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

[frogwoman]

How many police officers have been convicted of causing deaths while in police custody?

 

[detective-boy]

Yes, but they don't. Here lies the problem.

That is a problem for politicians, not the police, to resolve. They could not make the changes even if they wanted to (which, in many ways, they do - entirely handing over complaints investigation, etc. to the IPCC for instance would be something that got a lot of support within the police).

 

[Pickman's model]

They prove one thing, again and again. Just as the people of Northern Ireland knew that no soldier who killed innocent people while on duty would ever be held to account, we know that no police officer who kills innocent people while on duty will ever be held to account.

er... lee clegg and ian thain were both convicted of murder.

 

[detective-boy]

And to ensure the post revolution society stayed on course, wouldn't some of the new rev-cops have to infiltrate dissenters?

Indeed. I think the experience of the post-revolution societies we have seen suggests that the use of "secret police" is hardly something that is confined to the capitalists and monarchists!

 

[detective-boy]

If in a post-revolutionary society, some people wished to sell copies of Capitalist Boss on street corners, or hold a demo to complain about all this ruddy fairness, or to form a human chain around some wasteland to prevent tree-planting and demand more exploitation of natural resources, then I'd see no reason why they should be infiltrated, or indeed prevented or impeded.

And if they started smashing up all your nice cuddly revolutionary organisations and beating up all you nice cuddly revolutionaries ...

 

[frogwoman]

Huh? that isn't what the people infiltrated in this case did. I know, because I know one of them.

 

[Pickman's model]

And if they started smashing up all your nice cuddly revolutionary organisations and beating up all you nice cuddly revolutionaries ...

then i'm sure they'd be sent to join you in whatever pit of tartarus you'd be in.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

And if they started smashing up all your nice cuddly revolutionary organisations and beating up all you nice cuddly revolutionaries ...

How many of the people this tout spied on have done either of those things?

 

[detective-boy]

He stitched them up by lying to them.

That's not "stitching them up" in the way the phrase is generally used.

I agree that the infiltration should not be simply on the basis of lawful, political disagreement with the status quo. If it turned out to be on that basis it would be unlawful and it should be investigated and prosecuted. Preventing people and businesses from going about their lawful business by threats, violence, intimidation and disorder is not "democratic" is it? Democratic is persuading the majority of the electorate to change the law.

But I am 100% sure that it was not made on that basis but on the basis of suspected serious criminal offences (damage, assault, disorder).

 

[Proper Tidy]

He went and gathered information as directed. That is a perfectly lawful order and has nothing to do with whether he had anything personal against the or not. As I have regularly done before, I would suggest that it would be totally wrong for an individual officer to refuse to carry out a particular policing task because he happens to like the people he is told to carry it out on. The officer would be perfectly entitled to ask to see the grounds for suspecting criminal activity. They would be entitled to confirm that the necessary authorisations had been given. They would not be entitled to pick and choose what they did.

And "stitched up" usually means framed using false evidence. Please provide your evidence for the allegation that this officer provided false evidence resulting in unsafe convictions.

We had a case last year of an article in the Observer with a snout 'revealing all' about his time undercover in Youth against Racism in Europe (YRE) and Militant. The article was a bit silly really, trying to make out it was like going underground with the RAF, when everybody knows Militant are not that sort of group politically, and have never pissed about with individual direct action or squadism, but that is by the by. Everybody I know who knew this snout back in the early 90's says that he was always encouraging, essentially, squadism; to go out bashing racists & homophobes instead of building mass campaigns against them, this sort of thing. Agitating.

So, what would be your legal view of that? Is it unacceptable for police offices to attempt to create trouble, rather than just attempting to prevent it?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Damage and 'disorder' are serious criminal offences?

Not in may book. Rape, murder, gbh, etc, those are serious criminal offences.

Define 'disorder' for me, anyway.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Yes. I could. In fact I have before. There is no point in me doing so again because you will still not acknowledge it as a justification.

I'm really not that upset by your refusal to answer a rhetorical question tbh.

And no, funnily enough I don't think there can possibly be any justification for charging into a crowd of unarmed people and bashing their heads in indiscriminately. That paticular method of 'crime prevention' makes about as much sense to me as swatting a fly with a hand grenade.

 

[detective-boy]

...we know that no police officer who kills innocent people while on duty will ever be held to account.

No. You don't "know" that at all. Not least because lots of police officers who have killed innocent people whilst on duty have been held to account (i.e. investigated and prosecuted). And lots have been convicted (which is what I assume you actually mean by "held to account", seeing as you don't actually mean expected to account for their actions, you mean convicted and punished (which is not the same thing at all).

You are just spouting a lazy untruth that you have chosen to believe.

 

[krtek a houby]

If this fellow had infiltrated a far right group, would he be as villified as he is now, do you reckons?

 

[Proper Tidy]

And if they started smashing up all your nice cuddly revolutionary organisations and beating up all you nice cuddly revolutionaries ...

But that wasn't who was infiltrated here, was it? None of these people represented such a threat, did they?

 

[Streathamite]

Who is Irish then?

AKA?

The tout?

db?

AKA

 

[detective-boy]

How many police officers have been convicted of causing deaths while in police custody?

It's been gone over repeatedly on other threads. I can't be arsed doing it all again. Go look it up.

 

[AKA pseudonym]

who? the tout? AKA or db?

... and besides Wayne Rooney plays for England and his name is also Irish (as is his granny)

Im presuming Streathamite may be refering to be me as being Irish.. If you have read the thread I make mention of the touts face being familiar
btw: the clue might be in my location given here? and I have met Streathamite previously...

 

[littlebabyjesus]

It's been gone over repeatedly on other threads. I can't be arsed doing it all again. Go look it up.

You said 'lots', so you must have a rough idea. What is it?

 

[detective-boy]

Huh? that isn't what the people infiltrated in this case did. I know, because I know one of them.

YOU know that ... but the police don't until they, er, gather some information ...

 

[detective-boy]

So, what would be your legal view of that? Is it unacceptable for police offices to attempt to create trouble, rather than just attempting to prevent it?

Yes. Totally. And it is unlawful. (There is obviously a very low level of things which may be necessary to establish and maintain cover but actually agitating for offences to be committed or committing significant offences cannot be, and is not, condoned (by ordinary informants, let alone undercover officers)).

 

[Proper Tidy]

If this fellow had infiltrated a far right group, would he be as villified as he is now, do you reckons?

I have no more desire to see far right groups stifled and harassed by the state, if they are no trying to blow people up, than I do far left ones.

Always looking for hypocrisy, and always failing.

 

[Streathamite]

Problem with the police is the problem with any bureaucracy - who's interests do they serve? Who are they accountable to? Same with armed forces.

I couldn't agree more; and until a post-revolutionary society solves quis custodiet ipsos custodes, then the revolution can't be said to have succeeded

 

[detective-boy]

Damage and 'disorder' are serious criminal offences?

Yes. At the serious end of the scale. Obviously (well, obviously to anyone with the slightest ability to take an objective view ...)

 

[SpookyFrank]

He went and gathered information as directed. That is a perfectly lawful order and has nothing to do with whether he had anything personal against the or not. As I have regularly done before, I would suggest that it would be totally wrong for an individual officer to refuse to carry out a particular policing task because he happens to like the people he is told to carry it out on. The officer would be perfectly entitled to ask to see the grounds for suspecting criminal activity. They would be entitled to confirm that the necessary authorisations had been given. They would not be entitled to pick and choose what they did.

Well I personally wouldn't spend years spying on people I liked, but then I have a thing called a conscience. And all humans are entitled to pick and choose what they do as it happens. I am reminded of something my dear old nan used to say; "take your job and shove it up up your arse you wretched fascist cunt"

And "stitched up" usually means framed using false evidence. Please provide your evidence for the allegation that this officer provided false evidence resulting in unsafe convictions.

Where I come from it is more of a catch-all term encompassing cheating, betrayal and general wrongdoing towards one's fellow man.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

YOU know that ... but the police don't until they, er, gather some information ...

So what you're saying is that in over nine years of spying, he was unable to work out whether or not the group he was spying on was a terrorist threat?

Fuck me, he must have been fucking shit at his job.

 

[krtek a houby]

I have no more desire to see far right groups stifled and harassed by the state, if they are no trying to blow people up, than I do far left ones.

Always looking for hypocrisy, and always failing.

If this fellow had infiltrated a group of nonces, then?

 

[detective-boy]

I'm really not that upset by your refusal to answer a rhetorical question tbh.

It's not a "refusal". It's pointing out that we have already done this. And that you don't acknowledge the answer I give and you won't this time either ... so it's a total waste of time.

 

[DotCommunist]

If this fellow had infiltrated a group of nonces, then?

is noncing a democratic right now?

score.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

If this fellow had infiltrated a group of nonces, then?

That could be justified imo. The nonces would, by definition, be nasty people deserving of betrayal.