Well for a while now I have been looking for the answer to a question about spies but I have searched on the Internet and I have not managed to find the answer. I was wondering what happens if a spy or someone who works for MI6 or the KGB or whatever they are called now and they are stopped by the police and asked for their name and address what they say. Here is a story about people who were rioting and refused to goive their name and address and the judge in court told them “Come back next year”. It says Officers were unable to identify them because they had no documentation Three suspected rioters walked free from court yesterday despite refusing to reveal their names.
They whooped with delight when a magistrate let them go, only making them promise to come back next year. It says They were ‘simply laughing at the law’, according to…
‘I have never heard of anything like this in my 32-year career,’ he added. ‘It is absolutely ridiculous.
‘This is another crushing blow to…after a very difficult few weeks. This will only encourage others to withhold their identities.’
What is to stop every rioter following their lead? He asked if they would follow their lead?
Officers were unable to identify the trio because they were not carrying any documentation, a tactic favoured by militant anarchists.
They were held in custody for almost 48 hours before being brought before Westminster magistrates accused of refusing to reveal their names to a constable.
When asked to disclose their identities in court yesterday they simply shook their heads and grinned.
One suspect told police he was called Tyrone Falls. This appears to be false because the only Briton with that name is a 42-year-old from Northern Ireland.
The young man, who had long unwashed brown hair, smirked and waved at his friends in the public gallery during the short hearing. Another suspect simply gave his name to police as Bruno. The third gave no information at all.
A senior magistrate who serves outside London said: ‘You just have to hope the police can find some way of identifying them and compelling them to attend.’
…had their fingerprints, DNA and photographs taken by police and images of them could be released if they fail to show up next March.
They were originally charged with obstructing a police officer. But this was changed to a charge under section 50 of the Police Reform Act 2002 which makes it an offence not to reveal your identity to a constable when asked.
The maximum penalty for refusing to reveal your identity in these circumstances to a police officer is a £1,000 fine. The court heard they all gave ‘no comment’ interviews about their actions and refused to co-operate with police.
It is not clear why they were not charged with contempt of court, which is punishable with jail and fines.
So with this in mind that it says that it is an offence not to reveal identity to constable when asked that there could be consequences of that for the spy or they could be charged like someone was with not giving their details to the best of their ability. Even on the railways a conductor or Revenue Protection Inspector who suspects that someone has committed and offence can ask for their name and address under the bye-laws and it is also an offence to provide a false name and address. And I would like to know how this works for a spy.
Are they allowed to give their cover name rather than their real name? Unless there is some kind of “secret password” between spies and the police which seems unlikely. In relation to what spies do in relation to the police there is not much to find about it.
So have any spies out there who have written memoirs or books or appeared on TV
from MI6 or the KGB or whatever it is now then ever spoken about this?
I’m not sure what you think a spy is. The vast majority would answer with their real name, and those few who wouldn’t would have some cover name that they would answer by. They aren’t “allowed” to use a cover name, because they’re not allowed to be spying to begin with.
Here in the US, police will hold prisoners in custody until identity can be established. The arrested aren’t even booked unless identity is reasonably confirmed. No phone calls or meetings with lawyers.
As for spies, see Operation Pastorius. During the Second World War, German submarines infiltrated American waters and delivered eight agents. The wikipedia page has some details on blending in with the enemy population like fake IDs, backstories, draft deferment cards.
Most spies don’t even need that: They have perfectly legitimate jobs as attachés in embassies where they can do perfectly legitimate work under their own names and secrete all kinds of things back home in diplomatic pouches, perfectly legitimately.
And, no, you can’t look at their secretions without provoking a war, so don’t try.
Or they’re just some guy who works in a factory run by some defense contractor who, for one reason or another, have grown disillusioned with their employer, their country, and/or life, and who see working for an enemy to be a good idea. If Bob Smith, Boeing engineer, decides to sell secrets to the Russians, and the police ask him his name and occupation, he’ll tell them “Bob Smith, Boeing engineer”.
Interesting story. All eight were quickly arrested because one of them, George John Dasch, defected almost immediately to the FBI. Six were executed in the electric chair, a co-defector was given a life sentence, Dasch got 30 years.
This seems harsh for the defector (although he did know a manhunt was underway). Perhaps the lack of leniency was due in part to the fact that “FBI Chief J. Edgar Hoover made no mention that Dasch had turned himself in, and claimed credit for the FBI for cracking the spy ring.”
ETA: All 8 were sentenced to death, but FDR commuted two sentences. After 6 years, President Truman deported Dasch and the other survivor to West Germany, where they were greeted as traitors.
Quote not snipped, but the first paragraph encompasses putting you in handcuffs and more - just for “detaining you” here in the USA. Fess up. You are a spy for the Illuminati, and a Victim of Love to paraphrase Robert Palmer.
I get the impression that the OP:s question is more about undercover agents. Like, if a guy from some government agency who has been infiltrating a gang of some kind of political extremists, perhaps for months or years, gets caught together with a couple of them in something like a minor riot or drug bust (and the local police doesn’t know about his presence, or indeed existence?)
What’s the protocol for informing the police that he is on their side, while not blowing his cover?
Probably not doing anything. If you’re a deep undercover agent infiltrating the mob or a drug gang & you’re not ready to end the investigation & it’s not your agency arresting you then you’d get arrested & processed just like the other bad guys. Then when you’re out, you notify your superior/handler & they quietly make the arrest go away. Whoops, your paperwork was ‘misplaced’ so you’re not scheduled for a preliminary hearing on the same day as the other guys, or whoops, you’re ‘lawyer’ is not available & gets a deferment to the hearing; by the time it’s rescheduled, you’re undercover operation is probably wrapped up, when they can officially get charges dropped.
As mentioned above, most spies operate under some sort of ‘legal’ cover, typically a diplomat or a journalist. As such, they tend to give the embassy as an address when challenged, or their press bureau.
Or more likely, your agency already knows as soon as you’re arrested, and takes whatever steps are considered appropriate without you even asking. Which might include letting you rot in jail, if that’s what’s needed to give you more credibility with the group you’re infiltrating. And of course, you’d have already discussed all of these details with your superiors before starting the mission.
I doubt very much they were released for not revealing their identities, especially give the source which is a well known lying Tory rag that attempts to smear anyone not of their small minded persuasion.
If you go to court in the UK having refused to identify yourself then you will be held in the cells for contempt of court, keep going and a jail term will be forthcoming, it might only be a few hours, but it will build on each subsequent court appearance.
No, what is most likely to have occurred is that there was no evidence they had committed an offence, or no prospect of a successful prosecution. On that basis it is unlikely to be worth holding them.
There seems to be a complete mismatch of the “facts” here because this rag seems to report that they were bailed to appear before the courts again - clearly this is impossible because it would require a court order to appear to be served. If they have to appear at a future date to answer charges then their identities are known and if they have been bailed this reinforces that view.
So, I call foul on this story, its a crock of shite and pretty much what I expect of this crap “newspaper” - it makes Fox news seem like a fact finding mission
A spy will either be working under their genuine identity but a cover story for why they are there (i.e., CIA operatives posing as State Department diplomats, e.g., Valerie Plame) or they will be given a complete cover identity, which will be verifiable and which they will use at all times.
For example, Valerie Plame had as part of her resume the name of a consulting company for whom she “worked”. After it all came out, one news agency did a search for that company name and contacted another person whose online resume also included that same consulting company. Right after that, the other guy’s resume disappeared from the internet. (An example of “collateral damage” from leaks)
Basically, anyone who is “undercover” ha a cover story. It may be cultural attache for the embassy, or he might be Bob Smith from Cleveland who sells plumbing supplies, or Charles Tate-ffolkes from Birmingham, consulting architect for Tate and Smith Inc., etc. complete with valid passport and driver’s license.
Real spies with the backing of their agency do NOT just wander the countryside. They have cover stories that can stand basic scrutiny for things like traffic stops. The biggest danger in today’s internet-connected society, as Jennifer Lopez says to Jason Statham in “Parker” is “I did a credit check on you and until 6 months ago you didn’t exist.” It takes a serious agency to be able to fake a full backstory in today’s easily documented world - birth certificates, school records, job and credit history, etc. But then, real undercover spies are pretty rare. How much scrutiny does your backstory need to survive? As mentioned above, it’s mainly embassy types or fly-in “businessmen” who then contact legitimate locals willing to sell out something or other.
Think this through in a little different way. Let’s say Russia’s SVR (foreign intelligence service) sends someone to spy in some country… let’s say the United States. That person is going to take a commercial flight into this country and go through passport control at which point their identity is going to be examined by immigration officials, you follow?
So if the spy can get by passport control, I don’t think they are going to be worried about the local police pulling them over for a traffic infraction. (And if they are under official cover, that is, posing as a diplomat, they really don’t have to worry about local law enforcement because of the protections associated with diplomatic immunity.)