She'd have been very badly affected if she'd discovered his
>> ID being used my Mark Kennedy or one of the other's named recently in this
>> context.
Having lost a very young child, I'd be similarly minded. It bring back a lot of difficult memories about a very difficult time. I'd be wanting to meet the particular individual (in person) who thought it a good idea and then they can explain in person why they though it was a good idea.
>> >>but hardly a national scandal or against the law.
>>
>> Obviously they've got to play the role; getting stand offish about social activity would be
>> a give away. Flirting etc is perhaps OK, but no further. It seems to me
>> grossly immoral to be sleeping with subjects who you're supposed to be surveilling, never mind,
>> as at least one did, having a kid with them.
>>
That part of it, I'm not that fussed about. My issue would be who an earth thought it a good idea to have all these officers undercover for years, with god knows who many in support chasing around after what? A load of the professional protesters, drop outs and oddballs, who's greatest level of criminality is likely to be trespass, Breach of the peace etc.
Hardly ISIS are they?
>> It would be a disciplinary offence now. I agree though that it's not a place
>> criminal law needs to go.
Agreed, one for their priest not a judge.
|
