#FreeAssange: Wikileaks team wins appeal at RCJ to go UK Supreme Court 24/01/22 VIDEO + JulianAssange “In His Own Words” 2021

 #Wikileaks #WIN!! – was live video: Stella Moris on the win today @ 1.38sec. in

The Wikileaks team leaving the RCJ hearing trumphant, at last!
.

  

Must-read: #JulianAssange “In His Own Words” 2021:

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Murder most foul: THE SHIELD – Scotland Yard protected gangland informant who helped kill a cop – The Upsetter 09 Jan. 2022

THE SHIELD

EXCL: Scotland Yard protected gangland informant who helped kill a cop.

 
SCOTLAND YARD protected a gangland informant despite evidence that he supplied the guns used to murder a community police officer and a member of the public.

An Upsetter investigation can also reveal that the informant was working with an ex-cop to sell weapons to the underworld.

This included the two 9mm pistols used in the double murder of PC Patrick Dunne and William Danso in October 1993.

But rather than pursue the informant, Scotland Yard helped him get a soft sentence when he was caught in possession of enough arms “to equip a small army.”

Four former detectives and other well-placed sources confirm the informant’s link to the Dunne murder, police corruption and how Scotland Yard protected him.

The family of William Danso has now called for an independent investigation into – The Shield.

PC Patrick Dunne

Big Guns

The terraced houses on Cato Road in Clapham open on to a fairly typical residential street in south London. On 22 October 1993, gunmen knocked on William Danso’s door and shot the father-of-four multiple times in his hallway.

As the killers turned to leave, and not in any hurry, they saw PC Patrick Dunne emerge from across the road. The community officer had recently arrived on his bicycle to attend a domestic incident. He took a fatal bullet to the chest.

Witnesses said they heard laughter and further shots fired in the air “in apparent triumph” before rubber burned and the gunmen sped off.

Five weeks later, a 23-year-old local thug with the street name ‘Tyson’, on account of his short fuse and similar physique to the champ, was charged with two other men.

“We knew it was him a couple of hours after he murdered Danso and Pat,” a retired local cop told The Upsetter.

Reporters were being briefed that the case against Gary Nelson aka ‘Tyson’ was strong. His car was spotted leaving the murder scene, shells matched one found at the home of another suspect and all three had gangster form.

The murder of Danso, a bouncer, was said to have been a revenge attack following an incident of disrespect at a local nightclub. Dunne, wearing a high-visibility jacket, had simply got in the way.

But in February 1994, four months after the killings, and much to the recently-formed murder squad’s displeasure, the charges against the trio were dropped for lack of evidence.

Gary ‘Tyson’ Nelson

The double murder remained unsolved in June 1996 when Metropolitan police commissioner Sir Paul Condon spoke at the unveiling of a memorial plaque for PC Dunne.

Death Wish director Michael Winner helped organise the event on the spot where the 44-year-old officer fell.

Condon loaded his speech with references to bravery and sacrifice. The Dunne murder had “shocked the nation” he told assembled guests including the fallen officer’s mother, two brothers and a niece and nephew who were waiting to lay flowers. 

Even Tory Prime Minister John Major had sent a hand written card along with home secretary, Michael Howard, who unveiled the plaque.

Michael Howard at Dunne memorial

The tragic death of a cop in the line of duty was an irresistible opportunity for the Big Guns of law and order to tap public sympathy and deodorise the stench of corruption and hypocrisy coming from inside the Met and Downing Street.

At the time, the government and police were on a national mission to bring back “family values”, jail jaw-grinding ravers and curtail the right to silence, while at all costs obscuring their own failings and those of the organisations they led.

Major’s cabinet was drowning in sleaze scandals while Condon was in charge of a police force he could hardly admit was institutionally corrupt, racist and sexist.  

Secretly, the commissioner had launched a Ghost Squad of undercover anti-corruption officers – men whose own integrity left much to be desired – with the intention of keeping a lid on the rotting orchard he had taken over in 1993.

Among the emerging scandals that needed suppressing were the unsolved murders of Daniel Morgan and Stephen Lawrence and rampant corruption in crime squads across London where detectives and their informants were divvying up drugs and cash.

PC Dunne was one of the many honest ones. He’d retrained as a community cop in 1990 aged 40 after a career as a math teacher. Following his cold-blooded murder, Dunne received the highest commendation in the Met and a police building was named in his honour.

The Met wanted everyone to know it cared and wouldn’t forget. But the force didn’t care enough to act on its own intelligence that a gangland informant working with a corrupt ex-cop had supplied the Tanfoglio and Browning 9mm pistols used to kill Danso and then Dunne.

Worse still, organised crime detectives had interceded with a judge to get the informant a light sentence for possessing an arsenal of weapons all by the time Sir Paul Condon eulogised PC Dunne at the 1996 memorial. 

What sort of informant is that valuable to the police?

Brynmor Lindop. (Photo: Michael Gillard)

War Stories

Brynmor Lindop loved war. He was captivated by war films, war stories and war memorabilia, some of it so big he had to keep it at his yard on the Thames at Dagenham.

Visitors to his east London heavy plant machinery business marvelled at the Second World War ordinance and tank. His father was a war veteran with a chest of medals. Lindop was proud of his old man but never enlisted in the armed forces.

He saw another kind of action – in the trenches of London’s underworld as an armed robber by day and doorman at nightspots loved by criminals and the coppers who chased them.

The Villa in Gants Hill, Charlie Chan’s in Walthamstow and Peter Stringfellow’s Hippodrome in Leicester Square were just some of the doors Lindop worked. And when menace could be retired for a moment, his charm and chat were a hit with the ladies that he let in or rescued from pissed punters.

According to a family friend, Lindop was one of the many criminals Bertie Smalls, the armed robber-turned-supergrass, gave up in return for a sweetheart deal from the Met’s Flying Squad.

Certainly Lindop got a long sentence for armed robbery in the Seventies and on his release shacked up with an east end girl straight out of central casting. When the Flying Squad were rounding up the usual suspects, she swaddled her man’s handgun next to their first born while the house was being searched.

Life with Brynmor Lindop was a challenge for any woman. Another friend recalled how he used his head doorman job to cover up affairs when the cat dragged him home in the wee hours.

There’d been a horrendous fight at the nightclub, he’d tell his disbelieving common law wife. “Claret everywhere, love. Old Bill like flies. You get the picture.”

The off duty coppers who frequented the nightclub and worked down the road at Barkingside police station were willing to confirm the brawl that never was if she ever checked up. It wouldn’t be the last time the Met’s finest covered for Lindop.

Though comfortable in the company of cops, Lindop was in his element hanging out with hoodlum friends across the generations and the Thames. Kray henchman, Tony Lambrianou, was a close mate.

The story goes that Lindop was once taken to see Ronnie Kray at Broadmoor prison and asked to kill a reporter for writing some nasty things. He humoured the lunatic gangster, but didn’t take up the contract.

Lindop did, however, keep a signed picture of Ronnie at home and drove a Bentley that once belonged to a Kray moneyman, the close family friend recalled.

Villains and women loved Brynmor Lindop. So did some of the police who came into contact with him. One retired senior Flying Squad detective put it this way:

“People misunderstand cops and robbers because I think there is a very thin dividing line between [their] sense of humour, not the way of life. And Lindop was definitely good company, but I wouldn’t want to meet him in a dark alley.”

Lindop (left) with a young Ray Winstone

‘One Tough Cunt’

Armed robber? Guilty. Underworld armourer? No doubt. Hit man? Probably. Shagger? Definitely.

But no one close to Brynmor Lindop would believe that prolific police informant could also be added to that CV.

Sure he knew cops from his work on the doors, from going ‘over the pavement’ or through gun clubs and freemasonry. But he was too staunch, too east London, too much of a villain to be a grass. Wasn’t he?

In truth, many of London’s best villains have at one point or another been informants. The motivation for grassing, among them money, getting rid of competition, settling scores, corrupting police officers and avoiding prison are often somewhere in the mix.

But Lindop was different. He liked the buzz. Documents show he’d been a high-level informant since at least 1990 – three years before PC Dunne’s murder.

Informed sources say it started in the late 80’s and he was recruited over an incident in Wales when guns were supplied to two wannabe Kray brothers.

At the time of the double murder in Clapham in 1993, Lindop was being handled by a ginger giant detective sergeant on the Barkingside No 9 Regional Crime Squad and registered at Scotland Yard under the pseudonym ‘George Wimpey.’

Lindop in Hong Kong. (Photo: Michael Gillard)

When his handler transferred to the New Southgate office of the South East Regional Crime Squad (SERCS) in 1992, Lindop came with him.

Back then, a detective was judged by the quality of the informants they ran and the ‘work’ these slippery customers put up.

The informant was supposed to ‘belong’ to the Met but in reality they belonged to the detective who’d recruited or handled him, who drank with them, listened to their gripes and smoothed some of them out.  

Back then, the detective running the ‘snout’ also acted on his information and even paid out cash from Scotland Yard’s Informants Fund if it led to convictions, the recovery of drugs, stolen goods or anything else resembling success in the war on crime.

Lindop, however, was more than a run-of-the-mill source of underworld gossip. Senior management at Scotland Yard had on several occasions given permission for him to be a ‘participating informant’ in undercover operations.

This involved risks on both sides and was a mark of trust. The police were taking a chance by letting Lindop know the identity of their undercover officers before he introduced them to target criminals.

And if the undercover operation went well,  Lindop, despite his reputation, was now at risk of being identified as the informant. For the person introducing the undercover officer invariably is the first one to come under suspicion and therefore at risk of kidnap, torture or worse.

To be successful, Lindop had to have the trust of criminals and the police. Documents show that the year before the murder of PC Dunne he was put to work on a variety of undercover operations.

In June 1992, a Liverpool drug gang wanted Lindop to arrange a driver to pick up a trailer with 500 kilos of cannabis inside. It was stored near his yard in Dagenham and the gang wanted the load moved north after a London firm had taken their cut of the dope.

In September that year, Lindop told his handler he had been asked to go to Spain with David Hunt, an up-and-coming east London gangster, to assist the Wright brothers sort out a bit of bother with a drug cartel that had seized their assets.

That same month another opportunity arose to introduce an undercover officer to someone offering to sell the original printing plates for £50 notes. 

Not all these jobs resulted in convictions. But looking back from retirement, the ginger giant detective who handled Lindop was glad to have him on his side. He asked not to be named, but told The Upsetter:

“Wimpey was a criminal and a good source of intelligence and a mediocre source of pavement work. I never worked out what his motivation was. His psyche made him believe he was an undercover officer rather than an informant.

He’s a James Bond type figure. He got paid fortunes, tens of thousands, all above board. We got to know each other very well. I got to know his family. He was not a nice individual to others, but I liked him. One tough cunt.”

DI Bob Berger Finchley Flying Squad

The Sweeney

At 5am on Friday 18 March 1994, five months after the murder of PC Dunne, detectives and surveillance officers gathered at Barking police station for a briefing before making crucial arrests.

Detective inspector Bob Berger of the Flying Squad was in charge of the operation, which had developed from intelligence about the supply of illegal weapons and the Dunne murder.

Weeks earlier, a “Greek looking” gunman had been arrested attempting to rob a nightclub in south London. His associates, which were said to include Tyson, had escaped and he was left carrying the weight of a long sentence.

The Greek was “‘a complete live wire, dangerous fucker”, Berger told The Upsetter. But he wanted to trade with the police and started giving information about the supply of reactivated weapons.

A deactivated gun is one that has been officially certified as incapable of firing and can be legitimately sold to collectors. However, the gunman was claiming reactivated ones could be bought through an intermediary linked to a man called Brynmor Lindop.

Berger said the name meant nothing to him at the time but he remembers the “infighting” over whether the Flying Squad should be looking at the supply of illegal weapons, which was the South East Regional Crime Squad’s natural domain.

True, the Flying Squad was about catching armed robbers, preferably ‘on the plot’, that is actually robbing a bank or cash-in-transit van. But finding how villains sourced their guns seemed “a very legitimate thing to do” Berger argued.

“We were trying to build a picture, trying to understand about reactivation and deactivated arms, because there weren’t that prevalent on the streets. The feeling was they were there or thereabouts and we were starting to get some murders with reactivated firearms so it was worth digging.”

Early forensics had indicated the bullets that killed PC Dunne and Danso were from reactivated weapons and now the Greek was pointing a finger at Brynmor Lindop as the supplier.

As he was a SERCS informant it didn’t make sense that they should be allowed to look into their own man.

In fact, documents show that only eight months before the double murders Lindop was working undercover with SERCS on an arms deal. In February 1993 criminals operating from a pub in Peckham, south London had approached him with a shopping list of weapons including a rocket launcher, M16s and grenades.

Lindop (Photo: Michael Gillard)

Berger won the day and started Operation Carlagg against Lindop in early 1994. After weeks of surveillance, detectives identified his home in Ilford, his daily routine and Lindop Developments Limited, the business run from his Dagenham yard.

Operation Carlagg also identified a frequent visitor called Norman Fallows, a former police driver, who was also suspected of buying illegal weapons. Such precise intelligence most likely came from a bug in Lindop’s car or the Portacabin at his yard and phone taps.

On 18 March, Berger was ready to make arrests. And at the briefing that morning he dispatched surveillance teams to ‘sit on’ Fallows and Lindop at their respective homes.

Lindop, wearing a leather jacket and holding a black shiny case, emerged at 10am and got into his red Vauxhall. A surveillance team followed him to his yard in Thunderers Road, which ran parallel to the Thames.

Fallows was also followed to the yard and carried out anti-surveillance manoeuvres, even running a red light along the way.

At 11.40am, when both men were standing by the Portacabin, Berger called the attack and told his driver to ram the yard gates.

“They’re on us!” Lindop shouted as Flying Squad cars burst through and armed detectives emerged barking orders.

Fallows was off like an ageing sprinter holding the shiny black case Lindop had brought to the yard. The fifty-year-old didn’t get far, nor did the case he tried to sling while being chased.

A detective cuffed him, as another looked inside the case. It contained a Day of the Jackal type sniper rifle in three parts with a telescopic sight, silencer and ammunition.

Lindop had wisely stayed put when he saw the Sweeney crash his gates. “Don’t shoot the dogs,” he shouted, hands raised, before dropping to his knees, then lying on the ground face down in the dirt.

“You’ll have no trouble from me,” he told Berger as the plasticuffs were applied. Another detective asked Lindop if he was carrying any weapons. Of course he was. He had a loaded Astra automatic handgun in his trouser pocket and elsewhere a clip with four bullets, a roll of £580 in twenties and a mobile phone.

By now Berger had gone to the Portacabin where a videoed search was taking place of the inert military ordinance all over the floor and a stash of illegal weapons, among them a M16, various other rifles, a Benelli shotgun and ammunition.

More alarming was the large photograph on the wall of a beaming Brynmor Lindop shaking hands with Berger’s boss, Met Commissioner, Sir Paul Condon.

“We went into his cabin and there was a picture of Brynmor shaking Condon’s hand. And I’m thinking, Christ Almighty! What’s going on here?

A relative of Brynmor’s had been a uniformed sergeant and he’d done his good service and good conduct medal ceremony and Brynmor had leapt in and got a photo with the commissioner, which he thought was really funny.

Brynmor wasn’t a shy person in coming forward. We did have to ask the commissioner what his relationship was with this gunrunner. I didn’t do that face to face, that was done through a staff officer.”

Sir Paul Condon at the Dunne Memorial in 1996

The reaction of detectives to his photo with Condon made Lindop chuckle. He then opened his safe, where a diary, contacts book, letters and various Polaroids were seized, according to records of the search.

On the way to his house, where more illegal weapons were stored, Lindop’s chat was convivial. He casually mentioned that his wife was not going to be happy as she was preparing a birthday party for their son.

Semi-automatic handguns, automatic assault rifles and ammunition were found in a secret compartment in the loft. Anything else. Drugs? “No drugs, never used or had them,” he told detectives before being taken to a police station.

Lindop gave a no comment interview over the weekend, was charged and remanded to Pentonville prison.

Fallows also had his home searched for illegal weapons. When his wife returned from walking the dog, the bum bag around her waist was immediately seized with a loaded .38 Smith and Wesson handgun found snugly inside.

“It’s my husband’s”, she told detectives. “Why do you take it with you when walking the dog?” one asked. “For my personal protection,” she replied.

A Glock, a double-barrelled shot gun, a side loading shotgun and two rifles with telescopic sights and silencers plus loads of live rounds were seized from Fallows’ home.

He too was taken to a police station and charged over the weekend. Days later, and still in custody, Fallows took Flying Squad detectives to a stream near the main lake at Hainault Country Park.

He directed them to look under a stone for two plastic bags. The detectives found three Smith & Wesson revolvers and a Star semi-automatic pistol, according to their statements.

“Where’s the Glock?” Fallows was asked. “I’m sorry, I made a mistake, I meant to say Star revolver,” he replied.

The situation looked bad for both men and, according to the family friend, Lindop was “shitting himself”. At 46-years-old he was looking down the barrel of a double-figure sentence for the illegal weapons.

Apparently, Lindop used to say cops at Barkingside police station had supplied him with guns he would then “loan” to criminals and destroy on their return. This seems far-fetched.

But Operation Carlagg did uncover Lindop’s link to a corrupt former policeman.

Tipped The Wink

In July 1994, four months after Lindop’s arrest, DI Berger and the Flying Squad raided the three-bedroom home of Sidney Wink, a former Met police dog handler.

Wink had retired from the Met in 1975 and dedicated his life to guns. He came into Operation Carlagg’s cross hairs from detectives targeting Lindop.

Berger says Wink was part of a racket where illegal firearms were being officially certified as deactivated, then reactivated and sold on the black market by Lindop. 

The Flying Squad raided the Ilford house at 5.30am, but it looked like their quarry had been tipped the wink.  

“Wink knew. We went in there and missed him. The tea was still hot. It was one of those ones. Fuck it, where is he? And he knew very quickly and rang me and said, ‘I’m not coming back.’ Then by appointment he was going to come and see me. He’d rung me and said, ‘I am going to be late’. And I said, ‘No. I’m not accepting that. You turn up when you are told to turn up’. And he said, ‘No. I am going to come by bus, not bring my car.’ I said, ‘You do whatever you want but I’m telling you what time you have to be there. Get an earlier bus.’

But he was very premeditated and I think he realised the evidence against him was enough to charge him there and then, even just from the search. We didn’t have to go into all the other stuff. His house was full of deactivated, reactivated firearms. It was an arsenal. You couldn’t really class it as anything else. And it wasn’t as if we had to open anything, it was all out, strewn all over the house.”

Two days before Wink was due to be interviewed, the 66-year-old went into the side alley by his house, put a gun to his head and pulled the trigger. He left a suicide note for his wife reportedly with the message: “I am very sorry for what I have done.”  

By this stage Berger knew “the gun that killed Pat Dunne was a reactivated firearm” and had likely come from Lindop via Wink.

“Whether that was a direct sale or he was selling to other people whatever we could never establish because I didn’t think we’d turn Wink immediately but I did think we’d get Wink to talk. Because once he and his family were out the way, and he was moving, I thought he would try and protect himself as much as possible but that never materialised.

He’d obviously had his thinking time. He knew we had enough evidence just from the search and he probably knew it was all coming on top anyhow because of the all the other activities.” 

The Worshipful Company of Gunmakers based in The City since 1675 is responsible for official certification. Berger suspected that someone there had been “facilitating” Wink, whose deactivation often involved little more than “a Stanley blade put between hammer and cap”.

The Flying Squad inspector also felt a certain resistance when he started making official enquiries of what the Worshipful Company of Gunmakers had certified.

“Wink would take a whole lot of firearms down there, tell them they were all deactivated and take them home and reactivate them. They would have known they weren’t properly deactivated. But you can’t prove that. But they couldn’t also tell me to go away.”

Had Wink not committed suicide he would have been questioned, if not charged, with supplying the gun used to kill PC Dunne, said Berger.

He was also liaising with the murder squad, whose detectives were suspicious of the Sweeney’s involvement, Berger recalled.

“There was something that we were able to show that it [the gun] would have been supplied to them [Tyson’s crew] by this person [Wink]. The problem was we couldn’t step in on the murder squad so we were briefing the murder squad on what we thought was the position but they weren’t really that interested because it didn’t take them any further forward.”

PC Patrick Dunne

The homicide detectives had had their own significant but mysterious breakthrough in the Dunne and Danso murder. They had located the reactivated Italian Tanfoglio and Browning 9mm pistols used in the double killing.

Police reports suggested the guns were discovered in a Wandsworth cemetery close to Tyson’s home following an anonymous tip off by a woman to Crimestoppers. Detectives claimed they were guided to the guns by lipstick crosses she put on gravestones.

The anonymous source was later identified through DNA from her lipstick as someone connected to Tyson’s family. She told police the initial plan was to help dispose of the two buried guns but tipped off the police instead.

A £100,000 reward put up by The News of The World and the Met was on offer at the time.

William Danso

A retired homicide detective with good knowledge of the Dunne and Danso case agreed to speak all these years later but only on condition of anonymity.

The source said it was known Wink had converted the Tanfoglio used by Tyson because of distinctive markings on the weapon. These came from a tool Wink used to remove serial numbers from reactivated guns. 

“There was a mechanical fit between a punch recovered from Wink’s workshop and the gun,” the source explained.

Furthermore, a name and phone number in Tyson’s diary linked the gangster to a man called Alan. The diary entry ‘Alan GU’ and phone number also linked to Lindop and Wink, said the source.

Berger confirms that the Flying Squad had Alan under surveillance. The Essex-based man was later arrested on suspicion of acting as Lindop’s front for selling the guns that Wink reactivated.

And two people very close to Lindop confirmed Alan’s involvement in the supply of guns to the underworld and the double murder.

Yet, at the time of these events in mid-1994 the Met categorically denied to the media there was any link between Wink and the Dunne case.  

But The Upsetter can reveal a former detective has come forward with information about a third police operation which had also discovered the link.

Former detective sergeant Steve Morris (Photo: Michael Gillard) 

Nugget Of Intelligence

Retired Met detective sergeant Steve Morris had an east London informant who in the 90s moved drug money for some of the top players of the game. The informant put up a lot of information and Morris paid him for it from Scotland Yard’s Informants Fund.

But the detective started to suspect that another informant – George Wimpey – aka Brynmor Lindop – was getting paid for information that his man had put up.

Morris complained to bosses that he suspected corruption between Lindop and his handler, the well-known ginger giant detective at the South East Regional Crime Squad (SERCS).

The ginger giant denies there was ever an exchange where Morris called him corrupt to his face and had there been the outcome for his accuser would not have been pretty, he told The Upsetter.  

Wimpey, he said, was paid ‘“fortunes” for his information, “all above board”.

“When providing intelligence Wimpey preferred face to face meets. We were both well known, and easily identifiable, therefore with the pressure of work clandestine meets were impossible.

It was common sense that as he was known to have police associates he therefore wanted to explain amongst his circle that I was another ‘friend’ – a high risk strategy for myself, but best for the job.

Informants are a dangerous species, but are essential in special ops work. They are a two edge sword [with] the ability to disrupt criminals and dedicated detectives simultaneously.”

Shortly after the fall out between the two handlers, Morris’ informant reported back that Lindop was paying a crane driver working on the Dagenham docks to act as a spotter for any police or unusual activity around his yard.

Morris recalls briefing Berger and as a result the spotter was taken out before the Flying Squad came crashing through the gates of Lindop’s yard in March 1994. Morris said:

“Because of the known high level of police corruption surrounding Lindop the operation against him was developed in the utmost secrecy by going ‘off grid’ which meant that normal protocols were not followed.

This was a risky strategy but we all knew this would be the only way he would be caught to face prosecution. Good intelligence existed which indicated Lindop had compromising evidence against many police officers including those at the top. He was more than well protected.”

His informant was paid for the crane tip off, said Morris, who shortly after Lindop’s arrest was asked by his boss to look into the supply of illegal guns.

The initial intelligence led to some “good jobs”, so much so the senior brass in charge of policing in north and east London decided they needed a more formal initiative.

Morris was given two detective constables and an office in Claygate to run an intelligence gathering operation codenamed Nugget. 

The team went over existing intelligence and followed up leads about the recovery of guns from police searches and arrests. Operation Nugget also got deep into some of the MI5 intelligence on gun trafficking in the UK.

Morris said one of his team knew he still had a hard on for Lindop and drew his attention to a report by SO11, the Met intelligence department through which all informant material and other secret information flowed.

“As a result of my involvement in the arrest of Lindop and my success as a prolific informant handler I was given the task of setting up an intelligence and proactive firearms unit covering north and north east London under the name Operation Nugget.

During the course of this operation one of my researchers discovered that Lindop, who was now in custody, had supplied the firearm that killed Police Constable Patrick Dunne. This intel came from Scotland Yard’s SO11 Intelligence Branch and would have been readily available to detectives.”

Meanwhile, The Mirror’s crime editor, Jeff Edwards, who had unrivalled cop contacts, received a very precise tip off that Sidney Wink was suspected of reactivating at least 270 guns of which 150 made it into the hands of criminals.

Two, the Tanfoglio and Browning pistols, had been traced to the still unsolved murders of Danso and Dunne. But what else had Wink and Lindop, an ex-cop and an active police informant, supplied that could be traced to other murders?

One can begin to see why for the Met, even with Wink dead, Lindop’s forthcoming trial presented a problem should he choose to play the informant card. 

Judge Neil Denison

“Gun Nuts”

Lindop had been given bail from HMP Pentonville sometime in 1994. He was expecting a 15-year sentence when his trial started in February 1995, a close friend remembers.  

However, the ginger giant detective has revealed to The Upsetter that he was asked to privately brief the judge about Lindop’s role as an informant, to, in effect, give a good report so the judge went easy on him. 

“I was contacted by Bob Berger, post [Lindop’s] arrest and sometime before his [trial], requesting me to attend the [Old Bailey] and explain to the judge his role as an informant. Date to be notified.

Sometime later I received a last minute call to attend court and do exactly as requested previously. I know I was busy, it is something I could have done without. I believe I was in Paris.”

The ginger giant said he returned to London and briefed Judge Neil Denison QC, the Common Serjeant of London, behind closed doors about Lindop’s informant activities.

He gave the briefing suspecting that the Flying Squad or another part of the Met were taking over his informant and didn’t want him in prison. He had no idea until now that Lindop was linked to the Dunne murder.

For his part, Berger does not deny contacting Lindop’s handler but cannot recall it. “I would have spoken to [him], how’s Paris and that sort of thing but it doesn’t ring a bell. He was a very well connected individual. He ran informants, good ones,” Berger said.

On 24 February 1995, Lindop and Fallows pleaded guilty and received very lenient sentences for possessing what the judge said was enough weapons “to equip a small army”, according to a court report.

The judge also called the two men “gun nuts” who broke the law because of their obsession. He accepted they didn’t intend to supply criminals with weapons, which flew in the face of all the intelligence and evidence the Met had at the time.

Lindop was jailed for two years and Fallows for just 15 months. While both men earned one-third off their sentence for pleading guilty, even then it was generous.

With time already served on remand, Lindop was out by the end of 1995. By all accounts he returned to his life of crime and womanising. His continued relationship with the police, however, remains a mystery.

Lindop was never handled again by the ginger giant. The SERCS detective was a major target of the anti-corruption Ghost Squad at the time of his informant’s trial. Nevertheless, the Met used him to brief a senior judge and get a light sentence for an informant linked to the murder of a police officer! 

One possible scenario is that the Ghost Squad recruited Lindop as an informant to tell all he knew about bent cops and gangsters. Such a dodgy deal was not beyond the capability of the shadowy men behind the Met’s the anti-corruption squad.

Perhaps it is just a coincidence that after Lindop’s trial Berger joined the Ghost Squad in 1996.

The Ilford Recorder

Burnt Out

Six years later, on 25 January 2002, Lindop was gunned down as he pulled up outside his flat in a black Range Rover. It was coming up to 9pm and a man was waiting in a stolen car parked across the way.

As Lindop got out of his car, still talking on his phone, the assassin seized the moment and fired. Lindop bled out while the gunman drove off, dumping the car not far away.

Berger learned about the murder from a senior Met officer responsible for that part of east London. The girly voice on the end of the line belonged to detective chief superintendent Jon Shatford, who’d spent part of his career in the shadows looking at corrupt links between organised crime and cops.

Shatford apparently preferred the theory that the motive for the murder was likely to be jealousy. By all accounts Lindop was still a womaniser. His marriage had fallen apart and he was seeing an estate agent while having an affair with one of his neighbours, according to a close friend.

But a crime of passion seemed at odds with the nature of the execution. Had Lindop’s informant past finally caught up with him? Or was the motive something criminal he was into at the time of his murder?

The close friend said Lindop had recently shot a Nigerian man in the leg over a dispute at the Dagenham yard and that his girlfriend thought he was unusually “jittery” in the days before his murder.

The police had put up a £5000 reward and were liaising with Lindop’s family in a rather curious way, according to an eyewitness who asked to remain anonymous.

Roughly one week after the murder, detectives received a tip off that Lindop had a stash of guns and £24,000 in cash at a relative’s home. The police arrived and only seized the guns, said the eyewitness.  

The family were later called to a meeting where detectives explained that Lindop’s Range Rover had mysteriously been burnt out while in a police compound. How was that even possible, the family wondered aloud.

“I know it was corrupt because [the detective] said he would look into the money if we made an issue over the Range Rover,” the eyewitness said. 

On the twentieth anniversary, the murder of Brynmor Lindop – informant, underworld armourer and accessory to the killing of a cop – remains unsolved.

Shatford, long since retired, and the ex-detective in charge of the murder both declined to comment.

The Met said the last forensic review was in 2011, but would not comment on the burnt out Range Rover and corruption claims.

Retired detective sergeant Steve Morris, however, had a lot to say: 

“[Lindop] was a prolific informant and corrupter of cops. He used the system to his advantage by utilising the weak officers to protect his criminal interests. His activities were an open secret in some quarters of the police as well as the criminal world. In all my many wide and varied years of informant handling I would say [Lindop] was one of the most used and abused informants I have ever known.”

Gary ‘Tyson’ Nelson arrested for road rage shooting

Justice Delayed?

And what about Gary Nelson, aka Tyson?

The Met never stopped looking at him and shortly after the Dunne murder he was jailed for shooting at a driver during a road rage incident.

On his release in 1999, detectives were soon up on Tyson again. A bug in his flat led to a conviction in 2003 for possessing a gun and silencer. He was lifed off.

Three years later and the reward unclaimed, 36-year-old Tyson was convicted of the Dunne and Danso murders, for which he received another life sentence.

The evidence was circumstantial and shored up by a former cellmate’s controversial claim that Tyson had confessed to him. Two other witnesses came forward, one was the lipstick lady who had guided police to the gun stash in the cemetery.

The fallen PC’s surviving two brothers declined to comment on the findings of this investigation. But in a statement, the Danso family said: 

“We are deeply distressed to hear evidence that suggests that a corrupt Metropolitan police officer and a police informant supplied the guns that were used to murder our father William Danso and PC Patrick Dunne 28 years ago.

Our family calls on Dame Cressida Dick as head of Scotland Yard to refer this matter for independent investigation and to account to us and the public as to whether there has been an institutional cover up.”

Former Met detective sergeant Steve Morris supports the family’s call. Last night he said:

“I find it repugnant that Lindop was never brought to justice for supplying the weapon that killed a police officer. What message does this send to those risking all on the frontline of policing?

I strongly believe the only way to resolve this very serious issue surrounding the murder of Police Constable Patrick Dunne is to have a full independent no holds barred Public Inquiry with teeth into the actions of the Metropolitan Police.

Sadly this is not an isolated incident and this will allow people like myself and other good cops to speak openly and freely without fear of intimidation or threats from the organisation. I will be at the head of this queue should that day arrive.”

And so it goes.

Good article, yet again. Look to the murder of Lee Balkwell, Essex plod assisted in some very dirty covering up. As to Daniel Morgan’s murder being unsolved, wrong, young Lion. It was Fintan Creaven, who had shortly before quit The Met. An axe and an altercation with Irish travellers.

 

Reply

 
 
 

.

FAIR USE NOTICE: This site may contain copyrighted (© ) material. Such material is made available to advance understanding of ecological, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, moral, ethical, and social justice issues. This constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed for analysis, commentary, educational and intellectual purposes. In some cases comedy and parody have been recognized as fair use –Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License….. For more information please visit: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/17/107

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | 1 Comment

Watch out for this one in the Sunday Mirror 9/1/22. The story was so damaging for #Metpolice they didn’t put it in the #topsecret #OperationTiberius #Leaked #report.

Watch out for this one in the Sunday Mirror 9/1/22. The story was so damaging for #Metpolice they didn’t put it in the #topsecret #OperationTiberius #Leaked #report.

#Corruption at its very worse.

Blue on Blue, Dog eat Dog and all for dirty money, the real story of #BadCops.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

OUTRAGE!: Assange Loses, High Court Allows US Appeal; Quashes Assange’s Discharge VIDEO – Consortium News, BBC – 10 Dec. 2021

 

Assange Loses, High Court Allows US Appeal; Quashes Assange’s Discharge

The High Court allowed the U.S. appeal to reverse an order not to extradite Julian Assange and to send the case back to magistrate’s court.

The High Court at the Royal Courts of Justice. (David Castor/Wikimedia Commons)

By Joe Lauria
Special to Consortium News

The High Court in London on Friday ruled in the U.S. appeal against a lower court decision not to extradite imprisoned WikiLeaks publisher Julian Assange by sending the case back to Magistrate’s Court with instructions to send the case to the secretary of state to decide on Assange’s extradition.

The matter is now in the hands of Dominic Raab, secretary of state for justice, unless Assange’s lawyers appeal the decision to the U.K. Supreme Court, which they have said they will do. If extradited, Assange faces up to 175 years in prison on charges under the Espionage Act and one count of conspiracy to commit computer intrusion. Assange is the first journalist to be charged with espionage for obtaining and publishing state secrets.

Lord Justice Timothy Holyrode, who read the High Court’s summary decision in court in nine minutes, said the order by a lower court to discharge Assange was overturned and that he was to remain on remand in prison.  Holyrode said that the High Court had accepted the U.S. assurances that Assange would not be kept in harsh prison conditions in the U.S. He called them “solemn undertakings from one government to another.”

The High Court was satisfied, Holyrode said, that Assange would not be held under Special Administrative Measures or sent to ADX Florence maximum security prison in Colorado, that Assange would receive adequate medical treatment while incarcerated and that he could serve his post-trial and post-appeal sentence in his native Australia.

“The court rejected various criticism argued on Mr. Assange’s behalf …that the assurances …were not sufficient,” Holyrode said. 

He read:

“For the reasons given in the judgment which is today handed down, the court allowed the appeal on the grounds that .. a. the DJ [District Judge], having decided that the threshold for discharge under section 91 of the Extradition Act 2003 was met, ought to have notified the USA of her provisional view, to afford it the opportunity to offer assurances to the court; and b. the USA has now provided the United Kingdom with a package of assurances which respond to the DJ’s specific findings.” 

Holyrode read only the summary judgment in court. He said nothing about the district judge’s finding of oppression to discharge Assange, pointing out only that the High Court was satisfied with the U.S. assurances. Details of the mental health issues are in the full 27-page judgement that can be read here.  It is discussed later in this report.

Holyrode (justice.uk)

Holyrode pointed out that the district judge, Vanessa Baraitser, “decided all but one of the issues in favour of the USA. She decided that Mr Assange’s mental condition was such that it would be oppressive to extradite him because of the harsh conditions in which he was likely to be detained.” 

Holyrode said: “Mr Assange has indicated that he challenges the DJ’s decisions on the issues which were decided against him, and will seek to raise those issues at a later stage.” This is in reference to a possible cross appeal that Assange’s lawyers could lodge at the Supreme Court, depending on whether the Supreme Court accepts his appeal.

U.S. Grounds for Appeal

The High Court rejected three of the five U.S. grounds for appeal:

“The USA appeals against the order discharging Mr Assange on five grounds:

i) Ground 1: The judge made errors of law in her application of the test under section 91. Had she applied the test correctly she would not have discharged Mr Assange; [The High Court rejected this ground.]

ii) Ground 2: Having decided that the threshold for discharge under section 91 was met, the judge ought to have notified the USA of her provisional view to afford it the opportunity of offering assurances to the court;

iii) Ground 3: Having concluded that the principal psychiatric expert called on behalf of the defence (Professor Kopelman) had misled her on a material issue, the judge ought to have ruled that his evidence was incapable of being relied upon (or that little weight should be attached to it) or that his lack of independence rendered his evidence inadmissible. The district judge failed to interrogate or adequately assess the reasons for Professor Kopelman misleading her (seemingly concluding that it was sufficient that he had misled her for ‘human’ reasons) or to assess adequately how his willingness to mislead her impacted upon the overall reliability of his evidence. Had she not admitted that evidence or attributed appropriate weight to it, the judge would not have discharged Mr Assange pursuant to section 91; [The High Court rejected this ground.]

iv) Ground 4: The judge erred in her overall assessment of the evidence going to the risk of suicide, in particular in her predictive assessment of a future, long term risk which was based upon several contingencies which might or might not eventuate;[This ground was rejected by the High Court.]

v) Ground 5: The USA has now provided the United Kingdom with a package of assurances which are responsive to the judge’s specific findings in this case. In particular, the US has provided assurances that Mr Assange will not be subject to SAMs or imprisoned at ADX (unless he were to do something subsequent to the offering of these assurances that meets the tests for the imposition of SAMs or designation to ADX). The USA has also provided an assurance that they will consent to Mr Assange being transferred to Australia to serve any custodial sentence imposed on him if he is convicted.”

The High Court judgment says:

“The USA contends that had the judge approached the evidence surrounding the issue of oppression correctly (grounds 1 to 4) she would have decided the question differently and sent the case to the Secretary of State. In consequence the appeal should be allowed. In the alternative the question should be remitted for redetermination.”

In other words, the High Court could have sent the case back to Magistrate’s Court to be re-litigated. Instead it decided to send the case back to the lower court with the instructions to reverse its ruling and send the matter to the secretary of state to decide on extradition.

The High Court laid out specifically why it allowed the U.S. appeal and rejected Assange’s argument. It came down to the fact that the court accepted the U.S. assurances even though they came after Baraitser’s ruling not to extradite. The High Court explicitly believed in the sincerity of those assurances. 

The judgment said: “There is no reason why this court should not accept the assurances as meaning what they say. There is no basis for assuming that the USA has not given the assurances in good faith.”

It said further:

“There were no assurances before the judge (ground 5). They are now offered in response to the finding on oppression. The contention of the USA is that the assurances raise a new issue for the purposes of section 105 of the 2003 [Extradition] Act and that had the assurances been available to the judge she would have decided the oppression question differently.”

“It is submitted that on this basis alone, the appeal should be allowed.” [Emphasis added.]

The High Court rejected arguments by Assange’s lawyers that the U.S. assurances could not be trusted, by  ruling:

“General statements of opinion calling into question the good faith of the USA from those who establish no relevant expertise to give such an opinion are of no more value than a journalistic opinion culled from an internet search. We have nonetheless considered all the material de bene esse.”

The court rejected the Assange argument that the assurances should not be admitted because they came after Baraitser had ruled. “In our view, a court hearing an extradition case, whether at first instance or on appeal, has the power to receive and consider assurances whenever they are offered by a requesting state,” the High Court judgment said.

It said further:

“An offer of assurances in an extradition case is a solemn matter, requiring careful consideration by the requesting state of its willingness to give specific undertakings to another state. It would not be appropriate to require that to be done on a contingent or hypothetical basis; and we doubt the practicability of such an approach. We do not accept that the USA refrained for tactical reasons from offering assurances at an earlier stage, or acted in bad faith in choosing only to offer them at the appeal stage.”

The High Court also tried to justify why the U.S. waited until after the extradition hearing in September 2020 to make its assurances. “We observe that the decision that all closing submissions should be made in writing, in a case in which the arguments had ranged far and wide over many days of hearing, may well have contributed to the difficulty faced by the USA in offering suitable assurances any earlier than it did,” the court said.

The U.S. assurances appear to contain an error. It promises Assange will not be held pre-trial at ADX Florence prison, when Assange would be held before trial at the Alexandria Detention Center.

Mental Health Issue

Koppelman. (nhs.uk)

The High Court rejected ground 3 of the U.S. appeal that the testimony of defense witness Prof. Michael Kopelman should not be given any weight because in his first report to the lower court he concealed the relationship Assange had with Stella Moris, and their two children. Baraitser had ruled that while he mislead the court it was humanly understandable given the risks to Moris and the children.

Those risks came from C.I.A. contractor UC Global, which was spying on his Assange and all of his visitors at the Ecuador embassy in London, including Moris, and Assange’s lawyers and doctors. The High Court made no mention of this, but concluded:

“It is submitted that the judge – who had of course seen and heard all the evidence, and was well aware of the criticisms made in the cross-examination of Professor Kopelman — accepted that he had made two misleading statements in his first report but concluded nonetheless that his expert opinion was impartial and reliable. She was entitled to come to that conclusion and there is no basis on which this court can go behind it.”

The High Court however severely criticized Kopelman for violating his oath to the court to tell the truth. “With all respect to the judge, we cannot agree with her implicit finding that Professor Kopelman’s failings could be excused or overlooked merely because his conduct could be viewed as ‘an understandable human response’”.

Assured By the Assurances

Despite this ruling, the High Court made clear that it based its entire decision to quash Assange’s discharge on accepting the U.S. assurances. It accepted the U.S. contention that “the risk that Mr Assange would be made subject to SAMs and/or would be detained at the ADX was ‘front and centre’ of the opinions of both [defense witnesses] Professor [Michael] Kopelman and Dr [Quinton] Deeley, and was the basis of the judge’s decision that extradition would be oppressive. Once that risk is removed by the assurances, the judge would have reached a different decision.” The court added: 

“Given the emphasis which the judge placed on the ‘harshest SAMs regime’, and given that the evidence of Professor Kopelman and Dr Deeley of the risk of suicide was premised on Mr Assange being held under harsh conditions of isolation, we are unable to accept the submission that the judge’s conclusion would have been the same if she had not found a real risk of detention in those conditions.”

In other words, the High Court accepted that it would be Assange’s prison conditions that were the key factor to his risk of suicide, and that once the U.S. assurance removed that factor, Assange should be extradited. 

The C.I.A.

Neither the words “C.I.A.” nor “Central Intelligence Agency” appear anywhere in the High Court decision, even though Moris’ safety was at risk because of the C.I.A. and more significantly, because the C.I.A. had seriously considered kidnapping or killing Assange while he was in the embassy.

This plot was submitted as evidence in Assange’s September 2020 extradition hearing and in much greater detail at the High Court hearing at the end of October, when Assange lawyer Mark Summers QC referred to the Yahoo! News report about the C.I.A. plot. 

He argued that Assange could not be extradited to a state whose intelligence services had discussed a plot to kill him. At his conclusion, Summers recommended that the two high court judges read the Yahoo! report. If they did, they clearly ignored it. 

In fact, it rejected a new submission by Assange that the U.S. had committed “an abuse of the process because the USA was prompted by ulterior motives.” The High Court said: “The DJ [Baraitser] was satisfied that the federal prosecutors who brought the charges against Mr Assange acted in good faith.”

Reactions

There was no immediate reaction from the U.S. government to the High Court decision. 

WikiLeaks Editor-in-Chief Kristinn Hrafnsson said: “Julian’s life is once more under grave threat, and so is the right of journalists to publish material that governments and corporations find inconvenient.”

Moris, Assange’s fiancee, issued a statement after the ruling:

Joe Lauria is editor-in-chief of Consortium News and a former U.N. correspondent for The Wall Street Journal, Boston Globe, and numerous other newspapers. He was an investigative reporter for the Sunday Times of London and began his professional work as a 19-year old stringer for The New York Times.  He can be reached at joelauria@consortiumnews.com and followed on Twitter @unjoe  

Video:  Stella Moris @ 27.30secs, Craig Murray @ 24.30secs – Crowd protests outside RCJ London court against Julian Assange ruling

Joe Lauria on the Assange High Court ruling

……………………………………………………….

Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules – BBC

WikiLeaks" founder Julian Assange leaves Westminster Magistrates Court in London, Britain January 13, 2020
Julian Assange pictured leaving court in January 2020

Julian Assange has moved closer to being extradited from the UK to the US, after the US government won the latest stage in its extradition bid.

In January, a UK court ruled the Wikileaks founder could not be extradited due to concerns over his mental health.

He is wanted in the US over the publication of thousands of classified documents in 2010 and 2011.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

You can receive Breaking News on a smartphone or tablet via the BBC News App. You can also follow @BBCBreaking on Twitter to get the latest alerts.

More on this story

  • US begins legal appeal to extradite Assange

    Published27 October
  • Assange’s US extradition blocked on health grounds

    Published4 January
  • Assange given permission to wed partner in prison

    Published11 November
  • Profile: Julian Assange

    23 September 2020

     
  • Published

source:  https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-59608641

 

FROM OUTSIDE THE ROYAL COURTS OF JUSTICE, LONDON, 10 Dec. 2021:

…………………………………………………………………………..

update 13 Dec. 2021:

CN LIVE NOW! S3E13 The Survival of #JulianAssange

https://youtu.be/o1zGWmCkgX0 with #joelauria #elizabethvoss #FreeAssange 

.
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Maurice Kirk: Appeal re: Machine Gun South Wales Police Conspiracy VIDEO – 07 Dec. 2021 + archive

 Appeal re: Machine Gun South Wales Police Conspiracy

.
Revised skeleton argument:
 
Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Maurice Kirk ACQUITTED: “Former Taunton vet Maurice Kirk NOT GUILTY of stalking MP” + BBC News 20 May 2021 + archive

Man cleared of stalking MP Rebecca Pow given restraining order

Published
 
 
Taunton Deane MP Rebecca Pow
Image source, UK Parliament
Ms Pow described Mr Kirk’s behaviour as “terrifying”, however a jury cleared him of stalking her

A man who sent his MP a letter covered in white powder has been cleared of stalking her but has been issued with a restraining order.

Maurice Kirk, 76, of Westgate Street, Taunton, said he wanted to enlist Rebecca Pow’s help in a police dispute.

The Conservative MP for Taunton Deane told Exeter Crown Court she found Mr Kirk’s behaviour “terrifying”.

His restraining order is for seven years but he may contact her by letter or email at the House of Commons.

Mr Kirk is not allowed to visit Ms Pow’s home or her constituency office in Taunton.

He represented himself in court and was cleared of one count of stalking that caused serious alarm or distress.

The prosecution claimed his stalking campaign started in May 2019 while he was in prison for an unconnected offence of breaching a harassment order against a doctor.

Social media restriction

Mr Kirk said he had contacted Ms Pow’s office to enlist her help in his attempt to sue South Wales Police.

The court heard he wanted to sue the force over a prosecution in which he was cleared of fixing a machine-gun on a vintage plane, after claiming it was a harmless piece of metal.

Mr Kirk said he used toothpaste to seal an envelope that he sent to Ms Pow’s office, which she mistook for possible anthrax.

He also turned up at Ms Pow’s home during the national lockdown in May 2020, but again said he was trying to get her to help him and that his contact was normal.

Mr Kirk posted a photo of himself carrying a shotgun with two pictures of Ms Pow posted directly beneath on his website.

Judge Peter Johnson banned Mr Kirk from making any comments about Ms Pow on social media or his website.

He was also ordered to remove a post he published while the jury was considering its verdict.

In a statement, Ms Pow said: “I would like to thank those who have supported me over the past two years, especially my dedicated staff and my close family.

“I welcome the decision to apply a robust restraining order for my protection so that Mr Kirk’s behaviour towards me as an MP is properly regulated in future.”

More on this story:

————————————————————————————————————————-

 
Maurice Kirk arriving at Exeter Crown Court during his trial

Former Taunton vet Maurice Kirk NOT GUILTY of stalking MP Rebecca Pow

A man who sent his MP a letter covered in white powder has been cleared of stalking her but has been issued with a restraining order.

Maurice Kirk, 76, of Westgate Street, Taunton, said he wanted to enlist Rebecca Pow’s help in a police dispute.

The Conservative MP for Taunton Deane told Exeter Crown Court she found Mr Kirk’s behaviour “terrifying”.

His restraining order is for seven years but he may contact her by letter or email at the House of Commons.

Mr Kirk is not allowed to visit Ms Pow’s home or her constituency office in Taunton.

He represented himself in court and was cleared of one count of stalking that caused serious alarm or distress.

The prosecution claimed his stalking campaign started in May 2019 while he was in prison for an unconnected offence of breaching a harassment order against a doctor.

Social media restriction

Mr Kirk said he had contacted Ms Pow’s office to enlist her help in his attempt to sue South Wales Police.

The court heard he wanted to sue the force over a prosecution in which he was cleared of fixing a machine-gun on a vintage plane, after claiming it was a harmless piece of metal.

Mr Kirk said he used toothpaste to seal an envelope that he sent to Ms Pow’s office, which she mistook for possible anthrax.

He also turned up at Ms Pow’s home during the national lockdown in May 2020, but again said he was trying to get her to help him and that his contact was normal.

Mr Kirk posted a photo of himself carrying a shotgun with two pictures of Ms Pow posted directly beneath on his website.

Judge Peter Johnson banned Mr Kirk from making any comments about Ms Pow on social media or his website.

He was also ordered to remove a post he published while the jury was considering its verdict.

In a statement, Ms Pow said: “I would like to thank those who have supported me over the past two years, especially my dedicated staff and my close family.

“I welcome the decision to apply a robust restraining order for my protection so that Mr Kirk’s behaviour towards me as an MP is properly regulated in future.”

Presentational grey line
 
source: https://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/news/19317410.former-taunton-vet-maurice-kirk-not-guilty-stalking-mp-rebecca-pow/
…………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Archive [here] continues [from 2011]
https://www.butlincat.com/?s=maurice+kirk

Maurice’s site / updates from: “Flying Vet challenges South Wales Police” https://www.mauricejohnkirk.com

Email:  maurice@kirkflyingvet.com

 

A classic case of “you can’t believe all you read”:

Somerset MP allegedly stalked and sent white powder by constituent

   
   
 
   
 

Man denies stalking Taunton Dean MP Rebecca Pow

Maurice Kirk, 76, denies harassing Taunton Deane MP Rebecca Pow causing her to increase security.

 
   

Former vet stalked Somerset MP for more than a year, court hears

Maurice Kirk allegedly sent letter containing white powder to government minister Rebecca Pow

 
   
 

‘Stalker sent letter with white powder to MP Pow and posted gun photo’ c…

A STALKER left Taunton Deane MP Rebecca Pow fearful for her safety after posting a letter containing a white pow…

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

CAMPAIGN OPPOSING POLICE SURVEILLANCE: UPDATE: The Kate Wilson Case – Exposing Institutional Sexism of #Spycops – 27 April 2021

 Campaign Opposing Police Surveillance

The Kate Wilson Case – Exposing Institutional Sexism of Spycops

Kate Wilson outside the Royal Courts of Justice, 3 October 2018

Kate Wilson outside the Royal Courts of Justice

As Kate Wilson’s epic case makes its way through the Investigatory Powers Tribunal, we delve in the legal arguments being made and their significance for everyone affected by the spycops scandal.

For the last ten years, Kate Wilson has been on a dogged fight for justice. Deceived into to a relationship by undercover police officer Mark Kennedy, she wanted answers.

Part of a group of eight women also deceived into relationships by spycops, she was granted an apology by the Metropolitan Police who sought to brush them off. However, where others were forced to settle, a single door was left open for Kate – the notoriously secretive Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT). It was a small chance, but she went for it anyway.

This week, her unique battle finally made it to court, coinciding with the second set of hearings in the Undercover Policing Inquiry, to which it provides a fascinating counterpoint. There has been some excellent media coverage of the case, highlighting evidence that has coming out, which we will not repeat here (The GuardianStandardMorning StarThe Canary) This article will explore Kate’s actual legal claim – and some of the surrounding context – in more depth.

TEN YEAR STRUGGLE

Kate has taking on the Metropolitan Police and exposing its institutional sexism. As anyone who has dealt with the police knows only too well, she was met with all the usual obstruction tactics. A full account of these is a tale in itself, and would take a book to recount properly. The short account is that this backfired on them, as it only made Kate more determined.

It is already common ground between all the parties that the relationships were unlawful and should never have happened. However it is the impact of the relationship that the Tribunal is, in part, being asked to address.

At first, the police claimed that because they had admitted that these relationships happened, the Tribunal did not need to consider any evidence about them; they could keep secret just who knew, and how they knew, about the various spycops’ sexual relationships. Kate successfully argued against that – the Tribunal could not possibly determine the extent to which her human rights were breached without looking at the evidence.

When that didn’t work, the police switched tactics – using outright denial, twisting and changing their story, ignoring court orders and abusing legal processes (for example, serving things late or chaotically). They admitted things but then withdrew their admissions, showing utter contempt for the court. As one observer put it, it was a ‘defence by malicious incompetence’.

That lengthy process took more than two years and priced Kate out of legal representation. Undeterred, she took on the case herself and continued fighting, later gaining a team of pro bono lawyers from Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer. It has culminated in this week’s hearing.

This case is about wider issues than just the relationships of one disgraced undercover. It is about challenging the culture that led to the undercovers abusing women in this way, while their bosses turned a blind eye – the institutional sexism at the heart of their system.

It is also emblematic of a wider disdain for the rights of people who engage in protest. These units viewed everyone politically active as extremists and this viewpoint allowed them to casually strip them of their privacy. The National Public Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU, 1999-2011) and the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS, 1968-2008) defined extremism so broadly that the notion of ‘collateral intrusion’ on innocent people adjacent to true targets became meaningless – almost everyone was considered fair game in their world.

TAKING SPIES TO THE SECRET COURT

However, just as this is not a standard court case, this is not your standard court either. The case is being held in the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) – a body created under the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), which since 2000 has been the framework for undercover policing including the authorisation regime.

The IPT does not try cases as such, rather it looks at human rights claims arising under RIPA with a view to improving the regime. Importantly, however, it can make findings of fact.

The IPT is a secretive court, that makes its own rules, though it is clearly a judicial proceeding. The IPT is so secret that it won’t even say how many cases it hears, but it has numbered in the thousands and is only known to have ruled against the state once.

Although the IPT tries to follow established practice, if it wants, it can hold hearings entirely in secret, and a barrister is appointed to kind-of-represent the interests of the person bringing the claim. The person making the claim often never sees any of the evidence, and it is left entirely to the IPT’s discretion whether it even takes up a case.

The strength of Kate’s case – and her perseverance – allowed her to turn much of that on its head. The disclosure she has received is genuinely unique. The police have been forced by the IPT to turn over a great deal of evidence to her, including Kennedy’s own pocket notebooks and contact logs, and previously confidential NPOIU documents.

Days 1 and 2

The hearings opened with Charlotte Kilroy QC speaking on behalf of Kate Wilson. For two and half days she spoke solidly, taking the Tribunal through the evidence and multiple legal arguments.

Held at the Royal Courts of Justice and broadcast live online, the scene was striking, with boxes of evidence and arguments piled so high most could not see the faces of the three judges – Baron Boyd of DuncansbyProfessor Graham Zellick and Lady Justice Natalie Lieven.

SO WHAT IS KATE ARGUING?

Under the terms of RIPA, the IPT looks at human rights violations by the likes of the police and Secret Service (MI5). Any claim must be framed in that context.

Her case has many angles. The most prominent one is that she was deceived into a relationship by Mark Kennedy and this was a gross breach of her rights. Even the police have accepted this – that the relationship was breach of her Article 3 human rights, her right not to be subject to inhumane and degrading treatment or torture. This is an absolute right that no circumstances can justify breaching.

 Lord Boyd of Duncansby

Lord Boyd of Duncansby

With that also came a breach of her private life and that of her family and friends (Article 8). Kennedy made himself an integral part of her life for several years, furthering the abuse of her trust. Central to this is not the degree to which she and Kennedy had a relationship, but the degree to which this was encouraged and condoned by the unit that ran him – the National Public Order Intelligence Unit (NPOIU) – and their reasons for doing this.

However, Kate’s case is not just about Kennedy. Multiple undercovers intruded and reported on her over a decade of political activism. They too interfered in her private life, and also her right to protest.

She and her friends, and the other women deceived into relationships, were being targeted because they were exercising their rights to free speech and assembly (Articles 10 & 11). Once you look at the bigger picture, it becomes impossible to separate the relationship from the reason why Kennedy and the other undercovers were in her life in the first place.

This is where we get into the much wider aspects of the case, that the entire targeting of her was part and parcel of that abuse, and Kennedy’s spying has to be seen in the context of all those other undercovers. When you look at things this way, questions emerge not just about Kennedy’s operation but about all of the NPOIU’s activities.

STAND UP FOR YOUR RIGHTS

Under the European Convention on Human Rights, most of these rights are ‘qualified rights’. There are no possible exceptions when it comes to Article 3 rights (freedom from torture etc) but there are some for Articles 8, 10 and 11. This means governments are allowed to interfere with those rights, but must provide some justification for doing so.

For that justification to be lawful, it must be shown to be both necessary and proportionate. Kate has challenged the police to provide evidence that these undercover operations were necessary and proportionate. She argues that if they cannot provide such evidence, these operations may not have been lawful at all. Thus Kate’s case includes the assertion that the authorisations of Kennedy’s deployment, and thus the entire operation, not just aspects of it, were unlawful.

And further, when you factor in the interference with so many rights, there emerges a case that the legislation under which those authorisations were made failed as a reliable legal framework protecting individual’s rights.

Finally, Kate has pointed out the institutional sexism that lies at the heart of the police. This is not the sole cause of her human rights being breached, but has certainly exacerbated them, for her and all the other women wrongfully targeted for relationships. She is arguing that the way abuses discriminated against women should be taken into account when considering the other breaches, and a finding made on it as well. (Article 14: protection from discrimination).

As part of this legal argument there is an important concept of ‘positive obligation’. A substantive part of the legal discussion at the hearings is the degree to which they police were required to be proactive in protecting Kate from these violations of her rights. How this plays out varies from right to right, but comes down to who knew and what was the regime in place to protect her – and that means looking at the evidence around training and guidance, and structures of oversight and supervision, including the degree to which there was an embedded culture of sexism within the units which turned accepted the acts of Kennedy and his colleagues.

WRINGING THE EVIDENCE OUT OF THE POLICE

Assistant Commissioner Sir Stephen House

Assistant Commissioner Sir Stephen House

There have already been some notable successes in this case. One of these was an acknowledgement that to understand the severity of the human rights breaches the facts needed to be known.

At first the police tried to control this narrative and keep hold of the material, rather than releasing it to Kate. They produced a statement (signed off by Assistant Commissioner Sir Stephen House) giving their interpretation, based on a limited review of material they had gathered.

The statement was readily debunked as ineffective and flawed. Kate kept up the pressure, saying it was not good enough, and the IPT agreed. Bit by bit she forced the the police to surrender material to her. First came contact and decision logs for Kennedy’s case and internal reviews of his operation. Then authorisations for the undercovers and NPOIU intelligence reports.

Even these small samples were damning and opened the door for further requests. Unsurprisingly, the police did their best to prevent this disclosure. They ignored Tribunal orders, or deliberately misinterpreted them.

Another tactic was to make concessions on the case, claiming that meant there was no need for evidence. When that did not work, they withdrew the concessions, trying to blame their previous lawyers for having made admissions. It was disruptive and frustrating, but they underestimated Kate’s tenacity.

She was able to show that it was not just Kennedy she needed answers about, as there was a pattern of intrusion and spying on her life. For instance, there was the question about how Kennedy’s undercover predecessor ‘Rod Richardson’ had spied on her. Or how much did Kennedy’s contemporaries ‘Marco Jacobs‘ and ‘Lynn Watson‘ know about his many relationships?

This brought more disclosure, about other undercovers, such as Jim Boyling and Rod Richardson, who had spied on her as early as 1999 – years before Kennedy was deployed.

From all the material, it was obvious the right to privacy meant nothing to them; Kennedy filtered nothing out and his bosses appear to have said nothing. It was also painfully clear from the logs that anyone reading them would have been well aware that Kennedy and Kate were in a relationship.

As Kate puts it:

Disclosed #spycops cover logs contain more than 30 references to Kennedy staying with me in my parents’ home, moving in together, and time alone, not protest, or campaigning or crime, just ordinary activities. Kennedy’s handler records that Kennedy gives my name as his “next of kin”.

The evidence, particularly the contact logs that document Kennedy’s continual reports to his ‘handler’ officer, are a goldmine of information about these operations. Although limited, and hampered by the fact that much material (particularly from the key period when Kennedy began the relationship) has apparently been lost or deliberately destroyed, they nonetheless give useful insight into the units.

WHO ELSE KNEW?

It has been possible to build up a bigger picture using Kate’s own memories and those of her fellow campaigners, and other women targeted by the spycops.

NPOIU officer known as Rod Richardson

NPOIU officer ‘Rod Richardson’, Mark Kennedy’s predecessor, also spied on Kate Wilson

Kennedy had one cover officer, known by the cipher EN31, for the entirety of his deployment. The police have admitted that this cover officer must have known about Kennedy’s many relationships. However, EN31 denies this and has refused to cooperate with the police in this case.

It has become abundantly clear that there were multiple officers in close proximity to Kennedy, who were aware of his activities. Though there is no explicit mention of relationships in any of the documents disclosed, anyone reading them would have been immediately aware that something was going on.

As the picture built up, other players came into view: the heads of the NPOIU undercover units and their deputies; cover officers for other undercovers such as Lynn Watson; Nottinghamshire Special Branch.

According to Sir Stephen House, none of these people knew anything. But the contact logs and other material demonstrate otherwise. For instance, it was policy for these logs to be sent to the unit’s managers every week. They were written to be read by others – including messages left in the logs for the Senior Investigating Officer to read. This puts the lie to the police’s position that Kennedy was a ‘rogue’ operator – it is clear, as Kennedy himself told Parliament, that they knew what he was doing at all times.

Kate said:

The cover logs are damning. The Police try to claim senior officers didn’t read the logs. That is not borne out by the evidence – throughout the logs there are personal notes to the Senior Investigating Officer, including the problem of me wanting to meet MK’s mum.

Likewise, part of the police case has been that the undercover unit was a silo, kept discrete from even the rest of the NPOIU. But, again, this is demonstrably untrue.

And what of all the other material? The logs and intelligence reports show that campaigners’ relationships were regularly reported as a matter of course by the undercover and it was deemed important enough to be circulated onward? Yet not one of Kennedy or the other undercovers’ relationships appear in the material. The more one looks at that side of things, the more it is obvious something was amiss. It’s hard to be definitive, but it appears that any such material was being suppressed – ‘sanitised’, as they put it.

As Kate’s barrister, Charlotte Kilroy QC, argues there was a cultural practice of ignoring relationships deeply embedded in the unit, treating them as a given though not to be mentioned.

The police have relied heavily on there being a supposed prohibition on sexual relationships, but are unable to point to any concrete proof of this, other than general regulations against criminality and a duty to respect human rights. They claim that because they now accept sexual relationships are an abuse of Article 3, that means that must have always been the case. Plus, they argue, there are a some bits of circumstantial evidence in their favour, such as the denials of an undercover trainer, and a supposed role-playing exercise in the training given to undercovers.

Kilroy has ably unwound their dubious logic. For example, while there was an explicit prohibition on using drugs for the period in question, no equivalent guidance existed for sexual relationships (since the undercover policing scandal broke ten years ago, a more explicit prohibition on sexual relationships has been made police policy). And it didn’t appear to apply to the NPOIU’s sister unit, the Special Demonstration Squad, which spoke of ‘fleeting, disastrous relationships’ forming part of an undercover’s ‘tradecraft’.

Kate said:

The Tradecraft Manual shows that although it may have been suggested that #spycops sexual relationships should be “avoided” it was not said that they should never happen. Viewed alongside what happened in practice, relationships were not fleeting, although they were disastrous.

The importance of this was it showed there was no real prohibition on sexual relationships worth its salt within the undercover policing units.

CULTURAL PRACTICE

Kilroy also set out the cultural context around Kate’s case in two ways.

The first of these entailed exploring the obvious parallels with other undercovers’ deceitful relationships. Clearly both Lynn Watson and Marco Jacobs knew of Kennedy’s relationships, and Jacobs had his own. There seems to have been a culture of accepting these relationships, viewing them as unremarkable. Plus, there was a certain amount of cultural crossover between the Special Demonstration Squad and the NPOIU, the former unit clearly having a culture where relationships was permitted.

Kate said:

Police deny widespread indifference or encouragement for MK’s sexual relationships. But they also acknowledge that, by its very nature, a culture of sexism may not get written down. They have not investigated or presented any #spycops bosses as to be witnesses.

The second of Kilroy’s examinations of the culture concerned the ways in which the structures of these undercover policing units made them institutionally sexist. There were no proper monitoring systems. Training was inadequate, and supposedly relied on oral prohibitions, for which evidence is limited, to put it politely.

There was no acknowledgement that prolonged deployments increased the risk of such dishonest relationships occurring, as well as the likely impact on the women deceived in this way (for example, pregnancy, or lies about intentions). The spycops were content to manipulate these women, disregarding their dignity. The fact that these relationships were known about for many years in the SDS itself reveals a discriminatory attitude towards women and their rights.

AUTHORISATIONS DISMANTLED

Charlotte Kilroy QC

Charlotte Kilroy QC

Kilroy also criticised the regime under which undercover police operations were authorised. According to RIPA and related regulations, senior officers had to sign off the deployments. Deployments had to be justified, necessary and proportionate. Her line of attack was to ably demonstrate that the arguments for necessity in the authorisations simply were not met and inadequate.

The first authorisations made out for Mark Kennedy did not name specific individuals or organisations to target, as they should have. Instead, he was sent into Nottingham’s Sumac Centre, a community centre used by a wide variety of groups – it was a fishing trip to gather ‘pre-emptive intelligence’. A list of groups which used the centre is provided in in support, but is clearly spurious. It includes what is described as the ‘extreme left wing’ Stop the War Coalition.

Kilroy was able to demonstrate the excessive breadth of the authorisations, which essentially deemed everyone a potential target for spying.

Kate said:

Stop the War is listed, described as a “traditionally extreme left wing” movement. It then talks about the massive demonstrations in London attended by millions of people and peaceful demonstrations that took place in Nottingham. This is what #spycops target as “extreme”.

Once in place, the authorisations were self-perpetuating justifications – Mark collected intelligence and once that started that was deemed sufficient in itself. There were no objectives by which it could be measured, something the police’s own internal reports acknowledge. Mission-creep became a feature, his deployment extending to cover campaigns across Europe that had no bearing on the UK. Criminality was no longer the main reason given but replaced by purely policing resource arguments. Justifications move on to merely protecting his ‘legend’.

Within the authorisations, when it came to ‘collateral intrusion’ of spying on those around activists, anyone involved, however peripherally, in protest or campaigning was considered a legitimate target, and the focus is on privacy in the strictest, data protection sense. What it did not do was consider the kinds of friendships Kennedy was forming, and just how intrusive the operation would be for those whose lives he invaded and reported back on.

WITHOUT JUSTIFICATION, SPYING IS UNLAWFUL

As such, the important consideration of collateral intrusion (an Article 8 ‘right to private and family life’ consideration in itself) was brushed aside, because almost everyone Kennedy came into contact with could be regarded as a target. The authorisations were based on calling everyone an extremist rather than particularising. There was no proper assessment, as required for it to be a justified deployment. As one of the judges put it, in the standard authorisations form the section for considering on collateral intrusion became an Article 8 box-ticking exercise.

Many of the authorisations were misleading and some contained lies. For example, in one of them, Kate is described as being a main organiser of a housing cooperative which was named as a target. This was utterly false, and the NPOIU officers signing off on it would have known this. She is only included as a named target when she was living in Spain and Kennedy wanted to maintain contact with her.

The authorisations show no pressing social need, being about pre-emptive intelligence gathering without clear targets or goal. It was an operation for its own sake, and became increasingly so as time went on. No proper assessment was made about the levels of interference that were actually required or justifiable. This is something that an internal report from the Serious Organised Crime Agency (into Kennedy and the NPOIU) was critical of.

This leads to an important legal point: once it becomes an undercover deployment for its own sake, with no specific outcomes, how can it be capable of meeting the criteria of being ‘necessary’? The ‘necessity’ condition must be met for such operations to be lawful. Kate’s argument is that it can be shown these operations were not necessary and therefore none of the Mark Kennedy authorisations, and possibly other undercover deployments, were lawful.

Day 3

THE RIGHT TO PROTEST

We began by returning to look at Articles 10 and 11 (free speech, and assembly), at the request of the judges. This pair of rights are often combined in this context as a general ‘right to protest’.

Kate is arguing that the extensive targeting of her over a decade amounted to not just an engagement of those rights but, more seriously, an actual interference with them.

This part of the case is not just about Kennedy, although he played a significant role in what can be termed ‘interference’, but the degree to which she was under surveillance and the impact it had on her. The basic argument is the State had no business monitoring her because of her political views and activities. It does not matter whether or not she was aware of the exact details of this surveillance, it still had an impact on her.

Kate’s barrister, Charlotte Kilroy QC, pointed to European case law that supported this position, recognising that extensive police surveillance in itself has a ‘chilling effect’ on protest.

As one of the judges, Professor Zellick, put it:

‘You might say the state has no business spying on the legitimate political activities of its opponents.’

The evidence allowed Kate to go further. By comparing her own memories with the contact logs, she could identify moments were she was being deliberately manipulated to meet Kennedy’s agenda (and that of his bosses) . He persuaded her to go to events that she was not interested in, or talked her out of others. In this he was leaning heavily on the closeness of their relationship and the trust she had placed in him.

She is still left wondering now just how much his influence affected her:

It is unchallenged in my witness statement that MK did influence and change my political views. #spycops were deeply manipulative and we were very close and he may have influenced me in ways I don’t even know. How many of the decisions and beliefs I held back then were my own?

Then there is the impact that the discovery has had on Kate and her comrades. She has gone from being deeply committed to political organising, to struggling to engage with people and large gatherings. She has become cut off from some groups as a result of her anxieties, which Kennedy and his cover officer knew affected her, which have now grown. Other groups were destroyed under the weight of the Kennedy revelations.

Kate explained:

I now find it very hard to engage with politics that reminds me of MK. The impact of betrayal by MK and other #spycops was devastating for the political groups and communities. Even if I wanted to continue, many of those wonderful projects, groups and movements no longer exist.

At this point one of the judges asked about the fact that some of the movements Kate was involved in were aware of the dangers of state surveillance. Kilroy responded that a concern was one thing, but what Kennedy exposed was the sheer extent the police were willing to go to gather information on political views.

Things were far worse than what the campaigners feared – in effect, their paranoia was nothing compared to the actual reality. And because it only came to light accidentally, it means the police cannot be trusted to be honest, to root out misbehaviour in their units.

So having argued that there Articles 10 and 11 were engaged, and breached, the next step is again to consider whether the State could make the case that this was justified. The police have already conceded that the sexual relationship with Kennedy did in itself interfere with Kate’s Articles 10 rights. However, she wants to make the point that this goes much wider than Kennedy, that all the spying on her amounted to an ‘interference’, and that the actions of all the other undercovers need to be taken into account.

As with Articles 3 and 8 (freedom from torture etc, right to private and family life), the interferences arose out of the same police desire to monitor and control protest. It was the reason Kennedy and the other undercovers were deployed, and even the police’s own internal reports acknowledge that when it came to peaceful protest, they overstepped the line. The scope and depth of the reporting that the NPOIU set out to do was not justified under the legal regime, as shown in the analysis of the authorisations.

A PROBLEM WITH RIPA

Since 2000, the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA) has governed how bodies use covert monitoring tactics, including undercovers and informers, and issues such as collateral intrusion, should be handled.

There is also an important bit of case law, Malone v UK (1985), which requires that the law must be sufficiently clear to give citizens adequate indication of the circumstances and conditions on which authorities are empowered to use to this secret and potentially dangerous interference with the right to respect for private life.

Kilroy took the Tribunal through a careful analysis of RIPA, showing that Malone v UK was not satisfied. She pointed out that the level of authorisation required for undercover police was actually quite low in comparison to, say, planting a listening device or bugging a phone. Likewise, the conditions are much more stringent.

Kate said:

Who’d have thought that UK law, where uniformed officers need a warrant from a judge to search your garden shed, that all it would need would be the OK from another police officer for them to send #spycops to live in your home and sleep in your bed for years?

Kilroy argued this means that while some intrusion could be foreseeable, on the face of RIPA the public could not reasonably deduce that undercover policing would be used in such an intrusive way.

The judges questioned her, saying that while the relationships are agreed to be unlawful due to their violation of fundamental human rights, RIPA was not at fault, it’s just that the police hadn’t adhered to it.

To this, Kilroy responded that a related case, that of AKJ v Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis, had since ruled that the definition of relationships in RIPA as pertaining to undercovers did in fact encompass sexual/ intimate relationships. The law itself was not as clear as it should have been, given the extent of intrusion it permitted.

Without a clear prohibition on sexual relationships, the appropriate legal safeguards supposedly in place to properly reflect the severity of the intrusion were not actually there. So part of the problem lies with RIPA itself, something even HM Inspectorate of Constabulary had flagged up in previous reports.

THE POLICE REPLY

David Perry QC

David Perry QC

The Metropolitan Police and National Police Chiefs Council, the Defendants in the case, were represented by David Perry QC. He began by claiming that the police were approaching the case with the least adversarial approach possible and seeking to disclose everything that could be, thereby raising not a few eyebrows.

He acknowledged that the operations were ‘tainted by illegality’ and their authorisations could be stigmatised as unlawful on the basis of the concessions already made by the police. These concessions were on the basis of Articles 3 and 8 (freedom from torture etc, right to private life), not on the grounds of the interference with the right to protest, other than where Kennedy’s sexual relationship with Kate Wilson had an impact on these.

This breach was further exacerbated by the fact that Kennedy’s cover officer, EN31, ought to have known of the relationship, a failure of the police’s ‘positive obligation’ under Articles 3 and 8. However, Perry takes EN31’s denial of any knowledge of sexual relationship at face value.

Perry didn’t want to detract from the admitted breaches, but did want to address their severity by interpreting the material as disclosed. This is a problem with much of this case – the lack of any real witness from the police side to adequately testify on their behalf. As a result, there is an awful lot of freestyle interpretation going on, with Perry putting it out there what he reckons the officers involved might have been thinking.

From the start it is clear that they are hanging Kennedy out to dry. Considerable time was spent on going through the regime, codes and training that officers received. We were told that they were instructed on the ethical and moral standards expected from them at all times. They say that Kennedy completely violated these. According to Perry, this was the starting point by which his fellow officers would treat and judge him, and he betrayed all of them, including EN31.

The police say they couldn’t possibly have foreseen what Kennedy would do. After all, before joining the NPOIU, Kennedy had been an experienced police officer (of ten years) which included low level undercover work as a Test Purchasing Officer buying illegal drugs. He’d gone through the training which, according to them, included prohibition of sexual relationships. His fellow officers could surely expect him to comply with the standards set out for all police officers, as well as for undercovers.

Kate highlighted:

Lieven J: Is there any evidence, and I mean evidence in the broadest possible sense, of any officer every being subjected to disciplinary action for having engaged in a sexual relationship whilst undercover?

Perry: No, there is not.

Perry pointed out that in having sexual relationships, Kennedy destroyed his own credibility as an undercover. Kennedy would have known had he witnessed any serious criminality, he could have been required to give evidence in court – but any such evidence would be hopelessly compromised by his personal relationships.

It is unclear if the barrister is aware of the significance of his words – the police have for a long time argued that the undercovers were guaranteed secrecy for life, and indeed we have seen the extent to which they will protect their identities. However, Perry was effectively conceding that the policing regime itself meant this could not be the case, that undercovers could not have such an unqualified expectation.

He then went on to argue that Kennedy was passing himself off as an honourable officer to his colleagues in the NPOIU while lying to them. Events such as him reporting a sexual advance by an activist demonstrated that he could be relied on to report such things honestly.

However, other evidence from the logs show that he was lying to them about his actions and reasons for doing things. For instance, on one occasion that he spent alone with ‘Lisa‘ (another woman he deceived into a relationship), his log entry claims to have included other people with whom he discussed political activity. Elsewhere he exaggerated to suit his own ends, and probably to justify his continued deployment.

Kate observed:

It seems the police point is MK did report a sexual advance by someone else. So #spycops Cover Officer could assume anything untoward that happened with anyone else (such as me) he would know. (Note: my relationship had been going on for 10 months by then)

EN31, was Kennedy’s Principal Cover Officer, someone he was in daily contact with and who had responsibility for his welfare and other issues. We know from the evidence that he would be physically close to Kennedy, and knew where he was at all times. He was in that position for the entire seven years of the deployment and clearly had a close bond with Kennedy.

It is accepted by the police that EN31, as Kennedy’s cover officer, should have been more intrusive and asked more questions. According to Perry, though, EN31 simply accepted Kennedy’s word in good faith and had no reason to believe otherwise. After all, Kennedy never reported that he was having sexual relationships. There were failings here, but the blame remains entirely with the undercover who deceived everyone, not just the women he targeted for relationships. Furthermore, the relationships were not for tactical purposes, they were for his own personal reasons and needs.

Significant to Perry’s case is that the contact logs did not record relationships per se. This was because Kennedy knew he’d be removed from the field if he did admit them.

Kate said:

The police go on to read a #spycops intelligence report 18/11/2003 “Katja” (that’s me) spent the night of the 17th November 2003 at Mark Stone’s flat in Marshall Street. Somehow this is supposed to support their case, because it doesn’t say we had sex. (We did)

It is also the police position that Kennedy’s own evidence about this, such as that given before the Home Affairs Select Committee, shows him to be an unreliable witness, angry with his seniors and seeking to blame them (when he said they must have known about his relationships). Even the Serious Organised Crime Agency (SOCA), which reviewed all Kennedy’s material in 2011, did not see a trace in the material of sexual relationships.

Kate noted the exchange:

Perry: “MK did not report any romantic or sexual advance by the claimant towards him whilst he was deployed.”

Judge: Mr Perry, is that really how you want that point to be recorded?

Apparently, yes, it is!

Overall, Perry is protective of EN31, presenting him as a trusting fella misled by Kennedy. He speculates on behalf of the cover officer as to what he was thinking and how he interpreted the the material, taking his statement very much at face value and focusing on the contact logs as if they gave the full picture. He did not explore the relationship between Kennedy and EN31, which appears from the logs to have been very close and matey.

Likewise, Perry has a very particular interpretation of the material in the logs on the grounds of viewing them through EN31’s eyes – as if they are the arbitrators of the facts themselves. Without going into detail, the Tribunal was presented with a weird interpretation of life among the campaigners targeted by Kennedy through this incomplete reporting. For instance, he spent some time on the fact that as they travelled around to events, campaigners would spend time at each others addresses. So mentions of this in the logs should not be taken as untoward or indicative of sexual relationships. Likewise, by the nature of the groups targeted, Kennedy would have to associate with people of both genders.

It was frankly weak stuff. It is a misleading reading of detailed contact logs which clearly infer Kennedy was conducting a relationship with Kate Wilson. At best, it is saying that in seven years, EN31 was so profoundly  incompetent that he suspected nothing and did nothing. Likewise, the various senior officers in the NPOIU who also read the logs. It also calls into to question the thoroughness of the SOCA report if they missed the obvious.

A TERRORIST AT THE HOME OFFICE?

Not long before the end of the day, there was an important exchange regarding an NPOIU intelligence report from the time Kate Wilson is recorded as having first stayed over at Kennedy’s house in Nottingham. Justice Lieven noted that it contained a reference to a family friend of Kate’s, describing him as a ‘South African terrorist working at the Home Office’ when he was in fact a Minister of State.

Perry was quick to distance the police from the outrageous comment, claiming it was an example of Kennedy’s inaccurate reporting, but Justice Lieven pointed out that Kennedy’s contact logs for that period are among the documents that have been ‘lost’, and that this report is authored by someone else in the NPOIU, not Kennedy, and that they clearly thought the information was of sufficient interest to send up the chain. Perry accepted that the information was derived from Kennedy, but that the report was written by someone else.

Lieven demanded that the police lawyers address the issue by producing something that would allow her to understand who authored, saw and commented on the reports. The police barrister said he would have to take instruction, and promised her something by Monday.

THE HEARINGS CONTINUE…

On Friday 23 April, the Tribunal sat in ‘closed session’. This is where evidence that was not shown to Kate was to be discussed. She was not allowed to be there, although the police will be. Instead her interests will be represented by the Counsel to The Tribunal, Sarah Hannett QC.

Monday 26 April will see the open hearings resume, with a continuation of the police case. This will be followed by a response from Kate’s lawyer, Charlotte Kilroy QC, to any new points. At which point the hearing finally ends. It is unknown when judgement will be handed down, but it may take several months.

sourcehttp://campaignopposingpolicesurveillance.com/2021/04/24/kate-wilson-case-exposing-institutional-sexism-spycops/?fbclid=IwAR3191KbU6vC1JIVTzFSS0pJfPe69lhw2gfQEZPGb3J9Wr4cDgf1J8mLqlk

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

UPDATED 02APRIL: Michael K Jaco: COVID created at Fort Dietrich US – GLOBAL COUP CONTINUES March 25 2021 + update current news

#COVID CREATED AT #FORTDIETRICH #US 

Mar, 25, 2021 

– Update Current News

Michael Jaco Official

Michael Jaco Official

 

#MichaelKJaco 

LATEST 02 APRIL 2021 

 

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

#FreeAssange: PETITION UPDATE #JulianAssange has asked the High Court to certify three points of law of general public importance – WRITE! 16Jan2022

FFS when’s this #Assange farce gonna end? Held 23 hours a day in tiny cell without charge, having to be vaccinated, hardly ever seeing lawyers or family – this is barbaric and shameful! What kind of “legal system” is this? All this is merely payback for upsetting the yanks with their Iraq war crimes!! More than a public scandal when the entire British LEGAL SYSTEM KOW TOWS TO A BUNCH OF YANK WAR CRIMINALS!!—>

#FreeAssange PETITION UPDATE #JulianAssange has asked the High Court to certify three points of law of general public importance WRITE!

https://www.change.org/p/free-julian-assange-before-it-s-too-late-stop-usa-extradition/u/30066234?cs_tk=AsDQPn4Ju_LcA4Kd7GEAAXicyyvNyQEABF8BvByN5GL-sZsogiYPDk-eVjY%3D&utm_campaign=10f949353fe74bad99ab5cc7c86c6b18&utm_content=initial_v0_5_0&utm_medium=email&utm_source=petition_update&utm_term=cs

PETITION UPDATE

Julian Assange has asked the High Court to certify three points of law of general public importance

Phillip Adams

Brisbane, Australia

14 JAN 2022 — 

Hi All, Good health to all for 2022. “Julian #Assange has asked the High Court to certify three points of law of general public importance. The Supreme Court cannot hear his appeal unless the High Court agrees to certify at least one of them. The High Court could notify its decision about certification at any moment.”. Stella Moris FB.

This petition has submitted to the Office of the Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court (The Hague). We allege the “mental torturing” of Julian Assange is a “crime against humanity”. This petition’s submission should be followed up with pressure to the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court to investigate this international crime that paves the way to a dictatorship. This is going to involve more of an effort from as many people as possible. 

It starts when You / We followup.

Together and focused we are a serious power that can affect change. Pressure can be applied without setting on foot on the pavement..

All it takes its our minds, actual efforts, the internet and YOUR/OUR fingers pressing buttons and letting The International Criminal Court understand how important it is to investigate this alleged case of a crime against humanity.

Here are the contact details for your/our contact and followup and don’t forget to let them know that  : “I am a Signatory to the Free Julian Assange, before it’s too late petition’s submission to investigate the alleged case of a Crime Against Humanity” in the Mental Torturing of Julian Assange”.

Information and Evidence Unit
Office of the Prosecutor
Post Office Box 19519
2500 CM The Hague
The Netherlands

or send by email to Copy and paste this email address of the ICC’s Office of the Prosecutor ” otp.informationdesk@icc-cpi.int

otp.informationdesk@icc-cpi.int

or send by facsimile to +31 70 515 8555.

Cheers

Phillip

                                

            

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , | Leave a comment

Ex Gang Stalking Operative Explains Tactics and Motives + explains why Targeted Individuals are being selected and how targeted is being done VIDEO

Ex Gang Stalking Operative Explains Tactics and Motives

Kruno Baraba 22 Dec. 2017

Ex Gang Stalking Operative Explains Tactics and Motives In this rare radio interview , ex gang stalker explains us why Targeted Individuals are being selected and how targeted is being done . Ha says that T.Is are normally coming from conspiracy theory background and or high tech back ground , PHDs who did not go along with the agenda , so they end up being targeted . He also says that T.Is are normally people of higher I.Q. and undefended way of thinking . The purpose of targeting is to isolate the individual , alienate him from jobs and friends , bring him to the bottom , homelessness and keep him there . There are many ways how to achieve this , V2K , then subtle though manipulation , sending throats to exactly brain part where they originate , so target can not distinguish he’s thoughts from those implanted . This is very effective way how they manipulate un suspected public and T.Is .

He also explains gang mentality of perps ; they are happy to have well payed jobs , so much power over targets , support of group , they can date women they want using same techniques they use on T.Is I picked this video from YouTube channel of one T.I. and I do not know the origin of it , otherwise you would have some links and ore data about where and when etc. Gang Stalking, Voice To Skull V2K, Silent Hypnosis https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ek7SS… From Pasha Pashou Thanks Pasha , you always have interesting videos . Cheers to you and to all of you ; fellow T.Is , lurking public and perps

PS Oh , I just found original of video Pasha Pashou snatched , and I snatched out from him . Gang Stalking & V2K Testimony by Private Security Whistleblower https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RSwTJ…

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Crisis of confidence: can Britain’s police recover public trust? – UK Corrupt Police 27 Dec. 2021

Crisis of confidence: can Britain’s police recover public trust?

In a square outside Barking town hall, east London, a sombre-faced Helen Ball, assistant commissioner in the Metropolitan Police, on Friday walked nervously up to a bank of microphones and cameras. She had come to apologise, minutes after an inquest jury had delivered their verdict on what they called “fundamental failings” in the force’s investigation of four murders in 2014 and 2015 by Stephen Port, a serial killer.

The verdict, which Ball admitted was “devastating”, was that three of the murders could probably have been avoided if the first, of Anthony Walgate in June 2014, had been properly investigated. Members of the victims’ families glowered at her from the other side of the television cameras.

These cases are the latest in a series of high-profile scandals around police conduct that have brought the UK’s forces under scrutiny. They include the revelation that Greater Manchester Police failed to record around a fifth of the crimes reported to it in the year to June 2020.

However, Ball admitted that the Met — which has twice the officer numbers of the country’s next-largest force — faced particularly probing questions after what she called the “devastating finding” by the jury.

“We’re . . . deeply sorry that there were failings in the police response to the murders,” Ball said. “I give my own and the Met’s heartfelt apologies.”

As Ball retreated into the town hall, she left unaddressed rising public concerns about the culture, efficiency and effectiveness of British policing. Those concerns are particularly intense for sexual assault and rape crimes and cases involving minorities, such as the Barking murders, where the victims were all young gay men.

The families were furious that the Met successfully sought to have the jury barred from considering how far the force’s investigation into the murders by Port was influenced by homophobia. They remain convinced that prejudice played a role.

“Had four white, heterosexual girls been found dead in the same manner as Anthony, Gabriel, Daniel and Jack, then the police’s actions, and the likely outcomes, would have been different,” Neil Hudgell, a solicitor for the victims’ families, told reporters after the Barking verdicts.

The homophobia accusations — which the Met denies — come on top of other claims — also denied — that race played a role in the mishandling of the murders last June of Bibaa Henry and Nicole Smallman, two mixed-race sisters killed in a park in north-west London. The Met initially refused to take seriously family members’ reports that the women were missing. Two officers have since been jailed for criminal misconduct after taking photos of the women’s bodies and sharing images of the crime scene on WhatsApp.

PC Deniz Jaffer (left) and PC Jamie Lewis, the two police officers who took pictures of murdered sisters Bibaa Henry and Nicole Smallman

PC Deniz Jaffer (left) and PC Jamie Lewis, the two police officers who took pictures of murdered sisters Bibaa Henry and Nicole Smallman © Victoria Jones/PA

Police failings around these three crimes — Port, Couzens and the murder of the two sisters — “cover fundamentally different areas around gender, around race and around sexuality”, says Dal Babu, a former Metropolitan Police borough commander now advising London Mayor Sadiq Khan. “But underlying it all are the issues around the culture of the organisation and the lack of resources.”

Part of the problem is that UK policing is stuck in a vicious circle, says Babu, where funding cuts are followed by upsurges in crime that trigger new investment in previously abandoned initiatives. “We’re at a crisis point in policing and I just wonder whether this [crisis] will be the nudge to say we need to have a different approach to policing and stop this constant reinvention cycle,” he says.

Louisa Rolfe, assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, describes recent months as “a watershed moment”. Commissioner Dick has launched a “wholesale review of culture and standards” at the force in light of the Everard case. Home Secretary Priti Patel has also called for an inquiry aimed at establishing a “definitive account” of the events leading up to the murder, as well as “wider issues across policing” including “vetting practices, professional standards and discipline, and workplace behaviour”.

Ball told reporters in Barking that the force had been working “for some time now” to rebuild trust in the Met. A survey by YouGov for the End Violence Against Women coalition found 47 per cent of women and 40 per cent of men reported declining trust in the police following the Everard case.

“We completely accept that people’s trust in us has been damaged by a number of recent events,” Ball said.

The low conviction rates for hard-to-investigate crimes such as sexual violence, and lengthy delays in bringing offenders to justice, have also raised worries about forces’ ability to keep the public safe.

Rolfe says the Met-commissioned review following the Everard case will be “root and branch” and look into “all aspects” of the force’s culture and standards.

“This is something which is a deep societal issue for us,” she adds. “The public rightly expect so much more of policing.”

Austerity bites

Concerns over the police’s competence in handling complaints of rape and sexual assault, both inside and outside the force, have been particularly acute since Everard’s death. Several police officers have been accused of sexual violence, including two allegations of rape by serving Met officers. Meanwhile forces in England and Wales received reports of 61,158 rapes in the year to June, 9.6 per cent up on the previous year. The proportion resulting in a charge or summons in the same period barely changed, running at 1.5 per cent in the year to June against 1.4 per cent the previous year.

Betsy Stanko, a criminologist who has worked on improving police forces’ response to sexual violence, says that women are “pissed off”. “I’ve never seen women so angry,” she says.

The low conviction rate for rape reflects wider problems brought on by austerity spending cuts after 2010, according to Stanko. “What we have is a policing organisation that’s running around to put plasters on things — in England and Wales in particular,” she says. Forces in the two nations lost more than 21,000 officers — around 15 per cent of the total — between 2010 and 2018. Between 2010 and 2017, 18,000 civilian police staff were lost.

The cuts, says Stanko, came as publicity following the death in 2011 of Jimmy Savile, a paedophile celebrity, produced large volumes of new, complex claims of historic sexual abuse. The #MeToo movement has similarly prompted a wave of difficult investigations, as have reports of abuse in churches, youth organisations and other settings. The jury in the Barking inquest acknowledged that the officers investigating the deaths had all been severely overworked.

“They’ve basically pushed rape and sexual assault to the back of the queue,” Stanko says. “These are really complex cases. [The situation produced] maximum complexity and fewer resources to investigate it.”

Getting an investigation off the ground is not the only hurdle. In a report earlier this year, HM Inspectorate of Constabulary and Fire & Rescue Services, the sector’s watchdog, said it had found numerous examples of serious criminal court cases that had been cancelled at short notice, although the offences had taken place a long time before.

Rick Muir, director of the Police Foundation, a think-tank, attributes the low conviction rate and slow progress on many investigations to forces’ struggle to adapt to a shift from crime committed in public — such as bar fights — to ones committed in homes or other private places.

“It’s just more complex to investigate a crime where there are no third-party witnesses and it’s taken place between two people who know each other,” he says.

Significant volumes of more straightforward work have also landed on forces. While coronavirus lockdowns have reduced levels of serious violent crime, offences such as fraud have increased. Violent crime has also rebounded in some areas following the end of lockdowns.

“What you’ve had effectively is an increase in crime and I think added to that is that we’ve had significant cuts in children’s services . . . so a lot of the glue around safeguarding and keeping people safe has dissipated,” Babu says.

Police forces in England and Wales are recruiting 20,000 new officers to make up for past cuts. But Babu points out that, while numbers are again rising, there has been a far less systematic effort to replace the lost police staff, the personnel who work in offices and support colleagues on their beats. “These are the men and women who would be analysing data, making sure officers are deployed efficiently,” he says.

The new officers will also take time to become effective crime-fighters. “You don’t become a police officer overnight,” he adds.

Inspector James Page at Bridgwater police station, which has trialled a technique known as ‘pulse patrols’

Inspector James Page at Bridgwater police station, which has trialled a technique known as ‘pulse patrols’ © Gareth Iwan Jones/FT

Evidence-based policing

Despite limits on resources, some forces in the UK are redoubling efforts to improve their policing — and restore the public’s faith — by applying new methods backed by data and research.

A walk round the market town of Bridgwater, 35 miles south-west of Bristol, with constable Max Priestley and Rebecca Lewis, a civilian support officer, reveals the new thinking. The pair, who both work for Avon and Somerset Police, are part of a trial, backed by £660,000 in Home Office funding, of a technique known as “pulse patrols”. The officers embark on 15-minute foot patrols of places that generate the highest number of calls about crime at the busiest times.

The officers switch on their body cameras so that supervisors can check they are following instructions in speaking to the public.

James Raphael, a detective superintendent in charge of the trials, says street violence in the targeted areas has fallen by 13 per cent since they began in June compared with previous years. “When we’ve spoken to shopkeepers they have come back to us saying that having that visibility and engagement has meant that antisocial behaviour has dropped off,” Raphael says.

PC Max Priestly and PCSO Rebecca Lewis, from Avon and Somerset police force, patrol crime hotspots in Bridgwater

PC Max Priestly and PCSO Rebecca Lewis, from Avon and Somerset police force, patrol crime hotspots in Bridgwater © Gareth Iwan Jones/FT

The pulse patrol trial is an example of an approach known as “evidence-based policing”, under which policing techniques are treated as experiments, with certain strategies’ effectiveness measured against other areas where policing remains unchanged.

A range of forces are hoping that evidence-based techniques will improve their policing — including the Met, which has trialled techniques to help parents of young people involved in crime to steer them away.

In Bridgwater, it is clear that the officer’s arrival on Fore Street reassures some of the public, including a security guard at the town’s Boots store, who says he is “sick to death” of a group of people he suspects of shoplifting.

“They walk past smiling at me like it’s some kind of joke,” the guard tells the officers. Priestley promises to call by later to pick up video from the shop’s security system to identify those responsible.

Lawrence Sherman, director of the University of Cambridge’s Police Executive Programme, says that if followed rigorously the technique can transform forces’ crime-fighting capabilities. “I think what the police are doing now with evidence-based policing is developing the science of policing in a way that’s never been practised before,” he says.

Other reform efforts involve reviewing standard police practices and, where necessary, breaking with orthodoxy. Project Bluestone, another Avon and Somerset Police initiative, aims to improve conviction rates for rape and sexual assault by concentrating investigation on the perpetrator. Typically police focus on testing out a victim’s account which, according to Stanko, who was lead adviser on the project, can miss vital clues such as a pattern of complaints against an individual perpetrator. Stanko says that what the project has found about the shortcomings of current techniques and the scope to improve them has been “amazing”.

She is now working on a drive to bring the technique to other forces, including the Met. “I do think we’re going to get a fundamental shift,” she says. “What we want is officers who think critically, who learn from others, who are willing to be open and ask for help.”

Well-wishers turn on their phone torches at a vigil in honour of murder victim Sarah Everard on Clapham Common, south London, in March

Well-wishers turn on their phone torches at a vigil in honour of murder victim Sarah Everard on Clapham Common, south London, in March © Justin Tallis/AFP via Getty Images

Specialists wanted

Like many people who have worked in or studied policing, Stanko believes forces need to move away from using generalist officers to investigate crimes. “They have omni-competent officers with no specialist skillset, making biased decisions,” she says.

More specialism is required, she believes, given the growing complexity of investigations into areas such as computer-based fraud and the constant need to decode electronic devices. The problem is exacerbated by the regular poaching of officers who have specialist digital skills to higher-paying jobs in the private sector, she adds.

“I would bring in expert advisers,” Stanko says. “There’s no reason why you can’t have civilian investigators.”

More effective policing would help resolve some of the legitimacy problems, especially in minority communities, says Sherman. “If you want to talk about police failure to protect black Britons from murder, that’s a very substantive reason for that population to disapprove of police practice,” he says.

He points out that members of ethnic minorities — who report some of the lowest levels of confidence in the police — are disproportionately victims of crime. Survey evidence shows that they are likely to support tough measures to tackle offending. “If you listen to the voices of relatives of homicide victims, they want more focused policing in ways that will be criticised for things like [repeated use of] stop and search,” he says.

Sherman, who started his career with the New York Police Department, adds that people in the UK expect a lot from their forces — setting the police up for disappointment. “I think British policing is challenged by some of the highest expectations of any country in the world for what they want the police to do,” he says.

But confidence in the police, though subject to peaks and troughs, has rarely ebbed so low. Babu believes that the current crisis presents an opportunity for revaluation, but warns that changes may prove as ephemeral as they have in the past.

He hopes for a permanent transformation, one in which British police forces would become less insular and defensive and more outward-looking. “It’s about getting the culture of the organisation to change, understanding [public] confidence, engaging with the community and working more effectively in terms of partnerships,” he says. “It’s not rocket science.”

Thames Valley Police officer found to have committed gross misconduct following allegations of sexual impropriety

Met police officer found in possession of Class A drugs resigns

1 COMMENT

  1. “pulse patrols”, another name for Proper Policing “like what use to have”. A culture of Policing appears to be anything other than face to face contact with the public. Police Support Officers is not and will never be the answer, it was and is still ‘Policing on the cheap’, at least with a Police Officer they have a better chance of being useful. Years of inactivity of modern Police Officers has created most of the problems of the lack of respect and support of Police Officers. The lack of support given by the public is due to the well founded belief that we have a ‘them and us’ culture and Police Officers living within the Community they serve is seen less and less. The modern Police Station is a nothing short of a paramilitary bunker where the Public are not welcome. Recent ‘Audit’ You Tube postings show these people going out to ‘test’ the response of the Police, it is not a surprise that even law abiding people are angry at what they are witness to when viweing these clips. The Police has a long way to go and being reliant on a few good Officers is not going do it. Whilst this story is much about the Met the same can be said across the country. I’m sure the Current Government is happy with their performance.0

    sourcehttps://ukcorruptpolice.com/crisis-of-confidence-can-britains-police-recover-public-trust/

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Leave a comment

PURE EVIL: The ‘loneliest man in the hospital’: autistic man, 44, only had his basic needs met ‘like an animal’ while locked in a secure unit for two decades despite never committing a crime and being declared ‘fit for discharge’ in 2013

The ‘loneliest man in the hospital’: Whistleblower reveals autistic man, 44, only had his basic needs met ‘like an animal’ while locked in a secure unit for two decades despite never committing a crime and being declared ‘fit for discharge’ in 2013

  • Autistic man detained in hospital for 20 years was treated ‘like an animal’

  • Tony Hickmott was sectioned in 2001 and moved away from home in Brighton  

  • Whistleblower now claims Mr Hickmott was the ‘loneliest man in the hospital’

  • Government vowed to end scandal of adults being held for years as in-patients

An autistic man who has been detained in hospital for 20 years was treated ‘like an animal’, a whistleblower has alleged.

Tony Hickmott, 44, was sectioned under the Mental Health Act in 2001 and taken from his parents’ home in Brighton, East Sussex.

Though his family were initially told he would be away for nine months, he has lived in a secure Assessment and Treatment Unit for two decades – and was only declared ‘fit for discharge’ by psychiatrists in 2013. 

Mr Hickmott is still waiting for local authorities to find him a suitable home, and his elderly parents are now fighting to get him rehoused in the community. The hospital has not been named for his care and wellbeing. [typical secrecy!! how many more victims like this are there, feeding the hospital coffers with bogus patients who shouldn’t be in “places” like this?…ed.]

He is one of 100 people who have spent more than 20 years in ATUs. A BBC investigation found that 350 people have been detained in specialist hospitals for more than a decade, and more than 2,000 patients are being held in hospitals and other secure settings across England.  

Details of Mr Hickmott’s ordeal became public last month, after an order preventing reporting of the case was overturned in court

A support worker where the 44-year-old has been detained has now claimed that Mr Hickmott was the ‘loneliest man in the hospital’ and that – like ‘an animal’ – only his basic needs were met. 

Phil Devine described how he felt complicit in the autistic man’s ‘neglect and abuse’ while he worked at the private, low-secure hospital between 2015 and 2017.

Tony Hickmott, 44, was sectioned under the Mental Health Act in 2001 and moved away from his parents’ home in Brighton, East Sussex
  •  
Phil Devine (pictured) described how he felt complicit in the autistic man's 'neglect and abuse' while he worked at the private, low-secure hospital between 2015 and 2017
  •  
The BBC investigation found that 350 people have been detained in specialist hospitals for more than a decade. And 100, including Mr Hickmott, have spent more than 20 years in ATUs

The BBC investigation found that 350 people have been detained in specialist hospitals for more than a decade. And 100, including Mr Hickmott, have spent more than 20 years in ATUs

Mr Hickmott is still waiting for local authorities to find him a suitable home, and his elderly parents are now fighting to get him rehoused in the community
Mr Hickmott is still waiting for local authorities to find him a suitable home, and his elderly parents are now fighting to get him rehoused in the community

Mr Hickmott is still waiting for local authorities to find him a suitable home, and his elderly parents (pictured) are now fighting to get him rehoused in the community

Assessment and Treatment Units are designed to be short-term secure placements for people with learning disabilities to receive treatment before moving back into the community.

However, all too often, patients are being sectioned under mental health laws and sent to ATUs where they languish for years.  

People with autism placed in ATUs are particularly vulnerable: they can respond badly, even aggressively, to anxiety, stress or unexpected events.

Many sectioning orders are for a maximum of 12 weeks, but patients can then be shifted into a different category of indefinite length – although there are meant to be discharge plans made from the start.

The average stay for these patients at ATUs is five and a half years.

Without proper help from trained staff, stress levels for people with autism and learning disabilities can spiral as they react by fighting, fleeing or freezing. They can then get stuck in seclusion, sedated with drugs as their issues intensify.

Mr Devine alleged that Mr Hickmott had very little freedom, unlike many other patients in the hospital, and spent all his time in segregation. He believes this may have been because of the risk from other patients in the hospital.

‘He had never committed a crime, but here he was, living in solitary confinement,’ he told BBC News.

‘He was fed, watered and cleaned. If anything happened beyond that, wonderful, but if it didn’t, then it was still OK. 

‘The management at the hospital said to us: ”Here’s a care plan. At so and so time get breakfast, at so and so time get him dressed”. 

That’s just a schedule – that’s not a care plan. It was strict, it was rigid. But that was all Tony had.’ 

ATUs are designed to be short-term secure placements for people with learning disabilities to receive treatment before moving back into the community.

However, all too often, patients are being sectioned under mental health laws and sent to ATUs where they languish for years.  

Mr Hickmott’s case is being heard at the Court of Protection, which makes decisions on welfare matters for people who lack mental capacity. 

Senior Judge Carolyn Hilder, who is hearing the case, criticised ‘egregious’ progress in finding him the right care. 

His mother Pam, 81, said her son no longer ‘believes he’s coming home’.

She added: ‘If he’d murdered someone he’d be out now. He’s lost his family, he’s lost his home. He’s just a shadow of the human he used to be. There are so many families like us – crying and screaming. We are our children’s voices.’ 

Last year, the hospital was put into special measures because it did not always ‘meet the needs of complex patients’.  

Some of the patients there had committed crimes, while others such as Mr Hickmott were detained under the Mental Health Act

Some of the patients there had committed crimes, while others such as Mr Hickmott were detained under the Mental Health Act

Some of the patients there had committed crimes, while others such as Mr Hickmott were detained under the Mental Health Act

His mother Pam said her son no longer 'believes he's coming home'
  •  

A report highlighted high levels of restraint and overuse of medication, a lack of qualified and competent staff and an increase of violence on many wards. The Care Quality Commission said that the hospital has now been taken out of special measures but still ‘requires improvement’. 

In 2015, the Government launched a programme aimed at ending the scandal of adults with learning disabilities and autism being kept for years in in-patient units. 

This followed horrific revelations in 2011 about the neglect of patients with learning disabilities at Winterbourne View hospital in Gloucestershire.

The Huntercombe Group, which ran the hospital, was sold last year by its parent company, Four Seasons, which is currently in administration. While the name still exists, the previous company is no longer in existence.

In a statement, the group said: ‘The Huntercombe Group that ran this hospital up to the end of 2020 are a different legal entity to the current Huntercombe Group, who were not established at the time and therefore not involved in providing services.

‘All patient records from the hospital are held by the previous owners of the former group, and as such the current Huntercombe Group hold no records of patients.’

An NHS spokesman said it was working to ensure ‘appropriate care and support is in place’ for Mr Hickmott.

source: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10332367/Whistleblower-reveals-autistic-man-44-basic-needs-met-like-animal.html

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

THE NECRONOMICON – an immersive film and audio book experience

 

 

THE NECRONOMICON 

– an immersive film and audio book experience

 

Altrusian Grace Media presents THE NECRONOMICON – an immersive film and audio book experience. Inspired by and referenced in the literary works of H. P. Lovecraft, the Necronomicon is the infamous Book of the Dead. The Necronomicon, also referred to as the Book of the Dead, or under a purported original Arabic title of Kitab al-Azif, is a fictional grimoire (textbook of magic) appearing in stories by the horror writer H. P. Lovecraft and his followers. It was first mentioned in Lovecraft’s 1924 short story “The Hound”, written in 1922, though its purported author, the “Mad Arab” Abdul Alhazred, had been quoted a year earlier in Lovecraft’s “The Nameless City”. Among other things, the work contains an account of the Old Ones, their history, and the means for summoning them.

TIMESTAMPS:

00:00:00

Intro 00:01:45

The Necronomicon Introduction 00:07:11

Preface 00:25:15

The Spells (Translated) 00:32:36

A Word Concerning The Original Manuscript 00:34:02

Banishings 00:38:07

The Testimony Of The Mad Arab 01:01:56

OF THE ZONEI AND THEIR ATTRIBUTES 01:14:50

THE BOOK OF ENTRANCE, AND OF THE WALKING 01:27:34

THE INCANTATIONS OF THE GATES 01:40:52

THE CONJURATION OF THE FIREGOD 01:42:48

THE CONJURATION OF THE WATCHER 01:51:11

THE MAKLU TEXT 02:14:13

THE BOOK OF CALLING 02:45:43

THE BOOK OF FIFTY NAMES 03:07:37

THE MAGAN TEXT 03:45:50

THE URILIA TEXT 04:13:25

THE TESTIMONY OF THE MAD ARAB (The Second Part) 04:39:55

Ending Credits

THANK YOU TO THE FOLLOWING: EXECUTIVE PRODUCERS: Federico Pena The Crooked Trail Tracy Brien PRODUCERS: Charles Newton

 

Download the audio version at https://altrusiangrace.bandcamp.com/a…

Narrated by Matthew Schmitz Soundtrack by Psyclopean – get the Necronomicon Book Of Fifty Names t-shirt at https://amzn.to/33srG7P

More PSYCLOPEAN Merch – http://shrsl.com/1mh8t

Additional Sound Design by The Russian Comic Book Geek – https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCRDB…

Cover Art by Arturo Velasco – https://www.artstation.com/arturovelasco

YOUTUBE CHANNEL INITIATES AND ASSOCIATES: Andrew Stavrakakes Daniel Popov David Rimmer Jerrold Primus Johnny Spicer Julie A Mcalees Laurel Phillips Mairie Tycquet Paiwand Duski Robby Rash Samson Omonedo Steven Barfuss PATREON MEMBERS: Andy Beck Angelica L Anthony R. Williams Anthony Troy Ashley Ferguson-Vise Damian Caquisani Ewa Kolendowska-Jedrejek His Majesty Joe McIlvain Jonty Bylos Laura Scarlett Marvel Whiteside Parsons Matt Morgan Michal Wozny Neon Dark Nicholas Aurelius Philip Phillip Pena Todd W. McMillin Tracy Brien William Piper #necronomicon#lovecraft#occult

*JOIN MY PATREON at https://www.patreon.com/altrusiangrac… *BECOME A YOUTUBE CHANNEL MEMBER at https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCMzR… *JOIN THE CULT OF STARRY WISDOM at https://altrusiangrace.bandcamp.com/s… *LISCENSE MY MUSIC FOR YOUR PROJECT at https://www.pond5.com/artist/altrusia… *MY BOOKS ON AMAZON at https://amzn.to/3oQGh6A *MY DESIGNS ON AMAZON at https://amzn.to/3peS9j3 As an Amazon Associate I earn a small amount from qualifying purchases and it helps to support my channel. Please consider LIKING the video, SUBSCRIBING to the channel, and SHARING the links! These simple actions go a long way in supporting AGM and is truly appreciated!

——————————————————————————

~~Places to follow and support Altrusian Grace Media~~ Website ► https://altrusiangrace.blogspot.com/ Bandcamphttps://altrusiangrace.bandcamp.com Teepublic Store ► http://shrsl.com/166df Twitter ► https://twitter.com/AltrusianGrace YouTube ► https://www.youtube.com/AltrusianGrac… LBRY ► https://open.lbry.com/@altrusiangrace… Bitchute ► https://www.bitchute.com/channel/altr… Rumble ► https://rumble.com/c/c-375437

——————————————————————————

OFFICIAL PSYCLOPEAN MERCH – http://shrsl.com/1mh8t

MYSTERIES AND MYSTICISM MERCH – http://shrsl.com/21x1v

THINKERS, MYSTICS, and PHILOSOPHERS MERCH – http://shrsl.com/1mh8y

MORE WEIRD AND WILD MERCH By me – http://shrsl.com/1mh8o

To kindly donate directly to my channel: http://www.paypal.me/altrusiangrace

For inquiries regarding voice-over work or collaboration please contact altrusiangracemedia ((at)) gmail.com ~~

My Other Channels~~ UFO Retro ► https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCp0A…

Sleestak ► https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC3Ze…


more:

  The Necronomicon – All You Need to Know About the Worlds Most Dangerous Book 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ll67gXlC6qE&list=WL&index=6

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged | Leave a comment

Chris Hedges: The Execution of Julian Assange VIDEO – 14 Dec. 2021 – Consortium News

He committed empire’s greatest sin. He exposed it as a criminal enterprise. And empires always kill those who inflict deep and serious wounds.

(Original art by Mr. Fish)

By Chris Hedges
ScheerPost.com

Let us name Julian Assange’s executioners. Joe Biden. Boris Johnson. Scott Morrison. Theresa May. Lenin Moreno. Donald Trump. Barack Obama. Mike Pompeo. Hillary Clinton. Lord Chief Justice Ian Burnett and Justice Timothy Victor Holroyde. Crown Prosecutors James Lewis, Clair Dobbin and Joel Smith. District Judge Vanessa Baraitser. Assistant U.S, Attorney in the Eastern District of Virginia Gordon Kromberg. William Burns, the director of the CIA. Ken McCallum, the director general of the U.K. Security Service or MI5.

Let us acknowledge that the goal of these executioners, who discussed kidnapping and assassinating Assange, has always been his annihilation. That Assange, who is in precarious physical and psychological health and who suffered a stroke during court video proceedings on Oct. 27, has been condemned to death should not come as a surprise.

The 10 years he has been detained, seven in the Ecuadorian embassy in London and nearly three in the high-security Belmarsh prison, were accompanied with a lack of sunlight and exercise and unrelenting threats, pressure, anxiety and stress.  “His eyes were out of sync, his right eyelid would not close, his memory was blurry,” his fiancé Stella Morris said of the stroke. 

His steady physical and psychological deterioration has led to hallucinations and depression. He takes antidepressant medication and the antipsychotic quetiapine. He has been observed pacing his cell until he collapses, punching himself in the face and banging his head against the wall. He has spent weeks in the medical wing of Belmarsh. Prison authorities found “half of a razor blade” hidden under his socks. He has repeatedly called the suicide hotline run by the Samaritans because he thought about killing himself “hundreds of times a day.”

The executioners have not yet completed their grim work. Toussaint L’Ouverture, who led the Haitian independence movement, the only successful slave revolt in human history, was physically destroyed in the same manner, locked by the French in an unheated and cramped prison cell and left to die of exhaustion, malnutrition, apoplexy, pneumonia and probably tuberculosis.  

Assange committed empire’s greatest sin. He exposed it as a criminal enterprise. He documented its lies, callous disregard for human life, rampant corruption and innumerable war crimes. Republican or Democrat. Conservative or Labour. Trump or Biden. It does not matter.

April 5, 2010: Julian Assange addressing National Press Club in Washington about WikiLeaks’ release of “Collateral Damage” video showing the wanton killing of civilians by U.S. air attacks in Baghdad on July 12, 2007.  (Jennifer 8. Lee, Flickr)

The goons who oversee the empire sing from the same Satanic songbook. Empires always kill those who inflict deep and serious wounds. Rome’s long persecution of the Carthaginian general Hannibal, forcing him in the end to commit suicide, and the razing of Carthage repeats itself in epic after epic. Crazy Horse. Patrice Lumumba. Malcolm X. Ernesto “Che” Guevara. Sukarno. Ngo Dinh Diem. Fred Hampton. Salvador Allende.

If you cannot be bought off, if you will not be intimidated into silence, you will be killed. The obsessive CIA attempts to assassinate Fidel Castro, which because none succeeded have a Keystone Cop incompetence to them, included contracting Momo Salvatore Giancana, Al Capone’s successor in Chicago, along with Miami mobster Santo Trafficante to kill the Cuban leader, attempting to poison Castro’s cigars with a botulinum toxin, providing Castro with a tubercle bacilli-infected scuba-diving suit, booby-trapping a conch shell on the sea floor where he often dived, slipping botulism-toxin pills in one of Castro’s drinks and using a pen outfitted with a hypodermic needle to poison him. 

The current cabal of assassins hide behind a judicial burlesque overseen in London by portly judges in gowns and white horse-hair wigs mouthing legal Alice-in-Wonderland absurdities. It is a dark reprise of Gilbert and Sullivan’s Mikado with the Lord High Executioner drawing up lists of people “who would not be missed.”

I watched the latest installment of the Assange show trial via video link on Friday. I listened to the reading of the ruling granting the appeal by the United States to extradite Assange. Assange’s lawyers have two weeks to appeal to the Supreme Court, which they are expected to do. I am not optimistic. 

Friday’s ruling was devoid of legal analysis. It fully accepted the conclusions of the lower court judge about increased risk of suicide and inhumane prison conditions in the United States. But the ruling argued that U.S. Diplomatic Note No. 74, given to the court on Feb. 5, which offered “assurances” that Assange would be well treated, overrode the lower court’s conclusions. It was a remarkable legal non sequitur. The ruling would not have gotten a passing grade in a first-semester law school course. But legal erudition is not the point. The judicial railroading of Assange, which has eviscerated one legal norm after another, has turned, as Franz Kafka wrote, “lying into a universal principle.” 

The decision to grant the extradition was based on four “assurances” given to the court by the U.S. government.  The two-judge appellate panel ruled that the “assurances” “entirely answer the concerns which caused the judge [in the lower court] to discharge Mr. Assange.” The “assurances” promise that Assange will not be subject to Special Administrative Measures (SAMs) which keep prisoners in extreme isolation and allow the government to monitor conversations with lawyers, eviscerating attorney-client privilege; can, if the Australian his government agrees, serve out his sentence there;  will receive adequate clinical and psychological care; and, pre-trial and post trial, will not be held in the Administrative Maximum Facility (ADX) in Florence, Colorado. 

Help Us Cover the Assange Case! 

“There is no reason why this court should not accept the assurances as meaning what they say,” the judges wrote. “There is no basis for assuming that the USA has not given the assurances in good faith.”

And with these rhetorical feints the judges signed Assange’s death warrant. 

None of the “assurances” offered by Biden’s Department of Justice are worth the paper they are written on.  All come with escape clauses. None are legally binding. Should Assange do “something subsequent to the offering of these assurances that meets the tests for the imposition of SAMs or designation to ADX” he will be subject to these coercive measures.

And you can be assured that any incident, no matter how trivial, will be used, if Assange is extradited, as an excuse to toss him into the mouth of the dragon. Should Australia, which has marched in lockstep with the U.S. in the persecution of their citizen not agree to his transfer, he will remain for the rest of his life in a U.S. prison.

But so what? If Australia does not request a transfer it “cannot be a cause for criticism of the USA, or a reason for regarding the assurances as inadequate to meet the judge’s concerns,” the ruling read. And even if that were not the case, it would take Assange 10-to-15 years to appeal his sentence up to the Supreme Court, more than enough time for the state assassins to finish him off.

I am not sure how to respond to assurance No 4, stating that Assange will not be held pre-trial in the ADX in Florence. No one is held pre-trail in ADX Florence. But it sounds reassuring, so I guess those in the Biden DOJ who crafted the diplomatic note added it. ADX Florence, of course, is not the only supermax prison in the United States that might house Assange. Assange can be shipped out to one of our other Guantanamo-like facilities. 

Light projection plea for U.S. President Joe Biden to pardon Daniel Hale on East Building of the National Gallery of Art in Washington, June 26. (Backbone Campaign, Flickr, CC BY 2.0)

Daniel Hale, the former U.S. Air Force intelligence analyst currently imprisoned for releasing top-secret documents that exposed widespread civilian casualties caused by U.S. drone strikes, has been held at USP Marion, a federal penitentiary in Marion, Illinois, in a Communications Management Unit (CMU) since October. CMUs are highly restrictive units that replicate the near total isolation imposed by SAMs. 

The High Court ruling ironically came as Secretary of State Antony Blinken announced at the virtual Summit for Democracy that the Biden administration will provide new funding to protect reporters targeted because of their work and support independent international journalism. Blinken’s “assurances” that the Biden administration will defend a free press, at the very moment the administration was demanding Assange’s extradition, is a glaring example of the rank hypocrisy and mendacity that makes the Democrats, as Glen Ford used to say, “not the lesser evil, but the more effective evil.” 

Assange is charged in the U.S. under 17 counts of the Espionage Act and one count of hacking into a government computer. The charges could see him sentenced to 175 years in prison, even though he is not a U.S. citizen and WikiLeaks is not a U.S.-based publication.

If found guilty it will effectively criminalize the investigative work of all journalists and publishers, anywhere in the world and of any nationality, who possess classified documents to shine a light on the inner workings of power. This mortal assault on the press will have been orchestrated, we must not forget, by a Democratic administration. It will set a legal precedent that will delight other totalitarian regimes and autocrats who, emboldened by the United States, will gleefully seize journalists and publishers, no matter where they are located, who publish inconvenient truths. 

There is no legal basis to hold Julian in prison. There is no legal basis to try him, a foreign national, under the Espionage Act. The CIA spied on Assange in the Ecuadorian embassy through a Spanish company, UC Global, contracted to provide embassy security. This spying included recording the privileged conversations between Assange and his lawyers. This fact alone invalidates any future trial.

Assange, who after seven years in a cramped room without sunlight in the embassy, has been held for nearly three years in a high-security prison in London so the state can, as Nils Melzer, the UN special rapporteur on torture, has testified, continue the unrelenting abuse and torture it knows will lead to his psychological and physical disintegration. The persecution of Assange is designed to send a message to anyone who might consider exposing the corruption, dishonesty and depravity that defines the black heart of our global elites. 

Dean Yates can tell you what U.S. “assurances” are worth. He was the Reuters bureau chief in Baghdad on the morning of July 12, 2007, when his Iraqi colleagues Namir Noor-Eldeen and Saeed Chmagh were killed, along with nine other men, by U.S. Army Apache gunships. Two children were seriously wounded. The U.S. government spent three years lying to Yates, Reuters and the rest of the world about the killings, although the army had video evidence of the massacre taken by the Apaches during the attack. The video, known as the Collateral Murder video, was leaked in 2010 by Chelsea Manning to Assange. It, for the first time, proved that those killed were not engaged, as the army had repeatedly insisted, in a firefight. It exposed the lies spun by the U.S. that it could not locate the video footage and had never attempted to cover up the killings. 

The Spanish courts can tell you what U.S. “assurances” are worth. Spain was given an assurance that David Mendoza Herrarte, if extradited to the U.S. to face trial for drug trafficking charges, could serve his prison sentence in Spain. But for six years the Department of Justice repeatedly refused Spanish transfer requests, only relenting when the Spanish Supreme Court intervened.

The people in Afghanistan can tell you what U.S “assurances” are worth. U.S. military, intelligence and diplomatic officials knew for 18 years that the war in Afghanistan was a quagmire yet publicly stated, over and over, that the military intervention was making steady progress.  

The people in Iraq can tell you what U.S. “assurances” are worth. They were invaded and subject to a brutal war based on fabricated evidence about weapons of mass destruction. 

The people of Iran can tell you what U.S. “assurances” are worth. The United States, in the 1981 Algiers Accords, promised not to interfere in Iran’s internal affairs and then funded and backed The People’s Mujahedin Organization of Iran (MEK), a terrorist group, based in Iraq and dedicated to overthrowing the Iranian regime.

The thousands of people tortured in U.S. global black sites can tell you what U.S. “assurances” are worth. CIA officers, when questioned about the widespread use of torture by the Senate Intelligence Committee, secretly destroyed videotapes of torture interrogations while insisting there was no “destruction of evidence.” 

The numbers of treaties, agreements, deals, promises and “assurances” made by the U.S. around the globe and violated are too numerous to list. Hundreds of treaties signed with Native American tribes, alone, were ignored by the US government. 

Assange, at tremendous personal cost, warned us. He gave us the truth. The ruling class is crucifying him for this truth. With his crucifixion, the dim lights of our democracy go dark.  

Chris Hedges is a Pulitzer Prize–winning journalist who was a foreign correspondent for 15 years for The New York Times, where he served as the Middle East bureau chief and Balkan bureau chief for the paper. He previously worked overseas for The Dallas Morning NewsThe Christian Science Monitor and NPR. He is the host of the Emmy Award-nominated RT America show “On Contact.” 

This column is from Scheerpostfor which Chris Hedges writes a regular columnClick here to sign up for email alerts.

Help Us Cover the Assange Case! 

Support CN’s  
Winter Fund Drive!

Donate securely with PayPal

   

Or securely by credit card or check by clicking the red button:

1240

source: https://consortiumnews.com/2021/12/14/hedges-the-execution-of-julian-assange/

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment
%d bloggers like this: