.png)
4 hours ago
2
Information in the public domain about the undercover policing of protest groups from the late 1960s onwards would not be there were it not for the extraordinary courage of a group of women who were conned by officers into long-term sexual relationships. It is more than a decade since the investigation of this, and other wrongful actions, by undercover units was taken over by a judge-led public inquiry. Following revelations that officers had spied on Stephen Lawrence’s family, Theresa May, who was then the home secretary, ordered that inquiry.
ITV’s new three-part documentary, The Undercover Police Scandal: Love and Lies Exposed, made in collaboration with the Guardian, emphasises that there was nothing inevitable about this outcome. The series, which features remarkable home-video footage of one officer, Mark Jenner (known undercover as Mark Cassidy), is a gripping and shocking account of the way that five women were tricked into romantic relationships lasting years. As well as the insidious conduct of individuals, the series sheds light on the systemic nature of the abuse and the tenacity of the women who uncovered the truth.
Undercover police, like the intelligence services, have a role to play in protecting the public from dangerous criminals. But the methods of the secret unit that these officers belonged to, the Special Demonstration Squad, were abusive and wrong – as the Metropolitan police admitted when it settled a civil case 10 years ago. The women spied on were grossly unsuitable targets. The activists in the film were involved in non-violent leftwing protests.
When Mark Stone (in reality Mark Kennedy) was unmasked in 2011, efforts were made to present him as a “rogue officer”. But this too was false: a tradecraft manual obtained by this newspaper recommended “fleeting” relationships as a tactic. We now know that 50 or more women were manipulated into relationships by at least 25 officers, several of whom had children with partners who did not know their real names (the mother of Bob Lambert’s child learned his identity from the press).
Whose idea was all this? Who authorised it in specific cases? Was the officer the sole conduit for intelligence or were conversations bugged? What kinds of discussions with supervisors took place when women began to speak about having children, or suffered bereavements and asked their boyfriends to attend funerals?
Despite the inquiry, vast amounts of material remain hidden. Of the four men featured in the series, so far Lambert is the only one to have testified at the inquiry. John Dines (known undercover as John Barker), with whom Helen Steel spent two years before he deserted her, has refused to appear. Last year, one officer, Trevor Morris, described the Met’s official apology to the women as “outrageous”.
Years of reflecting on what happened have made these women eloquent witnesses as well as skilful detectives. Almost all the undercover officers using these tactics were men, some of them married with children. Their victims derive some satisfaction from having outsmarted the secret state. But nothing can turn back the clock or get back those stolen years and feelings. The officially sanctioned deception and abuse of multiple young women by British police officers was a disgraceful episode. It is not enough to pledge that it will never be repeated. Continued resistance to full disclosure, and accountability, must end.
