Stephen Lawrence’s father Neville delivers open letter to Amber Rudd over spy cop who spied on campaigners & Labour MPs


Neville Lawrence and other victims of an undercover police officer who infiltrated and spied on murdered teen Stephen Lawrence’s family delivered a letter to Amber Rudd today, demanding that their concerns are listened to, and changes made, in the Undercover Policing Inquiry.

Stephen Lawrence’s father was among a group of core participants in the inquiry delivering the letter at lunchtime today, to the Home Office in Marsham Street. They are demanding to an increasing amount of secrecy over the role of “skycops” who spied with impunity and little oversight on campaigners including the family of Stephen Lawrence and even Labour MPs.

They included Dr Neville Lawrence OBE and Sharon Grant OBE, as well as two of the women deceived into long-term relationships with undercover officers, ‘Alison’ and ‘Andrea’.

The letter asks Rudd to reconsider the appointment of additional panel members to this Inquiry, and to ensure increased disclosure of information to us, the ‘core participants’.

We are frustrated about the seeming shift towards secrecy, away from the open-ness and transparency promised in the past.
Previous letters have gone unanswered for months, and we are not satisfied by the answers we’ve had so far. We have asked Rudd to respond to this one within twenty one days (ie by Tuesday 15th May).

Sharon Grant OBE said today: “Three years have passed since Peter Francis disclosed that Bernie and other Labour MPs were spied upon and yet I am still no closer to knowing who carried out that spying, who authorised it and why they did it.

A considerable amount of money has been spent on this inquiry as officers argue for their identities to be withheld but all of that will be wasted if this inquiry fails only for another inquiry to be established under a future government.

Most of the MPs spied upon were Labour MPs, many of the campaigns Bernie worked on focussed on anti-racism and exposing police misconduct and I fear this Conservative Home Secretary has a vested interest in shielding the truth from public scrutiny.

I am becoming increasingly disappointed, exhausted and mistrustful and unless a panel of experts is appointed I have little faith in the Inquiry identifying how institutional racism and political bias impacted upon police spying operations. Without such a panel – similar to the one which was so effective in the Macpherson Inquiry – the Undercover Policing Inquiry will likely obscure further what it was meant to open up to public gaze.

I therefore call on the Home Secretary to do the right thing and appoint a panel without delay.”

This was echoed by ‘Alison’, who spent five years living with a man she knew as ‘Mark Cassidy’, finally confirmed by both the Inquiry and the Metropolitan Police Service as Mark Jenner, aka ‘HN15’:

“It’s obvious to core participants that at the heart of this inquiry are the politics of race, sex and class. If we’re ever to get to the bottom of what’s been allowed to happen with undercover political policing in this country, we need an inquiry led by people with sensitivity, experience and real understanding of these issues”

“The Inquiry needs a panel of advisers who have sufficient expertise and diversity to be able to recognise and challenge sexism, racism and police malpractice. As a priority, it should release the cover names of all officers and the files they compiled on activists and campaigners. It should release the names of all groups about whom information was gathered.

If those who have abused their power are to be held to account and the scale of political spying in this country is to be exposed, the Home Secretary needs to act. It is in the public interest for this Inquiry to have the confidence of its core participants. Without transparency, how can the extent of the wrong-doing be understood? How can lessons be learned? And most importantly, how can human rights abuses perpetrated by covert police units be prevented in the future?”

‘Andrea’, who is still waiting for the Inquiry to release the real name of ‘Carlo Neri’, the officer who infiltrated her life and even proposed marriage to her, said:

“We have lost faith in the Chair and do not believe he can continue to lead this Inquiry alone. We believe that there needs to be a panel appointed with the relevant expertise to investigate thoroughly what has happened, not just one judge. We are especially concerned, as victims of institutional sexism, that Sir John Mitting’s recent comments on relationships have shown him to be desperately out of touch.”

Dr Neville Lawrence OBE was also in attendance said: “I have grave concerns about how Chairman Mitting has been handling the anonymity applications by police officers, consistently granting them anonymity after hearing evidence behind closed doors and disclosing almost nothing to the lawyers representing the victims of police spying. Even senior officers who could give evidence about whether my family or I were spied upon have been granted anonymity, meaning they will give their evidence behind closed doors, shrouded in secrecy.

“This completely undermines my hopes for this Inquiry when it was set up after Mark Ellison QC made his findings. In 2014, the then Home Secretary, Theresa May, said only a public inquiry will be able to get through the full truth behind the matters of huge concern contained in Mr Ellison’s report. This is starting to look like anything but a public inquiry.

“If I do not have the cover names of people who were involved in undercover spying operations, I have no way of knowing for myself whether my family, my friends and I were victims and I will be unable to assist the Inquiry in getting to the truth. The Inquiry will be unable to consider anything except the views of the police whose actions they are investigating.

“I feel that Chairman Mitting is so far removed from the experiences of those who have been victims of undercover policing that he should recognise the need to sit with a panel of experts. His recent comments in court reveal that he just doesn’t get it, and in my view, there is a risk that this will lead to an unfairness to the victims. I call upon the Home Secretary to reconsider her decision not to require the Chair to sit with a panel, as has been requested time and time again by the lawyers for the victims of police spying, or to recuse himself.”


Notorious spycop at the centre of Stephen Lawrence Inquiry is finally revealed. Now can we tackle state racism?

Brexit has given people license to be openly racist, says mother of murdered teenager Stephen Lawrence

Since you’re here …

Real, independent, investigative journalism is in alarming decline. It costs a lot to produce. Many publications facing an uncertain future can no longer afford to fund it. This means journalists are losing the ability to hold the rich and powerful to account.

We do not charge or put articles behind a paywall. If you can, please show your appreciation for our free content by donating whatever you think is fair to help keep TLE growing.

Every penny we collect from donations supports vital investigative and independent journalism. You can also help us grow by inviting your friends to follow us on social media.

Donate Now Button

2 Responses

  1. richard

    Hello Joe

    What do you feel about the National Crime Agency safehousing the mercenary child rapist twins the Parkers of Nuneaton during MacPherson Inquiry ? At a time Jack Straw, to the knowledge of the Lawrence team, was suppressing inquiry called for by Kent Police Authority that would have included questions around Det sgt John Davidson ?

    Why did the Lawrences keep quiet ?

    What connection with Stephen Lawrence did the Richardson ex crime family have … possibly by knowing him or of him at his school and at Cambridge Harriers ?

    What information did the Richardsons send week one of murder inquiry via their envoy the Cornerstone property management manager (Ex Royal Military Police) ?

    Was Lee Jasper and IRA supportive SWP telling the truth in the two years prior to murder about white supremacist BNP youth gangs ? Or did they invent the stories for racist purposes ?

    Why was a white youth restraining Duwayne Brookes arm in the melee caused by the two black youths colliding with five white youths trial witnesses said were running for the bus ?

    Why is the BBC still showing “Re-enactment based on a narrative of the time that has been discredited by trial testimony ?

    What information did Richardsons send to Lambeth paedo and fraud inquiry and was this before or after Driscoll was sacked off the inquiry in disgrace ?

    The undercover police inquiry was not going sainted Doreens way and the Lawrences are running now wanting a final word. I am querying whether Gary Dobson has been given cat D or cat C D in secret as a persuader not to appeal. While the Lawrences abandon ship.

  2. richard

    Joe you published !! Like Tommy Robinson says the freedom of speech you protect the most is that of the folk you disagree with the most.

    In 1971 I got a Home Office commendation as a rookie cop. It was for spotting and reporting mischievous research conducted on trainees by a Home Office sociologist. “Institutionalised racism” was a red herring concept used to test trainees for gullibility and malleability and concept compliance. I did not get far before I was not a cop

    I am an officially called witness to NCA Stephen Lawrence case corruption inquiry. I am unable to tell you why because I dunno. It seems to be to do with arrests of UDA drugs pushers and hit men Margate by RCS 1992 which led to the Norris murder trial 1993 which bizarrely was source of the Lawrence murder team from Day 6 of the trial of UDA. Senior detectives were on high security trial duties.

    Of course IRA ally Mandela with his undeclared UDA interest was due to visit just in time to create unlawful political pressure for arrests of the Lawrence team selected white men. So St Georges Day time of annum and 25th anniversary Enoch Powell speech. Hence the Windrush shenanigans, the 50th anniversary of Powell speech and the creation of a Stephen Lawrence day idea on 25th anniversary of his killing all crop up together 47 years after a Home Office sociologist trialled “Institutionalised racism” as a product that might be marketed by boosting it from myth to bogus reality by mass hysteria … the Lawrence case.

    All was going swimmingly for the myth manipulating team until someone mentioned at two trials Det sgt Davidson’s 1995 had not been fully disclosed to defences. And complaint had been made to CPS who put their head of organised crime on the task (why her I dunno) she wrote to NCA and Met. Then Met went public with more adverse evidence that had been hidden from two trials. A womans bag strap and CCTV footage of a man who was not Gary Dobson and whose distinctive jacket was not Gary Dobson’s jacket.

    Then it was suggested to CPS they should regard the forensics scientist history, as adverse for mandatory disclosure whose team found the miracle blood spot on Gary Dobson jacket, which is not the jacket seen at Lawrence murder scene. This was Roy Green the scientist discredited in blood spatter evidence at Hutton Inquiry ?

    When it comes to Det sgt Davidsons 1995 disciplinary CPS and NCA and Met were asked who was source of moonlight bodyguard work on plod time to the Det sgt ? And of course he was a man on whom in 1997 Kent Police Authority called for inquiry and report. As that inquiry was being suppressed by Jack Straw what did uninvestigated man do ? Well he contributed information to Dr Kelly’s mate Toma Mangold’s book on WMD. And the Lawrences (Fighters for justice my arse) kept quiet presumably because ignoring mercenary murders of black folk in Mandela regime and ignoring WMD stories and Det Davidson disciplinaries was suiting the black racist cause being championed by MacPherson.

    Yer Attorney General as MacPherson progressed got a week problem. Blood sample tampering allegations against Kent Police in a Margate Police custody death case. At time Kent Plod had custody of Lawrence case forensics to conduct MacPherson Inquiry and at time CIB3 Yates of the Yard was investigating Davidson

    So the attorney general ordered nowt in writing and HM Coroner Thanet sacked herself in the case and the Dover HM Coroner held a complete new inquest thus avoiding a planned appeal on the blood tampering issue by whatever means.

    And the secrecy actions of Labour attorney general were not disclosed as adverse fact at the 2012 trial. The exhibits integrity of Kent Police in the Lawrence evidence handling chain was protected during MacPherson by a secrecy order of Labour Attorney General. Ask Doreen or her mate Ros Howells or her solicitor Imran Khan or her brief (British Irish Rights Watch) Mickey Mansfield.

    The bag strap ? Has it been investigated to see if it is property of a white woman attacked by six blacks at Lewisham earlier that day (Allegedly) Did the six blacks split to 3 pairs ? Was one pair followed ? And was justice for the alleged rape quickly exacted ?

    The CCTV image has it been checked as an exact match to a man Kent Police Authority wanted interviewed in 1997.

Leave a Reply