Showing posts with label spycops. Show all posts
Showing posts with label spycops. Show all posts
Tuesday, February 21, 2023
Sunday, December 06, 2020
Wednesday, November 18, 2020
Monday, November 16, 2020
Monday, November 09, 2020
Sunday, April 09, 2017
When Special Branch helped sabotage the Grand National.
The Grand National has become symbolic of the cruelty
of horse racing. In recent years there have been protests at Aintree but
these have always been controlled by the police. In 1993, however,
activists succeeded beyond their wildest dreams as the steeplechase had
to be abandoned and became “the race that never was”. The animal rights
dimension has largely been written out of the story but you here you
can find out what really happened and it will be revealed how an
undercover police officer played a key role in an action which cost the
racing industry £75 million.
There had been protests against the Grand National during the eighties but a more militant campaign began after the deaths of four horses in 1989 and seven more the following year. The callous attitude of the racing fraternity was summed up by champion jockey Josh Gifford who said: “I don’t know what all the fuss has been about. In this game horses get injured and killed every day, even exercising on the gallops.”
In 1992, there were protests by local activists both inside and outside the track and some disruption was caused. That year a new organisation was launched called Action to Abolish the Grand National. It spearheaded a national campaign and produced leaflets, press releases and merchandise not only about the National but horse racing, show jumping and eventing in general, demanding that the BBC stop broadcasting equestrian sports and the public stop gambling on horses or any other animal abused in the name of sport.
The Grand National campaign was part of an upsurge in animal rights activism in the early nineties. One of the main targets was Boots the Chemist, which had its own vivisection laboratory, and about ten people from London Boots Action Group went to Aintree for the protest in 1993. The driver was a well liked member of the group named Matt Rayner, who regularly used his van for demos, sabbing and direct action. Although the journey was over 400 miles there and back, he asked passengers only for what they could afford. The difference in petrol money was made up from the group’s coffers.
A small demonstration at the entrance to the course took place on the Friday but by the next day there were at least 100 people. The vast majority stood outside leafleting but a small group decided to take direct action. This account was given was given by the Aintree 15 in the CAW Bulletin No.11 published later that year:
“Moments before the start eight activists jumped onto the course and occupied the ground in front of the first fence. Police and security guards were taken completely by surprise and the start was aborted. The course took some time to clear and just as the horses were lined up for the second time,another seven animal rights people leapt over the barriers and ran chanting towards the start.
If the officials were taken aback by the first protest, they were dumbstruck by the second. No-one seemed to know what to do, protesters ran back and forth, security guards and police vainly trying to bring them down with rugby tackles as the crowd cheered each new arrest.
Eventually all were caught and the course cleared for the third time, but by now the starter was so nervous that he made a complete hash of raising the tape and horses were called back yet again. After a delay of nearly 20 minutes the start was aborted again but the leading jockeys ignored the recall flag thinking it was another protest and continued on the course.
The race by this time was a complete shambles. Nine horses were spared the ordeal entirely when they failed to start and only seven bothered to complete the course, the rest of the 42 starters having realised that the race was abandoned.
The protest cost us very little, and all the protesters were released without charge after four hours in custody, but it cost the bookmakers and racing fraternity £75 million in returned bets and millions more in pre-race marketing. What we really gained was the satisfaction of knowing that almost all the horses escaped unscathed, most not even attempting the course. One suffered a bruised tendon but in the circumstances we are grateful because his injuries would have been far worse if past years are anything to go by.”
Newspapers called it “The Grand Farcical ” describing it as “an unforgivable shambles, a terribly public one”, but in general the media blamed the debacle on the failure of the starting system and the weather (there was torrential rain) largely ignoring the occupation. An exception was the Independent which stated: “The disruption of the world’s most-watched horse race was a victory for animal rights protesters who staged a demonstration at the first fence for the second year running.”
On the following Monday the Independent published a letter from J Stuart and C Jones from Manchester who said: “As two of the activists involved in the Grand National run-on protest on Saturday we’d like the opportunity to give our side of the story.” They went to to say how press censorship of the action meant they hadn’t received the credit they deserved for the cancellation of the event:
“The BBC failed to televise our protest and the press has played down our role in the day’s events. However the comments of jockeys, race officials and journalists support our view that we were responsible for stopping the race. The official inquiry need look no further than the run-on for the reason why the Grand National ended as it did.”
The Aintree 15 issued a warning: “We have a message for the horse racing fraternity, the bookmakers and everyone else involved in cruelty: don’t bother planning your next event, people have had enough of your cruelty, and now we are going to stop you.” By March 1994 ARC News was asking it this would be “The Last Grand National?”, while Action Against the Grand National said it “hoped that the march and demonstration will be even bigger this year.”
The authorities knew full well who was to blame for 1993’s “fiasco” as revealed by the newspaper headline “Welcome to Fortress Aintree”: “The Aintree authorities have thrown up a six-foot ring of steel…in a £1 million bid to keep animal rights militants at bay tomorrow. Fences are being guarded round the clock and more than 200 uniformed police will be on duty, backed up by plain-clothes units, fast response squads and a helicopter.”
Five days before the race, three workers at an animal rescue centre were arrested on the Aintree racecourse, charged with conspiracy to cause criminal damage and remanded in custody until 18 May. Nothing was left to chance. On the day of the National, 20 activists were arrested as they made their way to the demonstration outside the entrance and three more were arrested inside the event. Fences around the racecourse were improved, which made it much harder to get on the track. The race went ahead without disruption.
There was another contingent of protesters from London, once again driven by Matt Rayner. This time people were asked to contribute £7 towards petrol money. Twenty years later it was revealed that Rayner was really an undercover cop who worked for a secret Special Branch unit called the Special Demonstrations Squad. He was embedded with animal rights activists for five years and like many spies at that time he used the identity of a dead child (his real name is still a mystery). In 1996 he claimed he was going to work abroad and after sending letters to friends was never heard from again.
While Rayner himself did not take part in the occupation in 1993, about six or seven of those he transported to Aintree did. During the journey people talked about invading the racecourse and he would have been privy to the likelihood of it happening. Would the action have been so successful without the activists Rayner brought from London? It’s impossible to give a definitive answer but possibly not.
What happened on 3 April 1993 was truly remarkable. Fifteen brave people ran onto the track of the world’s most famous horse race – without concern for their own welfare – to say no to animal cruelty. Despite being arrested all were released without charge within a few hours. In those days all they would have been guilty of was trespass. This action caused £75 million loss to the racing industry and in terms of economic sabotage it is probably still the single most successful feat of direct action ever carried out in the name of animal rights.
Most amazing of all the role played by the Met Police in the whole affair. Not only did Rayner drive to Aintree in 1993 but he repeated it the following year, knowing full well that some some of the protesters he’d transported helped to disrupt the race. Rayner’s manager at the SDS was Bob Lambert, a notorious agent provocateur with a hands-on approach that included placing incendiary devices in department stores that sold fur. It seems Lambert demanded a similar level of involvement from his agents.
What’s more, while the Met was conniving with the protesters, another police force was trying to stop the plot going ahead. On the eve of the race, newspaper reports said the racecourse had agreed “a fluid plan…with the Merseyside Police and Special Branch…Among the weapons at Special Branch’s disposal are snatch squads to eject troublemakers from the course and bolt-cutters to stop protesters chaining themselves to fences.”
The same newspaper warned of a “2,000-strong army of activists…including the rent-a-mob variety wiling to march under any banner for a punch-up” and said there were reports that racecourse security had been infiltrated by activists who would be disguised as guards. No source was given for this ridiculous claim but if it wasn’t invented by the journalist, it was more than likely circulated by the police themselves.
The only people doing the infiltrating at Aintree that day were Special Branch. One section had a spy in a key role transporting protesters from London – and probably other spies amongst demonstrators too – while another was doing all it could to prevent the race from being sabotaged. And as is often the case, the police themselves were the main beneficiaries as there was no shortage of work for them to do.
Animal Aid on Aintree 2016: http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/n/NEWS/news_horse//3427//
Matt Rayner profile: http://powerbase.info/index.php/Matt_Rayner_(alias)
See also: https://network23.org/redblackgreen/2015/07/30/flashback-30-july-1995-police-spy-dresses-up-at-pagan-garden-party/
This is a revised version of an article which first appeared on the blog Red Black Green on 10 April 2016: https://network23.org/redblackgreen/2016/04/10/1993-the-year-the-grand-national-was-sabotaged-with-help-from-special-branch/
https://network23.org/arspycatcher/2017/04/08/when-special-branch-helped-sabotage-the-grand-national/
There had been protests against the Grand National during the eighties but a more militant campaign began after the deaths of four horses in 1989 and seven more the following year. The callous attitude of the racing fraternity was summed up by champion jockey Josh Gifford who said: “I don’t know what all the fuss has been about. In this game horses get injured and killed every day, even exercising on the gallops.”
In 1992, there were protests by local activists both inside and outside the track and some disruption was caused. That year a new organisation was launched called Action to Abolish the Grand National. It spearheaded a national campaign and produced leaflets, press releases and merchandise not only about the National but horse racing, show jumping and eventing in general, demanding that the BBC stop broadcasting equestrian sports and the public stop gambling on horses or any other animal abused in the name of sport.
The Grand National campaign was part of an upsurge in animal rights activism in the early nineties. One of the main targets was Boots the Chemist, which had its own vivisection laboratory, and about ten people from London Boots Action Group went to Aintree for the protest in 1993. The driver was a well liked member of the group named Matt Rayner, who regularly used his van for demos, sabbing and direct action. Although the journey was over 400 miles there and back, he asked passengers only for what they could afford. The difference in petrol money was made up from the group’s coffers.
A small demonstration at the entrance to the course took place on the Friday but by the next day there were at least 100 people. The vast majority stood outside leafleting but a small group decided to take direct action. This account was given was given by the Aintree 15 in the CAW Bulletin No.11 published later that year:
“Moments before the start eight activists jumped onto the course and occupied the ground in front of the first fence. Police and security guards were taken completely by surprise and the start was aborted. The course took some time to clear and just as the horses were lined up for the second time,another seven animal rights people leapt over the barriers and ran chanting towards the start.
If the officials were taken aback by the first protest, they were dumbstruck by the second. No-one seemed to know what to do, protesters ran back and forth, security guards and police vainly trying to bring them down with rugby tackles as the crowd cheered each new arrest.
Eventually all were caught and the course cleared for the third time, but by now the starter was so nervous that he made a complete hash of raising the tape and horses were called back yet again. After a delay of nearly 20 minutes the start was aborted again but the leading jockeys ignored the recall flag thinking it was another protest and continued on the course.
The race by this time was a complete shambles. Nine horses were spared the ordeal entirely when they failed to start and only seven bothered to complete the course, the rest of the 42 starters having realised that the race was abandoned.
The protest cost us very little, and all the protesters were released without charge after four hours in custody, but it cost the bookmakers and racing fraternity £75 million in returned bets and millions more in pre-race marketing. What we really gained was the satisfaction of knowing that almost all the horses escaped unscathed, most not even attempting the course. One suffered a bruised tendon but in the circumstances we are grateful because his injuries would have been far worse if past years are anything to go by.”
Newspapers called it “The Grand Farcical ” describing it as “an unforgivable shambles, a terribly public one”, but in general the media blamed the debacle on the failure of the starting system and the weather (there was torrential rain) largely ignoring the occupation. An exception was the Independent which stated: “The disruption of the world’s most-watched horse race was a victory for animal rights protesters who staged a demonstration at the first fence for the second year running.”
On the following Monday the Independent published a letter from J Stuart and C Jones from Manchester who said: “As two of the activists involved in the Grand National run-on protest on Saturday we’d like the opportunity to give our side of the story.” They went to to say how press censorship of the action meant they hadn’t received the credit they deserved for the cancellation of the event:
“The BBC failed to televise our protest and the press has played down our role in the day’s events. However the comments of jockeys, race officials and journalists support our view that we were responsible for stopping the race. The official inquiry need look no further than the run-on for the reason why the Grand National ended as it did.”
The Aintree 15 issued a warning: “We have a message for the horse racing fraternity, the bookmakers and everyone else involved in cruelty: don’t bother planning your next event, people have had enough of your cruelty, and now we are going to stop you.” By March 1994 ARC News was asking it this would be “The Last Grand National?”, while Action Against the Grand National said it “hoped that the march and demonstration will be even bigger this year.”
The authorities knew full well who was to blame for 1993’s “fiasco” as revealed by the newspaper headline “Welcome to Fortress Aintree”: “The Aintree authorities have thrown up a six-foot ring of steel…in a £1 million bid to keep animal rights militants at bay tomorrow. Fences are being guarded round the clock and more than 200 uniformed police will be on duty, backed up by plain-clothes units, fast response squads and a helicopter.”
Five days before the race, three workers at an animal rescue centre were arrested on the Aintree racecourse, charged with conspiracy to cause criminal damage and remanded in custody until 18 May. Nothing was left to chance. On the day of the National, 20 activists were arrested as they made their way to the demonstration outside the entrance and three more were arrested inside the event. Fences around the racecourse were improved, which made it much harder to get on the track. The race went ahead without disruption.
There was another contingent of protesters from London, once again driven by Matt Rayner. This time people were asked to contribute £7 towards petrol money. Twenty years later it was revealed that Rayner was really an undercover cop who worked for a secret Special Branch unit called the Special Demonstrations Squad. He was embedded with animal rights activists for five years and like many spies at that time he used the identity of a dead child (his real name is still a mystery). In 1996 he claimed he was going to work abroad and after sending letters to friends was never heard from again.
While Rayner himself did not take part in the occupation in 1993, about six or seven of those he transported to Aintree did. During the journey people talked about invading the racecourse and he would have been privy to the likelihood of it happening. Would the action have been so successful without the activists Rayner brought from London? It’s impossible to give a definitive answer but possibly not.
What happened on 3 April 1993 was truly remarkable. Fifteen brave people ran onto the track of the world’s most famous horse race – without concern for their own welfare – to say no to animal cruelty. Despite being arrested all were released without charge within a few hours. In those days all they would have been guilty of was trespass. This action caused £75 million loss to the racing industry and in terms of economic sabotage it is probably still the single most successful feat of direct action ever carried out in the name of animal rights.
Most amazing of all the role played by the Met Police in the whole affair. Not only did Rayner drive to Aintree in 1993 but he repeated it the following year, knowing full well that some some of the protesters he’d transported helped to disrupt the race. Rayner’s manager at the SDS was Bob Lambert, a notorious agent provocateur with a hands-on approach that included placing incendiary devices in department stores that sold fur. It seems Lambert demanded a similar level of involvement from his agents.
What’s more, while the Met was conniving with the protesters, another police force was trying to stop the plot going ahead. On the eve of the race, newspaper reports said the racecourse had agreed “a fluid plan…with the Merseyside Police and Special Branch…Among the weapons at Special Branch’s disposal are snatch squads to eject troublemakers from the course and bolt-cutters to stop protesters chaining themselves to fences.”
The same newspaper warned of a “2,000-strong army of activists…including the rent-a-mob variety wiling to march under any banner for a punch-up” and said there were reports that racecourse security had been infiltrated by activists who would be disguised as guards. No source was given for this ridiculous claim but if it wasn’t invented by the journalist, it was more than likely circulated by the police themselves.
The only people doing the infiltrating at Aintree that day were Special Branch. One section had a spy in a key role transporting protesters from London – and probably other spies amongst demonstrators too – while another was doing all it could to prevent the race from being sabotaged. And as is often the case, the police themselves were the main beneficiaries as there was no shortage of work for them to do.
Animal Aid on Aintree 2016: http://www.animalaid.org.uk/h/n/NEWS/news_horse//3427//
Matt Rayner profile: http://powerbase.info/index.php/Matt_Rayner_(alias)
See also: https://network23.org/redblackgreen/2015/07/30/flashback-30-july-1995-police-spy-dresses-up-at-pagan-garden-party/
This is a revised version of an article which first appeared on the blog Red Black Green on 10 April 2016: https://network23.org/redblackgreen/2016/04/10/1993-the-year-the-grand-national-was-sabotaged-with-help-from-special-branch/
https://network23.org/arspycatcher/2017/04/08/when-special-branch-helped-sabotage-the-grand-national/
Friday, August 26, 2016
Named: Scots police chiefs linked to disgraced ‘Spycops’ unit.
The identities of senior police officers in Scotland linked to a secret Metropolitan Police division under investigation are revealed today by The Ferret, prompting renewed calls for the Pitchford Inquiry to be extended to Scotland.
A Police Scotland response to questions submitted under Freedom of Information legislation reveals the names of high ranking Scottish police officers who attended meetings of the Association of Chief Police Officers’ Terrorism and Allied Matters Committee, aka ACPO TAM.
ACPO TAM is responsible for counter terrorism and oversaw the UK’s national domestic extremism units whose activities are being investigated by Lord Justice Pitchford.
The committee’s remit covered undercover officers with the Metropolitan Police who infiltrated campaigning groups and spied on animal rights activists and environmentalists, among others deemed domestic extremists.
The Ferret – publishing this information today in tandem with the Daily Record – also obtained details of Police Scotland’s command structure for the G8 Summit at Gleneagles in 2005 when the undercover Met Police officer Mark Kennedy was operating in Scotland with colleagues.
Kennedy was one of several undercover police officers who entered into relationships with women during covert operations.
Another called Bob Lambert fathered a child with a woman he was spying on and the actions of officers with the disgraced Met Police unit led to the Pitchford Inquiry being set up.
The public inquiry will investigate the policing of domestic extremism and also alleged miscarriages of justice linked to police spies in England and Wales.
However, revelations that undercover Met Police officers – including Kennedy – also worked north of the border led to calls for Pitchford to cover Scotland too.
Senior officers in Scotland who met with ACPO TAM included Sir Willie Rae, former Chief Constable of Strathclyde Police, and Paddy Tomkins, former Chief Constable of Lothian and Borders Police.
Sir Stephen House – who stepped down as Chief Constable of Scotland last year – also attended ACPO TAM meetings.
Former Assistant Chief Constables Colin McCashey and Ronnie Liddle – both now retired – were also listed in the Police Scotland FOI reply.
DCC Iain Livingstone still serves with Police Scotland and was also named as having attended ACPO TAM meetings.
Senior officers were members of the Association of Chief Police Officers in Scotland (ACPOS) which ceased to operate on 1st April 2o13 when Police Scotland was established.
The Police Scotland FOI reply also said that DCC Livingstone, along with Sir Stephen House, ACC Ruaraidh Nicolson and new Chief Constable of Scotland, Phil Gormley, have all attended ACPO TAM meetings since the formation of Police Scotland.
It emerged last weekend that Chief Constable Gormley is expected to give evidence during the Pitchford Inquiry.
In 2006, his role at the Met Police included oversight of both the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS) and the National Public Order Intelligence Unit(NPOIU).
Both of these now defunct units investigated domestic extremism and will be scrutinised during the Pitchford Inquiry.
Mr Gormley was head of Special Branch when the SDS was running Carlo Neri, an undercover officer who had relationships with two women who are now taking legal action against the Met.
Campaigners calling for the Pitchford Inquiry to be extended to Scotland said senior officers should have known that Met Police spies were operating in Scotland and should be questioned.
Senior officers leading the policing of the G8 Summit at Gleneagles in 2005, when the SDS was in Scotland, included ACC Ian Dickinson who was closely involved in counter terrorism.
Paddy Tomkins was also involved in policing the G8 Summit. He was awarded the Queen’s Police Medal for Distinguished Police Service.
Donal O’Driscoll, of Undercover Research Group, has been researching and exposing police spies while calling for Pitchford to cover Scotland.
He said: “This information shows that through ACPOS, Scottish police officers played a role overseeing undercover police officers such as Mark Kennedy and cannot deny knowing about their activities, including in Scotland.”
“We know that many of the spycops were active in Scotland or holidayed there with the women they targeted for relationships. For those most affected by these injustices it is vital for the full story of the abuse to come out, and for this reason alone the Pitchford Inquiry must be extended to Scotland.”
Labour MSP Neil Findlay has also campaigned for the public inquiry to cover Scotland. He said: “Evidence of Scottish involvement in the undercover policing scandal grows by the day.”
“We now must have all of this brought out in the open with a full public inquiry in Scotland. We cannot have people in England and Wales having access to justice but people in Scotland denied.”
A Police Scotland spokesman said: “We do not routinely comment on covert policing operations.”
“It is a matter for the public inquiry into undercover policing who is called to provide evidence and that request will be considered if received by Police Scotland.”
The Scottish Government has said it would explore the possibility of extending Pitchford to Scotland with the Home Secretary, Theresa May.
When asked what progress had been made a spokesperson for the Scottish Government, said: “Discussions concerning extending the Pitchford Inquiry to cover the activities of the Metropolitan Units in Scotland are ongoing.”
In January, The Ferret revealed that Ronnie Liddle – Scotland’s former counter-terrorism chief– was seconded to a controversial undercover Met Police unit now under investigation.
Mr Liddle was head of CID at Lothian and Borders Police before being appointed to lead counter-terrorism in Scotland in May 2012.
But he was seconded to the Metropolitan Police’s Counter Terrorism Intelligence Unit (CTIU), responsible for undercover police, seven months later.
Part of his remit was overseeing domestic extremism, including officers spying on protest groups in Britain.
Mr Liddle’s secondment to the Met Police was detailed in the minutes of a Lothian and Borders Police Board meeting in 2013.
It says Liddle was: “Temporarily promoted to Assistant Chief Constable from 23/4/12 upon secondment to CTIU for the period 23/4/12 to 15/12/12.”
Part of his remit at CTIU included responsibility for national domestic extremism.
Last month, more than 100 people signed a letter demanding that the Met Police revealed the fake names used by police spies ahead of the inquiry beginning.
The 133 signatories also called for a list of protest groups infiltrated by undercover officers to be made public.
The people who signed the letter will each play a key role in the Pitchford Inquiry.
People who signed the letter include Harry Halpin who told the Sunday Mail that an undercover officer called Mark Kennedy duped him into allowing access to his personal computer.
At the time, Haplin was a climate change activist studying for a PhD at the University of Edinburgh.
Another signatory was Jason Kirkpatrick, an activist who befriended Kennedy and suspects the officer interfered with his media work during the 2005 global summit at Gleneagles.
Kate Wilson also signed the letter. She successful sued the Met after being duped into a relationship with Kennedywho was in Scotland working undercover on 14 occasions.
The letter was published on a website called Campaign Opposing Police Surveillance (Cops).
In our view, the police’s ‘neither confirm nor deny’ policy is less about protecting individuals and far more about blocking exposure of misdeeds.CAMPAIGN OPPOSING POLICE SURVEILLANCE
It begins: “Dear Lord Justice Pitchford, As 133 of the inquiry’s core participants, we write to share our collective view that a fundamental requirement for the inquiry’s success is to instruct police to disclose, as soon as possible, a list of names of all the organisations about whom intelligence was gathered; the cover names (not the real identities) of the individual officers responsible for infiltrating and reporting on activists and campaigns; and the individual Special Branch reports for each core participant group or individual.
“Core Participants and other current and potential witnesses are likely to struggle to provide testimony as long as there remains inadequate or non-existent information available to them.”
“We are deeply concerned that a unique and historic opportunity may be lost unless the inquiry is able to provide the vital details we seek.”
The letter criticises the Met Police for failing to reveal the names used by undercover officers, accusing the force of obstructing the inquiry to serve its own interests.
It says: “We appreciate that the police will use every possible argument against providing greater openness and transparency, although there is no evidence that the public exposure of any undercover officer to date has either placed them at personal risk or posed any threat to national security.”
“In our view, the police’s ‘neither confirm nor deny’ policy is less about protecting individuals and far more about blocking exposure of misdeeds.”
The Met Police has refused to release the names of undercover officers as they have a policy of protecting covert tactics and the safety of officers and their families.
https://theferret.scot/scottish-police-chiefs-spycops-pitchford-inquiry/?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=SVTF
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)