Skip to content or view screen version

PC Mark Kennedy sold services to E-ON via Global Open

7 July 1969 | 12.01.2011 11:53 | Climate Chaos | Energy Crisis | Repression

Story pulled from mainstream media in damage limitation exercise

This story,

Undercover-eco-warrior-PC-Mark-Kennedy-sold-services-E-ON

 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1346303/Undercover-eco-warrior-PC-Mark-Kennedy-sold-services-E-ON-police-force.html

which appears to confirm E.on were one of the clients of Global Open, has been PULLED by the Daily Mail!

It appears nowhere now! Is this the confirmation that E.on were one of the companies that have been identified as paying Mark Kennedy's wages? Are they worried about reprisals?

If so, lets attack E.on and research all the other companies that keep Global Open running - for the purpose of disturbing their 'daily business' - ruining and exploiting our lives.







7 July 1969

Comments

Hide 1 hidden comment or hide all comments

another Mail story about how Mark Kennedy sexually violated activists

12.01.2011 13:07

 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1346432/Did-married-police-spy-use-sex-infiltrate-climate-group-Activist-felt-violated-relationship-undercover-officer.html

There was a cop recently sentenced to life for rape for having sex with vulnerable people he met in his job. This isn't that much different - a public servant with a duty of care to the public abusing his position to get sexual favours? If I were Mark Kennedy I would be shitting myself right now.

anon


another pic of Mark Kennedy

12.01.2011 13:11

undercover cop Mark Kennedy
undercover cop Mark Kennedy

here is another picture of Mark Kennedy from the Mail

anon


Feed back loop

12.01.2011 14:08

steady on guys the Daily Hiel is the least reliable of the full of lies “mainstream” press.

Its entirely possible that their source is in-fact indymedia this was being suggested on here last night.

Now i'm not saying that the research into the SkumFucks at Global Open is not usefull stuff or that it seems probable that Mark shithead Kennedy moved to them.

but the mail is NEVER a reliable source EVER.

@rchie


Keep to the facts

12.01.2011 15:03

"There was a cop recently sentenced to life for rape for having sex with vulnerable people he met in his job. This isn't that much different - a public servant with a duty of care to the public abusing his position to get sexual favours? If I were Mark Kennedy I would be shitting myself right now."

I thought that consensual sex wasn't rape. The cop who was jailed for rape didn't have consensual sex with his victims. He coerced vulnurable addicts into sex they didn't want - rape. Mark Kennedy didn't do that. There is enough on him without talking rubbish that diminishes what real rape is and what the survivors go through.

Saying that, the poster has one thing right. Mark Kennedy and all other undercovers and grasses should be bricking it.

No BS


@No BS - consent = reasonable consent

12.01.2011 17:26

It's not bullshit and it is not demeaning the offence of rape to describe this sort of misbehaviour as rape in my opinion. Consent means informed consent, a decision made knowing all the relevant and important facts.
In Scottish law at least rape is currently defined in statute by the lack of “reasonable consent". I don't feel it is reasonable for any professional organisation to entrap protestors into coitus using institutionised deception. Until recently this case would have, or rather should have, been prosecuted as the wholly appropriate charge of “clandestine injury”, but this charge was dropped in favour of the single charge of rape as it was being used by rapists to escape prosecution where no force was used.

If a confidence trickster defrauds you out of your money under false pretenses then it is still a crime of theft even if you consent to handing over the money without force of violence. No in the mainstream media or the judiciary argue that the victim is at fault or that no foul was committed. This was a far greater fraud and a far more damaging crime and yet it is being excused by the media and ignored by the judiciary because it was a policeman who committed the crime. Worse than that, the crime was and is official police policy.

There are numerous other legal examples where similar dishonesty than this would result in a long prison sentence. Sexual behaviour can lead to injury and death, never mind persuading people to take risky actions such as climbing cooling towers. Where someone has consensual sex with a partner who does not disclose their HIV status or similar then the partner will be imprisoned.

This crime is closer to that level of decption rather than the various pundits quotes currently in newspaper forums, claiming that everyone tells lies to have sex with a potential partner, it's not like claiming you have a big bank account or remarkable technique, it is serious, criminal fraud.

In extremis, if a doctor removed your organ to sell as a transplant by falsely telling you it was diseased, this would not just be misconduct, it would be a crime regardless of whether you had signed a consent form. If you shouted 'Fire' into a crowded theatre, you would be prosecuted for any resultant deaths although you never forced anyone to panic and trample each other.

Apart from everything else, these police officers are guilty of prostitution, and their employers are guilty of the same offences any madame would be charged with. And if the courts and politicians won't act to uphold justice against these police scum, then the people have a common law duty to punish them. Now I am not knowledgeable about this case and don't think we should be discussing it too much, this is my first and last comment on this thread, but I think you are wrong to underplay the criminal behaviour of Mark Kennedy purely in the sexual misconduct aspect of this. You don't need to use violence to rape someone.

Danny


definitely violation

13.01.2011 10:06

whether or not rape is the right word to use or not, and I think that's just a semantic argument (ie it depends on how you define the word) his sexual partners, especially his long term partner have all been violated. He was a sleazy bloke who despite allegedly being married couldn't believe his luck at being asked to infiltrate a scene where 'open' relationships were common.

denis o'neil


Doesn't sound like rape to me.

13.01.2011 12:37

For it to be rape it would have had to be at least coercive with at least implied force/blackmail. Consent was apparently given with no such threat.

If an individual was unable to "reason" the person they were consenting to have sex with could possibly be a bald faced liar then the person would clinically fail the mental competency test and by that measure it would actually be rape.

Otherwise, by the same measure, a cheating partner would become a rapist. A gay man in a sham marriage a rapist, anyone who lied about what they do for a living would be a rapist.

An Arab who has sex pretending to be a Jew is apparently a rapist. But I don't think that case precedent squares with any sane notion of justice, but I think it is an identical 'reasoning'.

 http://www.newstatesman.com/blogs/the-staggers/2010/07/arab-rape-guilty-jew

You would have an easier time arguing that he broke trading standards law.

If there was no force, no blackmail, no competency issue nor age issue, then it was a disgusting and sickening violation for sure, but not rape.

But don't do rape a disservice by belittling it with shrill overclaim, as false claims help nobody but damage everybody.

Helping Nobody


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 View From The Grassy Knoll

13.01.2011 14:00

In recent days the media have been fixated with the tale of Mark ‘Flash’ Stone (real name Mark Kennedy), the undercover cop who for seven years infiltrated the environmental movement, and who supposedly ended up supporting the movement he was helping to destroy. This Hollywoodesque portrait of Kennedy as some downmarket Donnie Brascoe has appealed to lazy hacks out for a juicy story and denied contact with everyone involved except for a few low-rent media whores and outright traitors. Yet the truth is very different.

The early part of the unmasking of ‘Mark Stone’ will be familiar to activists, or at least the bare bones of it will. He was infiltrated into the movement in 2003, moving to Nottingham, going to the Sumac Centre a few times, and then turning up at that year’s Earth First! Summer Gathering where he began to become known. Over the next seven years he became a main player in the UK environmental movement, going on numerous actions, attending conferences and gatherings, and generally making himself useful, primarily as a driver. He also infiltrated or attempted to infiltrate other movements, both here and abroad.

The sleeping policeman’s downfall came sometime last year when his long-term girlfriend within the movement found a passport in the name of Mark Kennedy, ‘Stone’s real name. The passport also contained the details of a child. Kennedy span an elaborate tale to account for the find, which his girlfriend appeared to accept. Eventually though she spoke to friends about it, and after an investigation traced a birth certificate for the child which gave his father’s occupation as “police officer” (as his paternal grandfather had been) a rather disparate bunch of friends, six in all, confronted their erstwhile comrade. The undercover cop had obviously been trained in how to act if his cover was blown, and after his excuses fell on deaf ears, he burst into tears, seeking the sympathy of those he had so thoroughly betrayed.

The group questioned Kennedy; primarily about themselves it seems, but also about another suspected undercover cop, formerly based in Leeds. Controversially, Kennedy confirmed that she was part of the same unit. How long the questioning went on we do not know because the fruits of it, if there are any, have not been shared with the movement. Kennedy was allowed to go on his way unharmed.

In fact, far from being harmed or intimidated, immediately following the encounter, Kennedy was still so clear-headed, that he telephoned another long-term partner, who the Group of Six had failed to warn, confessed his occupation, and drove some distance with the aim of seeing her. She is merely one of many women within the movement who Kennedy exploited and betrayed during his seven years undercover.

Within days of Kennedy’s ‘outing’, a short piece appeared on Indymedia making his true identity public. There was also a photo of him wearing a large hat which covered his forehead, hair, and ears. This was later supplemented by a second photo, though this seems to have been regarded by many Indymedia posters as little better than the first. Among the incredulity, shock, and disbelief in the 174 comments (plus many more that were ‘hidden’, or censored, by Indymedia moderators) which followed the post were numerous requests for more information and better photos, requests that were for the most part met by irritation by the cognoscenti and their allies.

While many of the close friends and comrades of Stone/Kennedy, outside of the Group of Six, were in fact offered very little forewarning, support, or protection, there was much talk, both on the net and at a well-attended Anarchist Bookfair meeting, about protecting “those closest to him” and about the need for “security” (a bit like closing the barn door after the pig has already bolted). It appears to have been understood by many however, that further information about Kennedy would be made publically available, not least to ensure that his career as an undercover cop really was well and truly over. If assurances were made, as has been claimed, those assurances were broken, no more information has been provided to the movement by the Group of Six, and information posted to Indymedia by others has been subject to censorship at their direction.

Kennedy had lived at several addresses in Nottingham (and obviously elsewhere as a cop), but at the time of his fall from grace he was living on a canal barge he had bought at the beginning of 2010. The boat, called Tamarisk (of which there are several registered narrow boats), was moored close to Nottingham, and in lieu of Kennedy himself, was an obvious target for those he had betrayed. Members of the Group of Six, or others very close to them, apparently assured other activists that the boat would be dealt with. Instead however, it was allowed to simply sail away, much like Kennedy himself. The name of the boat was only exposed as frustrated activists became more and more angry at the lack of any further information about Kennedy and one of them posted it to a heated Indymedia thread, in which the Group of Six were accused of ‘protecting’ Kennedy. That post was ‘hidden’ following a request on the Indymedia moderation list (received on 10th January 2011) from “some of the people directly involved” for any reference to Kennedy’s canal boat, even its very existence, to be expunged from Indymedia. Now why would they want to stop people finding out about Kennedy’s boat?

The only thing surprising about the recent explosion of coverage of the Stone/Kennedy affair is that it took so long to happen. The story first appeared in The Sunday Times on the 19th of December 2010, with a particularly nauseating political slant, and an even more nauseating photo of the (thankfully disbanded) Clown Army. The piece appeared to be largely culled from Indymedia, and was reasonably sympathetic to both Kennedy and to the wet-end of the environmental movement who had clearly planted the story. As with the avalanche of coverage which would come a few weeks later, one of the common themes was the utter worthlessness of the UK environmental movement in terms of infiltration, a slant on the story that appears to have come from the environmentalists themselves and that they would later shamelessly parrot endlessly for the bourgeois media. The cops it seems should have been focussing their resources on less ‘fluffy’ activists than these “hippies and tree-huggers”.

It was the second Ratcliffe-On-Soar trial, which led to the real media frenzy. The story was that a group of protestors had planned to invade and occupy a power station at Ratcliffe, and Kennedy had been a key-player, and arguably an agent provocateur, in the operation. Naturally the cops were tipped off, and swooped arresting 114 activists, and Kennedy, while they were discussing the action at a meeting in Nottingham. Charges were eventually dropped against most of those arrested, including Kennedy of course, with 26 going on to face trial. Despite their knowledge of Kennedy’s involvement, the first group of 20 chose to fight the case on the basis of climate change and an appeal to the liberal sensibilities of the jury, a principled stand which resulted in them all being convicted. Through their lawyer, the remaining six challenged the prosecution’s lack of disclosure regarding Kennedy, and were discharged before their trial could even begin.

Despite the media lie that would dominate coverage for days to come, the trial was NOT halted because Kennedy had offered to give evidence for the defence.
What had actually happened was that one of the 6 defendants, Dr Simon Lewis, an inveterate careerist and wealthy academic, but someone with a background in Reclaim The Streets, Earth First!, Dissent, and the Climate Camp (as well as a friend of Special Branch tout and Clown Army founder John Jordan), was so frightened of having his lucrative career damaged by an actual conviction that he contacted the cop, Kennedy, and appealed for his help, insisting that he never intended to go on any action in the first place (which to anyone who knows Lewis is entirely believable). In taped phone conversations which were later acquired by the BBC, Kennedy whines self-pityingly about how much he hates himself, before mumbling about possibly helping. This is as far as any help went. Kennedy’s assistance was of course not required anyway, it was his activities and the fact that they had not been disclosed that was important, not any assistance he might give to a grovelling sell-out like Lewis, someone who is happy to talk to cops to save his own skin.

The false story that the media seized on was that Kennedy had “gone native” and that the trial had collapsed because of his offer of help. It was a lie they were able to run with because of the assistance of traitors who have collaborated with the press, often they have been people who barely knew Kennedy personally. Either way, they have queued up to do the media’s bidding, with Simon Lewis’s posh girlfriend Sophie Stevens, an ‘activist’ with all the pedigree of a Hush Puppy, even appearing on Newsnight. While the media frenzy has been useful in terms of Steven’s CV, and the egos (and perhaps pockets) of the other media whores, the truth about Kennedy “going native” is that it has since transpired he is now working for a private security company.

Yet, despite its nauseating slants and untruths, many activists will have learned more from reading between the lines of the bourgeois media than they ever have from the supposed comrades who conducted the investigation into Kennedy and who have been steadfast in their refusal to disclose further photographs of him or any further information, including his whereabouts. While they may not have anything more to say to the movement, at least one of their number certainly had plenty to say to The Guardian.

Despite being an undercover cop, Kennedy’s vanity meant that he was always posing for photographs, there must be hundreds in existence, yet the Group of Six and their associates have repeatedly claimed they had none. Again, it’s funny how they were available to The Guardian.

Having been allowed to escape, Kennedy now supposedly lives abroad at a location known to the Group of Six, but which they have adamantly refused to disclose on the basis that Kennedy has a wife and teenage son who must be protected. This position is not only a dereliction of duty and an abuse of both power and of trust, but it is a vicious smear against the movement who they are implying are no better than TV gangsters. Such reactionary prejudice has at its basis the innate middle-class fear of ‘the other’, of the uncontrollable ‘mob’ who (in this case) cannot be trusted to deal responsibly and intelligently with information their betters hold safely in keeping. In this they have sided with a cop and with the state.

In the UK Mark Kennedy may have primarily engaged in political activity with ineffectual liberals, and indeed spent most of his time partying in the sleazy semi-retired eco-activist scene inhabited by those now protecting him, but he travelled widely, visiting 22 countries according to The Guardian, and in most of those countries he comported himself differently and mixed with a more militant class of activist. Some of those comrades certainly have more to lose than a few months on a probation order, yet they have been hung out to dry by a tiny clique of party-heads and one-time eco warriors in Nottingham. At the very least they deserve to know that Mark Kennedy is not living on the next street to them.

German activists recently uncovered their own undercover cop, it took them seven months rather than seven years, and the subsequent international press release contained as much information as they were able to gather, as well as excellent photographs. Kennedy spent long periods infiltrating German activist groups, and they are both shocked and astonished by the way things have been handled here. With questions being asked in the German parliament, they may eventually get more answers from the authorities than from their UK comrades.

Despite heavy censorship on Indymedia frustration among some activists is beginning to turn to anger, and the Group of Six have been accused of an unspoken agreement with Kennedy – That he would protect them as best he could, and that in return they would let him walk away, leave his boat alone, not post their archive of photographs and personal information to the net, and not disclose his whereabouts or those of his family. With every day such a theory becomes more compelling.

There is no doubt that Kennedy’s former close friends must be extremely distressed and traumatised by the events of the past six months, but those in the Group of Six have to realise that Kennedy’s activities have implications way beyond themselves, and that they need to behave with a sense of responsibility to the wider movement. Divesting themselves may also help take them towards closure in the affair, instead of prolonging it (by intervening on Indymedia for example). They did a good job in tracing Kennedy’s real identity, but it might then have been better to hand the matter over to other activists who were less emotionally involved. That they did not, and let Kennedy walk away, is unfortunately symptomatic of the middle-class ‘activist’, they never imagine that anyone might be better qualified than themselves. As for Kennedy, he should certainly not have got off so lightly.

Another preoccupation both of the press and of some activists has been how bad poor old Mark Kennedy (the cop who lied to those around him for seven years and betrayed his closest friends and comrades) must be feeling now. We neither care nor are interested. Kennedy supposedly spent his working days hanging from a rope, and we can only hope that one day justice finds him at the end of one.

The Boys from the Grassy Knoll


Hide 1 hidden comment or hide all comments