# Former lovers of undercover officers sue police over deceit (UK) **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 17, 2011, 5:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/former-lovers-of-undercover-officers-sue-police-over-deceit-uk/606545 "2011-12-17T17:17:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 5\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 3:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/former-lovers-of-undercover-officers-sue-police-over-deceit-uk/606545/41 "2011-12-20T03:07:16Z")
> [@CitizenPained](#): > > That slippery slope thing usually doesn’t work very well in the courtroom. This is not the “slippery slope argument”. This is the floodgates argument. And this works very well. ---
**Author:** ![Lust4Life](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecc23a/32.png) [@Lust4Life](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lust4Life)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 11:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/former-lovers-of-undercover-officers-sue-police-over-deceit-uk/606545/42 "2011-12-20T11:04:28Z")
> [@casdave](#): > > Interesting to note that one of the undercover cops admitted that he was proactive in trying to get these activists to commit crimes. > > [Mark Kennedy (police officer) - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Kennedy_(police_officer)) > > A whole bunch of prosecutions fell apart when this happened > > [http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/features/interview-mike-schwarz](http://www.lawgazette.co.uk/features/interview-mike-schwarz) > > We have also had murder trials completely fall apart and convictions overturned > > [Killing of Rachel Nickell - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Rachel_Nickell) > > In this case, the person originally prosectued in court was show to be wholly innocent, and another person was later convicted. > > [Archive news from the Bradford Telegraph and Argus](http://www.thetelegraphandargus.co.uk/archive/1999/09/04/Bradford+District+Archive/8063920.Murder_case_ruined_my_life/) > > Take a look at the dangers to mental health that this can impose on the UC officer > > [Covert police officer: 'After 12 years undercover, I was a broken biscuit' | The Independent | The Independent](http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/covert-police-officer-after-12-years-undercover-i-was-a-broken-biscuit-2185729.html) > > Seems odd to me that the Undercover police operative can claim and win compensation - as per the Stagg case - and yet the the real victims of this duplicity have to struggle, both to clear their names due to the selective way in which evidence that might have supported their defence was concealed and also the way in which their emotional wellbeing was jeopardised. I checked out every single link that you’ve offered and they simply don’t either back up your position on the o.p. or are totally irrelevant to the topic of the thread. That apart I agree that the U.C. officer has made statements in favour of the Animal Activists, which is hardly surprising as he fell in love with one of them and married her. So any statements that he made should be received with just the teensiest weeniest pinch of salt. ---
**Author:** ![tomndebb](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/b9e5f3/32.png) [@tomndebb](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tomndebb)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 3:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/former-lovers-of-undercover-officers-sue-police-over-deceit-uk/606545/43 "2011-12-20T15:11:56Z")
> [@Lust4Life](#): > > I checked out every single link that you’ve offered and they simply don’t either back up your position on the o.p. or are totally irrelevant to the topic of the thread. Really? I would say that a series of stories noting that undercover officers have both inflicted harm and suffered harm as the result of their actions, actions that were fully compliant with their superiors’ orders, would be very relevant to this discussion. So none of them are either unsupportive of **casdave** ’s position or irrelevant to the discussion. > [@Lust4Life](#): > > So any statements that he made should be received with just the teensiest weeniest pinch of salt. This is a consideration, but a “pinch of salt” is different than the complete dismissal you offered. ---
**Author:** ![Lust4Life](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/ecc23a/32.png) [@Lust4Life](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lust4Life)\ **Post date:** [December 20, 2011, 11:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/former-lovers-of-undercover-officers-sue-police-over-deceit-uk/606545/44 "2011-12-20T23:22:23Z")
Try looking up "Irony ", in the dictionary. ---
**Author:** ![Sailboat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/sailboat/32/461_2.png) [@Sailboat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sailboat)\ **Post date:** [December 29, 2011, 7:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/former-lovers-of-undercover-officers-sue-police-over-deceit-uk/606545/45 "2011-12-29T19:41:27Z")
> [@Lust4Life](#): > > The Old Bill put undercover officers into these groups because of what some of these not very pleasant people might be planning, not because of their beliefs. Isn’t that the very slipperiest of slopes? Who knows what _might_ be planned? > [@Lust4Life](#): > > I personally believe that the police were wrong I just included the above fragment so casual readers wouldn’t mistake your overall position due to my snipping your full quote. 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/former-lovers-of-undercover-officers-sue-police-over-deceit-uk/606545.md?page=2)