Senior Met officer quizzed by MPs over undercover police – as it happenedFebruary 15, 2013
Metropolitan police’s Patricia Gallan gives evidence to MPs following Guardian revelations about undercover policing – along with victims’ lawyers and reporter Paul Lewis
The identities of an estimated 80 dead children have been used by undercover police. A police operative who used the alias Pete Black to spy on protest groups explains how they did it
Hello and welcome to live coverage of the Commons home affairs select committee’s hearing into the Guardian’s revelations about undercover policing.
Patricia Gallan, a deputy assistant commissioner in charge of the Metropolitan police’s investigation into the controversy, faces questions from MPs about the scandal, which this week widened to include the stealing by police of the identities of dead children.
Before Gallan appears, the public hearing will begin at 3.15pm with evidence from solicitors for women who feel they were duped into having relationships with undercover officers. Eleven women are currently bringing legal action against the Metropolitan police for damages. The lawyers appearing before the committee today are:
• Harriet Wistrich, solicitor, Birnberg Peirce & Partners
• Jules Carey, solicitor, Tuckers Solicitors
• Marian Ellingworth, solicitor, Tuckers Solicitors
Also speaking will be my colleague Paul Lewis, who along with fellow Guardian reporter Rob Evans two years ago broke the story that led to these hearings when they reported that police officer Mark Kennedy had lived for seven years undercover in the environmental protest movement, establishing sexual relationships with activists during the course of his work. One woman was his girlfriend for six years.
Lewis and Evans went on to report that, of nine undercover police identified by the Guardian over the past two years, eight were believed to have slept with the people they were spying on. In at least three cases, relationships between police and the women they were spying on resulted in the birth of children.
Kennedy will also give evidence today – but in private.
In a further development, this week Lewis and Evans reported that police secretly authorised undercover officers to steal the identities of around 80 dead children over three decades. (Kennedy is not thought to have done this.) In this video, a police operative who used the alias Pete Black to spy on protest groups explains how they did it.
Keith Vaz, the chair of the home affairs committee, has said he is “shocked” at the “gruesome” practice, and has said the police should inform parents whose children’s identities were used. Scotland Yard has announced an investigation into the controversy, and has said the practice is not “currently” authorised. Lord Macdonald, the former director of public prosecutions, has called for a public inquiry into undercover policing following the revelations.
We’ll be covering the hearing live here, and you can watch it on the parliament website.
Updated at 3.21pm GMT
3.21pm GMT
The committee seems to be running late – or the live broadcast is not working. Apologies.
Updated at 3.30pm GMT
3.36pm GMT
The live stream has begun. Sorry for the delay.
3.38pm GMT
Keith Vaz, the committee chair, says the committee has sat in private to take evidence from witnesses.
Now the lawyers are here to speak in public.
He starts with the issue of police using dead children’s identity.
Lawyer Jules Carey says he has been instructed by one family whose son Rod Richardson’s name was used by an undercover police officer, who infiltrated various political groups.
Updated at 3.38pm GMT
3.39pm GMT
Carey says his client wants to understand why he child’s name was used. He says he is also representing a number of women who are concerned that such operations are still carrying on.
He says he has submitted a written complaint to the police, which he believes is the complaint that has triggered a police investigation.
3.40pm GMT
Vaz asks lawyer Harriet Wistrich if there is any justification for police to use undercover tactics.
She says there is no justification for them to use sex in their work.
That is the issues she is concerned with: the “overwhelming damage” that has been caused.
All the women involved have been “very, very seriously psychologically harmed” as a result of what the police did to them, Wistrich says.
The police were aware of this, she says.
3.46pm GMT
Vaz quotes from Mr Justice Tugendhat’s recent judgment about undercover police, in which the judge used James Bond as context for police using sex during undercover work.
Wistrich asks what controls we can put on undercover police.
She says MPs could not have meant sexual relationships to have been part of the Regulation of Investigatory Practices Act.
Does the law need to be changed, Vaz asks lawyer Marian Ellingworth.
Ellingworth says sex should not be sanctioned.
Carey says RIPA cannot approve sexual relationships. The structure of the act does not envisage sexual relationships, he says. The words “personal and other relationships” cannot have been meant to include sex – they are too vague for that.
You cannot legislate to breach a fundamental right such as “bodily integrity”, Carey says.
3.49pm GMT
Tory Lorraine Fullbrook asks what the absolute legal limit should be on undercover police officers’ behaviours.
Wistrich says you have to completely stop before a sexual relationship.
Fullbrook tries to pin her down on the “absolute legal limit”, but Wistrich says that depends on the circumstances.
Vaz says Fullbrook is looking for a list of what is and isn’t acceptable.
Wistrich says again there are circumstances when different things are acceptable – for example to stop a child trafficking ring.
Carey says undercover officers shouldn’t be deployed unless it’s necessary and proportionate – political groups wouldn’t be covered, he says.
3.51pm GMT
Tory Michael Ellis repeats Tugendhat’s point that undercover policing wouldn’t surprise the public.
These kind of sexual relationships “probably happen more often to men” than to women, he claims, citing the example of Mata Hari.
He accuses the lawyers of wanting to tie the police’s hands unreasonably.
3.54pm GMT
Wistrich says using sex in this way is massively beyond the bounds of a civilised society.
Labour’s Bridget Phillipson asks if police were directed to form these relationships or did so of their own volition.
Ellingworth says the police won’t even confirm that the men in question were undercover officers, let alone say whether they were following orders.
Wistrich says the police have not yet tried to come up with a circumstance that they say are justified.
Phillipson asks if female officers have had relationships with men.
Carey says they are aware of one female officer who has been deployed in this way. None of the lawyers are instructed by males.
Wistrich says there are always exceptions, but this is really a form of “institutionalised sexism”.
The impact is massively upon women, she says.
3.57pm GMT
Labour’s David Winnick asks if it’s naive to believe the police were not aware sexual relationships were taking place involving undercover officers.
Wistrich says she believes they were, officially or unofficially.
Carey says there is a striking similarity in terms of how many of these relationships started and ended. Many of their clients felt these relationships were entered into by design by the officers. That suggests senior officers were aware of it.
Carey says the public would expect police officers to behave like James Bond if we lived in a world full of Dr Nos. But we don’t, he says.
There is no necessity for these actions, Carey says.
3.59pm GMT
Winnick raises the adopting of the names of dead children. Was this authorised?
Wistrich says she felt this would have been authorised.
Winnick asks if the lawyers consider that a particularly despicable act.
Carey says every aspect of this policing operation is “utterly depraved”. It’s very hard to quantify particular aspects.
“It’s utterly despicable,” says Wistrich.
Ellingworth agrees.
4.02pm GMT
Labour’s Chris Ruane asks how the police can be held to account here.
Wistrich says that’s what the lawyers are aiming to do.
They have met with “a complete barrage of obstacles” from the police. The police have asked for information from them but given none in return.
Wistrich says she has written to the IPCC, which is supervising an investigation into some of these issues, but got no response.
Ruane asks what the key questions that need to be answered. Wistrich suggests:
Why were the police involved in these people’s lives? What information did they gather? How can this be stopped from happening in the future?
4.05pm GMT
Carey says the principal question he would ask is whether they have read the nine principles of policing from 1828.
He reads one out: the police’s actions depend on public approval of those actions.
They’ve lost public respect through these actions, Carey says.
Tory Mark Reckless asks whether the deception by the officers means the sex they had with activists was non-consensual.
Wistrich says that’s a very good point. She’s written to the CPS but got no reply.
Vaz asks for copies of all these letters.
Carey says he is representing a client who had a child from one of these relationships.
Updated at 5.31pm GMT
4.11pm GMT
The Guardian’s Paul Lewis takes his seat.
Vaz asks how Lewis and Rob Evans discovered all this information.
Lewis says they spoke to police officers while working on a book related to this. He says the police officers were not just using the names of dead children, they were adopting many aspects of that person’s identity.
Where does the figure of 80 officers using this tactic come from, Vaz asks.
It’s an estimate, says Lewis. He’d like to hear from the Met police about this. It’s possible it could be fewer or more than 80 officers.
Carey’s complaint comes from 2003, he says.
Vaz says it’s a “pretty gruesome practice” and that it must be “heartless and cruel” for the parents not to have been informed.
Lewis ask if this was limited to the Special Demonstration Squad or was used more widely.
4.13pm GMT
Lewis says he has spoken to people whose children’s identities have been used in this way.
He says the Met police have placed the families of these children at some risk. Other activists could try to track down the undercover officers and seek out the family of the child whose identity was stolen. Far right groups were infiltrated in this way, Lewis says.
Vaz asks if the Met police have asked Lewis for this information.
Lewis says he has an obligation to protect his sources. He’s confident that the police know all the children’s identities.
4.15pm GMT
Vaz asks him to accept that in some circumstances the police are justified in using undercover agents.
Lewis says some undercover operations are justified, but raises the issue of proportionality. He mentions far right groups and violent animal rights groups. But in the main we are talking about non-violent activists, he says.
4.18pm GMT
Tory Michael Ellis asks if the public have a human right to be protected from crime and suggests senior officers are best-placed to decide when it’s right to use undercover officers.
He says he agrees with that.
But he begs to differ that the public would be unsurprised by officers using sex in this way.
Ellis says it was Tugendhat who said the public would be unsurprised, and he has great experience.
Lewis says Tugendhat was not referring to the public’s view, but to MPs’ view when they passed the relevant law.
4.21pm GMT
Ellis asks if Lewis has heard any account of absence of consent in these sexual relationships – discounting the overall deception.
Lewis says men and women have had sex with undercover police officers. They may argue that they did not have the necessary information to give informed consent – although Lewis says he doesn’t agree with that.
He says police say this behaviour was only happening among “bad apples”.
But he and Evans have identified nine undercover officers, and eight were having sexual relationships with activists. One officer was a woman, he says.
One undercover policeman told Lewis that of a team of 10 nine were having sexual relationships with activists.
Fullbrook asks if senior officers knew about this. Lewis says it’s likely. One undercover officer says he was told by a senior officer to use contraception. That implies the senior officer knew.
4.24pm GMT
Labour’s Bridget Phillipson says the length of the relationships involved shocked her.
Lewis says having met the victims he has found it difficult to convey their pain. He suggests the committee’s MPs think about how they would feel if their own partner turned out to be an agent of the state.
At least four children have been born as a result of these relationships, Lewis says.
Lewis says he does not believe MPs intended this in the RIPA, and would have used the words “sexual relationships” rather than “personal relationships”, and he certainly does not think they would have imagined children resulting from these relationships.
4.25pm GMT
Winnick asks if undercover agents could have done this job without embarking on sexual relationships with activists.
Lewis says some officers did not do this, so the answer is yes.
4.28pm GMT
Was it a rogue operation?
Lewis says some senior officers were unaware of the existence of the Special Demonstration Squad.
How can the police clean up this matter and restore confidence?
Openness and transparency, says Lewis. Over the last two years, the Met police have offered “very little help”.
We are heavily reliant on sources who have the courage to come forward, Lewis says.
At some stage the Met police will have to think about the best strategy to regain trust, he says.
The truth tends to come out eventually, he says.
4.30pm GMT
Deputy Assistant Commissioner Patricia Gallan of the Met police takes her place next.
4.33pm GMT
Vaz says there will be an open session and then a private session.
He says he was pretty shocked to learn about the use of dead children’s identities. Was she equally shocked?
Gallan tries to outline her role instead.
Vaz insists she answers the question.
Gallan says we are investigating something that has been going on since 1968 and it is important to understand the context.
She says she is overseeing the operation examining past practices relating to this.
She says she does not know if the figure of 80 children’s identities being used is accurate. She knows of two cases. More evidence will probably come to light, but she does not want to prejudge the investigation.
But she is very concerned at what she has heard, she says.
That is why the Met have asked the IPCC to supervise.
4.35pm GMT
Gallan says it is looking at the activities of the SDS over 40 years.
There are more than 50,000 documents to sift through and retired officers to speak to. They want to hear from anyone who has any evidence, she says.
But was she shocked, asks Vaz.
Gallan says she was “very concerned” because “it is not practice as I know it”.
That doesn’t sound very condemnatory, Vaz says.
It isn’t still happening, Gallan says. It has been confined to the SDS and the NPOIU (National Public Order Intelligence Unit).
4.38pm GMT
Vaz asks who is dealing with the operational matters regarding undercover policing. The commander of cover policing, Richard Martin, she says.
Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley is above him, she says.
She can’t give a date when the practice of using dead children’s identities stopped, she says. But it is not sanctioned today among the Met or any other police force in the country, she says.
Should the children’s parents be informed, Vaz asks.
Gallan says it’s important to find out all the circumstances and whether they are accurate.
She says ethical and legal issues also need to be considered.
Would it affect any operatives whose positions would be exposed, she says.
Vaz says some members of the committee have heard this kind of thing regarding phone-hacking.
4.39pm GMT
Vaz stresses that where the police have names and addresses now, they should inform parents now.
Gallan says she can’t give a blanket yes or no.
4.42pm GMT
It has never been practice within most areas of undercover policing to take identities in this way, she says. Only the SDS and National Public Order Intelligence Unit did this.
Thirty-one staff are working on Operation Hearn, looking into the issue of undercover police regarding the SDS, including 20 police officers.
The estimated cost to date is £1.25m.
Vaz says that sounds like a lot of money and a lot of officers, implying that they can probably get through all those 50,000 documents more quickly than they are.
Vaz asks if when she has completed her operation she will inform the parents.
Gallan says she needs to consider all the issues and can’t give a yes or no answer.
4.44pm GMT
Vaz asks if she would like to apologise for this scandal.
Gallan says at the appropriate time statements would be made.
Until she knows all the facts she can’t do anything like that, she says.
4.46pm GMT
The admission that a second unit, the NPOIU, has used dead children’s identities is very important, since that unit was only formed in 1999.
4.48pm GMT
Vaz asks if the Guardian revelations broke the news to her of the use of children’s identities. She knew of one example in September last year.
Since then has she informed the parents, Vaz asks. She says she hasn’t and she’ll explain why in closed session.
Gallan is asked again about apologising. She says there are live proceedings ongoing and the Met police will decide at the end.
4.49pm GMT
Michael Ellis asks what rank of officer was in charge of the SDS or the NPOIU.
Superintendent, Gallan says.
Were they rogue units?
Gallan says from what she has seen the practices in place weren’t following national guidelines. We need to get all the evidence, she says, so she doesn’t want to go further than that.
4.51pm GMT
Ellis asks if taking children’s identities was not accepted practice even at the time.
Gallan says it was not standard procedure.
Ellis says these were unauthorised practices even at the time. He suggests these were rogue units or units operating outside their protocols.
That’s one of the things we’re investigating, Gallan says.
A senior officer cannot authorise something that is outside of procedures at the time, Ellis says.
4.53pm GMT
Winnick asks if Gallan thinks it was in the public interest for the Guardian to give the names of some of the dead children?
She says she believes in the free press.
Has the reputation of the press been harmed?
Gallan says when used appropriately undercover work is very important, and they are worried about anything that undermines confidence in that.
Asked the same question again, she says: “I think it is.”
I’ll take that to be a yes, says Winnick.
4.55pm GMT
How far is it possible for undercover work to take place without sexual relationships, Winnick asks.
Gallan says she doesn’t believe you can authorise such activities, morally.
If something like that does happen it should be reported immediately.
Winnick asks if it’s right to assume the officers were not not told to engage in sex.
Gallan says she might be able to explain that in closed session, but it was not authorised.
4.59pm GMT
Metropolitan police commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe has said it is “almost inevitable” some undercover officers will have sexual relationships in this way although he wouldn’t encourage it, Vaz says. Doesn’t that contradict Gallan’s view?
Nick Herbert, the policing minister, has said that to ban such actions would provide a ready-made test for the targeted group, Vaz says.
What is her view?
Gallan repeats that there is a moral issue. Legally, the law is silent on that, and she will explain that in closed session, she says.
The Met police does not authorise that conduct, she repeats.
She says she cannot envisage under any circumstances a commander authorising this kind of behaviour.
5.02pm GMT
But was it prohibited, asks Vaz.
In the closed session, she will explain more, says Gallan.
Tory James Clappison suggests that some of these relationships went on for so long that senior officers must have known what was happening.
Vaz says he is disappointed that Gallan has not sent out a message that the Met police is sorry that the practice of using dead children’s identities has taken place.
Winnick adds that the committee is disappointed.
Vaz says he is concerned that she has known about one incident since September and still has not got to the bottom of it.
One of the victims followed the trail and turned up at the house of the dead child’s parents. They weren’t there, but imagine their grief if they had have been, Vaz says.
Gallan repeats her “concern” and says she is keeping an open mind about the facts.
It would be inappropriate to rush to make statements in haste, Gallan says.
5.03pm GMT
Does she have a timetable for the conclusion of Operation Hearn, Vaz asks.
Gallan says it would be wrong to put a timescale on it.
We are determined to go where the evidence takes us, she says.
5.03pm GMT
With that the committee goes into closed session.
5.36pm GMT
Summary
Here is a summary of what we have learned from that committee session.
• The use of dead children’s identities by undercover police officers was not confined to the Special Demonstration Squad, but was also a practice employed by the National Public Order Intelligence Unit, a unit that was only set up in 1999, Deputy Assistant Commissioner Patricia Gallan of the Metropolitan police revealed to the Commons home affairs committee.
• Gallan knew about one case of a child’s identity being used in this way in September last year. The practice is not sanctioned today among the Met or any other force in the country, she said.
• Including the case that came to light in September, she knew of only two cases of this happening, she said, and did not know if the Guardian’s estimate of 80 cases was accurate. But she felt that more cases would probably come to light.
• Keith Vaz, the chair of the committee, said he was “disappointed” that Gallan would not apologise for the police’s actions, saying only that she was “very concerned” at the allegations and wanted to wait until all the facts had been established before rushing to make a statement.
• Vaz was also extremely concerned that Gallan had not informed the parents in the case discovered in September last year, and wanted her to promise she would inform all the parents involved as soon as possible. Gallan would not agree to this.
• Police officers having sex with activists in groups they infiltrated was not authorised, and could not justified morally, Gallan said. She could not envisage any circumstances under which a commander would authorise this.
• She admitted the Metropolitan police’s reputation had been harmed by the scandal.
• Thirty-one staff are working on Operation Hearn, looking into the issue of undercover police, including 20 police officers. The estimated cost to date is £1.25m.
• Lawyers for women who feel they were duped into having relationships with undercover officers attacked the practice as being “depraved”, “dispicable” and beyond the bounds of a civilised society. MPs on the committee broadly seemed to agree, although Tory Michael Ellis drew attention to Mr Justice Tugendhat’s contention that such relationships would not surprise the public, accused the lawyers of wanting to tie the police’s hands unreasonable. He asked if the public had a human right to be protected from crime and suggested senior officers were best-placed to decide when it was and was not right to use undercover officers.
That’s all from me. Thanks for all your comments.
Next
Previous
Blog home
Related information
UK news
Police ·
Politics
House of Commons · Keith Vaz ·
Police must inform parents of children whose IDs were used by spies, says MP
4 Feb 2013
Keith Vaz says it would be heartless not to tell affected parents, and asks Theresa May to investigate whether practice was legal
4 Feb 2013
Police spy: ‘How we stole dead children’s identities’ – video
30 Jan 2013
Chief police officers criticise recruitment and promotion reforms
30 Jan 2013
If China lifts its game console ban, what will adults panic about next?
Should outsiders be allowed fast-track entry into the police?
30 Jan 2013
Home secretary Theresa May will today announce plans to allow police forces to recruit senior officers from outside the service, meaning business leaders, for example, could quickly move into top jobs rather than having to start as constables pounding the beat. Many police are opposed. Do you support the move?
Paul Owen
guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 5 February 2013 14.17 GMT
Find this story at 5 February 2013
© 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.
Brother of boy whose identity was stolen by police spies demands apologyFebruary 15, 2013
Anthony Barker says police could have put family in danger by using identity of brother John, who died aged eight
John Dines, a police sergeant who adopted the identity of John Barker to pose as an environmental campaigner, pictured in the early 1990s
Undercover police were “reckless” when they stole the identity of an eight-year-old boy who had died of leukaemia, according to his brother, who is demanding an apology for putting his family at risk.
Anthony Barker, whose brother John Barker died in 1968, said he was shocked to discover the boy’s identity was resurrected and adopted by undercover police spying on political groups.
The Metropolitan police has admitted that two of its undercover units appear to have used the identities of dead children, a practice which has lasted four decades and was still going on in the 2000s.
The identity of John Barker was adopted by a police sergeant called John Dines, who posed as an environmental campaigner between 1987 and 1992.
“The danger the police put my family in – and all the other families this has happened to – is horrendous,” Barker said. An investigation by the Guardian has established police used the identities of dead children so their undercover agents could pose as real people. Barker said that in doing so, they placed innocent families at risk.
“In our case, we now discover, there was a girlfriend who was left behind when the policeman pretending to be my brother disappeared from the scene,” he said. “Apparently she was so worried about him that she tracked him down to the house we had moved out of a few years earlier.
“Now, imagine that policeman had infiltrated a violent gang or made friends with a volatile person, then disappeared, just like this man did.
“Someone wanting revenge would have tracked us down to our front door – but they wouldn’t have wanted a cup of tea and a chat, like this woman says she did.”
Although many police spies using dead children’s identities were infiltrating peaceful leftwing and environmental groups, many were also deployed in violent far-right groups.
“If we had told those sorts of people that the man they thought they had known for so many years has died as a little boy, they would have thought we were lying,” Barker said. “Who knows what would have happened to us then?”
He added: “These people could have found our family in a heartbeat. That was an absolutely reckless thing for the police to do.”
Anthony Barker, who was born the year after his brother died, said: “My parents always said he was a lovely lad. They could not afford more than one child. They only had me because John passed away.
“It totally shattered my parents when he died. You can see from photographs how much his death aged them. When I was a toddler they looked like my grandparents.”
Barker described the use of dead children’s identities as a “clinical, mechanic way of policing” and morally “horrific”. He believed his parents, who are now deceased, would have been appalled to discover a police officer was posing as their beloved son.
“In my view, these were politically motivated undercover operations. That is what I cannot understand. What kinds of crimes did these political activists commit? We’re not talking about drug dealers or terrorists. These operations must have cost hundreds of thousands of pounds, and all the while my parents were living in poverty.”
He added: “Not only is it horrendous to steal the identity of a child but by taking that identity into an unpredictable and potentially dangerous situation, they’re putting entire families at risk.”
The Met has declined to say how many dead children’s identities it believes have been used by covert agents, although the force has stressed that the practice is not currently in use.
A document seen by the Guardian indicates that the Special Demonstration Squad, one of two police units known to have used the practice, used the identities of around 80 dead children.
On Tuesday the Met’s deputy assistant commissioner Patricia Gallan told a parliamentary inquiry that a second unit involved in spying on protesters appears to have used dead children’s identities.
The second unit, the National Public Order Intelligence Unit, was founded in 1999 and operated throughout the 2000s.
It suggests the total number of dead children’s identities used by police could exceed 100.
MPs expressed their disapproval when Gallan, who is overseeing a £1.25m review of protest spying operations, refused to apologise for any hurt caused until her inquiries were complete.
She also refused to say whether she would contact the families involved, saying there were “legal and ethical issues” to consider.
Barker said: “I strongly believe all the families who this has happened to need to be told. They have been placed at risk. That is the bottom line. These were undercover operations. Anything could have happened.”
…
Amelia Hill, Paul Lewis and Rob Evans
guardian.co.uk, Wednesday 6 February 2013 16.55 GMT
Find this story at 6 February 2013
© 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.
Woman’s 18-year search for truth about police spy who used dead child’s nameFebruary 4, 2013
When the man known to his activist girlfriend as John Barker disappeared, she embarked on a journey that led her to the former home of a child whose name he used as an alias
John Dines taking part in a race in the early 1990s when he was serving as an undercover sergeant in the Metropolitan police’s special branch
John Barker was an eight-year-old boy who died of leukaemia in 1968. Nineteen years later his identity was quietly resurrected by the police. The man who adopted the boy’s identity, claiming it as his own, was John Dines, an undercover sergeant in the Metropolitan police’s special branch.
In 1987 Dines was tasked with posing as an anti-capitalist protester, feeding intelligence to his handlers in a secret unit called the special demonstration squad (SDS). It was a controversial and morally dubious deployment that lasted five years and will now return to haunt him.
Like many SDS officers, Dines had a long-term girlfriend who was a political activist. She does not want to be identified and has asked to be referred to as Clare.
Her story lays bare the emotional trauma experienced by women whom police have described as “collateral” victims of their spy operations, as well as the risks police were taking by adopting the identities of dead children.
In 1990 the man Clare knew as John Barker asked to borrow money so he could fly to New Zealand for his mother’s funeral. “The night before he got the flight to go there, he stayed at my place and kind of poured his heart out. We became emotionally close. When he got back, we got together.”
There was no funeral in New Zealand and Dines had no need to borrow money. But Clare had known Dines as a fellow protester for three years and had no reason to suspect him. The couple would end up in an intimate relationship for two years.
“He said he wanted to spend the rest of his life with me and I was madly in love with him,” she said. “He said he wanted us to have kids. He used to say he had once seen an elderly Greek couple sitting on a veranda gazing into the sunset, and that he pictured us growing old like that.”
By the summer of 1991, as part of an exit strategy, Dines began exhibiting symptoms of a mental breakdown.
“He kept talking about how he had nobody left apart from me,” Clare said. “His parents had both died. He had no brothers and sisters. The only woman that he had ever loved before me, a woman called Debbie, had left him. He said he was convinced I was going to do the same to him.”
Dines gave the impression he wanted to run away to escape inner demons. “I saw him crying loads,” Clare said. “He told me that he had thrown all of his mother’s jewellery into a river because he thought she never loved him. He told me his parents had abused him.”
In March 1992 an emotional-sounding Dines called from Heathrow airport saying he was about to fly to South Africa. After that, Clare received two letters with South African postmarks. Then her boyfriend vanished altogether.
Clare was left distraught and confused. “I was very worried about his mental state,” she said. “I was also sick with worry that he might kill himself.”
Clare contacted the British consulate in South Africa and frantically phoned hostels she thought he may have stayed in Johannesburg. She later hired a private investigator who could find no trace of Dines.
It was the start of a journey for the truth that would last almost two decades and eventually take her to New Zealand. It was not until 2010 that she found out for sure that the man she had loved was a police spy.
For some of the time that Clare thought her boyfriend was missing abroad, he was actually working just a few miles away. When his undercover work finished, Dines changed his mullet-style haircut and returned to a desk job at the Met headquarters in Scotland Yard where, according to a colleague, he appeared “very miserable”.
In her search for clues, one of the first things Clare did was locate a copy of what she assumed was her boyfriend’s birth certificate. The document confirmed the details he had always given her: it named a city in the Midlands where he was born in January 1960. She had no idea that the identity was a forgery, or that the real John Barker had died as a boy.
In April 1993, desperate after a year of searching, Clare decided to visit Barker’s family home in the hope of finding any surviving relatives, but when she knocked on the door of the terrace house there was no answer. She went back later but the occupants said the family no longer lived there.
Looking back, she wonders what would have occurred if the dead child’s parents had opened the door. “It would have been horrendous,” she said. “It would have completely freaked them out to have someone asking after a child who died 24 years earlier.”
It was another 18 months before Clare decided to inspect the national death records. “I just suddenly got this instinct. It was a whim: I thought, I’m going to go in there and look through the death records.”
She recalls her horror when she discovered the real John Barker was dead. “It sent a chill down my spine,” she said. “When I got the certificate itself, it was so clear. The same person. The same parents. The same address. But he had died as an eight-year-old boy.”
The Guardian has been unable to find surviving relatives of the child.
The discovery turned Clare’s world upside down. “It was like a bereavement but it was not something I could talk to people about. Now suddenly he didn’t exist. This was a man I had known for five years, who I had lived with for two years. How could I trust anybody again?”
Clare now knew her boyfriend had lied about his identity, but still had no idea who he was. The idea that he might have been a police spy crossed her mind, but he might also have worked in corporate espionage or had a hidden criminal past. It was another 10 years of searching before she got closer to the truth.
Clare had two clues to go on. One was the name of a woman in New Zealand who Dines had told her was an aunt. The other was a letter in which he had made a curious reference to his biological father being a man he had never met, called Jim Dines.
The woman in New Zealand was not his aunt but, bizarrely, the mother of Dines’s real wife. Stranger still, Jim Dines was, in fact, the police officer’s real father and had brought him up in London.
Clare has no idea why the undercover police officer chose to compromise his deployment by giving Clare cryptic references to people in his real life. Perhaps he was psychologically traumatised by his dual identities and wanted to leave a trail that would allow Clare to find him.
Whatever his reason, the clues led Clare to a public archive in New Zealand. It was there, in 2003, that she made a crucial connection: a document that linked Dines with the woman he married, Debbie.
Clare instantly realised they must have been a married couple. Back in London, she ordered the couple’s wedding certificate. “What hit me like a ton of bricks is that he listed his occupation as a police officer,” she said. “When I read that, I felt utterly sick and really violated. It ripped me apart basically, just reading that.”
Clare was now agonisingly close to the truth. She knew that Dines was a police officer when he married his wife in 1977. But there was still a possibility that he gave up his job before becoming a political activist.
She shared the evidence with friends and family. Some cautioned her against concluding Dines had been a police spy. “I remember my dad and others said: ‘You’re being paranoid – that would never happen in this country.'”
…
Paul Lewis and Rob Evans
The Guardian, Sunday 3 February 2013 19.21 GMT
Find this story at 3 February 2013
© 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.
Police spies stole identities of dead childrenFebruary 4, 2013
Exclusive: Undercover officers created aliases based on details found in birth and death records, Guardian investigation reveals
John Dines, an undercover police sergeant, as he appeared in the early 1990s when he posed as John Barker, a protester against capitalism
Britain’s largest police force stole the identities of an estimated 80 dead children and issued fake passports in their names for use by undercover police officers.
The Metropolitan police secretly authorised the practice for covert officers infiltrating protest groups without consulting or informing the children’s parents.
The details are revealed in an investigation by the Guardian, which has established how over three decades generations of police officers trawled through national birth and death records in search of suitable matches.
Undercover officers created aliases based on the details of the dead children and were issued with accompanying identity records such as driving licences and national insurance numbers. Some of the police officers spent up to 10 years pretending to be people who had died.
The Met said the practice was not “currently” authorised, but announced an investigation into “past arrangements for undercover identities used by SDS [Special Demonstration Squad] officers”.
Keith Vaz, the chairman of parliament’s home affairs select committee, said he was shocked at the “gruesome” practice. “It will only cause enormous distress to families who will discover what has happened concerning the identities of their dead children,” he said. “This is absolutely shocking.”
The technique of using dead children as aliases has remained classified intelligence for several decades, although it was fictionalised in Frederick Forsyth’s novel The Day of the Jackal. As a result, police have internally nicknamed the process of searching for suitable identities as the “jackal run”. One former undercover agent compared an operation on which he was deployed to the methods used by the Stasi.
Two undercover officers have provided a detailed account of how they and others used the identities of dead children. One, who adopted the fake persona of Pete Black while undercover in anti-racist groups, said he felt he was “stomping on the grave” of the four-year-old boy whose identity he used.
“A part of me was thinking about how I would feel if someone was taking the names and details of my dead son for something like this,” he said. The Guardian has chosen not to identify Black by his real name.
The other officer, who adopted the identity of a child who died in a car crash, said he was conscious the parents would “still be grief-stricken”. He spoke on the condition of anonymity and argued his actions could be justified because they were for the “greater good”.
Both officers worked for a secretive unit called the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS), which was disbanded in 2008.
A third undercover police officer in the SDS who adopted the identity of a dead child can be named as John Dines, a sergeant. He adopted the identity of an eight-year-old boy named John Barker, who died in 1968 from leukaemia. The Met said in a statement: “We are not prepared to confirm nor deny the deployment of individuals on specific operations.”
The force added: “A formal complaint has been received which is being investigated by the DPS [Directorate for Professional Standards] and we appreciate the concerns that have been raised. The DPS inquiry is taking place in conjunction with Operation Herne’s investigation into the wider issue of past arrangements for undercover identities used by SDS officers. We can confirm that the practice referred to in the complaint is not something that would currently be authorised in the [Met police].”
There is a suggestion that the practice of using dead infant identities may have been stopped in the mid-1990s, when death records were digitised. However, the case being investigated by the Met relates to a suspected undercover police officer who may have used a dead child’s identity in 2003.
The practice was introduced 40 years ago by police to lend credibility to the backstory of covert operatives spying on protesters, and to guard against the possibility that campaigners would discover their true identities.
Since then dozens of SDS officers, including those who posed as anti-capitalists, animal rights activists and violent far-right campaigners, have used the identities of dead children.
One document seen by the Guardian indicates that around 80 police officers used such identities between 1968 and 1994. The total number could be higher.
Black said he always felt guilty when celebrating the birthday of the four-year-old whose identity he took. He was particularly aware that somewhere the parents of the boy would be “thinking about their son and missing him”. “I used to get this really odd feeling,” he said.
To fully immerse himself in the adopted identity and appear convincing when speaking about his upbringing, Black visited the child’s home town to familiarise himself with the surroundings.
Black, who was undercover in the 1990s, said his operation was “almost Stasi-like”. He said SDS officers visited the house they were supposed to have been born in so they would have a memory of the building.
“It’s those little details that really matter – the weird smell coming out of the drain that’s been broken for years, the location of the corner Post Office, the number of the bus you get to go from one place to another,” he said.
The second SDS officer said he believed the use of the harvested identities was for the “greater good”. But he was also aware that the parents had not been consulted. “There were dilemmas that went through my head,” he said.
The case of the third officer, John Dines, reveals the risks posed to families who were unaware that their children’s identities were being used by undercover police.
During his covert deployment, Dines had a two-year relationship with a female activist before disappearing from her life. In an attempt to track down her disappeared boyfriend, the woman discovered the birth certificate of John Barker and tried to track down his family, unaware that she was actually searching for a dead child.
She said she was relieved that she never managed to find the parents of the dead boy. “It would have been horrendous,” she said. “It would have completely freaked them out to have someone asking after a child who died 24 years earlier.”
The disclosure about the use of the identities of dead children is likely to reignite the controversy over undercover police infiltration of protest groups. Fifteen separate inquiries have already been launched since 2011, when Mark Kennedy was unmasked as a police spy who had slept with several women, including one who was his girlfriend for six years.
…
Paul Lewis and Rob Evans
The Guardian, Sunday 3 February 2013 19.13 GMT
Find this story at 3 February 2013
© 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.
Did police cover up murder of ‘informant’?July 13, 2012
Family accuses Met Police of whitewash and racism and awaits result of a third inquiry
Scotland Yard has been accused of a “cover up” after it emerged that its own review into the controversial death of a man believed to be an informant did not address key evidence which suggested officers bungled the investigation.
Kester David, 53, was found burned to death under railway arches in north London two years ago. Police concluded that he had committed suicide, but his family claim that he was murdered, possibly connected to him being a police informant, and that detectives failed to carry out a proper investigation because he was black.
In response, Inspector Brian Casson conducted an internal inquiry into the initial investigation. He found that officers had made a “catalogue of errors” that amounted to “a failing in duty”.
However, The Independent has established that the Met then ordered another review, carried out in March this year by DSI Keith Dobson, which did not address Casson’s findings.
Dobson’s report, obtained by The Independent, says: “I have not discovered anything which would have altered the ‘course and direction’ of the original investigation or alter the conclusions and findings which are documented by the investigators and experts involved…Based on all the information supplied to me I concur with that conclusion.”
Last night Mr David’s brother Roger Griffith described the Dobson report as an attempted “whitewash” by the Met and part of a sustained attempt to cover up the failings of the original detectives, whom he believes were motivated by racism.
He said: “The Dobson report was a cover up which ignored everything Casson found and concluded that the original investigation was a good job. It was a complete whitewash.”
He added: “How is it right that two police officers who failed us so tragically are still on the streets? They seemed hell bent on not investigating and putting forward that it was suicide…The two officers should be suspended now, so that no other mother has to go through what our mum has been put through.”
An inquest into Mr David’s death recorded an open verdict in January 2011 amid unanswered questions and a missing DNA report. After the critical Casson report was leaked to the press, Met Commissioner Bernard Hogan-Howe ordered a new inquiry, which is still ongoing.
Inspector Casson, who was investigating the family’s complaints, found two key witnesses who had called 999 with evidence that pointed to foul play, but were never interviewed by the detectives.
One man, who was awake feeding his baby daughter, reported hearing two screams of ‘no’ by a man who sounded panicked, frightened and in pain at 4.20am. He was first interviewed by the Inspector Casson – almost 18 months after the incident.
The second caller was a Morrisson’s supermarket night shift worker who had seen a white Mercedes van in the car park, which borders the Travis Perkin yard where Mr David was found, and two men walking towards the yard at 3.45am. He had never before seen a vehicle in the car park at that time of night. The CCTV footage was never recovered.
Mr David’s burnt body was found without shoes but there was a pair of white Reebok trainers found close-by, which his family said did not belong to him. The detectives concluded that they were his because, they told the coroner, DNA taken from the shoes “would have” belonged to a close relative. This was not true; there is no mention of a close relative in the excerpt of the DNA report quoted by Casson, the same report apparently lost by the detectives so never seen by the coroner or family.
The forensic scientist actually found two DNA profiles, one was dominant so most likely belonged to regular wearer of the shoes, but this was not run against the police DNA database. Casson’s inquiry found that it was perfect match to a white man from the travelling community.
At the inquest, Detective Kirk told the coroner that the CCTV footage showing Mr David buying a canister of petrol a few hour before he is believed to have died, pointed to a planned suicide. The inquest was not shown footage from a few minutes later which showed an RAC van attend as Mr David’s car had broken down because it was out of fuel. This footage was “not discovered” by the original investigation.
Casson also found that crucial mobile phone analysis was not done.
The Casson report recommended “a severity assessment” be conducted in light of his findings. Even the Dobson report recommends they are “considered for local management action” because of the insensitivities shown to the family and the inaccurate information they passed on. But both still remain on full duty.
They family do not understand why the IPCC, which is currently investigating five alleged cases of racism, decided not to get involved pending the outcome of the criminal investigation. The IPCC said it was reviewing this decision following the family’s request not to delay the investigation.
The Met did not comment on Mr Griffith’s view that the Dobson report was a whitewash and an attempt to cover up the actions of racist officers but said: “There is a fresh on-going investigation into the death of Kester David by the Specialist Crime and Operations Directorate (SC&O1)… detectives retain an open mind about the circumstances surrounding the incident.
“An investigation into an unexplained death of this nature is reviewed as a matter of course after 28 days, usually internally, but in this case by an external police force ensure Mr David’s family is as reassured as they can be about the effectiveness of our investigative process.”
She added: “The investigation into this complaint has not been completed… the Directorate of Professional Standards awaits the outcome of the [criminal] investigation. No action has been taken against any officer at this stage. No disciplinary action can be considered until SC&O1 have finalised their investigation.”
Timeline: Kester David Case
7 July 2010 Kester David dies around 4am. His burnt body is found under railway arches of Palmers Green station, north London, at 11am.
…
Find this story at 7 July 2012
Nina Lakhani
Saturday, 7 July 2012
© independent.co.uk