Discussion:
The price of spying on hippies
(too old to reply)
Rutterkin
2014-10-23 21:28:04 UTC
Permalink
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer

Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
Bill
2014-10-23 21:49:18 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 22:28:04 +0100, Rutterkin
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
There is no 'police pension fund'.

Police pensions are paid out of the government's general income just
as most other public service pension schemes are...
Basil Jet
2014-10-24 03:36:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
So she thought the father of her child was a parasite who hates society,
and when she found out he actually had a job she was traumatised... I
can certainly see why we should give her 400k.
saracene
2014-10-24 07:05:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
So she thought the father of her child was a parasite who hates society,
and when she found out he actually had a job she was traumatised... I
can certainly see why we should give her 400k.
He turned out to be a pig pretending to be a human being. This is far more plausibly a case of rape than some drunk footballer screwing some some drunk groupie slapper. I wouldn't be sorry if he got 5 years.
Basil Jet
2014-10-24 07:07:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
So she thought the father of her child was a parasite who hates society,
and when she found out he actually had a job she was traumatised... I
can certainly see why we should give her 400k.
He turned out to be a pig pretending to be a human being. This is far more plausibly a case of rape than some drunk footballer screwing some some drunk groupie slapper. I wouldn't be sorry if he got 5 years.
How does that differ from women wearing make-up and giving men a shock
in the morning?
saracene
2014-10-24 07:20:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
How does that differ from women wearing make-up and giving men a shock
in the morning?
You are a misogynist.
Basil Jet
2014-10-25 04:11:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by Basil Jet
How does that differ from women wearing make-up and giving men a shock
in the morning?
You are a misogynist.
How about this one?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2773291/I-thought-father-baby-Premier-League-footballer-fake-Josie-Cunningham-reveals-fooled-18-MONTHS-man-claimed-Hull-City-player-Curtis-Davies-goes-labour.html
saracene
2014-10-25 06:08:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by saracene
Post by Basil Jet
How does that differ from women wearing make-up and giving men a shock
in the morning?
You are a misogynist.
How about this one?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2773291/I-thought-father-baby-Premier-League-footballer-fake-Josie-Cunningham-reveals-fooled-18-MONTHS-man-claimed-Hull-City-player-Curtis-Davies-goes-labour.html
That's only impersonating a footballer, not a human being,
Rutterkin
2014-10-24 07:33:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman
who has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance
that the father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
So she thought the father of her child was a parasite who hates
society, and when she found out he actually had a job she was
traumatised... I can certainly see why we should give her 400k.
He turned out to be a pig pretending to be a human being. This is far
more plausibly a case of rape than some drunk footballer screwing
some some drunk groupie slapper. I wouldn't be sorry if he got 5
years.
Spot on.

Some filth was on the radio recently calling for harsher sentences for
people who kill filth, because the filth are special and want the
feeling of being recognised as special. Presumably being able to kill
people while in custody, stitch up innocent people, and sell information
to the media doesn't make them feel special enough.
yetti (not my cousin)
2014-10-24 08:18:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than =A3400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payo=
ut-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
=20
So she thought the father of her child was a parasite who hates society,=
=20
and when she found out he actually had a job she was traumatised... I=20
can certainly see why we should give her 400k.
He turned out to be a pig pretending to be a human being. This is far more =
plausibly a case of rape than some drunk footballer screwing some some drun=
k groupie slapper. I wouldn't be sorry if he got 5 years.
Why is it more plausibly rape?

He lied to the woman about his identity and therefore decieved her, but how many folk have told lies in a relationship? That does not mean he forced himself on her against her will.

Just because certain women are more gullible than others does not mean they have been raped, until they find out the truth many years later.
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
Rutterkin
2014-10-24 08:27:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Post by saracene
He turned out to be a pig pretending to be a human being. This is
far more plausibly a case of rape than some drunk footballer
screwing some some drunk groupie slapper. I wouldn't be sorry if he
got 5 years.
Why is it more plausibly rape?
He lied to the woman about his identity and therefore decieved her,
but how many folk have told lies in a relationship? That does not
mean he forced himself on her against her will.
Just because certain women are more gullible than others does not
mean they have been raped, until they find out the truth many years
later.
In 2012 the Guardian found 56 cases of police officers who had "been
found variously to have abused their positions to rape, sexually
assault, harass, groom and have inappropriate relationships with
vulnerable women and young girls, or have been investigated over such
allegations." [1]

Some police officers used the police computer system to find "soft
targets". How is what the undercover filth did different? Isn't it worse?

[1]
http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2012/jun/29/police-abuse-vulnerable-women-girls
saracene
2014-10-24 08:29:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Why is it more plausibly rape?
He lied to the woman about his identity and therefore decieved her, but how many folk have told lies in a relationship? That does not mean he forced himself on her against her will.
In English law:-

(3) A man also commits rape if he induces a married woman to have sexual intercourse with him by impersonating her husband.

This case is like that. He was impersonating her lover when in reality he was a secret agent of the state. She did not consent to sleeping with that
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Just because certain women are more gullible than others does not mean they have been raped, until they find out the truth many years later.
Rutterkin
2014-10-24 08:36:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Why is it more plausibly rape?
He lied to the woman about his identity and therefore decieved her,
but how many folk have told lies in a relationship? That does not
mean he forced himself on her against her will.
In English law:-
(3) A man also commits rape if he induces a married woman to have
sexual intercourse with him by impersonating her husband.
This case is like that. He was impersonating her lover when in
reality he was a secret agent of the state. She did not consent to
sleeping with that
If he had been a human being he would have left his job, made public
everything he knew about police undercover operations and everyone he
knew to be spying on people who were doing no more than exercising their
legal rights. He preferred to revert to being a pig, so a pig he is.

How many undercover police officers do you suppose are monitoring
bankers or company directors for illegal activity?
JNugent
2014-10-24 09:12:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rutterkin
Post by saracene
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Why is it more plausibly rape?
He lied to the woman about his identity and therefore decieved her,
but how many folk have told lies in a relationship? That does not
mean he forced himself on her against her will.
In English law:-
(3) A man also commits rape if he induces a married woman to have
sexual intercourse with him by impersonating her husband.
This case is like that. He was impersonating her lover when in
reality he was a secret agent of the state. She did not consent to
sleeping with that
If he had been a human being he would have left his job, made public
everything he knew about police undercover operations and everyone he
knew to be spying on people who were doing no more than exercising their
legal rights. He preferred to revert to being a pig, so a pig he is.
How many undercover police officers do you suppose are monitoring
bankers or company directors for illegal activity?
The same number as those monitoring gangs planning criminal activities
at power stations, etc.
Bill
2014-10-24 15:06:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by Rutterkin
Post by saracene
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Why is it more plausibly rape?
He lied to the woman about his identity and therefore decieved her,
but how many folk have told lies in a relationship? That does not
mean he forced himself on her against her will.
In English law:-
(3) A man also commits rape if he induces a married woman to have
sexual intercourse with him by impersonating her husband.
This case is like that. He was impersonating her lover when in
reality he was a secret agent of the state. She did not consent to
sleeping with that
If he had been a human being he would have left his job, made public
everything he knew about police undercover operations and everyone he
knew to be spying on people who were doing no more than exercising their
legal rights. He preferred to revert to being a pig, so a pig he is.
How many undercover police officers do you suppose are monitoring
bankers or company directors for illegal activity?
The same number as those monitoring gangs planning criminal activities
at power stations, etc.
There is no evidence at all for any police spies operating within the
banking system working to uncover corrupt practices.
yetti (not my cousin)
2014-10-25 09:16:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill
Post by JNugent
Post by Rutterkin
Post by saracene
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Why is it more plausibly rape?
He lied to the woman about his identity and therefore decieved her,
but how many folk have told lies in a relationship? That does not
mean he forced himself on her against her will.
In English law:-
(3) A man also commits rape if he induces a married woman to have
sexual intercourse with him by impersonating her husband.
This case is like that. He was impersonating her lover when in
reality he was a secret agent of the state. She did not consent to
sleeping with that
If he had been a human being he would have left his job, made public
everything he knew about police undercover operations and everyone he
knew to be spying on people who were doing no more than exercising their
legal rights. He preferred to revert to being a pig, so a pig he is.
How many undercover police officers do you suppose are monitoring
bankers or company directors for illegal activity?
The same number as those monitoring gangs planning criminal activities
at power stations, etc.
There is no evidence at all for any police spies operating within the
banking system working to uncover corrupt practices.
There is no evidence at all for other intelligent life in the universe, but that doesn't mean there isn't any.
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
JNugent
2014-10-24 09:11:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Why is it more plausibly rape?
He lied to the woman about his identity and therefore decieved her, but how many folk have told lies in a relationship? That does not mean he forced himself on her against her will.
In English law:-
(3) A man also commits rape if he induces a married woman to have sexual intercourse with him by impersonating her husband.
This case is like that. He was impersonating her lover when in reality he was a secret agent of the state. She did not consent to sleeping with that
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Just because certain women are more gullible than others does not mean they have been raped, until they find out the truth many years later.
"He was impersonating her lover"?

What was this "lover's" name and date of birth?
saracene
2014-10-24 15:27:23 UTC
Permalink
raped, until they find out the truth many years later.
Post by JNugent
"He was impersonating her lover"?
What was this "lover's" name and date of birth?
Impersonating a police officer is a crime. Date of birth of said officer not required.
JNugent
2014-10-25 00:02:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
raped, until they find out the truth many years later.
Post by JNugent
"He was impersonating her lover"?
What was this "lover's" name and date of birth?
Impersonating a police officer is a crime. Date of birth of said officer not required.
Who is talking of the police officer?

Certainly not I.

I was asking about this mysterious "lover" whom the police officer was
said to have been "impersonating".

I'm inclined to believe that this "lover" didn't exist.
saracene
2014-10-25 06:06:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
raped, until they find out the truth many years later.
Post by JNugent
"He was impersonating her lover"?
What was this "lover's" name and date of birth?
Impersonating a police officer is a crime. Date of birth of said officer not required.
Who is talking of the police officer?
Certainly not I.
I was asking about this mysterious "lover" whom the police officer was
said to have been "impersonating".
I'm inclined to believe that this "lover" didn't exist.
He doesn't have to. If you impersonate a police officer he does not have to exist either. People who think this kind of sick police behaviour is acceptable must surely have some deep hatred for women?
JNugent
2014-10-25 14:17:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
raped, until they find out the truth many years later.
Post by JNugent
"He was impersonating her lover"?
What was this "lover's" name and date of birth?
Impersonating a police officer is a crime. Date of birth of said officer not required.
Who is talking of the police officer?
Certainly not I.
I was asking about this mysterious "lover" whom the police officer was
said to have been "impersonating".
I'm inclined to believe that this "lover" didn't exist.
He doesn't have to. If you impersonate a police officer he does not have to exist either. People who think this kind of sick police behaviour is acceptable must surely have some deep hatred for women?
In your experience, as wide or as narrow as it might have been, does the
"Don't you recognise me? I'm your lover. Come, let's to bed" approach
actually work?
yetti (not my cousin)
2014-10-25 14:27:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
raped, until they find out the truth many years later.
Post by JNugent
"He was impersonating her lover"?
What was this "lover's" name and date of birth?
Impersonating a police officer is a crime. Date of birth of said officer not required.
Who is talking of the police officer?
Certainly not I.
I was asking about this mysterious "lover" whom the police officer was
said to have been "impersonating".
I'm inclined to believe that this "lover" didn't exist.
He doesn't have to. If you impersonate a police officer he does not have to exist either.
Well the person(s) who they were impersonating did not exist and neither were they police officers. They were people who had died as young children decades earlier, and they had used names from the national register of deaths.

People who think this kind of sick police behaviour is acceptable must surely have some deep hatred for women?
Post by JNugent
In your experience, as wide or as narrow as it might have been, does the
"Don't you recognise me? I'm your lover. Come, let's to bed" approach
actually work?
How do you know he actually 'loved' her?

How can he be her lover, if the emotional relationship is purely onesided?
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
JNugent
2014-10-25 14:32:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
raped, until they find out the truth many years later.
Post by JNugent
"He was impersonating her lover"?
What was this "lover's" name and date of birth?
Impersonating a police officer is a crime. Date of birth of said officer not required.
Who is talking of the police officer?
Certainly not I.
I was asking about this mysterious "lover" whom the police officer was
said to have been "impersonating".
I'm inclined to believe that this "lover" didn't exist.
He doesn't have to. If you impersonate a police officer he does not have to exist either.
Well the person(s) who they were impersonating did not exist and neither were they police officers. They were people who had died as young children decades earlier, and they had used names from the national register of deaths.
People who think this kind of sick police behaviour is acceptable must surely have some deep hatred for women?
Post by JNugent
In your experience, as wide or as narrow as it might have been, does the
"Don't you recognise me? I'm your lover. Come, let's to bed" approach
actually work?
How do you know he actually 'loved' her?
I don't know that.

I am just (uncritically) using the terminology already in use in the thread.
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
How can he be her lover, if the emotional relationship is purely onesided?
It depends on how you define the term "lover", though in the end,
nothing much turns on it because the phrase was introduced several
generations of posting ago.
saracene
2014-10-25 14:53:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
How do you know he actually 'loved' her?
I don't know that.
I am just (uncritically) using the terminology already in use in the thread.
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
How can he be her lover, if the emotional relationship is purely onesided?
It depends on how you define the term "lover", though in the end,
nothing much turns on it because the phrase was introduced several
lover
ˈlʌvə/
noun
noun: lover; plural noun: lovers

a partner in a sexual or romantic relationship outside marriage.
"I think she had a secret lover"
synonyms: boyfriend, girlfriend, man friend, woman friend, lady friend, lady-love, beau, loved one, beloved, love, darling, sweetheart;
Post by JNugent
More
generations of posting ago.
JNugent
2014-10-25 15:13:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
How do you know he actually 'loved' her?
I don't know that.
I am just (uncritically) using the terminology already in use in the thread.
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
How can he be her lover, if the emotional relationship is purely onesided?
It depends on how you define the term "lover", though in the end,
nothing much turns on it because the phrase was introduced several
lover
ˈlʌvə/
noun
noun: lover; plural noun: lovers
a partner in a sexual or romantic relationship outside marriage.
"I think she had a secret lover"
synonyms: boyfriend, girlfriend, man friend, woman friend, lady friend, lady-love, beau, loved one, beloved, love, darling, sweetheart;
Post by JNugent
More
generations of posting ago.
As you wish.

It isn't an important point. I'm happy to use whichever definition was
meant by the poster who introduced the term into the discussion.
saracene
2014-10-25 14:51:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
In your experience, as wide or as narrow as it might have been, does the
"Don't you recognise me? I'm your lover. Come, let's to bed" approach
actually work?
I have little experience of seduction and was never very good at it.
JNugent
2014-10-25 15:15:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
In your experience, as wide or as narrow as it might have been, does the
"Don't you recognise me? I'm your lover. Come, let's to bed" approach
actually work?
I have little experience of seduction and was never very good at it.
Well, don't use that one. It is vanishingly unlikely to work.
saracene
2014-10-25 15:40:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
In your experience, as wide or as narrow as it might have been, does the
"Don't you recognise me? I'm your lover. Come, let's to bed" approach
actually work?
I have little experience of seduction and was never very good at it.
Well, don't use that one. It is vanishingly unlikely to work.
The creep was present at the birth of his child by her before he disappeared without warning. At that stage he was posing as her lover when he was really just a pig. You may not like what you think of as hippy women and think they deserve that sort of treatment.
Rutterkin
2014-10-25 17:17:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
In your experience, as wide or as narrow as it might have been,
does the "Don't you recognise me? I'm your lover. Come, let's
to bed" approach actually work?
I have little experience of seduction and was never very good at it.
Well, don't use that one. It is vanishingly unlikely to work.
The creep was present at the birth of his child by her before he
disappeared without warning. At that stage he was posing as her lover
when he was really just a pig. You may not like what you think of as
hippy women and think they deserve that sort of treatment.
The notion of "rape by the state" is an appropriate one, as he is
extremely unlikely to have been accepted as a fellow environmentalist
without the state's backing to give him credibility. And WTF were his
supervisors doing?
JNugent
2014-10-26 00:07:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
In your experience, as wide or as narrow as it might have been, does the
"Don't you recognise me? I'm your lover. Come, let's to bed" approach
actually work?
I have little experience of seduction and was never very good at it.
Well, don't use that one. It is vanishingly unlikely to work.
The creep was present at the birth of his child by her before he disappeared without warning.
If you are talking about the police officer who has been in the news,
the reports are that he and the lady lived together for three years.
Post by saracene
At that stage he was posing as her lover when he was really just a pig.
Does using that word make you feel big and clever?

It makes you look bitter, twisted and stupid.
Post by saracene
You may not like what you think of as hippy women and think they deserve that sort of treatment.
I have nothing against hippies. The general rule is that they leave me
alone and I leave them alone. Long may it continue.
saracene
2014-10-26 06:52:37 UTC
Permalink
On Sunday, October 26, 2014 1:07:28 AM UTC+1, JNugent wrote:
e and the lady lived together for three years.
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
At that stage he was posing as her lover when he was really just a pig.
Does using that word make you feel big and clever?
It makes you look bitter, twisted and stupid.
I take it you feel no outrage at this police policy and behaviour. There we differ.
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
You may not like what you think of as hippy women and think they deserve that sort of treatment.
I have nothing against hippies. The general rule is that they leave me
alone and I leave them alone. Long may it continue.
JNugent
2014-10-26 09:04:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
e and the lady lived together for three years.
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
At that stage he was posing as her lover when he was really just a pig.
Does using that word make you feel big and clever?
It makes you look bitter, twisted and stupid.
I take it you feel no outrage at this police policy and behaviour. There we differ.
I understand and accept that the law may only be adequately enforced
against particularly aggressive and sociopathic groups by subterfuge.

You are outraged at the idea of the law prevailing. You must have your
own reasons for that and it is unlikely that you are going to clearly
spell them out here.
Post by JNugent
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
You may not like what you think of as hippy women and think they deserve that sort of treatment.
I have nothing against hippies. The general rule is that they leave me
alone and I leave them alone. Long may it continue.
saracene
2014-10-26 13:00:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
You are outraged at the idea of the law prevailing. You must have your
own reasons for that and it is unlikely that you are going to clearly
spell them out here.
I don;t really want to be nasty to you but I suspect you are a bit thick. Ok I'll admit to a discreditable motive. I would love to have the privilege of raping with impunity, and because I can't have it I don't think anyone else should, and that includes the police.
JNugent
2014-10-26 18:25:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
You are outraged at the idea of the law prevailing. You must have your
own reasons for that and it is unlikely that you are going to clearly
spell them out here.
I don;t really want to be nasty to you but I suspect you are a bit thick. Ok I'll admit to a discreditable motive. I would love to have the privilege of raping with impunity, and because I can't have it I don't think anyone else should, and that includes the police.
No, it isn't that.

You have other reasons to hate the police.

You know what they are.
saracene
2014-10-26 19:08:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by JNugent
You are outraged at the idea of the law prevailing. You must have your
own reasons for that and it is unlikely that you are going to clearly
spell them out here.
I don't really want to be nasty to you but I suspect you are a bit thick. Ok I'll admit to a discreditable motive. I would love to have the privilege of raping with impunity, and because I can't have it I don't think anyone else should, and that includes the police.
No, it isn't that.
You have other reasons to hate the police.
You know what they are.
& I know your secret.
JNugent
2014-10-26 21:00:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by JNugent
You are outraged at the idea of the law prevailing. You must have your
own reasons for that and it is unlikely that you are going to clearly
spell them out here.
I don't really want to be nasty to you but I suspect you are a bit thick. Ok I'll admit to a discreditable motive. I would love to have the privilege of raping with impunity, and because I can't have it I don't think anyone else should, and that includes the police.
No, it isn't that.
You have other reasons to hate the police.
You know what they are.
& I know your secret.
As you wish.

I did *say* that it was unlikely that you would not spell out your
reasons for hating the police.

But you clearly do have such reasons.
saracene
2014-10-26 22:14:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
& I know your secret.
As you wish.
I did *say* that it was unlikely that you would not spell out your
reasons for hating the police.
But you clearly do have such reasons.
I don't hate anybody.


"He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me,"-- in those who harbour such thoughts hatred will never cease. "He abused me, he beat me, he defeated me, he robbed me," -- in those who do not harbour such thoughts hatred will cease. For hatred does not cease by hatred at any time: hatred ceases by love, this is an old rule. (Dhammapada)
JNugent
2014-10-26 22:23:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
& I know your secret.
As you wish.
I did *say* that it was unlikely that you would not spell out your
reasons for hating the police.
But you clearly do have such reasons.
I don't hate anybody.
Right.
yetti (not my cousin)
2014-10-25 09:22:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Why is it more plausibly rape?
He lied to the woman about his identity and therefore decieved her, but how many folk have told lies in a relationship? That does not mean he forced himself on her against her will.
In English law:-
(3) A man also commits rape if he induces a married woman to have sexual intercourse with him by impersonating her husband.
This case is like that. He was impersonating her lover when in reality he was a secret agent of the state. She did not consent to sleeping with that
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Just because certain women are more gullible than others does not mean they have been raped, until they find out the truth many years later.
"He was impersonating her lover"?
What was this "lover's" name and date of birth?
Of course if it is going to be a rape accusation by every woman who has been shagged by a man who hid certain parts of his life and kept them secret, then any woman who has ever had sex with a freemason has been raped.

That should keep the courts busy.
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
Rutterkin
2014-10-25 09:23:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Of course if it is going to be a rape accusation by every woman who
has been shagged by a man who hid certain parts of his life and kept
them secret, then any woman who has ever had sex with a freemason has
been raped.
Don't freemasons prefer boys?
yetti (not my cousin)
2014-10-25 10:57:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rutterkin
Post by yetti (not my cousin)
Of course if it is going to be a rape accusation by every woman who
has been shagged by a man who hid certain parts of his life and kept
them secret, then any woman who has ever had sex with a freemason has
been raped.
Don't freemasons prefer boys?
I have heard that said, and underage ones allegedly, but because the myriad of inquiries into their behaviour are, or have been, chaired by other freemasons or their dinner party hostesses, it is highly unlikely that we will ever get a definitive answer to such a serious question.

However, I am sure that there are some who have no real preference for which hole their member is inserted in, as long as it is in one as frequently as possible.
--
Posted by Mimo Usenet Browser v0.2.5
http://www.mimousenet.com/mimo/post
JNugent
2014-10-24 09:08:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by Basil Jet
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
So she thought the father of her child was a parasite who hates society,
and when she found out he actually had a job she was traumatised... I
can certainly see why we should give her 400k.
:-)
Cassandra
2014-10-24 07:17:25 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 22:28:04 +0100, Rutterkin
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
I'm sure FBI undercover officers, who infiltrate the Mafia and biker
drug gangs, really admire British police officers and their efforts to
stop hippies holding up banners on private property.
Bill
2014-10-24 15:07:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill
On Thu, 23 Oct 2014 22:28:04 +0100, Rutterkin
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
I'm sure FBI undercover officers, who infiltrate the Mafia and biker
drug gangs, really admire British police officers and their efforts to
stop hippies holding up banners on private property.
I think you'll find that this a knife that cuts both ways...

The FBI seems to spend much time entrapping reasonably harmless
Muslims and various tree huggers as well.
Mel Rowing
2014-10-24 07:36:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
As you have been informed elsewhere there is no police pension fund.

In any case, why should police officers as a whole meet this cost out of
their pockets? It's bad enough that they have to pay for you!

Sure this is a private matter between them. If he had met this young
lady in a night club and taken her home would she still be £400000
better off or is it alleged that she was raped or deceived in some way.
If so why have criminal proceedings not been taken against this ex-officer?

Or was he ordered as part of his duties to enter into a sexual liason
with this woman.

Surely it is a civil matter that called for no more than a paternity
suit against the officer concerned. No doubt this woman was entitled to
some recompense but it should come from the other person concerned and
not the public purse.
andy
2014-10-24 09:14:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mel Rowing
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
As you have been informed elsewhere there is no police pension fund.
In any case, why should police officers as a whole meet this cost out of
their pockets? It's bad enough that they have to pay for you!
Sure this is a private matter between them. If he had met this young
lady in a night club and taken her home would she still be £400000
better off or is it alleged that she was raped or deceived in some way.
If so why have criminal proceedings not been taken against this ex-officer?
Or was he ordered as part of his duties to enter into a sexual liason
with this woman.
Surely it is a civil matter that called for no more than a paternity
suit against the officer concerned. No doubt this woman was entitled to
some recompense but it should come from the other person concerned and
not the public purse.
Would have been better value for the citizen to pay all the police and
security service blokes responsible the dole for life as opposed to
giving them jobs.

Paying people to sit on their arse is better than paying them to commit
crime.
Rutterkin
2014-10-24 09:34:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by andy
Paying people to sit on their arse is better than paying them to
commit crime.
The police are paid a generous salary, plus they get away with rape,
murder, assault, theft, sexual molestation, and they demand *more*
power, *more* money, *more* legal protection. They bring shame on the
species.
Mel Rowing
2014-10-24 11:32:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rutterkin
Post by andy
Paying people to sit on their arse is better than paying them to
commit crime.
The police are paid a generous salary, plus they get away with rape,
murder, assault, theft, sexual molestation, and they demand *more*
power, *more* money, *more* legal protection. They bring shame on the
species.
No it's people like you who bring shame to the species by taking
advantage of facilities provided to help you to steal from us instead.
Then to add insult to injury, you bite the very hands that feed you by
grumbling and moaning about all and everything.

As I said yesterday, if you don't like society, detach and divorce
yourself from it. It's easy enough to do but you won't do that will you?

Hypocrite!
Bill
2014-10-24 15:08:56 UTC
Permalink
On Fri, 24 Oct 2014 08:36:58 +0100, Mel Rowing
Post by Mel Rowing
Or was he ordered as part of his duties to enter into a sexual liason
with this woman.
He should have been specifically ordered to not do so and when his
liaison came to the attention of his superiors he should have been
ordered to break off the relationship.
Mel Rowing
2014-10-26 10:36:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill
On Fri, 24 Oct 2014 08:36:58 +0100, Mel Rowing
Post by Mel Rowing
Or was he ordered as part of his duties to enter into a sexual liason
with this woman.
He should have been specifically ordered to not do so and when his
liaison came to the attention of his superiors he should have been
ordered to break off the relationship.
He does receive pre-guidance and training. His mission is to integrate
fully with his targeted group.

He is subject to the urges and temptations of any other male (or female
if it comes to that!) There is surely the likelihood that he will err
from his training and guidance.

He knew he was himself married with children. Did that fact restrain
him? Perhaps but we don't know except that clearly if it did, the
restraint was insufficient.

We know too that he left the police service as soon as this detachment
ended. The suggestion was that he "went native" That is surely a danger
associated with this sort of operation.

The question is that for these reasons alone should this kind of
operation be attempted?
Bill
2014-10-26 15:23:11 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 10:36:14 +0000, Mel Rowing
Post by Mel Rowing
Post by Bill
On Fri, 24 Oct 2014 08:36:58 +0100, Mel Rowing
Post by Mel Rowing
Or was he ordered as part of his duties to enter into a sexual liason
with this woman.
He should have been specifically ordered to not do so and when his
liaison came to the attention of his superiors he should have been
ordered to break off the relationship.
He does receive pre-guidance and training. His mission is to integrate
fully with his targeted group.
He is subject to the urges and temptations of any other male (or female
if it comes to that!) There is surely the likelihood that he will err
from his training and guidance.
He knew he was himself married with children. Did that fact restrain
him? Perhaps but we don't know except that clearly if it did, the
restraint was insufficient.
We know too that he left the police service as soon as this detachment
ended. The suggestion was that he "went native" That is surely a danger
associated with this sort of operation.
The question is that for these reasons alone should this kind of
operation be attempted?
Oh come on.

He was inside this group for three years.

No charges resulted

It took the cops three years to work out that nothing criminal was
going on?

Come off it.
Mel Rowing
2014-10-26 16:58:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 10:36:14 +0000, Mel Rowing
Oh come on.
He was inside this group for three years.
No charges resulted
It took the cops three years to work out that nothing criminal was
going on?
Come off it.
Undercover officers are not there to effect arrests but as part of the
intelligence gathering process. To keep eyes and ears open. Gather names
of who is involved finding out what particular activity is next on the
list, picking up gossip. identifying hierarchies.

An undercover officer will never ever make an arrest or appear as a
witness in court. That would blow his cover and in fact he would be
useless as a potential witness in court.

Individual targets can always be picked up well away from the scene of
any disturbance and some time afterwards.

There's more to public order policing than simply making arrests.
Intelligent policing is intelligence led.
Bill
2014-10-26 23:11:52 UTC
Permalink
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 16:58:49 +0000, Mel Rowing
Post by Mel Rowing
Post by Bill
On Sun, 26 Oct 2014 10:36:14 +0000, Mel Rowing
Oh come on.
He was inside this group for three years.
No charges resulted
It took the cops three years to work out that nothing criminal was
going on?
Come off it.
Undercover officers are not there to effect arrests but as part of the
intelligence gathering process. To keep eyes and ears open. Gather names
of who is involved finding out what particular activity is next on the
list, picking up gossip. identifying hierarchies.
An undercover officer will never ever make an arrest or appear as a
witness in court. That would blow his cover and in fact he would be
useless as a potential witness in court.
Individual targets can always be picked up well away from the scene of
any disturbance and some time afterwards.
There's more to public order policing than simply making arrests.
Intelligent policing is intelligence led.
Well, no.

These people never broke a law in their pursuit of their goals.

The bloke had a three year holiday with full pay and added benefits.

The whole business makes me feel slightly unclean.

The idea that a police spy could be tasked with such a duty is
appalling and scandalous and utterly without any justification.
saracene
2014-10-28 17:03:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bill
The idea that a police spy could be tasked with such a duty is
appalling and scandalous and utterly without any justification.
Hear hear.

tj
2014-10-24 09:53:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
She must have been very traumatised.
Mel Rowing
2014-10-24 11:34:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by tj
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
She must have been very traumatised.
I'll bet she tried real hard to fight him off!
tj
2014-10-24 17:14:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Mel Rowing
Post by tj
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
She must have been very traumatised.
I'll bet she tried real hard to fight him off!
Re the psychiatric treatment, trauma may be a trigger but there has to
be an underlying susceptibility for mental illness.
This is evident from the fact that not all traumatised people develop
psychiatric problems.

£400,000 is a lot of money but I guess when you factor in the cost of
raising a child, and the officer's financial obligations, then it isn't
so large.

However women who have children through direct rape seldom get such a
sum of money from their assailant .
saracene
2014-10-24 17:40:55 UTC
Permalink
Post by tj
However women who have children through direct rape seldom get such a
sum of money from their assailant.
When the it's state that commits the crime it's worse. The police are there to protect us.
tj
2014-10-24 17:52:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by tj
However women who have children through direct rape seldom get such a
sum of money from their assailant.
When the it's state that commits the crime it's worse. The police are there to protect us.
Are you saying the woman's experience is worse if it's by a state official?
saracene
2014-10-24 19:00:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by tj
Post by saracene
When the it's state that commits the crime it's worse. The police are there to protect us.
Are you saying the woman's experience is worse if it's by a state official?
The seriousness of the offence does not depend on measuring the painfulness of the woman's experience.
JNugent
2014-10-25 00:03:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by tj
Post by saracene
When the it's state that commits the crime it's worse. The police are there to protect us.
Are you saying the woman's experience is worse if it's by a state official?
The seriousness of the offence does not depend on measuring the painfulness of the woman's experience.
Of what "offence" [sic] do you speak?
saracene
2014-10-25 06:03:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by tj
Post by saracene
When the it's state that commits the crime it's worse. The police are there to protect us.
Are you saying the woman's experience is worse if it's by a state official?
The seriousness of the offence does not depend on measuring the painfulness of the woman's experience.
Of what "offence" [sic] do you speak?
This thing that ought ot be considered rape.
firemonkey
2014-10-25 06:18:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by tj
Post by saracene
When the it's state that commits the crime it's worse. The police are there to protect us.
Are you saying the woman's experience is worse if it's by a state official?
The seriousness of the offence does not depend on measuring the painfulness of the woman's experience.
Of what "offence" [sic] do you speak?
This thing that ought ot be considered rape.
So if a man doesn't disclose everything to a woman and gets her into bed
it's rape but if a woman doesn't disclose everything...

Immoral, no doubt, but as for calling it rape...
saracene
2014-10-25 06:31:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by firemonkey
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by tj
Post by saracene
When the it's state that commits the crime it's worse. The police are there to protect us.
Are you saying the woman's experience is worse if it's by a state official?
The seriousness of the offence does not depend on measuring the painfulness of the woman's experience.
Of what "offence" [sic] do you speak?
This thing that ought ot be considered rape.
So if a man doesn't disclose everything to a woman and gets her into bed
it's rape but if a woman doesn't disclose everything...
Immoral, no doubt, but as for calling it rape...
No. If a pig impersonates a human being in his office as pig that should count as rape. It's an abuse of authority like a teacher screwing a 16 old pupil of his. Don't police have as much power and privilege as it is? Who else can beat people up with impunity?
JNugent
2014-10-25 14:15:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by tj
Post by saracene
When the it's state that commits the crime it's worse. The police are there to protect us.
Are you saying the woman's experience is worse if it's by a state official?
The seriousness of the offence does not depend on measuring the painfulness of the woman's experience.
Of what "offence" [sic] do you speak?
This thing that ought ot be considered rape.
By the *state*?
saracene
2014-10-25 14:49:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by tj
Post by saracene
When the it's state that commits the crime it's worse. The police are there to protect us.
Are you saying the woman's experience is worse if it's by a state official?
The seriousness of the offence does not depend on measuring the painfulness of the woman's experience.
Of what "offence" [sic] do you speak?
This thing that ought ot be considered rape.
By the *state*?
By a secret agent of the state.
JNugent
2014-10-25 15:15:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
Post by saracene
Post by tj
Post by saracene
When the it's state that commits the crime it's worse. The police are there to protect us.
Are you saying the woman's experience is worse if it's by a state official?
The seriousness of the offence does not depend on measuring the painfulness of the woman's experience.
Of what "offence" [sic] do you speak?
This thing that ought ot be considered rape.
By the *state*?
By a secret agent of the state.
I can envisage a crime - more or less any crime - being committed by an
individual who happens to be a state employee.

It is not possible to imagine the *state* committing a rape.
saracene
2014-10-25 15:36:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
I can envisage a crime - more or less any crime - being committed by an
individual who happens to be a state employee.
It is not possible to imagine the *state* committing a rape.
Whyever not? Just imagine what has happened in this case. If he were just a common or garden criminal he would have been put on trial and she would not have been offered £400,000 compensation.
JNugent
2014-10-26 00:05:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by saracene
Post by JNugent
I can envisage a crime - more or less any crime - being committed by an
individual who happens to be a state employee.
It is not possible to imagine the *state* committing a rape.
Whyever not? Just imagine what has happened in this case. If he were just a common or garden criminal he would have been put on trial and she would not have been offered £400,000 compensation.
It is probably true that if any particular person "were just a common or
garden criminal", they would be put on trial for the crime(s) of which
they are accused.

But not telling every sexual conquest the truth, the whole truth and
nothing but the truth about one's life and background is not a crime.
abelard
2014-10-26 09:45:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by JNugent
It is probably true that if any particular person "were just a common or
garden criminal", they would be put on trial for the crime(s) of which
they are accused.
But not telling every sexual conquest the truth, the whole truth and
nothing but the truth about one's life and background is not a crime.
then why is the state paying out such large damages?
--
www.abelard.org
























---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com
Mel Rowing
2014-10-26 12:06:02 UTC
Permalink
Post by abelard
Post by JNugent
It is probably true that if any particular person "were just a common or
garden criminal", they would be put on trial for the crime(s) of which
they are accused.
But not telling every sexual conquest the truth, the whole truth and
nothing but the truth about one's life and background is not a crime.
then why is the state paying out such large damages?
The state is picking up such large damages because the officer concerned
had been put into and maintained in this surveillance position by the
state and further required to integrate into a target community. Indeed
had he not made himself as inconspicuous as possible
his presence there would have been pointless.

The question to be asked is was he a free agent in this situation or
alternatively if he did extend his brief into jumping into bed with
female members of the movement was this not a jump too far?

Is it the case that it is common behaviour that members of protest
groups are inclined to behave in such a promiscuous manner? No doubt
some do but would those who don't somehow become conspicuous and thus
suspect?

To cut to the point, did the officers superiors expect him to behave
thus? If so was his wife in on the decision. Did she accept vocational
adultery as part of her husband's job?

I think that the more you ask such questions you come to the conclusion
that the officer concerned like many men took the opportunity for a
little bit on the side or possibly even saw this woman in terms of a new
direction is his life.

Under such circumstances the matter is not a matter for the metropolitan
Police his employer. A civil employer would not under any circumstance,
be deemed responsible for adulterous behaviour of two of his employees'
whether occurring in work time or not.

Responsibility for the child rests entirely with its parents. If the
mother feels deserted then it is her prerogative either to come to an
arrangement with regard to the maintenance of this child to go to law
and seek maintenance payments for the child just as thousands of others do.

But it's another case of "It's only our money" so much more convenient
and less embarrassing to to dip into the ever open public purse and dig
out a generous payment to send this lady on her way well compensated and
satisfied. I would think girls will be queuing up to go to bed with
policemen (or soldiers, sailors or airmen) after this. It's a bit better
than a council flat isn't it?
JNugent
2014-10-26 18:24:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by abelard
Post by JNugent
It is probably true that if any particular person "were just a common or
garden criminal", they would be put on trial for the crime(s) of which
they are accused.
But not telling every sexual conquest the truth, the whole truth and
nothing but the truth about one's life and background is not a crime.
then why is the state paying out such large damages?
No idea.

The legal system deals with alleged crime by way of prosecution, not
civil damages.
f***@gmail.com
2014-10-26 15:33:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Rutterkin
"The Metropolitan police are to pay more than £400,000 to a woman who
has been profoundly traumatised after discovering by chance that the
father of her son was an undercover police officer."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/oct/23/police-compensation-payout-woman-undercover-officer
Taking it from the police pension fund would encourage collective
responsibility and peer review.
There's an interesting book on this case and others of a similar nature:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/product/B00CNVPERS?psc=1&redirect=true&ref_=oh_aui_d_detailpage_o00_

The "Look Inside" preview gives you a flavour of the content.

dG
Loading...