I was violated by a police spy — and the state gave its blessing
As a report prepares to set out how undercover officers slept with their targets, one victim tells her story for the first time
You put out to a bloke who was lying to you.
This is not an uncommon life event.
Dammit girl… You got to experience the real James Bond™ girl experience, and you’re still complaining?
Some women are truly never satisfied…
Eleanor Fairbraida was harvesting salad on an organic farm in the Yorkshire Dales when she received the phone call that would turn her world on its head.
I have never seen Black Mirror because the modern world disgusts and annoys me.
But I assume this is exactly how an episode of that show would start.
And when a fringe group plants a bomb the public will say why weren’t the police infiltrating and investigating them.
If two individuals start a consensual sexual relationship, and it turns out one was dishonest about themselves, then for the injured party it’s a case of “be more careful next time”. Buyer beware and all that.
However, if the State sends someone to deliberately deceive someone into a relationship and use false representation, including bedding them, for its aims, that is a fucking disgrace and we should rightly be alarmed, in the same way we would be alarmed if the State used deciet in any other way. More perhaps.
It’s funny that there seem to be a few on here propping up the bar and agitating loudly for the classical liberal cause, unless there is the opportunity for some casual misogyny. Then it’s all power to the males.. the state has spoken.
” if the State sends someone to deliberately deceive someone into a relationship and use false representation, including bedding them, for its aims,”
and the prrof for that is?
Oh, I forget ALWAYS believe the woman
The proof is in the paycheque. Innit.
Inclined to agree with our ectoplasmic friend. Geezers & women pulling the wool over each other’s eyes is just part of life. But it looks like the filth were perfectly comfortable with this situation. Despite coppers who do exactly the same off their own bat being subject to anything from disciplinary proceedings to prosecution.
I agree with Harry H’s G. and bis.
I don’t pay taxes to subsidise the constabulary ejaculating into deluded hippies.
However if you tell police undercover operatives that they can’t sleep with any of the people they are investigating then you create a perfect loyalty test for such organisations to use on new recruits – get someone to come on to them and demand sex as a proof of bona fides. If they are a genuine recruit to the cause they’ll comply, if they are an undercover cop they’ll have to refuse, and that’ll mark them as a potential undercover agent. OK, so this process might result in a few genuine recruits refusing to go along with the demands, and getting blackballed falsely, but those so blackballed would include ALL undercover cops, so it would a be a price worth paying, from the security of the organisation viewpoint.
Does the same apply to murder or kneecapping?
Harry
That’s light years away from consensual at the time sex.
I very much hope there has been no evidence or even suggestion that either of the proofs of loyalty you describe have ever been complied with by security forces.
How are undercover folk able to operate if a simple test of loyalty involving murder or kneecapping could expose them?
What was so sinister about these yoghurt munching tofu knitters that made them such a threat to the state that 130 police spies were required to monitor their activities?
And the ongoing enquiry has already cost 64 million quid.
Ye gods, Jesus wept, et cetera.
@ Harry Haddock’s Ghost
An organisation that insisted every new recruit murders somebody would soon be caught and shut down. An organisation that insists on an act of pre-marital sex is in rather less danger.
‘However, if the State sends someone to deliberately deceive someone into a relationship and use false representation, including bedding them, for its aims, that is a fucking disgrace and we should rightly be alarmed, in the same way we would be alarmed if the State used deciet in any other way’
If we are to have u set over police then I am happy for them to use deceit.
@HHG: We’re not talking about overtly terrorist organisations, or out and out criminal gangs. I’m sure such people already operate some sort of initiation process that involves serious crimes. Here we are talking about ostensibly legal groups (environmentalists/animal rights activists for example, or it could be extreme political groups from Left or Right) who in the course of their activities are bordering on criminal/terrorist activities, and the State wants to keep an eye on them, see what they are up to. Environmentalists aren’t going to get many recruits to their cause if they have to ask each one to kneecap someone to prove they are not a police spy. Whereas getting the witch finder to cosy up to new recruits (especially ones who are being given more senior positions in the organisational structure) and invite them for a bit of hows your father with the overt subtext ‘You need to do this to prove you’re not One of Them’ is not exactly going to scare too many horses. If you’re a bit of a nutter, shagging someone to prove you are fully committed to ‘The Cause’ isn’t going to be that much of a problem. And of course perfectly legal, unlike kneecapping.
So any organisation that is worried about infiltration by the police would have a perfect legal litmus test for potential spies in the camp – just try and shag them.
“No thanks, you’re a bit of a munter”
“No thanks, I’ve got a bird”
“No thanks, as a practising I don’t believe in sex outside of marriage”
and so on. It’s called being under cover.
Given how much disruption the environmentalists have been getting up to lately, it seems the police techniques have failed. Perhaps that’s why the average age at Extinction Rebellion is over 60 – nobody wants to sleep with them.
World of difference between consensual sex between adults (and nominally colleagues/allies in some sort of activist organisation) and deliberate seduction/rape as part of some sinister conspiracy
Seems to me some people cannot see that
Maybe they don’t want to
You’re dreaming Mr Ghost.
These people aren’t religious, so that’s never going to fly.
And most guys will sleep with anyone who offers, so excuse making about pretend girlfriends is daft.
I’ve been asked if I was under cover once because I did not fit the ethos of the rugby league team I was in. Undercover agents have to be completely in, or they are useless.
So, by that logic, all undercover agents in terrorist cells will have to carry out bombings, murders and punishment beatings?
I’m sorry if this ruins people’s porno fantasies, but undercover agents shouldn’t shag the targets.
Kyle, there are reputedly biker gangs with just such a membership qualification.
Big, international biker gangs, that have been operating successfully for many many decades.
Same with the Bloods, Crips, the Mafia, etc. “Blood-in, Blood-out”. If you want to go beyond associate membership levels of these organisations then you need to murder an opponent of theirs. This is to both prove your commitment to the organisation and act as a barrier against police infiltration.
Once you’re in though, you can never leave and retain lifelong obligation to the organisation.
One could argue that a bloke shouldn’t shag a bird to try to persuade her to let him into the secrets of her idiotic associates. But if she offers it, there’s no reason for him not to take her up on it.
In other words, like about 99.9% of all claims of sexual abuse, it depend on ‘he said, she said’. With all claims about what he and she meant decided after the event(s).
Same with the Bloods, Crips, the Mafia, etc. “Blood-in, Blood-out”. If you want to go beyond associate membership levels of these organisations then you need to murder an opponent of theirs.
Somewhat of a myth, really. Possibly with the spades because by definition, they aren’t the brightest & are territory for the sake of territory. The Mafia & the Angels are successful business operations. Offing someone is a reluctant final sanction, not a sport, because doing so has consequences. And the possibility of consequences means they get someone who knows what they’re doing, not a newby. They’re even reluctant to commit crimes, because in the long run there’s more money in legitimate business. What really defines them is loyalty to the organisation because failure to be will result in more than a law suit. Something that was once common in legitimate business. Hence “dictum meum pactum”.
Harry Haddock’s Ghost:
Now… The Times being the Times I can’t read the article itself and determine what exactly the no-doubt-completely-harmless-group the complaining missus was/is part of, and even a day later there’s no Twatstorm with any other information on Google Page 1.
But I do feel your comment is of, at best, Solanous quality, and shows a lack of understanding of the prerequisites necessary for “the State” to even contemplate initiating an undercover operation to figure out what a group of people who have Blackboxed themselves are up to.
The paperwork, training, support structure, and as a result the costs alone are staggering.
And you need a tame, accomplished actor with capabilities well above Improv Night at the Local to pull it off.
And send him/her off into a situation that’s most certainly risky, potentially dangerous, and possibly lethal.
And clear that with HR, Legal, and Accounting without triggering any alarums.
I don’t care what miss Foot Soldier is whining about, but whatever she was part of must have cleared those bureaucratic hurdles to have rated sending in an undercover operative.
She got shagged by a spy sent in to deceive. Boo. Hoo.
Incidentally, do you realise what the major honey trap is for groups like that to get new recruits? It sure ain’t celibacy and/or fidelity.
Her major beef is that she got fooled during her ..recruitment drive..
And to emphasise how utterly stupid she is: She is now publicly admitting that fact, hoping for a pity cuddle and a round of cheers.
I have not a shred of pity for the bint. If that makes me a casual misogynist, so be it. Bring on that “shame”. I’ll use it as warpaint.
I do incline to your point of view Grikath. Spies are liars. If it’s wrong for the state to send people to lie to others, then all spying must cease. As KJP points out, such whingers’d be the first to complain if they were blown up because the state was too ethical to send a professional liar to investigate the ratbags who did it.
Of course I suppose I’m thinking of the latest proposal to force soldiers to wear body cameras. I naturally believe that soldiers are killers. They are sent to kill people who might otherwise kill ME!!!!! Needless to say I have no time for this idiotic idea of trying to make them hesitate.