Skip to content or view screen version

Ratcliffe trial collapses!

IMC | 10.01.2011 02:36 | Analysis | Climate Chaos | Repression | Sheffield | World

According to this BBC Newsnight report, the 10th January trial has collapsed after undercover cop Mark Kennedy changed sides and offered to give evidence on behalf of the defendant's.

Mark Kennedy.
Mark Kennedy.

According to this BBC Newsnight report, the 10th January trial has collapsed after undercover cop Mark Kennedy changed sides and offered to give evidence on behalf of the defendant's.

It says,

"The trial of six green campaigners has collapsed after an undercover policeman who had infiltrated their group offered to give evidence on their behalf.

The six were charged with conspiring to shut down the Ratcliffe-on-Soar power station in Nottingham in 2009.

The case was due to start on Monday, but was abandoned after Pc Mark Kennedy contacted the defence team to say he would be prepared to help them.

The prosecution subsequently dropped their case."




Hide the following 26 comments

R4 coverage and Newsnight tonight

10.01.2011 08:25

This was the 2nd item on Radio 4's 8am news and the coverage earlier in the Today program wasn't as bad as their usual pro-Estalbishmnent properganda. It's also going to be the main stort on Newsnight tonight, hopefully with thingy who used to be in Workers Power will cover the story...


statement from defendants + Guardian coverage

10.01.2011 09:48

Campaigners expose undercover cop to prove their innocence:

Mark Kennedy: A journey from undercover cop to 'bona fide' activist:

Undercover officer spied on green activists:


5 live

10.01.2011 10:05

it's been mentioned quite a lot of 5 live this morning as well. guess they might do a longer feature later on, most likely on the 4-6 programme...

- Homepage:

Would a police officer tell a lie?

10.01.2011 11:31

Hmm...the aspect of this we may never get to the bottom of is what caused Flash Mark to withdraw his offer to help the defendants and cut off communication with defence lawyers a couple of weeks ago. According to the media he cited "concerns for his own and his family's safety".

I hope those who were clamouring for "more information" and the production of documents when Flash Mark's identity was revealed last year will now desist. It was precisely to protect his family that information was limited as it was. It looks like our circles been doing our best to protect those uninvolved people, while the state threatens them. All our friends in the know can do is their best to keep the media off their backs.

And here was me thinking the police's job was to ensure people's safety, not threaten it. That's what a copper told me, anyway, and would a police officer tell a lie?


More information

10.01.2011 11:58

Stropyoldgit, is that a tacit admission that a deal was made to protect this fucking cop? There were far more people targetted than the Ratcliffe protesters (none oe whom was ever looking at jail time) and more that could be targetted in future.

Harry Roberts

Original link

10.01.2011 12:09

Original link to the BBC report here.


In the thick of it...

10.01.2011 12:30

PC Kennedy locked on to gate at Hartlepool power station in 2006
PC Kennedy locked on to gate at Hartlepool power station in 2006

Last photo on this article

Shows Mark D'locked to gate at Hartypool Nuclear power station in 2006


Paranoid shit

10.01.2011 12:43

DOH! Where do you get this paranoid shit, Harry Roberts?

There was simply concern to keep the media off the backs of his uninvolved family, whose existence had just been discovered. What's wrong with that? Everything right with it, I reckon.
The cops may have been threatening his family, but they're scum. You seem to be imputing cop-style motives to principled activists unwilling to dump unknown people in the shit.

Why on earth would anyone have wanted to do a deal with Flash Mark once his identity had been discovered? A deal as two sides. What would the other side have been? He was asked questions about another suspected infiltrator and confirmed the suspicions. (Not as good an act as him, obviously). Since she had by then disappeared, what more was there?

No "information" given by Flash was worth doing a deal for (even if anyone had wanted to) as he was a proven liar and any alleged information would have been uncertain and merely a cause of confusion. In fact, it could have been handing the cops an opportunity to cause disruption by dodgy information.

In case it hasn't sunk in, I'll repeat the last phrase: DISRUPTION BY DODGY INFORMATION.



10.01.2011 14:06

Very sensitively handled and in a careful and principled way, I'd say (not being one of those who handled it). In retrospect, perhaps it could be said (I said it, anyway) that one aspect was arse-about-face, but ain't hindsight great, eh? Everything you've ever done, Harry, was 100% perfect, not 95%, I'm sure.

In fact, in the light of recent developments, even the one thing which might have been done differently (not mentioning Flash's real surname so that redacted copies of a document could be released) looks like it would have gone pear-shaped if it had been done that way. The real name would have come out anyway in the Radcliffe court process. So, though I thought the people concerned had got it only 95% right at the time, hind-hindsight (aka foresight?) now makes it look more like 100%.

I'm glad those who dealt with this are the sensible and thoughtful people they are. The loudmouth / big boots / who gives a fuck who gets damaged approach advocated by Harry Roberts would have made the circles involved look like incompetent, shallow and dangerous arseholes. The way it was actually dealt with does the people concerned, their politics and the wider movement a lot of credit.

The arseholes today are the cops, of course. Please don't join them on the podium of shite, Harry


@ anon

10.01.2011 14:18

I believe it's an ex-family, and not just an ex-partner, but a child / teenager. Does anyone deserve shit because of who dad is?

Is it OK for us to behave as scummily as the cops and the media do? Not in my book.


The others

10.01.2011 14:33

Does this mean those already tried and given community orders, fines etc will have those orders removed? Or is this Mark's effort to make himself appear less shit to his old close circle of friends and to hell with the others?


Also to anon and others who think like that.

10.01.2011 14:44

Thanks to those for being reasonable on this thread, but to Anon and others here's why I think it's important to keep his family out of it...

So, they have nothing to do with it, they didn't infiltrate and try to destroy us, infact to be honest I kinda regard them as people that have been fucked over by the state and cops in this mess too - although of course to a lesser extent than us.

Why should family members be given grief for what Mark did? Justifying it by saying that's what the cops do is really a pretty lame arguement I think, the cops do some fucked up things, should we take what they do as any example of the way to act? Retaining some level of humanity and empathy for the people fucked over by this is something I'm pleased we collectively as a movement have done, and I have no bad feeling towards Mark's family at all, and am pretty gob-smacked by those of us that would wish young kids and a partner of his harm.

Although knowing some of those that bleat on about this, my sneaking suspiscion is that for all the griping, even if the family names became public, all this lot would do about it is crap on down the pub about how they were gonna 'do them' or some such 'I'm so hard' bluster over a pint or twelve. Yeah, it's well tough and radical and anarchist to threaten the family, strewth give me strength...

And Grackle, you fucking idiot. We didn't, just cos some have surfaced now from somewhere else (which are no better IMO anyway), why on earth does that prove we are liars??

Some of you really need some lessons in logical thought, clear thinking and constructing an decent arguement; you're adding 2 and 2 and getting rhubarb... twats.

Harry Robert's aunt


10.01.2011 15:03

Democracy is being destroyed by agents, informers and other collaborators working for states and for corporations against the common people . This is unacceptable and it will be stopped.

We are developing novel sources that will be used to identify and prosecute this immoral behaviour, for our own safety without reference to the victims wishes. We already have access to police and corporate intelligence and are evaluating what we have learned. Regretfully we do not have access to any jurisprudence or proportional punishment but we will deal with individuals not families. We will not sink to your level but we will use minimal force to deter future betrayal.

In the spirit of truth and reconciliation we are announcing a sixty day period of leniency from this date. Collaborators can confess their deeds and apologise to their victims in any public forum to protect themselves from serious repercussions. Simply include our group name in your statement and we will find it and remove you from our investigation once we verify it's authenticity. Failure to do so will be taken into account when we catch up with you. We will not be in a position to extend this offer once retribution begins so we recommend that you do not wait to see what happens to others.

Aksi Bonek

About the photos...

10.01.2011 16:11

I just don't understand what you and others are saying 'I know'...

The ones we put up were the best out of hundreds that we had access to. Are you saying we went to all the work, trouble and risk of exposing an undercover cop and then purposefully put rubbish (and I'd dispute that they were bad anyway) photos on the web to identify him?

Why on earth would we do that after having exposed him? FFS think about it before you open your gob, your arguement makes no sense at all.

Harry Robert's aunt

fun for all the family

10.01.2011 22:25

Maybe people should calm down a bit.

Whatever function an undercover like flash has in reporting on or provoking actions, another role for narks has often been to spread a bit of havoc, paranoia and suspicion. Its kill two birds with one stone really, as they can do it while still in cover, but their exposure will only double and redouble the shit flying around. This thread and how its falling into acrimony will be the one thing bringing a smile to mark's bosses faces today. I suggest keeping this kind of mud slinging out of indymedia, its just food for the cops and the journo scum who trawl looking for stories. Real useful discussions about this issue could be had in more sensible places.

Johann Neve

Cop Protectors?

10.01.2011 22:34

What's all this about people "protecting" Flash?
Who is doing it?
What are they protecting him from? Us? His erstwhile cop pals?
How are they doing it?

I'm pissed off a few people have gone against the general concensus that we weren't going to talk to the media about any of this and have seen several (ignored) emails from the BBC. There is a bit of an excuse for the Defendants, but they should have left it to their solicitor.



10.01.2011 23:10

How fucking sickening to see the BBC were trusted with documents and evidence withheld from the movement.


BBC misuse of resources.

10.01.2011 23:39

"How fucking sickening to see the BBC were trusted with documents and evidence withheld from the movement."

Withheld you say? Are you quite sure about that!

For instance, can we be absolutely sure that the BBC didn't know Mark Kennedy was a police officer way before Mark was outed as a cop. For instance, could it be possible that Mark was, in fact, passing information to the BBC on a whole range of actions as-well as his handlers at NSY as far back as 2005...for instance!

Can we be absolutely sure...of the BBC's independence?

A none moose.

Exit strategies

10.01.2011 23:52

A huge amount of money went into Mark's role as an undercover shit. I'm sure he was very well-trained in exit strategies or, what to do if he got found out. One of these might be to tearfully implicate others to sow dissent, another might be to continue the contact, to keep the rifts open and the sense of hurt and betrayal alive. He could keep the damaging effect of his betrayal going for years (He'll write a book next and then there will be the film). If we let him.
While we are still discussing him, we are arguing among ourselves. We're all going to have slightly differing opinions on how things might have been done differently but surely we are strongly united in knowing he is a lying, worthless nothing. Don't let's play into his manipulative hands any further.


Cops for garters!

11.01.2011 00:03

"We're all going to have slightly differing opinions on how things might have been done differently but surely we are strongly united in knowing he is a lying, worthless nothing."

And then there are, of course, those who had nothing to do with it and were busy campaigning against the wars instead of titting about chasing non-existent windmills!

War, cuts, nepotism, globalism, resource wars and mass murder. Is there something in these subjects that isn't worthy of your attention? I.E is the fact we are facing savage poverty while the wars continue not something that is important to ya?

Learn lessons, get over it and return to the matter at hand. Leave the hysterics to the elite.



11.01.2011 00:30

The people that exposed him had nothing whatsoever to do with the recent media storm. They agreed not to talk to the media and none of them have talked to him or the media since the story broke.

The people that have are the people involved in the climate trial (which is their choice as it's their case) and it's nothing to do with us. All recordings and documents seen have been ones they've got.

Stop speculating, and stop with the mad fantasies that people are hiding important things from you.

Harry Robert's aunt


11.01.2011 00:37

Regardless of what we might think about the way people have handled the whole thing, genuine and serious activists wouldn't be throwing hissy fits and slagging off other activists like some of the people on this thread have.

Those people must either be fucking stupid, unaware of the damage it can cause and the pleasure it inevitably gives the filfth, or they're coppers or other trollsters trying to shit stir.

Like someone's already said, discuss it through the appropriate communication channels.

Too much of this kind of shit. This site is for news. Get it sorted!



11.01.2011 00:42

NOBODY in the press (including IMC) have been shown any documents...they have just heard about their existence and the reasons why they can't be disclosed, as was told to the anarchist bookfair meeting. They imply they've seen them to make themselves look good. They haven't.

He admitted it. The met admitted it. Nobody needs any fucking documents!!!!!


Yeah, sickening

11.01.2011 11:38

"How fucking sickening to see the BBC were trusted with documents and evidence withheld from the movement."

Simple answer: THEY WEREN'T. I have heard a rumour the BBC have a staff of more than three and may have a couple of quid in the piggy bank. They just might be able to get hold of a document such as police-generated fake passport without any of us giving it to them. Hard to believe, I know, but it just might be achievable, you know.

As for "continuing protection". I asked above WHO is protecting him, WHAT FROM and HOW?. No answer. Just more destructive smears and bullshit based on no facts at all.

What are you trying to achieve? You seem determined to provide the consolation of "disruption" to the cops in what is otherwise a hefty and satisfying kick up their blue serged arse.

P.S. My previous criticism of people agreeing to go on Newsnight was reinforced by the actual event. Dire and unrepresentative. Did us no good at all. The issues raised and political points made should have been left to lawyers and uninvolved (probably liberal) campaigners about policing and state power.


Please watch what you say

11.01.2011 12:19

This site is where most of the information in the mainstream media is coming from. The right wing press and tabloids especially are taking quotes straight from what you give away. Don't talk shit here because it's giving tabloids juicy info to follow up and research, which they are doing with vigour!!! by talking shit on here YOU are talking to the press..stop it.



11.01.2011 12:32

There were moments on Newsnight when the cops seemed to be about to say something interesting but Kirsty Wark cut them off. She always does that, she doesn't listen to the people she interviews and wants to do most of the talking in interviews to appear more intelligent than she is. She's an establishment tool, a family friend of former Scottish First Minister Jack McConnell who holidays with him. The activist wasn't too bad imo, she appeared soft and harmless and upperclass which is ideal to appeal to the the establishment viewers, but yeah, you would've been better off with a lawyer or someone from Liberty prepared to ask serious questions. I cringed when she couldn't differentiate between Kennedy as either a 'camp follower' or an agent provacteur.