered undercover cops having sex with targets acceptable or not; it would certainly weigh more in the women's favour than the police's.

But who knows what possible environmental effects the extended hot spell may have had on Justice Bean's brain in the meantime.

 

[DaveCinzano]

PS

Ever wondered why it is Mark Jenner and John Dines in particular which the Met is so keen to avoid having to acknowledge? Or whether other actors beyond NSY might have had a say in plod's intransigence on the matter?

 

[DaveCinzano]

Police Spies Out Of Lives is saying the NCND ruling has been postponed until next Wednesday, 2 July, probably 9.30am or after.

 

[ddraig]

fucks sake

 

[Pickman's model]

I live in an inner city. Hot weather just makes everything worse here.

no it doesn't

a long hot summer relatively recently

 

[DaveCinzano]

Meanwhile, Theresa May has agreed the terms of reference with Mark Ellison QC (who undertook the damning Stephen Lawrence Independent Review) and the CPS (which released the laughably superficial Rose Report into Operation Aeroscope/Ratcliffe raid & trials, and whose boss Keir Starmer made the claim that there would be no need to initiate a full scale review of cases of people convicted on spy cop evidence or in related activity) for Ellison to, erm, lead a full review investigating potential miscarriages of justice...

Ellison will:

co-ordinate a multi-agency review, reporting to the Attorney General, to assess the possible impact upon the safety of convictions in England and Wales where relevant undercover police activity was not properly revealed to the prosecutor and considered at the time of trial. Nothing in these terms of reference affects the statutory responsibilities of the various agencies and office-holders working with the review.

The review will initially focus on the undercover police activity of the MPS’s Special Demonstration Squad and the National Public Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU) which, whilst not an MPS resource, worked to similar objectives. The review will then assess whether its scope may need to be broadened to cover other undercover police activity...

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/review-of-potential-miscarriages-of-justice

 

[Pickman's model]

Meanwhile, Theresa May has agreed the terms of reference with Mark Ellison QC (who undertook the damning Stephen Lawrence Independent Review) and the CPS (which released the laughably superficial Rose Report into Operation Aeroscope/Ratcliffe raid & trials, and whose boss Keir Starmer made the claim that there would be no need to initiate a full scale review of cases of people convicted on spy cop evidence or in related activity) for Ellison to, erm, lead a full review investigating potential miscarriages of justice...

Ellison will:


https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/review-of-potential-miscarriages-of-justice

nice picture of her on that link

she looks halfway human there.

as opposed to 100% vampire.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Potential miscarriages of justice? Off the top of my head over forty convictions have now been declared unsafe and overturned just because of the actions of one undercover officer. There's no 'potential' about it.

 

[SpookyFrank]

I hope Kennedy is enjoying sitting in exile somewhere, fucked off by his wife and kids, too shit scared to return home, and watching everything he 'achieved' during his seven years undercover unravel before his eyes.

I hope he reads this thread too.

 

[DaveCinzano]

I hope Kennedy is enjoying sitting in exile somewhere, fucked off by his wife and kids, too shit scared to return home, and watching everything he 'achieved' during his seven years undercover unravel before his eyes.

I hope he reads this thread too.

According to his testimony to the Home Affairs Select Committee, Kennedy is legally separated from his wife. However, he lied about a number of things in the evidence he gave there, so taking his word as gospel without corroboration might be unwise.

That aside, this issue is far more wide-ranging than the narrative of a few ‘rotten apples’, ‘renegade officers’, ‘cops going native’ or whatever else - the abuses were endemic to the system of infiltration.

The tactics and strategies were refined, expanded, and passed down as undercover officers themselves became spy cop managers (such as Lambert, Pearce and others); their work was in turn supported by and funded through unaccountable back channels (at the Home Office, through Special Branch, via ACPO and by way of private industry), all at the instigation of politicians; and those running the spy operations were protected by officers who are now very senior not just at the Met but also at other constabularies and police forces, and in related agencies.

 

[co-op]

That aside, this issue is far more wide-ranging than the narrative of a few ‘rotten apples’, ‘renegade officers’, ‘cops going native’ or whatever else - the abuses were endemic to the system of infiltration.

Yep. I'd guess that a lot of the individual cops concerned end up with pretty fucked up lives. I'm not inviting a ton of sympathy for them here, just pointing out that this kind of operation must have been systemic and the individual relatively low-level cops used on the ground have been used up and chucked away by the higher-ups without a great deal of concern for their long term well-being.

Some of the police involved in overseeing this kind of thing get pretty rewarding promotions and big rewards, people like Kennedy end up in exile as small-time grifters on the edge of the security industry.

 

[Citizen66]

Fucking love you Gumbo.

 

[DaveCinzano]

BOOM:

 

[ddraig]

hurrah!

 

[DaveCinzano]

There should be a statement from the women soon. In the meantime, they've posted up this primer on NCND:

Why NCND must be rejected….
By admin | Published: July 2, 2014
Ahead of today’s judgment over police obstructions to this case, here’s some background reading on why “Neither Confirm Nor Deny” must be rejected as an obstruction to justice……

(NCND = Neither Confirm Nor Deny – see here for an explanation)

• Critique of NCND by Alison, one of the women in the case – see HERE
• Legal arguments made by the womens’ lawyers – see HERE
• Seven (well-referenced) reasons “why NCND is bullshit!” – see HERE
• The women’s case began in December 2011, but the police didn’t mention NCND in relation to the case until June 2012 – see HERE
• Undercover officers contributed to the BBC’s “True Spies” programme as long ago as 2002, with the blessing of the Met – see HERE
• The most senior police officers in the country have already confirmed the identity of undercover officers – see HERE
• Mick Creedon, who leads Operation Herne, has testified about the activities of undercover officer Peter Francis to the Home Affairs Select Committee – see HERE
• Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary have stated that it is appropriate to waive NCND in the case of Mark Kennedy – see HERE (page 4)
• Several ex-undercover officers have identified themselves as such – see HERE and HERE and HERE.

Neither Confirm Nor Deny = NEITHER TRUTH NOR JUSTICE. We will keep fighting for truth and justice for the women who’s lives were abused by undercover units, and extend our solidarity to all those affected by intrusive, abusive undercover policing.​

 

[DaveCinzano]

Women's statement now up:

http://policespiesoutoflives.potage...s-of-intimate-relationships-while-undercover/

 

[DaveCinzano]

The small print:

However, he then disappointingly held that as there had been no official confirmation, “the Commissioner should not be required to admit or deny whether either of them is an undercover officer or has the real name alleged”. He went on to say “This may only postpone the day of reckoning, in the sense that if the case proceeds and no evidence is adduced to challenge that put forward by RAB and Helen Steel respectively, it appears likely that the respective factual cases put forward by them will be accepted”.

 

[DaveCinzano]

So, a pretty strong result, and despite the issues referred to above, Mr Justice Bean ultimately was not struck down with full-blown sunstroke; and it would appear that Jenner and Dines and their former employers, and perhaps most interesting of all, their subsequent employers, are not off the hook entirely.

 

[DaveCinzano]

Here's Mr Justice Bean's What I Did In The Summer Holidays:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2014/2184.html

 

[laptop]

Here's Mr Justice Bean's What I Did In The Summer Holidays:

http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2014/2184.html

Oh, yes. The sarcasm isn't bad:

(Ms Carss-Frisk mentioned a possible argument that one should never say never: it might be legitimate for an officer to sleep with someone on a single occasion in order to obtain information about an imminent terrorist act. That is so far from the present facts that I will leave discussion of it to a case in which it arises, if it ever does.)

...
The defence then goes on to deal with (or, it might be said, not deal with) the individual cases.

...
With [a few] exceptions, the pleading in the individual cases is entirely opaque.

That's several judge-speak translations of "for fuck's sake" for the file.

 

[DaveCinzano]

The third Op Herne report - about spying on family & justice campaigns - was released by the Met and Derbyshire Constabulary this lunchtime:

http://content.met.police.uk/cs/Satellite?blobcol=urldata&blobheadername1=Content-Type&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blobheadervalue1=application/pdf&blobheadervalue2=inline; filename="99/962/Operation Herne - July 2014 - SDS Reporting - Mentions of Sensitive Campaigns [PUBLIC].pdf"&blobkey=id&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobwhere=1283768671607&ssbinary=true
http://www.derbyshire.police.uk/Doc...porting---Mentions-of-Sensitive-Campaigns.pdf

It's a corker - in that Creedon admits that 17 (or 18 - he's ambiguous) family/justice campaigns were spied on by SDS between 1970 and 2005. The only one which is mentioned by name is the Lawrence family, because that was detailed in the previous Herne report, which coincided with the explosive Ellison Review.

Creedon has said that the families have been contacted but that he won't say which families/campaigns were spied on, you know, ‘out of respect for privacy, etc’. The Guardian has already identified the families of Ricky Reel, Cherry Groce and Jean Charles De Menezes as having been approached.

So let's build up some lists:

Definites

• Cherry Groce (1985)
• Stephen Lawrence (1993)
• Ricky Reel (1997)
  
• Jean Charles De Menezes (2005)

Possibles

• Kevin Gately (1974)
• Blair Peach (1979)
• Colin Roach (1983)
  
• Cynthia Jarrett (1985)
• Patrick Quinn (1990)
  
• Rolan Adams (1991)
  
• Quddus Ali (1993)
• Brian Douglas (1995)
  
• Wayne Douglas (1995)
  
• Harry Stanley (1999)
• Azelle Rodney (2005)

 

[ddraig]

but but the families weren't "under surveillance" just that "inappropriate information about them was gathered"

 

[Fozzie Bear]

Possibles

• Kevin Gately (1974)
• Blair Peach (1979)
• Colin Roach (1983)
  
• Cynthia Jarrett (1985)
• Patrick Quinn (1990)
  
• Rolan Adams (1991)
  
• Quddus Ali (1993)
• Brian Douglas (1995)
  
• Wayne Douglas (1995)
  
• Harry Stanley (1999)
• Azelle Rodney (2005)

Tunay Hassan (1987)
Michael Ferreira (1978)

 

[DaveCinzano]

David Emmanuel (2011).

Needs to be 1970-2005 to match the timeframe put forward by Creedon (also SDS was wound up in 2008; the similar NPOIU was in place from 1999 and operating nationally until 2010 merger that bundled it into NDEU along with NETCU & NDET, before NDEU was brought into Met structure in 2011, redesignated NDEDIU and its undercover unit hived off).

Started a new thread for this here:

http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...-policing-spying-on-justice-campaigns.325958/