Kate Wilson won a legal battle against the Metropolitan Police after discovering her long-term boyfriend was an undercover officer
All I need to do is join a bunch of leftist organizations and the state will assign me a sexual partner?
Incels hate this one simple trick!
This is one of my fears. I can’t imagine the betrayal and lack of ethics. I can’t imagine a person who would sell their souls to date someone they hate like this. Just thinking about it ugh! I’m in a community with a bunch of degenerates and sometimes I’ve dated guys who just seem to be lying through their teeth that they like me. I stopped frequenting their bars. Doesn’t help when the photographer at events is an undercover cop. I’m not the one in biker gangs but I stopped going because of all the fake suspicion. Still I’d need soooooo much therapy. I hope she got a huuuuge settlement.
If they slept together he raped her with government backing
Kennedy, who resigned from the Met in 2010, had sexual relationships with as many as 10 other women while undercover.
Maybe not as huge as it should be but
In 2021, the Investigatory Powers Tribunal (IPT) ordered the Met Police and NPCC to pay a total of £229,471 to Ms Wilson “by way of just satisfaction for the breaches of her human rights”
Not nearly enough.
I hope a sincere apology was included in that as well.
They were required to apologise also, although sincerity cannot be ensured.
Edit: Or rather, the Met police and NPCC have apologised, it seems like the officer has not and generally shows no remorse.
and some goddam alimony, not from the state either, from the cop.
“This is one of my fears”
I’m so sorry that this is actually a concern that someone legitimately feels. It’s unbelievable to me that anyone could date someone they don’t like, for whatever reason…
sends hug
Happens a lot in Spain.
There has been a lot cases of police officers infiltrating left and social movements, male and female, and “failing in love” with people inside them. Just off the top of my head, there is a case of female cop that was caught by her partner after 4 years of relationship and before getting married; an another one where a male cop infiltrated different associations and literally fucked his way up to the intel, tricking women and having them have (consent) sex with him. This one his awaiting trial because after finding out the girls sued him for sexual abuse, but i doubt it will go anywhere knowing how justice works here.
You cannot obtain consent by deceit. That’s rape.
Speaking only about the legal sense here, most places do not recognize that. If you are of sound mind and body, not under the influence of drugs, extortion, etc, then the consent is valid.
Part of the problem is that everyone is at least a little deceitful, and these have been used in courts to claim rape. I remember a case about the use of makeup (deceiving about her actual looks and genetics), and another about being the “wrong” ethnicity. Where is the line for the courts to be involved?
This makes me feel sick
It’s been years since I saw a burning cop car, I’m fucking irritated
One of my favorite memories is a comrade being interviewed during the LA Watt’s Rebellion. A TV reporter asked him why they were burning police cars. His reply, “Because it’s fun!”
That’s truly awful, ACAB.
However, I do want to let any of our new glowies know I personally give prior consent to be honeypotted by cuties who buy me nice things.
might wanna look up what “glowie” means and how it started buddy. it’s not something you wanna be throwing around
Davis addressed concerns about his language on his website, stating that “when I fight Satan, I use the sharpest knives I can find.”
I’m not saying I approve of his slur usage, but hot damn is that a quote.
You’ve heard of fucking in ass because you love Jesus, but have you heard of
Looked it up… idk this doesn’t feel like a problem? Yeah, the related term is absolutely a problem, but this seems like a sanitized version that’s meant to portray the same core meaning without the racial slur?
I could very well be wrong of course, I don’t have much more context than an extremely quick search so please correct me if I’m wrong.
I prefer the term ‘fed’
That being said, hello feds! Welcome to .world!
Believe it or not, Mark Kennedy is my brother in law.
He’s a bit full of himself, and it’s weird when this comes up in the news cycle.
He wrote a book about his experiences, but it wasn’t taken up with the publisher because he essentially didn’t express regret.
Of course he didn’t regret anything. ACAB
He should have been charged. The fact that none of the legal avenues have involved him is obscene.
He is still under investigation… He had to give evidence again a few months ago
I had a deadbeat housemate once who claimed to have been visited by two special branch cops who offered to arrange him a sexual partner in return for spying on the local anti-war group he was in. This seemed ludicrous at the time, as the group would gather outside the town hall in small numbers and sing “No More Blood For Oil” all in different keys, but in the light of this story (which had been known for quite a while now) it absolutely tracks with the tactics it turned out they’d been using.
I mean like… how do you even react to when the cops offer to pimp for you?
“It is important to note that since Mark Kennedy’s deployment there has been enormous change in undercover policing, both in the Met and nationally, and I want to be clear that this case in no way reflects modern-day undercover policing.”
Press X to doubt.
Incels just need to pretend to be leftists and then they’ll get their government mandated GF.
Have you seen them try and talk to women it’s embarrassing. They usually last about 15 minutes and then they call somebody “female”, or something and they can’t work out what went wrong.
They would be amusingly crap spies. You could probably keep them in your midst and just talk coded language, and they probably wouldn’t pick up on it.
I’m in a few local orgs and this is fucking nightmare fuel!
Wtf is this? The British version of Gestapo’s joy division? Fucking disgusting. Intelligence agencies shouldn’t exist outside war scenarios or valid EXTERNAL threats.
Most countries have intelligence agencies for internal threats. How would you detect and prevent terrorist attacks without them?
7/7 and 21/7 were committed by an internal threat. As was the Manchester Arena bombing, the assassinations of Jo Cox and David Amess and attempted assassination of Stephen Timms, the Streatham stabbings, the London Bridge attacks in 2017 and 2019, the Westminster car attack, Finsbury Park attack, 2017 Westminster attack, murder and attempted beheading of Lee Rigby, Glasgow Airport attack, London nail bombings, Exeter bombing attempt……
But sure, we don’t need internal intelligence agencies at all.
After all, why would we want them to have thwarted the 2006 transatlantic airline bombing plot, Talbot Street bomb factory, 2007 London car bombs, Theresa May assassination plot, Exiled 393, attempted hospital bombing in Leeds, and many more that aren’t made public…
deleted by creator
I get your point but there have been many cases of terrorism that was done by someone that already lived (usually legally) in a coutry. Like those assholes that steal a car or truck and just drive it into a busy street. Unfortunately intelligence agencies are a necessary evil.
You see, that’s the difference between US and UK - the so called “Gestapo’s joy division” stops a lot of extremist plots. That’s why you have Trump and we don’t.
deleted by creator
I scrolled on All/Top-6-Hours and I see this horror story on my front page.
Are we gonna play Among Us IRL now?
Are my parents even real? Or just government agents? 🤔
Less than £300k for a year of repeated rape by fraud? And no charges for the officer? Sounds like imperialism to me.
This is awful, but I wonder what is technically illegal about it. It is a misleading and manipulative lie, but it’s not illegal to lie about personal topics, I don’t think.
It’s fucking rape.
As horrible this is (as owl said) how do you figure out it is rape?
Edit: fucking sorry for asking a question, that’s too much for you it seems. “Everything is rape” isn’t the answer ffs.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_by_deception
False name, false life story, false reason for having sex with her. He had sex with her in order to spy on her.
Roger Dutton sentenced a 25-year-old woman, Gayle Newland, to eight years in prison for pretending to be a man
Soon: it was rape because I thought he was nice.
If everything is rape, then nothing is. Rape is about non-consent, not about deception. Or so I think.
consent doesn’t just mean “yes”… consent means informed consent… consent means non-coerced consent
my state in australia has recently implemented some fantastic new laws around consent, and have done a really good job of defining some very grey areas
https://www.respectvictoria.vic.gov.au/news/affirmative-consent
specifically the section about when someone can not consent is relevant here. it covers things like coercion, feeling like you can’t withdraw consent, abuse of authority (ie covers workplace sexual harassment), age, asleep/unconscious (regardless of previous consent), AND most importantly:
Despite what a person might like to hear, they haven’t received affirmative consent if:
…
- their partner cannot consent – including because of:
- … being mistaken about the identity of any other person involved
and in case you think that’s too restrictive, the laws have widely been praised by the BDSM and kink communities - places where non-verbal consent is common… they cover a lot of ways people might consent, and also withdraw consent
the issue with identity is that she would not have consented if she knew all the details - facts which the man kept from her, knowing that if she knew she would likely not consent
and that’s key: to consent, you have to have all the information available at the time
- their partner cannot consent – including because of:
You cant consent during deception. If your gf has aids and doesnt tell you, then you didnt consent. That is both the legal and culutral definition of rape.
Unfortunately: not everywhere is a woman capable of raping a man legally
Giving someone aids isnt rape, it’s like saying “she shot me during sex so it must be rape”.
Did you consent to getting shot? If it was during sex you have a case for rape.
Rape does not mean a penis goes in a vagina unconsentually. Rape means you removed someones agency in a sexual fashion. That can mean you fingered them like our president(but not under new york state law, even though the judge admitted it was rape), or it can mean you tore their clothes off, or stuck something in them they didnt like, it can mean they took the condom off without you knowing, it can mean they said they are fixed when they are not.
I just looked it up, you are correct. Knowingly transmitting hiv is not legally considered rape(except in some states), it’s its own crime. Most of the time a felony.
Bud, what happens if you consent to something that didn’t actually exist?
It’s sex under false pretences and deception. That’s a legally defined rape.
I agree with you. If being misleading is equal to rape, then this rule can easily be abused.
deleted by creator
If a woman has sex with me (hypothetically) because she saw me wearing expensive clothes, but later it turns out they were cheap imitations, that would be misleading, but not rape.
Maybe, when you start arguing that an immoral act is not technically rape, you should simply not do that.
Rape by deception is rape, plain and clear. Why did you pick a scenario where you didn’t lie, and try to compare it to someone who spun up an entirely new person out of thin air?
If he was asked if he got money and said yes, would that then be rape?
I’m trying to understand where the line is. Obviously in this story, the cop raped them, but I’m not sure it’s as clean cut for every situation.I’m not incredibly interested in pondering hypothetical questions. Rape is a complicated topic and the existence of a grey area doesn’t mean that everything is a grey area.
If someone lies to their victim about every single part of their personal life and history, while they ostensibly think their victim is a criminal and are acting as an agent of state to arrest them, their friends, and stop a cause they believe strongly in, convincing them to participate in sex is immoral. If someone wants to “devil’s advocate” they can do so with their therapist.
No it isn’t.
The legal battle was a civil suit, based more on the violations of Kate Wilson’s human rights, than on the legality of actions
That makes sense, I agree with that.
