"We're sorry" - false claims re police agent provocateur
riotact2 | 07.02.2009 16:08 | Indymedia | Other Press | Social Struggles | South Coast
Back in June 2008, indymedia reported on claims by George Galloway that a police inspector had been seen in civilian clothes at an anti-war demonstration in Parliament Square inciting people to violence against the police lines. Much doubt was expressed as to whether Galloway could be seen as a reliable witness to these events and raised the question as to whether he'd find himself being sued for libel. (
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/06/401962.html?c=on#comments)
http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2008/06/401962.html?c=on#comments)
It is strange then that indymedia admins choose to hide a follow up to this story which does indeed suggest strongly that Galloway made the whole thing up. The imc-uk-moderation list justifies the hiding of the article by saying it breaks the guideline on hierarchy and writes it off as a "post about a quarrel between 'socialist unity' and george galloway". ( http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-moderation/2009-February/0207-p2.html)
Clearly the moderator hadn't actually read the article as it can in no way be described as a tiff between one socialist faction and another. It is little nothing more than a public apology to the police officer which the publication accused of being an agent provocateur.
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-moderation/2009-February/0207-p2.html
Anyway, this isn't a complaint about the moderation (we all know people make mistakes), I just think it is important that the people who had heard about this the first time get to hear that the Crown Prosecution Service had decided that there was nothing to the claims.
From Socialist Unity (6th Feb), "On 25 June 2008 we published a posting, by Andy Newman, entitled “J’accuse! — the Dreyfus Affair”. This posting included a copy of a letter Mr George Galloway MP had sent to the RT Hon Jacqui Smith the Home Secretary, identifying Inspector Christopher Dreyfus as an agent provocateur at an anti-war demonstration in Parliament Square on 15 June 2008.
Mr Galloway said that he had observed Inspector Dreyfus commit various crimes, including incitement to violence, attempted assault on a police officer and several serious public order offences. He called upon the Home Secretary to conduct an inquiry into Inspector Dreyfus’ behaviour. Our posting called upon readers to comment on Mr Galloway’s letter. We made clear that Inspector Dreyfus denied the allegations.
We understand that, as a result of Mr Galloway’s letter, the matter has been comprehensively investigated by the British Transport Police and the Metropolitan Police, and that their findings have been reviewed by the Crown Prosecution Service.
The investigations did not substantiate Ms Whittaker-Khan’s story or the allegations in Mr Galloway’s letter. The CPS has confirmed that there is no case to answer.
We now accept that Christopher Dreyfus was not present at the demonstration and did not engage in any of the criminal behaviour referred to in Ms Whittaker-Khan’s story or Mr Galloway’s letter. We apologize to him for the damage caused to his reputation."
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-moderation/2009-February/0207-p2.html) Clearly the moderator hadn't actually read the article as it can in no way be described as a tiff between one socialist faction and another. It is little nothing more than a public apology to the police officer which the publication accused of being an agent provocateur.
http://lists.indymedia.org/pipermail/imc-uk-moderation/2009-February/0207-p2.html Anyway, this isn't a complaint about the moderation (we all know people make mistakes), I just think it is important that the people who had heard about this the first time get to hear that the Crown Prosecution Service had decided that there was nothing to the claims.
From Socialist Unity (6th Feb), "On 25 June 2008 we published a posting, by Andy Newman, entitled “J’accuse! — the Dreyfus Affair”. This posting included a copy of a letter Mr George Galloway MP had sent to the RT Hon Jacqui Smith the Home Secretary, identifying Inspector Christopher Dreyfus as an agent provocateur at an anti-war demonstration in Parliament Square on 15 June 2008.
Mr Galloway said that he had observed Inspector Dreyfus commit various crimes, including incitement to violence, attempted assault on a police officer and several serious public order offences. He called upon the Home Secretary to conduct an inquiry into Inspector Dreyfus’ behaviour. Our posting called upon readers to comment on Mr Galloway’s letter. We made clear that Inspector Dreyfus denied the allegations.
We understand that, as a result of Mr Galloway’s letter, the matter has been comprehensively investigated by the British Transport Police and the Metropolitan Police, and that their findings have been reviewed by the Crown Prosecution Service.
The investigations did not substantiate Ms Whittaker-Khan’s story or the allegations in Mr Galloway’s letter. The CPS has confirmed that there is no case to answer.
We now accept that Christopher Dreyfus was not present at the demonstration and did not engage in any of the criminal behaviour referred to in Ms Whittaker-Khan’s story or Mr Galloway’s letter. We apologize to him for the damage caused to his reputation."
riotact2
Comments
Hide the following 4 comments
Who is we?
07.02.2009 22:14
Who is we? who is this article claiming to speak for?
imcista
Socialist Unity
07.02.2009 22:31
Personally, I think it is a little naïve to believe something simply because police or the CPS said it. I can only imagine the thinking behind that – “The CPS said the cop didn't do anything” “Oh well the authorities said it must be true, let’s issue an apology”
ARA
miss
08.02.2009 13:11
A simple threat of legal action or something deeper?
Underestimated
Legal threats from the Police Federation or whatever police body
05.03.2009 19:41
Sir Paul Condon told the Home Affairs Select Committee back in the late 1990s that corrupt police in Scotland Yard have so many well financed (by organised crime?) lawyers that they were dubbed 'The Untouchables. He found he could do absolutely nothing to get them sacked.
His own estimate was between 100 and 250 corrupt policemen in Scotland Yard alone.
Which is why legal threats from the police have to be responded by the Daily Mail to but mean nothing at all about the facts on the ground.
Tony Gosling
Homepage:
http://www.public-interest.co.uk