• Buro Jansen & Janssen, gewoon inhoud!
    Jansen & Janssen is een onderzoeksburo dat politie, justitie, inlichtingendiensten, overheid in Nederland en de EU kritisch volgt. Een grond- rechten kollektief dat al 40 jaar, sinds 1984, publiceert over uitbreiding van repressieve wet- geving, publiek-private samenwerking, veiligheid in breedste zin, bevoegdheden, overheidsoptreden en andere staatsaangelegenheden.
    Buro Jansen & Janssen Postbus 10591, 1001EN Amsterdam, 020-6123202, 06-34339533, signal +31684065516, info@burojansen.nl (pgp)
    Steun Buro Jansen & Janssen. Word donateur, NL43 ASNB 0856 9868 52 of NL56 INGB 0000 6039 04 ten name van Stichting Res Publica, Postbus 11556, 1001 GN Amsterdam.
  • Publicaties

  • Migratie

  • Politieklachten

  • Stephen Lawrence evidence was mislabelled, trial told

    Forensic science workers made series of mistakes handling evidence relating to one of original murder suspects

    Stephen Lawrence trial: mistakes were made in the handling of crucial evidence. Photograph: PA

    A police forensic science worker made a series of mistakes in handling evidence relating to one of two men accused of murdering Stephen Lawrence, the Old Bailey heard on Wednesday .

    Yvonne Turner, a forensic science assistant, put the wrong case number on a jacket belonging to Gary Dobson, who was a suspect in the fatal stabbing of Lawrence in April 1993. She went on to wrongly record that no tapings of fibres had been taken from the jacket – a yellow and grey bomber jacket – and a cardigan belonging to Dobson.

    Evidence secured from the cardigan and jacket belonging to Dobson as a result of advances in science, and from trousers and a sweatshirt belonging to David Norris, are key to the crown’s case that the two men were in a group of white youths who attacked Lawrence 18 years ago.

    The jury at the Old Bailey was told yesterday that exhibits relating to five suspects – including Norris, Dobson, and two other men not on trial, Jamie and Neil Acourt – were all stored together in 1993 in a disused cell at Eltham police station.

    Dobson, 36, and David Norris, 35, deny murder. They claim their clothes became contaminated with blood, hair and textile fibres belonging to Lawrence while being stored and handled by the police and forensic scientists.

    Working out of a laboratory in Lambeth, south London, Turner had been asked to examine a jacket belonging to Dobson in October 1993. But she wrote a case number relating to a robbery case she was also working on, at the top of the paperwork for the jacket.

    “I wasn’t concentrating and I wasn’t focused at the stage when I wrote the case number in, but I’ve clearly got to grips with the case as I’ve written the correct item number,” Turner told the jury.

    The court heard she also marked “no tapings” for fibres had been taken from Dobson’s jacket, even though they had.

    Turner, who had been working in forensic science full-time for seven years by 1993, made the same mistake with Dobson’s cardigan. She then admitted there had subsequently been “difficulty locating the tapings as they had been annotated with the incorrect case number”.

    The scientist, who now runs her own company as a trainer and consultant in forensic science, said she was unable to say when the exhibits were taped for fibres. Her mistakes on the case notes were corrected before 1995 when her work was reviewed.

    Detective Constable Robert Crane told the jury that the homes of five suspects, including Norris, Dobson, the Acourts and a fifth unnamed man, were searched in simultaneous dawn raids on 7 May 1993, 15 days after Lawrence was killed.

    Crane, who had responsibility for all the items of clothing seized and items belonging to Lawrence, said that some items such as the teenager’s rucksack were stored on a bed inside a disused cell at Eltham police station.

    The exhibits from the suspects were placed on the floor of the same cell, either in boxes or large rubbish sacks, he said. But he said he did not mix them up.

    The case continues.

    • The headline on this article was amended on 24 November 2011. The original headline said: Stephen Lawrence evidence was mislabelled by police, trial told. The mislabelling was done by a forensic scientist.

    Sandra Laville, crime correspondent
    The Guardian, Wednesday 23 November 2011 21.53 GMT

    Find this story at 23 November 2011

    © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

    The Police’s Dirty Secret: Channel 4 Dispatches

    Paul Lewis reports on allegations that members of a clandestine Metropolitan unit employed ethically dubious tactics, including inappropriate sexual relationships and deceit, to spy on people – claims apparently substantiated by the personal testimony of a whistleblower who operated undercover for four years. The programme investigates the actions of those tasked with infiltrating political campaigns and protest groups, and speaks to the women who say they were duped into intimate relationships with men they didn’t know were serving police officers.

    Find this story at july 2013

    Exclusive: Doreen Lawrence pledges to condemn ‘racial profiling’ spot checks in the House of Lords

    Equalities watchdog says it will investigate the operations, with one member of the public saying it was akin to ‘Nazi Germany’

    The Home Office faces investigation by the equalities watchdog over stop-and-check operations condemned by new Labour peer Doreen Lawrence.

    The Independent revealed today that officials had conducted a series of “racist and intimidatory” spot checks to search for illegal immigrants in the wake of the Government’s “go home or face arrest” campaign.

    Officers wearing stab vests conducted random checks near stations in the London suburbs of Walthamstow, Kensal Green, Stratford and Cricklewood over the past three days. Nationwide, more than 130 alleged “immigration offenders” have been arrested including in Durham, Manchester and Somerset.

    Speaking this morning Mrs Lawrence said: “Why would you focus mainly on people of colour?

    ”I’m sure there’s illegal immigrants from all countries, but why would you focus that on people of colour, and I think racial profiling is coming into it.“

    The mother of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence, asked if the spot-checks were a cause for her to take up in her new role in the House of Lords, replied: ”Definitely so.“

    Stella Creasy, the Labour MP for Walthamstow, said she had received reports from constituents who had been stopped at around 7am yesterday outside the train station by a team of around a dozen Home Office officials.

    “I’ve been told they were only stopping people who looked Asian or African and not anyone who was white,” she said. “This kind of fishing expedition in public place is entirely unacceptable. I will not have my constituents treated in such a manner.”

    The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) is now set to look into what happened, as well as the Government’s controversial poster van warning immigrants of the risk of staying in Britain illegally.

    A spokesman said: ”The Commission is writing today to the Home Office about these reported operations, confirming that it will be examining the powers used and the justification for them, in order to assess whether unlawful discrimination took place.

    “The letter will also ask questions about the extent to which the Home Office complied with its public sector equality duty when planning the recent advertising campaign targeted at illegal migration.”

    The Home Office denied that its raids were connected to the “go home” vans. However, officials could provide no evidence of similar “random searches” taking place in the past.

    Onlookers described their shock at the operations, with one member of the public saying it was akin to “Nazi Germany”. The Labour MP Barry Gardiner had written to the Home Secretary, Theresa May, demanding an investigation into the checks which he said violated “fundamental freedoms”. The raids come just a few months after Ms May took direct responsibility for immigration from the disbanded UK Border Agency.

    “We do not yet live in a society where the police or any other officers of the law are entitled to detain people without reasonable justification and demand their papers,” Mr Gardiner wrote. “The actions of your department would however appear to be hastening us in that direction.”

    Witnesses who saw the operations in London claimed the officers stopped only non-white individuals, and in Kensal Green said that when questioned, the immigration officials became aggressive.

    Phil O’Shea told the Kilburn Times: “They appeared to be stopping and questioning every non-white person, many of whom were clearly ordinary Kensal Green residents going to work. When I queried what was going on, I was threatened with arrest for obstruction and was told to ‘crack on’.”

    Another witness, Matthew Kelcher, said: “Even with the confidence of a free-born Englishman who knows he has nothing to hide, I found this whole experience to be extremely intimidating. They said they were doing random checks, but a lot of people who use that station are tourists so I don’t know what message that sends out to the world.”

    The Home Office said a Ukrainian woman aged 33, an Indian man aged 44 and a 59-year-old Brazilian woman had been detained as part of the checks at Kensal Green. At Walthamstow Central station, immigration officials arrested 14 people after officers questioned people to check if they were in the UK illegally.

    Christine Quigley tweeted: “Sounds like UKBA checkpoint today in Walthamstow only stopping minority ethnic people. FYI UKBA – not all British people are white.”

    In Stratford, photographs posted on Twitter appeared to show Home Office officials talking to men of Asian origin. The Home Office said a Bangladeshi man had been arrested on suspected immigration offences. In Cricklewood on Tuesday in a joint operation with the Met, more than 60 people were questioned near the railway station. Police said three men were arrested for “immigration matters”, and 27 men received notices requiring them to surrender at Eaton House immigration centre for further investigation.

    Muhammed Butt, leader of Brent Council, said he believed that there was no coincidence between the “go home or face arrest” van and the new random checks in Kensal Green. “I am sure it is probably connected and it leaves a very nasty taste in the mouth,” he said. “These so-called spot checks are not only intimidating but they are also racist and divisive. It appears from speaking to people who witnessed what happened in Kensal Green that it was only black and Asian-looking people who were asked to prove their identity. What about the white Australians and New Zealanders who may have overstayed their visas?”

    Oliver Wright, Adam Withnall
    Friday, 2 August 2013

    Find this story at 2 August 2013

    © independent.co.uk

    Misuse of stop and search powers risks undermining police, says watchdog

    Police watchdog report says many forces do not understand how to use powers effectively nor their potential impact

    Home Office figures show that black people are still seven times more likely to be searched on the street than white people. Photograph: Stuart emmerson/Alamy

    The misuse of “intrusive and contentious” stop and search powers is threatening to undermine the legitimacy of the police, an official watchdog has warned.

    Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) says that most (30) of the 43 forces in England and Wales do not understand how to use stop and search powers effectively nor the impact their use has on the communities being policed.

    The official report also says that the priority given by senior police officers to improving the use of stop and search powers has slipped down the agenda since the publication in 1999 of the official inquiry report into the racist murder of black teenager Stephen Lawrence. Home Office figures show that black people are still seven times more likely to be searched on the street than white people.

    The HMIC report, published on Tuesday, was commissioned by the home secretary, Theresa May, in response to renewed concern about the way the police use stop and search powers in the wake of the 2011 August riots.

    The home secretary anticipated one of the report’s key findings last week when she launched a six-week consultation over the future use of the powers, saying the fact that only 9% of the 1.2m stop-and-searches that take place every year led to an arrest had caused her to question whether it was being used appropriately.

    The HMIC inquiry, which included a public survey of 19,000 people, found that too many forces are not collecting sufficient information to assess whether the use of the powers has been effective.

    It says that 27% of the 8,783 stop-and-search records examined by HMIC did not include sufficient grounds to justify the lawful use of the powers.

    “The reasons for this include poor understanding among officers about what constitutes ‘reasonable grounds’ needed to justify a search, poor supervision, and an absence of direction and oversight by senior officers,” says the report.

    The report adds that fewer than half the forces complied with a requirement for stop and search activities to be open to public scrutiny.

    It describes the street stop and search powers under the 1984 Police and Criminal Evidence Act (Pace) as “some of the most intrusive and contentious powers granted to the police” and warns that although some might think it will help to “control the streets” in the short term, its heavy-handed use may lead to major disorder in the long term.

    Stephen Otter of HMIC said urgent action was needed to tackle the lack of understanding of the powers to prevent and detect crime. He said the investigation found that the exercise, recording, monitoring, supervision and leadership oversight of the use of stop and search powers all too often fell short of the Pace codes of practice, which set the standards to ensure the powers were not used unlawfully and incorrectly.

    Tom Winsor, the chief inspector of constabulary, said: “The police service in the UK is almost unique in investing its lowest ranking officers with its greatest and most intrusive powers. These include those of stop and search.

    “The lawful and proper use of the powers is essential to the maintenance of public confidence and community acceptance of the police, without which the British model of policing by consent cannot function.

    “It is therefore crucial that police officers can show, with the greatest transparency, that they use these powers with the utmost lawfulness and integrity at all times,” said Winsor.

    A Home Office spokesperson said the home secretary had made clear that the government supports the ability of police officers to stop and search suspects within the law.

    “But if stop and search is being used too much or with the wrong people, it is not just a waste of police time, it also serves to undermine public confidence in the police,” he said.

    He added that specific proposals in response to the report and the public consultation would be published by the end of the year.

    Alan Travis, home affairs editor
    The Guardian, Tuesday 9 July 2013

    Find this story at 9 July 2013
    © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies.

    A quarter of police stop and searches are illegal: 250,000 people are stopped without officers sticking to the rules

    In 27 per cent of cases police did not have reasonable grounds
    This is the same as 250,000 people every year being stopped and searched
    The report warns of the potential to stir-up significant social unrest

    More than a quarter of police stop and searches are ‘unlawful’ and risk promoting ‘major disorder’, government inspectors warned last night.

    In a blistering report, Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Constabulary said that, in 27 per cent of cases, police failed to show they had reasonable grounds to carry out the search.

    It is the equivalent of 250,000 people every year being stopped and subjected to hugely intrusive searches without the police sticking to the rules.

    In 27 per cent of cases, police failed to show they had reasonable grounds to carry out the searches

    Legally, nobody should be stopped unless there is ‘reasonable suspicion’ they are guilty of carrying drugs, weapons or intending to carry out a burglary or other crime.

    The report – commissioned in the wake of the 2011 riots – warns of the potential to stir-up significant social unrest.

    More…
    Cool Mrs May sounded as if she was ticking off her dog…
    Terror suspects to be banned from claiming benefits under shake-up of laws to prevent repeat of Qatada costing us millions

    It states: ‘Apart from the fact that it is unlawful, conducting stop and search encounters without reasonable grounds will cause dissatisfaction and upset, and whilst some may think it will help to ‘control the streets in the short term’, it may lead to major disorder in the long-term’.

    The HMIC report, led by ex-chief constable Stephen Otter, is also hugely critical of the way police are targeting their resources.

    Most police forces said their priorities were reducing burglary, theft and violence.

    Yet only nine per cent of stop and searches focussed on finding weapons, and 22 per cent were for stolen property or going equipped to steal.

    By contrast, half of operations were targeted on possession of drugs – usually only small amounts which would only result in a police warning.

    Theresa May warned that police could be wasting hundreds of thousands of hours by interrogating stopping people who had done nothing wrong

    The report will increase the clamour for a major scaling back of the stop and search regime.

    Last week Home Secretary Theresa May warned that police could be wasting hundreds of thousands of hours by interrogating stopping people who had done nothing wrong.

    Last year, police conducted 1.2million stop and searches – but only nine per cent, or 107,000, ended in arrest.

    In some parts of the country, the figure is as low as three per cent, raising huge question marks over whether the power is being properly used.

    The HMIC warned of a ‘noticeable slippage’ in attention given to the use of stop and search powers by senior officers since the 1999 Stephen Lawrence Inquiry.

    Mr Otter warned that use of the powers was becoming a ‘habitual’ practice

    Around 27 per cent of the 8,783 stop and search records examined by inspectors did not include sufficient grounds to justify the lawful use of the power.

    Police officers are able to conduct stop and searches under 20 different powers, but the most common laws used are the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE), the Misuse of Drugs Act and the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act.

    The report found that less than half of forces complied with the requirements of the code to make arrangements for stop and search records to be scrutinised by the public.

    And half of forces did nothing to understand the impact on communities.

    The inspection found that the majority of forces – 30 out of 43 – had not developed an understanding of how to use the powers of stop and search so that they are effective in preventing and detecting crime.

    Only seven forces recorded whether or not the item searched for was actually found, the study found.

    Mr Otter warned that use of the powers was becoming a ‘habitual’ practice that was ‘part and parcel’ of officers’ activity on the streets.

    Last night a Home Office spokesman said: ‘The Home Secretary has made it very clear that the Government supports the ability of police officers to stop and search suspects within the law.
    ‘But if stop and search is being used too much or with the wrong people, it is not just a waste of police time, it also serves to undermine public confidence in the police.

    ‘That is why last week the Home Secretary announced a public consultation into the use of stop and search.

    ‘The Government will respond to the HMIC report and the replies to the public consultation with specific proposals by the end of the year.’

    By James Slack

    PUBLISHED: 00:03 GMT, 9 July 2013 | UPDATED: 06:30 GMT, 9 July 2013

    Find this story at 9 July 2013

    © Associated Newspapers Ltd

    Police watchdog: the Met is failing to tackle complaints of racism

    Warning: IPCC says racism complaints are being thrown out on the basis of an officers denial of them

    The Met is failing to tackle complaints of racism properly and needs a major “cultural change” to improve the way it deals with London’s minorities, the police watchdog said today.

    In a highly critical report, the Independent Police Complaints Commission said that Met investigators were often wrongly rejecting allegations of racism simply on the basis of an officer’s denial.

    It warns that other complaints are being thrown out because of the “unwillingness or inability” of officers to pursue them and highlights a further widespread failure to follow official guidelines when investigating alleged racist conduct.

    The report said that instead, the force tends to respond only to “overt” racism such as use of “n****r” and when other evidence such as mobile phone footage or whistleblower testimony is provided.

    The findings, which will raise concerns about the force’s progress since being labelled “institutionally racist” in Sir William Macpherson’s report following the murder of Stephen Lawrence, came as the watchdog also revealed details of new racism cases within the Met. Today’s report discloses that:

    Two thirds of appeals over racism complaints rejected by the Met were upheld by the watchdog last year.

    The Met has little understanding of covert or subconscious racism by officers.

    Complainants’ perceptions of racism are often not taken seriously.

    Letters sent to complainants are regularly blighted by jargon, are defensive and fail to deal with specifics.

    Unveiling today’s report, Deborah Glass, the IPCC’s commissioner for London, said that racism remained a “toxic” issue for the Met and that big changes were urgently needed.

    “There is an enormous amount of guidance out there which the Met’s officers are not following and the only way to change that is through cultural change,” she said. “If the Met Commissioner wants to be credible when he says that there is zero tolerance of racism in the force then his officers need to understand what racism is.”

    Ms Glass said that dealing with complaints of racism against officers properly was vital to public confidence in London because of the large ethnic population and the lack of faith among some residents in police attitudes. She added: “Race is an incredibly sensitive and sometimes toxic issue for the Met as we have seen over decades. They have made progress, but there is still some way to go.”

    The report comes after a year-long inquiry by the IPCC following a spate of highly publicised racism allegations against the Met. One of those resulted in the dismissal of Pc Alex MacFarlane for gross misconduct despite his acquittal at Southwark crown court last year over an alleged racially aggravated public order offence involving the alleged use of racist language against a 21-year-old man.

    The report is based on an analysis of 511 racist allegations against Met officers or staff made by the public in 2011/12, plus monitoring of 61 cases referred to the IPCC in April and May last year and a detailed study of 20 other complaint files.

    It found that although cases passed to Scotland Yard’s directorate of professional standards were generally dealt with well, those resolved at borough level — which form the majority — were poorly handled.

    The report said that officers were “routinely asked for brief accounts via email” rather than being questioned on specifics and that a denial frequently resulted in a complaint being rejected with not enough weight placed on the complainant’s account.

    Met Assistant Commissioner Simon Byrne said that he was summoning all 32 borough commanders and other senior officers to study the findings in one of a series of measures to improve the force’s performance.

    He added that all investigations into racism complaints would also be overseen by Scotland Yard for the rest of the year to raise standards, but conceded that the Met was failing the public over the issue. Victims of racism by police will also be invited to meet senior officers to talk about their experiences to “help our understanding” of the problem, Mr Byrne said.

    Martin Bentham

    Published: 17 July 2013

    Updated: 15:41, 17 July 2013

    Find this story at 9 July 2013

    © Evening Standard Limited

    Police continued to fire Tasers at chests – despite cardiac arrest warnings

    Figures show that since 2009, 57% of discharges have hit chest area, even though Taser warns of ‘serious complications’

    Police using a taser during the attempted capture of Raoul Moat. Firing the devices at suspects’ chests carries the risk of inducing a cardiac arrest. Photograph: Jamie Wiseman/Daily Mail/Rex

    British police have fired Tasers hundreds of times at suspects’ chests despite explicit warnings from the weapon’s manufacturer not to do so because of the dangers of causing a cardiac arrest, the Guardian can reveal.

    Following the death last Wednesday of a man in Manchester after police hit him with a Taser shot, figures obtained from 18 out of 45 UK forces show that out of a total of 884 Taser discharges since 2009 – the year when Taser International first started warning the weapon’s users not to aim for the chest – 57% of all shots (518) have hit the chest area.

    There is evidence that shots to the chest can induce cardiac arrest. Dr Douglas Zipes, an eminent US cardiologist and emeritus professor at Indiana University, who last year published a study that explored the dangers of chest shots, told the Guardian: “My admonition [to UK police] would be avoid the chest at all costs if you can.”

    He said the proportion of shots landing on the chest was huge, adding: “I think the information is overwhelming to support how a Taser shot to the chest can produce cardiac arrest.”

    The manufacturer’s warning in its training materials is clear. It states: “When possible, avoid targeting the frontal chest area near the heart to reduce the risk of potential serious injury or death.

    “Serious complications could also arise in those with impaired heart function or in those with an implanted cardiac pacemaker or defibrillator.”

    Firing at the back is the preferred option where practical.

    Zipes said Tasers were first found to have the ability to “capture” heart rhythm in a way similar to that of a pacemaker after Taser itself commissioned a study on pigs published in 2006.

    If fired close enough to the heart, the 50,000 volt weapons have the ability to interfere and take over the electrical signals in the heart in rare cases – something that can be avoided altogether by hitting other parts of the body.

    Zipes, who has acted as an expert witness in Taser death cases, said his peer-reviewed paper for the Journal of the American Heart Association documented eight cases of people in the US who have died or suffered significant brain damage following a cardiac arrest linked to a Taser shot.

    But, despite the apparent dangers of chest shots, a series of requests under the Freedom of Information Act suggests that police are routinely aiming Taser shots at that part of the body.

    Records from Gwent police force, for example, show that 82% of 55 Taser discharges by its officers hit people in the chest. Officers from Lancashire police fired Tasers 186 times between 2009 and October 2012, with 65% of shots hitting the chest.

    There have been 10 deaths since the introduction of Tasers by UK police forces in 2004. The most recent was last Wednesday evening after a 23-year-old factory worker, Jordan Begley, from Gorton, east Manchester, was said to have suffered a “medical episode” and died after police fired at him with the weapon.

    The chief constable of Greater Manchester, Sir Peter Fahy, and its police and crime commissioner, Tony Lloyd, met the dead man’s family and expressed their condolences.

    No cause of death has been directly linked to the high-voltage charge emanating from the weapons in the UK. But two of the 10 cases, including last week’s death in Manchester, continue to be investigated by the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC).

    The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo), which is responsible for Taser guidance, told the Guardian that following the 2009 warning, an independent panel of experts re-examined the threat to life from Tasers but found no substantial risk.

    Simon Chesterman, deputy chief constable of West Mercia police and Acpo lead on armed policing and Taser use, said that after the 2009 Taser warning Acpo asked the medical panel whether police training needed to be changed. “The answer that came back is that as they’ve said all along, the risk from the electricity is very low,” he said.

    Chesterman said the panel had maintained that guidance to this day and it was felt there was no need for police “to adjust our point of aim”.

    He said: “We don’t train them [officers] to go for the chest, we just train them to go for the biggest thing they can see, ie the major muscle groups.

    “When you’ve got a violent assailant who is facing you, coming towards you and you have to make a split second decision whether to use Taser or not, the chances are that clearly you’re going to aim for the torso and it may well be that one or both of the barbs will attach within the chest area.

    “I’m not saying Taser is a risk-free option,” he said, but added: “We haven’t had what you could describe as a Taser-related death in the United Kingdom – that’s despite the fact that we’ve been using them for 10 years”

    A separate FOI from February found that in 2011 Tasers were discharged 1,371 times in the year ending March 2011, a 66% rise on the previous year.

    In a statement to the Guardian, Steve Tuttle, vice-president of communications for Taser International, said that in the vast majority of cases, “the cause of death has nothing to do with the Taser deployments and to date in the UK there are no deaths in which the Taser has been listed as the cause of death”.

    He said the company’s “preferred targeting zones” were “best practices” that “take into consideration the most effective areas for placement on moving and/or violent subjects that don’t always co-operate.

    “We occasionally modify recommendations and warnings to reflect a best practices approach for our customers to consider,” he added. “The release of our [2009] training bulletin should not be interpreted as a significant change in how our products should be used. The recommendations should be viewed as best practices that mitigate risk management issues resulting in more effective deployments while maximising safety considerations such as avoiding face, neck, and chest/breast shots.”

    In the US, Taser was recently ordered to pay $5m (£3.3m) to the family of 17-year-old Darryl Turner, who died in 2008 after being shot by police with a Taser.

    The lawyer in that case, John Burton, from Pasedena, California, said that by aiming for the chest, UK police were being irresponsible.

    “This is just so irresponsible. I’m shocked to hear this,” Burton said. “If UK cops are shooting people in the chest it just shows that they just don’t take things seriously.”

    Sophie Khan, a UK solicitor who specialises in Taser cases, said Taser’s guidance “is meant to be there to protect the public and the police from civil claims”.

    She added: “From what I see people are being shot in the chest and stomach, when they don’t even need to be Tasered in the first place, that’s what’s happened.”

    Shiv Malik and Charlie Mole
    The Guardian, Sunday 14 July 2013 19.43 BST

    Find this story at 14 July 2013

    © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies

    Man shot with Taser dies; Electroshock weapon used on suspect during arrest in Manchester

    A woman arrives with flowers at the scene in Gorton, Manchester, where a man was shot with a Taser and later died. Photograph: Christopher Thomond for the Guardian

    A man has died after police shot him with a Taser, Greater Manchester police have said.

    The 23-year-old was said to have suffered a “medical episode” and died after police fired at him with the stun gun.

    Officers were responding to a disturbance at around 8.15pm on Wednesday in Gorton, Manchester, when they used the Taser while detaining the man.

    The police force has referred the case to the Independent Police Complaints Commission.

    Assistant Chief Constable Garry Shewan said: “Police received a 999 call reporting a disturbance on Beard Road in Gorton where there was a man with a knife.

    “Officers were dispatched immediately and arrived in eight minutes. On arrival a Taser was discharged to detain a 23-year-old man.

    “At this time it is unclear what happened, but at some point afterwards the man suffered a medical episode.

    “Paramedics performed first aid on the man at the scene before he was taken to hospital where he sadly died.”

    The death had been referred to the local coroner and police family liaison officers were supporting the family, police said.

    Press Association
    theguardian.com, Thursday 11 July 2013 06.50 BST

    Find this story at 11 July 2013
    © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies.

    McLibel leaflet was co-written by undercover police officer Bob Lambert

    Exclusive: McDonald’s sued green activists in long-running David v Goliath legal battle, but police role only now exposed

    Bob Lambert posed as a radical activist named Bob Robinson.

    An undercover police officer posing for years as an environmental activist co-wrote a libellous leaflet that was highly critical of McDonald’s, and which led to the longest civil trial in English history, costing the fast-food chain millions of pounds in fees.

    The true identity of one of the authors of the “McLibel leaflet” is Bob Lambert, a police officer who used the alias Bob Robinson in his five years infiltrating the London Greenpeace group, is revealed in a new book about undercover policing of protest, published next week.

    McDonald’s famously sued green campaigners over the roughly typed leaflet, in a landmark three-year high court case, that was widely believed to have been a public relations disaster for the corporation. Ultimately the company won a libel battle in which it spent millions on lawyers.

    Lambert was deployed by the special demonstration squad (SDS) – a top-secret Metropolitan police unit that targeted political activists between 1968 until 2008, when it was disbanded. He co-wrote the defamatory six-page leaflet in 1986 – and his role in its production has been the subject of an internal Scotland Yard investigation for several months.

    At no stage during the civil legal proceedings brought by McDonald’s in the 1990s was it disclosed that a police infiltrator helped author the leaflet.
    The McLibel two: Helen Steel and David Morris, outside a branch of McDonald’s in London in 2005 after winning their case in the European court of human rights. Photograph: Martin Argles for the Guardian

    A spokesman for the Met said the force “recognises the seriousness of the allegations of inappropriate behaviour and practices involving past undercover deployments”. He added that a number of allegations surrounding the undercover officers were currently being investigated by a team overseen by the chief constable of Derbyshire police, Mick Creedon.

    And in remarks that come closest to acknowledging the scale of the scandal surrounding police spies, the spokesman said: “At some point it will fall upon this generation of police leaders to account for the activities of our predecessors, but for the moment we must focus on getting to the truth.”

    Lambert declined to comment about his role in the production of the McLibel leaflet. However, he previously offered a general apology for deceiving “law abiding members of London Greenpeace”, which he said was a peaceful campaign group.

    Lambert, who rose through the ranks to become a spymaster in the SDS, is also under investigation for sexual relationships he had with four women while undercover, one of whom he fathered a child with before vanishing from their lives. The woman and her son only discovered that Lambert was a police spy last year.

    The internal police inquiry is also investigating claims raised in parliament that Lambert ignited an incendiary device at a branch of Debenhams when infiltrating animal rights campaigners. The incident occurred in 1987 and the explosion inflicted £300,000 worth of damage to the branch in Harrow, north London. Lambert has previously strongly denied he planted the incendiary device in the Debenhams store.
    While McDonald’s won the initial legal battle, at great expense, it was seen as a PR disaster. Photograph: Image Broker/Rex Features

    Lambert’s role in helping compose the McLibel leaflet is revealed in ‘Undercover: The True Story of Britain’s Secret Police’, which is published next week. An extract from the book will be published in the Guardian Weekend magazine. A joint Guardian/Channel 4 investigation into undercover policing will be broadcast on Dispatches on Monday evening.

    Lambert was one of two SDS officers who infiltrated London Greenpeace; the second, John Dines, had a two-year relationship with Helen Steel, who later became the co-defendant in the McLibel case. The book reveals how Steel became the focus of police surveillance operations. She had a sexual relationship with Dines, before he also disappeared without a trace.

    Dines gained access to the confidential legal advice given to Steel and her co-defendant that was written by Keir Starmer, then a barrister known for championing radical causes. The lawyer was advising the activists on how to defend themselves against McDonald’s. He is now the director of public prosecutions in England and Wales.

    Lambert was lauded by colleagues in the covert unit for his skilful infiltration of animal rights campaigners and environmentalists in the 1980s. He succeeded in transforming himself from a special branch detective into a long-haired radical activist who worked as a cash-in-hand gardener. He became a prominent member of London Greenpeace, around the time it began campaigning against McDonald’s in 1985. The leaflet he helped write made wide-ranging criticisms of the company, accusing it of destroying the environment, exploiting workers and selling junk food.

    Four sources who were either close to Lambert at the time, or involved in the production of the leaflet, have confirmed his role in composing the libellous text. Lambert confided in one of his girlfriends from the era, although he appeared keen to keep his participation hidden. “He did not want people to know he had co-written it,” Belinda Harvey said.

    Paul Gravett, a London Greenpeace campaigner, said the spy was one of a small group of around five activists who drew up the leaflet over several months. Another close friend from the time recalls Lambert was really proud of the leaflet. “It was like his baby, he carried it around with him,” the friend said.

    When Lambert’s undercover deployment ended in 1989, he vanished, claiming that he had to flee abroad because he was being pursued by special branch. None of his friends or girlfriends suspected that special branch was his employer.

    It was only later that the leaflet Lambert helped to produce became the centre of the huge trial. Even though the activists could only afford to distribute a few hundred copies of the leaflet, McDonald’s decided to throw all of its legal might at the case, suing two London Greenpeace activists for libel.

    Two campaigners – Steel, who was then a part-time bartender, and an unemployed postal worker, Dave Morris – unexpectedly stood their ground and refused to apologise.
    Steel and Morris outside the high court at the start of the first proceedings in the McLibel trial in 1990. Photograph: Photofusion/UIG/ Getty Images

    Over 313 days in the high court, the pair defended themselves, with pro bono assistance from Starmer, as they could not afford to hire any solicitors or barristers. In contrast, McDonald’s hired some of the best legal minds at an estimated cost of £10m. During the trial, legal argument largely ignored the question of who wrote the McLibel leaflet, focusing instead on its distribution to members of the public.

    In 1997, a high court judge ruled that much of the leaflet was libellous and ordered the two activists to pay McDonald’s £60,000 in damages. This sum was reduced on appeal to £40,000 – but McDonald’s never enforced payment.

    It was a hollow victory for the company; the long-running trial had exposed damaging stories about its business and the quality of the food it was selling to millions of customers around the world. The legal action, taking advantage of Britain’s much-criticised libel laws, was seen as a heavy handed and intimidating way of crushing criticism. However, the role of undercover police in the story remained, until now, largely unknown.

    On Friday, Morris said the campaign against the burger chain was successful “despite the odds overwhelmingly stacked against us in the legal system and up against McDonald’s massive and relentless advertising and propaganda machine.

    “We now know that other shadowy forces were also trying to undermine our efforts in the most disgusting, but ultimately futile ways. All over the world police and secret agents infiltrate opposition movements in order to protect the rich and powerful but as we have seen in so many countries recently people power and the pursuit of truth and justice is unstoppable, even faced with the most repressive and unacceptable Stasi-like tactics.”

    Sign up for the Guardian Today

    Our editors’ picks for the day’s top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.
    Sign up for the daily email

    What’s this?
    More from the Guardian
    The six types of atheist 15 Jul 2013
    Judy Murray doesn’t deserve this sniping 14 Jul 2013
    Tyson Gay ban: what is oxilofrine? 15 Jul 2013
    California wildfire burns seven homes and leads to evacuations 17 Jul 2013
    As police arrest British fugitives in Spain, are the days of the Costa del Crime numbered? 14 Jul 2013
    Related information
    Business
    Food & drink industry · McDonald’s ·
    UK news
    Police ·
    Environment
    Activism ·
    Law

    Why my little community is saying no to McDonald’s

    18 Jul 2013

    Garry Muratore: Tecoma residents have made it clear: we do not want McDonald’s in our small community. Our ongoing fight has brought the best out of all of us

    17 Jul 2013

    McDonald’s 34,492 restaurants: where are they?

    17 Jul 2013

    McDonald’s opens first branch in Vietnam

    17 Jul 2013

    McDonald’s seeks injunction against Victorian protesters

    Burgers and nuggets still dominate UK restaurant children’s menus – report

    17 Jul 2013

    Little fresh fruit or veg on offer in major high street eateries, research by Soil Association and Organix finds

    Paul Lewis and Rob Evans
    The Guardian, Friday 21 June 2013 14.54 BST

    Find this story at 21 June 2013

    © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

    Second police spy says Home Office knew of theft of children’s identities

    Former undercover officer Peter Francis says department helped spies by providing false passports in dead children’s names

    Peter Francis, the former undercover police officer turned whistleblower. Photograph: Graham Turner for the Guardian

    A second police spy has said the Home Office was aware that undercover police officers stole the identities of dead children to infiltrate political groups.

    Peter Francis, a former undercover officer turned whistleblower, said the Home Office helped the spies by providing false passports in the names of the dead children.

    His claim comes as Britain’s most senior police officer, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe, is due to publish a report on Tuesday about the secret use of dead children’s identities.

    It will be released on the same day that MPs on the home affairs select committee are due to question Mick Creedon, the chief constable who is leading the police investigation into the deployment of undercover officers in protest groups over a 40-year period.

    Creedon has already conceded that the theft of the children’s identities was “common practice” within a covert special branch unit which operated between 1968 and 2008.

    Earlier this month, Bob Lambert, one of the leading spies of the unit, claimed that the technique was “well known at the highest levels of the Home Office”.

    In a practice criticised by MPs as “ghoulish” and “heartless”, undercover spies in the unit, the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS), searched through birth and death certificates to find children who had died at an early age. They then assumed the identity of the child and developed a persona based on that identity when they went undercover for five years or longer.

    The spies were issued with fake documents such as passports, driving licences and national insurance numbers in the child’s name to further bolster their credibility.

    Francis, who infiltrated anti-racist groups from 1993 to 1997, discussed the technique with the head of the SDS because he had reservations about stealing the identity of a four-year-old boy who had died. He did not disclose the name of the SDS head.

    “We bounced it around – what were his thoughts, what were my thoughts. It was evident that it was standard practice,” Francis said.

    The head of the SDS told him the Home Office knew the undercover spies “were using the children”, he said, as it gave fake passports to the spies knowing that they were in the names of the dead children.

    The SDS was directly funded by the government, which received an annual report on its work for much of its existence.

    A Home Office spokesperson said: “We expect the highest standards of professionalism in all aspects of policing. That is why Chief Constable Mick Creedon is leading an IPCC-supervised investigation which will ensure any criminality or misconduct is properly dealt with.”

    Francis was an important source for the Guardian when the newspaper detailed the technique, dubbed the “jackal run” after Frederick Forsyth’s novel The Day of the Jackal, in February.

    Speaking then as Pete Black, one of his undercover identities, Francis said he felt he was “stomping on the grave” of the boy whose identity he stole. “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 at the time.

    Last month, he said his superiors had asked him to find “dirt” that could be used to smear the family of Stephen Lawrence, the black teenager who was stabbed to death in a racist attack in 1993.

    Lambert went undercover for four years in the 1980s to infiltrate environmental and animal rights groups. He adopted the persona of Bob Robinson, a seven-year-old boy who had died of a congenital heart defect.

    Interviewed by Channel Four News this month, Lambert said that at the time he did not “really give pause for thought on the ethical considerations. It was, that’s what was done. Let’s be under no illusions about the extent to which that was an accepted practice that was well known at the highest levels of the Home Office.” Lambert fathered a child with a campaigner while he was undercover.

    On Tuesday, Creedon is expected to be questioned by the select committee about whether the police will apologise to the parents whose children’s identities were taken. Creedon has said he has taken legal advice on whether the spies who stole the children’s identities could be put on trial.

    Rob Evans
    The Guardian, Monday 15 July 2013 18.35 BST

    Find this story at 15 July 2013

    © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

    Operation Herne Report 1 Use of covert identities

    Executive Summary

    History
    The Special Demonstration Squad (SDS) was an undercover unit formed by the
    Metropolitan Police’s Special Branch. It operated between 1968 and 2008, during
    which time it infiltrated and reported on groups concerned in violent protest.

    Operation Herne
    Operation Herne (formerly Soisson) was formed in October 2011 in response to
    allegations made by the Guardian newspaper about alleged misconduct and criminality
    engaged in by members of the SDS. Similar matters had been previously aired as early
    as 2002 in a BBC documentary.

    Operation Riverwood
    On 4th February 2013 the Metropolitan Police received a public complaint from the
    family of Rod Richardson, a young boy who had died in the 1970s. It is alleged that an
    undercover officer working for the National Public Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU) had
    used this child’s details as his covert identity. This matter was referred to the IPCC. The
    matter was returned to the force and is currently subject of a ‘local investigation’.

    National Public Order Intelligence Unit
    The NPOIU was formed within the MPS in 1999 to gather and coordinate intelligence.
    In 2006 the governance responsibility for NPOIU was moved to the Association of
    Chief Police Officers, after a decision was taken that the forces where the majority of
    activity was taking place should be responsible for authorising future deployments. In
    January 2011 the NPOIU was subsumed within other units under the National Domestic
    Extremism Units within the MPS.
    In January 1995 large numbers of police from London, Kent and Hampshire were
    drafted to the West Sussex harbour of Shoreham in response to protests surrounding
    the export of live animals to Europe. The Animal Liberation Front (ALF) and another
    animal extremist group named ‘Justice Department’ had a strong base in the
    community there. This led to a number of protests and in October 1995 there was a
    further demonstration in Brightlingsea, Essex. This resulted in a record number of police
    being deployed to prevent widespread public disorder. Ad-hoc protest groups emerged
    and the need for first hand high quality intelligence was evident. This led to undercover
    operatives being required to infiltrate these animal extremist organisations.

    The purpose of the NPOIU was:
    1 To provide the police service with the ability to develop a national threat assessment
    and profile for domestic extremism.
    2 Support the police service to reduce crime and disorder from domestic extremism.
    3 Support a proportionate police response to protest activity.
    4 Help the police service manage concerns of communities and businesses to
    minimise conflict and disorder.

    Control of the NPOIU moved to ACPO in 2006 under the direction of the ACPO National
    Co-ordinator for Domestic Extremism, Assistant Chief Constable Anton Setchell. He
    was replaced by Detective Chief Superintendent Adrian Tudway in 2010. The NPOIU
    worked with the National Extremism Tactical Co-ordination Unit (NETCU) and the
    National Domestic Extremism Team (NDET).
    The NPOIU now exists as part of the National Domestic Extremism Unit (NDEU) under
    the Metropolitan Police Service Specialist Operations and is run by Detective Chief
    Superintendent Chris Greaney.

    Deceased identities
    On 5th February 2013 the Home Affairs Select Committee (HASC) questioned Deputy
    Assistant Commissioner Gallan about the alleged practice that SDS officers had used
    the details of dead children, as part of a cover identity for undercover police officers. At
    the time DAC Gallan was based in the MPS Directorate of Professional Standards and
    was in overall command of Operation Herne. Her appearance before the HASC led to
    considerable media coverage and some negative commentary. As a result of the media
    coverage, Operation Herne has now received enquiries from fourteen (14) families
    regarding seventeen (17) children.

    Operation Herne review
    One hundred and forty-seven (147) named individuals are believed to have served as
    police officers within the SDS at all ranks from Chief Superintendent down. This covers
    the forty (40) years that the unit was in existence and not all the police officers were
    deployed in undercover roles.
    At this stage one hundred and six (106) covert identities have been identified as having
    been used by the SDS between 1968 and 2008.
    Forty-two (42) of these identities are either confirmed or highly likely to have used the
    details of a deceased child.
    Forty-five (45) of these identities have been established as fictitious. Work continues to
    identify the provenance of the remaining identities.

    Neither Confirm Nor Deny (NCND)
    The policy of ‘neither confirming nor denying’ the use of or identity of an undercover
    police officer is a long established one used by UK policing. It is essential so as to
    provide for the necessary operational security and to ensure undercover officers are
    clear that their identity will never be disclosed by the organisation that asked them to
    carry out the covert activity. The duty of care owed to such officers is an absolute one
    and applies during their deployments, throughout their service and continues when they
    are retired.
    Please note that this is an interim report specifically about the use of the identities of
    deceased children and infants. It does not seek to cover either all of the activities of
    the SDS nor has it been able to completely provide all the answers regarding the use
    of covert identities. The report clearly explains the use of the tactic and is submitted
    early given the need to deal with the public concerns and is provided in agreement with
    the Home Office who sought to have this matter concluded before the parliamentary
    summer recess.

    Find this report at July 2013

    Dead children’s IDs used by undercover police to be kept from families

    The identities of 42 dead children whose names were assumed by undercover police officers will not be revealed to their relatives, according to a report.

    The Metropolitan Police offered a general apology for the “shock and offence” the practice had caused.

    But Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe said revealing the identities used would endanger the officers concerned.

    The senior officer who wrote the report on the 1980s practice told MPs it would not be used as a tactic today.

    The report’s author, Derbyshire Chief Constable Mick Creedon, was asked to investigate in 2011 after the Guardian newspaper published allegations about the conduct of undercover officers.

    He told the Home Affairs Select Committee ministers did not authorise the practice but refused to condemn the officers’ actions.

    “It’s irrelevant what I think,” he said. “It is not a tactic we would use these days.

    “It would feel very strange for me to criticise the actions of people 20, 30, 40-years-ago without knowing what they faced at the time.”

    Earlier this year, the Guardian reported that officers had stolen the identities of about 80 children who died at an early age.
    Anonymity ‘vital’

    Mr Creedon’s report concluded that at least 42 children’s identities had, either definitely or very probably, been used by the Metropolitan Police’s Special Demonstration Squad (SDS) and its National Public Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU).

    The earliest known use of the tactic occurred between 1976 and 1981 and it was phased out from 1994 in the SDS, the report added.

    But it also found that the practice might have been used by the NPOIU as recently as 2003, and that it was “highly possible” that its use was more widespread than currently understood.

    The report said: “A range of officers at different ranks and roles have been interviewed by the investigation team. The information provided corroborates totally the belief that, for the majority of the existence of the SDS, the use of deceased children’s identities was accepted as standard practice.”

    Sir Bernard said 14 families had contacted the Met to ask whether the identities of their relatives had been used by undercover officers.

    The Met had apologised to them, and to another family that had heard separately that it might be affected by the revelations, he said.

    “Undercover officers are brave men and women” and maintaining their anonymity is “vital”, Sir Bernard said.

    He explained: “There are criminals behind bars and at large today who would have no qualms in doing serious harm if they discovered a former close confidant had been working for the police.

    “That’s why undercover officers spent so much time building up their ‘legend’ or false identity, and why that identity must be protected forever.”
    ‘Rot’

    Sir Bernard added: “I believe the public do understand the necessity for police and others to do things like this to protect against a much greater harm. It was never intended or foreseen that any of the identities used would become public, or that any family would suffer hurt as a result.

    “At the time this method of creating identities was in use, officers felt this was the safest option.”

    But Jules Carey, a solicitor acting for Barbara Shaw, who is concerned that her son Rod Richardson’s identity was used, said: “What we heard this morning was not an apology but a PR exercise.

    “The families of the dead children whose identities have been stolen by the undercover officers deserve better than this.

    “They deserve an explanation, a personal apology and, if appropriate, a warning of the potential risk they face, in the exceptional circumstances, that their dead child’s identity was used to infiltrate serious criminal organisations.

    “The harvesting of dead children’s identities was only one manifestation of the rot at the heart of these undercover units which had officers lie on oath, conduct smear campaigns and use sexual relationships as an evidence-gathering tool.”

    He added: “Ms Shaw has told me that she feels her complaint has been ‘swept under the carpet” and she has instructed me to appeal this outcome.”

    UK
    16 July 2013 Last updated at 16:29 GMT

    Find this story at 16 July 2013

    BBC © 2013 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

    Met chief sorry for police spies using dead children’s identities

    Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe releases report on surveillance used since 1970s but refuses to inform any affected families

    Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe said families of dead children whose identities were used would not be approached, as that could put undercover officers in danger. Photograph: John Stillwell/PA

    Britain’s most senior police officer has offered a general apology for the “morally repugnant” theft of dead children’s identities by undercover spies who infiltrated political groups.

    But Bernard Hogan-Howe, the Metropolitan police commissioner, has refused to tell any families if the identities of their children were stolen by the undercover officers. He said he wanted to protect the spies from being exposed.

    In a report published on Tuesday, he admitted that at least 42 police spies stole the identity of children who had died before they were 14 years old.

    But the total number of such spies could be far higher as he conceded that the technique could have been more widespread than initially believed.

    Hogan-Howe said he “should apologise for the shock and offence the use of this tactic has caused” among the public, after the Guardian revealed details of the policing method in February.

    The commissioner argued that the families could not be informed as it could lead to the exposure of the undercover officers sent to infiltrate the political groups.

    “It was never intended or foreseen that any of the identities used would become public, or that any family would suffer hurt as a result. At the time this method of creating identities was in use, officers felt this was the safest option” he added.

    His decision drew immediate criticism. Jenny Jones, a Green party member of the London Assembly, said: “This falls short of coming clean to all the families whose children’s identities were harvested. In giving a blanket apology they have avoided the difficult task of apologising to real people.”

    The Met has sent letters of apology to 15 families whose children died young, but has neither confirmed nor denied whether identities were stolen.

    One case concerned a suspected spy, deployed between 1999 and 2003, who allegedly stole the identity of Rod Richardson, who died two days after being born in 1973.

    The family’s lawyer, Jules Carey, said that Barbara Shaw, the mother of the dead boy, was taking legal action as she felt her complaint had been “swept under the carpet”.

    Carey said Hogan-Howe’s apology was a PR exercise. He added: “The families of the dead children whose identities have been stolen by the undercover officers deserve better than this. They deserve an explanation, a personal apology. The harvesting of dead children’s identities was only one manifestation of the rot at the heart of these undercover units.”

    Peter Francis, one of the spies who originally blew the whistle on the tactic, said the police should offer a personal apology to the families in the cases of spies whose identity had already been exposed. He agreed that the spies whose work remained secret should be protected.

    The report, on Tuesday, was produced by Mick Creedon, the Derbyshire chief constable who is conducting an investigation into the activities of the undercover spies over 40 years.

    Creedon revealed that the technique was used extensively as far back as 1976 and was authorised by senior police. He reported that the tactic became “an established practice that new officers were taught” within a covert special branch unit known as the special demonstration squad (SDS), which spied on political groups.

    “This was not done by the officers in any underhand or salacious manner – it was what they were told to do,” Creedon added.

    One senior spy is quoted as saying the undercover officers “spent hours and hours … leafing through death registers in search of a name [they] could call his own”.

    “The genuine identities of the deceased children were blended with the officer’s own biographical details,” Creedon said.

    The spies were issued with fake documents, such as passports and driving licences, to make their alter egos appear genuine in case suspicious activists started to investigate them.

    The last time the tactic was used, according to Creedon, was 2003, by a spy working for a second covert unit – the national public order intelligence unit (NPOIU) – which infiltrated political campaigns.

    Creedon said it was highly possible that the tactic was used by undercover officers in other units which infiltrated serious criminal gangs. “It would be a mistake to assume that the use of identities of dead children was solely within the SDS and the NPOIU.”

    He said that the use of the technique “however morally repugnant, should not detract from the [spies’] bravery”.

    Rob Evans and Paul Lewis
    guardian.co.uk, Tuesday 16 July 2013 12.22 BST

    Find this story at 16 July 2013

    © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

    Home Office ‘knew police stole children’s identities’

    Bob Lambert admits to adopting the identity of a seven-year-old boy and has conceded to having four affairs while undercover

    Bob Lambert was deployed as an animal rights activist named Bob Robinson in the 1980s.

    A former police spymaster has claimed the practice of resurrecting the identities of dead children so they could be used by undercover officers was “well known at the highest levels of the Home Office”.

    Bob Lambert, who is facing a potential criminal investigation over his work for a secret unit of undercover officers, admitted that when he was deployed as a spy himself, he adopted the identity of a seven-year-old boy who died of a congenital heart defect.

    He also admitted to using his false identity in court and co-writing the “McLibel” leaflet that defamed the burger chain McDonald’s, resulting in the longest civil trial in English legal history.

    Conceding publicly for the first time that he had four relationships with women while undercover, one of which resulted in him secretly fathering a child, he said: “With hindsight I can only say that I genuinely regret my actions, and I apologise to the women affected in my case.”

    Lambert was deployed as an animal rights activist named “Bob Robinson” in the 1980s for a covert Metropolitan Police unit called the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS) which deployed undercover officers in political campaign groups. In the 1990s, he was promoted to manage other undercover operatives.

    Over the last two years the Guardian has detailed the covert work of Lambert, one of the most controversial spies to have worked for the SDS and its sister squad, the National Public Order Intelligence Unit.

    Until now, Lambert has either declined to comment in detail or said the Guardian’s reports amounted to “a misleading combination of truth, distortions, exaggerations and outright lies”.

    However, in a Channel 4 News interview broadcast on Friday, Lambert admitted that many of the allegations made against him were true. “My reputation is never going to be redeemed for many people, and I don’t think it should be,” he told the programme. “I think I made serious mistakes that I should regret, and I always will do.”

    Lambert said he was arrested “four or five” times while undercover and in 1986 he appeared in a magistrates court charged with a “minor public order offence”. He said he had to appear in court using his alter ego – rather than his real name – in order to “maintain cover”.

    He also admitted to co-writing the McLibel leaflet. “I was certainly a contributing author to the McLibel leaflet,” he told the programme. “Well, I think, the one that I remember, the one that I remember making a contribution to, was called What’s Wrong With McDonald’s?”

    Asked if that was ever disclosed to the court during the long-running civil trial, he replied: “I don’t know the answer to that question.”

    Although he admitted having relationships with women, Lambert denied it was a deliberate tactic in the SDS to use relationships to gain access, saying “probably I became too immersed” in his alter ego. “I’d always been a faithful husband,” he said. “I only ever became an unfaithful husband when I became an undercover police officer.”

    Harriet Wistrich, a lawyer representing eight women involved in relationships with Lambert and other undercover police said that there was a systematic pattern in which operatives repeatedly used long-term relationships to build their cover.

    Almost all of the undercover officers identified so far – including those known to have worked under Lambert – had sexual relationships while operating covertly.

    An SDS spy who has become a whistleblower, Peter Francis, has said that when he was deployed as an anti-racist campaigner, his superiors asked him to find “dirt” that could be used to smear the family of Stephen Lawrence, the black teenager who was stabbed to death in a racist attack in 1993.

    His revelation has since triggered further investigations into alleged covert tactics used against the Lawrence family, their supporters and Duwayne Brooks, a friend of Stephen and the main witness to the murder.

    On Friday, police chiefs admitted bugging a meeting with Brooks and his lawyer, Jane Deighton. Deighton said that Brooks, who is now a Lib Dem councillor, conveyed his concern in a meeting with the deputy prime minister, Nick Clegg.

    In a previous Channel 4 News broadcast, Lambert denied the unit was involved in seeking to smear the Lawrence family during his tenure as deputy head of the unit.

    He had a supervisory role when other spies, such as Jim Boyling and Mark Jenner, formed long-term relationships with people they were spying on. All are now under investigation.

    The deployments of Francis, Lambert, Boyling and Jenner are detailed in a new book: Undercover: The True Story of Britain’s Secret Police.

    Lambert has also been accused in parliament of igniting an incendiary device in a branch of Debenhams as part of a fire-bombing campaign by the Animal Liberation Front. Repeating earlier denials, he told Channel 4 News that the claim was “false”.

    The home secretary, Theresa May, is coming under mounting pressure to announce an independent public inquiry into the affair. So far she has indicated that two pre-existing inquiries – one run by a barrister, the other an internal Met police review – are capable of investigating the allegations surrounding the Lawrences and Brooks.

    Paul Lewis and Rob Evans
    The Guardian, Saturday 6 July 2013

    Find this story 6 July 2013

    © 2013 Guardian News and Media Limited or its affiliated companies. All rights reserved.

    Undercover policeman who impregnated one of his targets and impersonated a dead child apologises for ‘serious mistakes’

    Bob Lambert had a five-year covert career using the alias Bob Robinson
    The married office slept with four women and fathered a child with one
    Lambert claims that being undercover led to his bad behaviour

    Back in the day: During a covert career in which he infiltrated various groups, Bob Lambert has spoke of his disgust at some of his actions

    A former Scotland Yard police officer who fathered a child with one of several targets he had relationships with while working undercover has apologised to the women.

    Bob Lambert said he would always regret the ‘serious mistakes’ he made during a covert career which saw him use the identities of dead children, give evidence in court under his false name and co-author a libellous leaflet.

    Mr Lambert used the alias Bob Robinson during his five years infiltrating environmentalist groups, when he was with the special demonstration squad (SDS), the Metropolitan Police unit that targeted political activists.

    The revelation that the married officer slept with four women – fathering a child with one – sparked outrage.

    In an interview with Channel 4 News, he said he accepts his behaviour was morally reprehensible and a gross invasion of privacy.

    ‘With hindsight, I can only say that I genuinely regret my actions, and I apologise to the women affected,’ he said.

    ‘I’d always been a faithful husband. I only ever became an unfaithful husband when I became an undercover police officer.’

    The ex-officer declined to reveal whether his superiors were aware of the child – insisting he would only discuss that with an investigation into the activities of undercover police activities being led by the chief constable of Derbyshire.

    Mr Lambert said he ‘didn’t really give pause for thought on the ethical considerations’ of adopting the identity of a dead child in 1984 as it was standard practice at the time.

    ‘That’s what was done. Let’s be under no illusions about the extent to which that was an accepted practice that was well known at the highest levels of the Home Office,’ he told the programme.

    More…
    Baby snatched from its pram and thrown to the floor outside a hospital by teenager who was on a legal high called Salvia

    He confirmed that he had appeared in court as Bob Robinson but could not say whether the judiciary was made aware by the police that he was doing so.

    ‘On occasions I was arrested as Bob Robinson and to maintain cover I went through the process of arrest, detention, and on occasions, appearing in court,’ he said.
    Lambert insists he was unaware of any campaign to smear family and friends of Stephen Lawrence

    He denied it amounted to perjury as ‘the position was that I was maintaining cover as Bob Robinson’.
    But asked if the court was ‘made aware’, he added: ‘Well, that’s what needs to be established.’

    Mr Lambert also confirmed that he helped write a libellous leaflet that attacked fast food giant McDonald’s and triggered the longest civil trial in English history.

    McDonald’s famously sued two green campaigners over the leaflet in a landmark three-year high court case.

    It was not disclosed during the costly civil legal proceedings brought by McDonalds in the 1990s that an undercover police officer helped write the leaflet.

    ‘I was certainly a contributing author to the McLibel leaflet. Well, I think, the one that I remember, the one that I remember making a contribution to, was called What’s Wrong With McDonalds?’, he told Channel 4.

    Over the line: Bob Lambert in a more recent picture, fathered a child with one of his targets

    Asked if that fact was disclosed during the proceedings, he said: ‘I don’t know.’

    He repeated his rejection though of claims that he planted an incendiary device in a Debenhams store in Harrow in 1987, calling that a ‘false allegation’.

    Mr Lambert, who was an SDS manager for five years, earlier this week insisted he had not been aware of any campaign against the family of murdered black teenager Stephen Lawrence.

    Those claims were made by another veteran of the unit, Peter Francis, who alleges he was told to find information to use to smear the Lawrence family – who are calling for a public inquiry to examine the issue.

    Home Secretary Theresa May has said they would be looked at by the Derbyshire probe and a separate inquiry led by barrister Mark Ellison QC into alleged corruption in the original Lawrence murder investigation, but has left open the possibility of other action.

    ‘My reputation is never going to be redeemed for many people, and I don’t think it should be,’ Mr Lambert said.

    ‘I think I made serious mistakes that I should regret, and I always will do. I think the only real comfort I can take from my police career is that the Muslim Contact Unit was about learning from mistakes.’

    Belinda Harvey, one of eight women who are suing the Metropolitan Police over relationships with men who turned out to be undercover officers, rejected his apology.

    ‘Almost everything he said to me was a lie; why would I possibly believe what he says to me know.’ she told Channel 4.

    ‘If it hadn’t been for the case we’re bringing against the police, he would never have apologised and I would have lived the rest of my days not finding out the truth.’

    Former director of public prosecutions Lord Macdonald of River Glaven said the latest evidence strengthened the case for a judge-led public inquiry.

    ‘It is as bad as I think we thought it was,’ he said.

    ‘He seems to have admitted a great deal of the conduct that people feared had been taking place.

    ‘It now sounds as though not only senior police officers but senior civil servants may have known what was going on.

    ‘It’s no good having this multitude of inquiries that are going on at the moment, one of them conducted by the police themselves which is pretty hopeless in my view.

    ‘We need a single public inquiry under a senior judicial figure to examine what happened, what went wrong, who authorised it and most of all to reassure us that its not going on still.’

    By Daily Mail Reporter

    PUBLISHED: 00:37 GMT, 6 July 2013 | UPDATED: 01:06 GMT, 6 July 2013

    Find this story at 6 July 2013

    © Associated Newspapers Ltd

    << oudere artikelen  nieuwere artikelen >>