Some truly crazy things in that article too. For example,
> X states he will kill her, leaves the room, and returns holding a machete ... The video cuts out amid her screams ... X was arrested, charged with assaulting Beth and appeared in court. However, while he was at court, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) dropped the case.
How can there be a _video_ of a machete attack and the case is dropped?
> items of hers that had also been seized by counter terror officers were returned to a member of her family by a man who did not identify himself. The relative assumed the man was an associate of X. ... We have established the visitor was an MI5 officer. Material seized by a police investigation, under a police warrant, had been given to MI5.
Just read that last sentence!
I'm not a UK national, but tend to believe in them -- including MI5 -- being the 'good guys'. We need good guys in today's world, desperately. This kind of article is hard to read.
They considered this guy to be a valuable asset and so "raison d'etat" prevailed.
This also highlights that whatever the official line on police and justice independence fed to the public phone calls and meetings that "never happened", well actually do.
What could MI5 possibly stand to gain from hiding a person who is described as "a violent misogynist abuser with paedophilic tendencies who had used his MI5 role as a tool of coercion"?
Is it only because it would "look bad on MI5" if people like that worked there? Seems like such a trivial thing to immediately take a stand against and get rid of as soon as you notice it, rather than trying to hide
That's a clear failure of culture and leadership in their investigation, how they can't see that defending bad actors in their organization only sheds a shadow on their entire organization is beyond me.
The accused agent, has brought shame and dishonor on their group, he effectively betrayed the organization with his actions, the fact his colleagues chose to break the law to support him is beyond the pale. This is just a symptom of the old boys club that normalizes deviancy, covering up slip ups and inevitably to shit like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Five
It is crazy how secret services in a lot of "democratic" countries now have a green pass to violate the national law for their own interests without real consequence.
It reminds me of the secret service in a Nordic country (maybe Denmark?) that shared national secret info with the US without any right to do so, without approval of the national assembly.
Also, what should be the scariest thing in the report:
Also, I can't help but feel depressed thinking about countries with less sophisticated justice systems. The absolute power an individual (they can be low rank!) gives me the shudders.
For anyone not familiar with the British State, it, along with its lieutenants such as the bbc, continually check the temperature of the nation. As it’s important that the docile middle classes who rarely interact with the justice system or question the media, remain naive. Along with those sold on the British Image around the world.
These legal cases are just theatre with professional actors.
‘Justice being seen to be done’
Trust in the bbc has been nosediving, and up pops this case of the BBC holding the state to account… and the judges giving appearance of impartiality…
What can I say, super instructive about what to expect when you start making inquiries about a state apparatus with lots of power. It also shows the need to make meticulous notes about everything and hold the state to telling the truth (as much as you can).
As worrying as this story is, I find it interesting and consoling that the BBC, which is a state owned media, didn't hesitate and even strongly pushed to investigate and publish a story of abuse at another government agency. They weren't pressured to drop it, but kept going.
Goes strongly against the common narrative about "the mainstream media" and state media in particular (about them being complicit and useless).
From what I can recall there has been similar things happening in Germany where police informers used the money gotten from informing on their (extreme right-wing) group to finance the group agenda. This is far from new. Secret services should be abolished in the name of democracy.
There was also the cases where at least one British undercover police officer infiltrated environmental organisations, and in the process fathered children under their assumed identity.
15 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 28.5 ms ] threadSome truly crazy things in that article too. For example,
> X states he will kill her, leaves the room, and returns holding a machete ... The video cuts out amid her screams ... X was arrested, charged with assaulting Beth and appeared in court. However, while he was at court, the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) dropped the case.
How can there be a _video_ of a machete attack and the case is dropped?
> items of hers that had also been seized by counter terror officers were returned to a member of her family by a man who did not identify himself. The relative assumed the man was an associate of X. ... We have established the visitor was an MI5 officer. Material seized by a police investigation, under a police warrant, had been given to MI5.
Just read that last sentence!
I'm not a UK national, but tend to believe in them -- including MI5 -- being the 'good guys'. We need good guys in today's world, desperately. This kind of article is hard to read.
MI5/6 are never good guys.
They considered this guy to be a valuable asset and so "raison d'etat" prevailed.
This also highlights that whatever the official line on police and justice independence fed to the public phone calls and meetings that "never happened", well actually do.
Is it only because it would "look bad on MI5" if people like that worked there? Seems like such a trivial thing to immediately take a stand against and get rid of as soon as you notice it, rather than trying to hide
Original title of article is:
> How MI5 piled falsehood on falsehood in court in the case of a spy who abused women
The accused agent, has brought shame and dishonor on their group, he effectively betrayed the organization with his actions, the fact his colleagues chose to break the law to support him is beyond the pale. This is just a symptom of the old boys club that normalizes deviancy, covering up slip ups and inevitably to shit like this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambridge_Five
It reminds me of the secret service in a Nordic country (maybe Denmark?) that shared national secret info with the US without any right to do so, without approval of the national assembly.
Also, what should be the scariest thing in the report:
Also, I can't help but feel depressed thinking about countries with less sophisticated justice systems. The absolute power an individual (they can be low rank!) gives me the shudders.
These legal cases are just theatre with professional actors.
‘Justice being seen to be done’
Trust in the bbc has been nosediving, and up pops this case of the BBC holding the state to account… and the judges giving appearance of impartiality…
Goes strongly against the common narrative about "the mainstream media" and state media in particular (about them being complicit and useless).
There was also the cases where at least one British undercover police officer infiltrated environmental organisations, and in the process fathered children under their assumed identity.