Skip to content or view screen version

Adrian Radford. A hoax, diversion and paid by Cancer Research UK?

Eye Spy on the Spies | 15.02.2010 02:04 | Animal Liberation | Bio-technology | Social Struggles | South Coast | World

The farce that is the "Adrian Radford" story. Adrian Radford claimed that he infiltrated SHAC who he describes as the ALF. He runs a "surveillance instruction" outfit and claims that he was working for MI6 [SIS]. He came out publicly and claimed that he was "responsible" for the info given to police about SHAC [leaving the real moles to carry on]. We think his real employer was Cancer Research UK.

In his publicity photos Adrain Radford poses next to a Cancer Research UK shop with Cancer Research UK propaganda in the window behind him.
We don't believe that he was [solely at any rate] working for NETCU never mind MI6. If he was it is unlikely that he would come out so publicly and put not just himself but his colleagues and handlers at risk. We don't think there is any way that the police or security services would advise or allow this.

He claimed that he had cancer and other people who have been suspected of being AR infiltrators have come out with a remarkably similar line, that they have "recently lost someone to cancer so joined AR". Now many of us know that Cancer Research is fraud in many cases but the Adrain Radford thing is a gigantic piss take.

He was never at Sandhurst as he has claimed. He was never in the SAS / MI6 /SIS as he has claimed. He has never been employed as a "security advisor" for the police or MI5 or MI6 a she has claimed. He is a scam artist.

He has told lie after lie and aimed for publicity and money. Why pose next to Cancer Research UK paraphernalia? How many more oddballs from Cancer Research are there? If he is / was indeed working for Cancer Research UK then they should be prosecuted for fraud and deception.

Eye Spy on the Spies

Comments

Hide 7 hidden comments or hide all comments

Why has he been mentioned again - is there a book launch?

15.02.2010 08:34

There dosn't seem to be much of a trigger to this post - is he due to publish the book he was writing?

Cynical

Adrian was an informant - it's pretty straight forward..

15.02.2010 08:50

Sorry, where's the argument here? He provided fundamental information in the SHAC case, it's pretty plain cut and simple. There isn't really much room for 'debate' here.

Yes he did infiltrate SHAC, so I don't know where this "we don't believe he was working for NETCU" comes from.. he was paid by a pharmaceutical company, I believe. Pretty much the same thing these days.

I don't really see the purpose of this post. Of course a lot of his stories wouldn't check out, he was working undercover, and won't be going around dishing out real information about himself!

I think it would be better rephrased - if this post is genuine - to raise questions regrading Adrian, rather than stating that "we" (implying activists / animal rights people) unanimously don't believe he even existed or infiltrated any groups. It's good to ask questions, discuss, learn from it, but not really much point denying something that is totally black and white.

NETCU

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

shut up

15.02.2010 16:50

mandy you fucking loon

mandy buster

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

To Adrian

15.02.2010 17:00

....whatever, you fucking loon yourself. Scumbag

Mandy

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Your "survelliance" school web info is mostly spelled wrong

15.02.2010 17:10

One would imagine that someone from MI6 would at least be able to write properly...Prick.

To Adrian or "Mandy Buster" [SHACWATCH] again

Re "He was paid by a pharmaceutical company"

15.02.2010 17:18

Cancer Research UK are a pharmaceutical company in the opinion of some. He was paid by them in the opinion of some. Yes he gave information to the police but they were not the ones who planted him there in the first place in the opinion of some.

If you agree that he was paid by a pharmaceutical company then why do you not think it "matters" which one?

anon

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

Do Cancer Research UK run SHACWATCH?

15.02.2010 17:20

Just a thought.

Another "LOON" [not Mandy]

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

SHACWATCH = Cancer Research UK

15.02.2010 17:27

Cancer Research UK "security" are behind SHACWATCH.

not shacwatch

Adrian Radford a fraudster, dangerous fantasist & liar. SHAC trials were unjust.

15.02.2010 17:51

If the SHAC trials and cases were based on "evidence" provided by Adrian Radford who's motive is financial...then the SHAC cases and trials were based on profit and the convictions of SHAC activists are therefore unsound.

anon

He "existed" but not in the way he claims. SHAC were fitted up.

15.02.2010 17:59

How on earth can anyone believe that his "evidence" can be taken seriously? SHAC should demand compensation for mistrials based on fraudulent "evidence" provided by Radford.

If he was a plant paid by a pharmaceutical company then they too should be invesitgated for fraud and prosecuted.

If it ever turns out that ity was CR-UK then they should be prosecuted.

anon

Who pays SHACWATCH and why?

15.02.2010 19:08

If the pharmaceutical industry, who have a financial vested interest against SHAC etc are paying SHACWATCH who have and are infiltrating animal rights, [and it seems they have an obssession with Bradford], how can any of their evidence given to police or courts be credible?

They are hired thugs, paid to lie, bully, threaten, slander, blackmail and harass aninmal rights activists.

?

Shacwatcher

16.02.2010 02:53

ShacWatch is so obviously run by police or GSK.

GSK - HLS' largest client
GSK - Bradford's largest funder

2 + 2 = 4!

GSKKK

Bradford Animal Lab is not HLS so why SHACWATCH it? Radford is a scammer.

16.02.2010 03:23

While Adrian Radford probably gave info to the police and security services once he "revealed" himself as a way of making money, he was never one of them in reality. He is a lying fraudster. If he was MI6 or whatever then he has broken the Official Secrets Act. David Shayler went to jail for doing this and this hasn't happened to Adrian Radford so he is in our opinion a fraudster and scammer. Any information that he has given the Times etc was based on fantasy. He is simply one of SHACWatch rather than a genuine Security Advisor. Real Security Advisors and Consultants would never have anything to do with this plum. He was not at Sandhurst and was never in MI6. He might of been passing on information to NETCU but what use would it be if he was a plant from a pharmaceutical company in the first place?

P.S. What's the obsession with Bradford that SHACwatch have? It's nothing to do with HLS.

An

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

The SHAC verdicts can be unjust - they pleaded guilty

16.02.2010 08:16

I know it spoils a good rant but we need to recall that 2 of the 3 SHAC leaders pleaded guilty.

Unforunate fact

Adrians evidence not used in SHAC trial

16.02.2010 11:56

None of Adrian's "work" was used as evidence in any SHAC trial. He infiltrated SHAC, and then let his police handlers know what was going on within SHAC, i.e who he thought was doing what etc. The police then used his "intelligence" to lauch their own investigations so they could get supposed evidence to support Adrians claims.

Reading Resident

Walter Mitty

16.02.2010 13:27

I knew this idiot back in NI. He was a walter mitty then and he's a walter mitty now. He's having to write a book because his company failed and he got kicked off Eye Spy magazine when they realised he was full of BS.

His advertising model is to keep putting his name in AR circles to try to drum up business. Most of the posts that mention him are the ones he wrote himself! What a sad little shit.

ex-squaddie

Yep! He's Walter Mitty ans a piece of shit.

16.02.2010 18:58

His security agency are full of freaks and weirdo wannabee scumbag criminal thugs.

anon

Hidden Comment

This posting has been hidden because it breaches the Indymedia UK (IMC UK) Editorial Guidelines.

IMC UK is an interactive site offering inclusive participation. All postings to the open publishing newswire are the responsibility of the individual authors and not of IMC UK. Although IMC UK volunteers attempt to ensure accuracy of the newswire, they take no responsibility legal or otherwise for the contents of the open publishing site. Mention of external web sites or services is for information purposes only and constitutes neither an endorsement nor a recommendation.

who are the shacwatch homophobes targeting Debbie Vincent?

16.02.2010 20:21

report these scum

gay

What do you mean "regrade Adrian"?

17.02.2010 08:02

Er...he's a fake, a fraud and quite possibly works for Cancer Research UK. Do you have grades for them? What grade did you give him then? We dread to think. Glad to see you're doing some real work, writing on Indymedia. It's what people pay taxes for after all.

ARA

Was he paid by Novartis?

02.03.2010 18:06

possible....

not noorvelloooo

Where "Adrian Radford" might really have come from

12.03.2014 23:40

"Radford" was never really MI6, but there is such a thing as army intelligence, and RAF intelligence, and Navy intelligence, until 1994 they all trained separately, but after 1994 they all trained together at Chicksands, a former American base with a long history of staff being corrupted by wily Bedfordshire and Northamptonshire drugs dealers.

Radford does seem to have trained the new intelligence officers in something or other, but lots of people, from all walks of life, are brought in to teach them how to do all sorts of ordinary jobs in a convincing way, so he could have been teaching them to pick up litter the way a proper park keeper would for all I know.

The most important thing about a place like Chicksands, is to protect the identity of the people being trained. Even the people teaching them how to tie their shoelaces, need to be trustworthy, because the trainers aren't going to being playing spies with the animal rights movement, they are going to be spying for real with real life FSB officers or IRA volunteers trying to spot them and kill them. The risk posed by someone like Radford in such a setting would be so extreme that you'd expect whoever employed him, to want to deny it.

If he were one of those unfortunates corrupted by the local druggies, then his subsequent life would have been spent pretending to give the police useful information whilst trying to get information useful to the druggies whose bitch he now was, and that would mostly have been along the lines of "when is the next surprise dawn raid going to happen in Bilberry Close or Pinemead?"

John Bingham

Hide 7 hidden comments or hide all comments