Oops! It appears that you have disabled your Javascript. In order for you to see this page as it is meant to appear, we ask that you please re-enable your Javascript!

The High Court in London was asked to rule on a case brought by a woman known as ‘Monica.’

undercover police sex
Royal Courts of Justice, London, UK

The background to the case was a former undercover police officer, Boyling, was a member of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS) Special Demonstration Squad which had a team of up to ten officers that infiltrated political groups in full-time undercover roles for many years at a time. He had infiltrated the environmental group Reclaim the Streets during the 1990s and is also alleged to have had sexual relationships with other women during his deployment besides ‘Monica.’

The judges said Monica’s lawyers had contended for a ‘substantial leap’ in the definition of consent, and “it would be wrong for such a fundamental change in the understanding of consent to be brought about by judges rather than the legislature.”

I wholeheartedly agree.

What Boyling, and others, did is beyond the pale. It has no place in undercover policing. Having a relationship is bad enough, but fathering children and living as a ‘normal couple’ is frankly disgusting. However, it does not amount to rape owing to a lack of consent.

Some may argue that the deception vitiates the consent. But that’s the point. That argument takes matters too far and as the High Court said, ““it would be wrong for such a fundamental change in the understanding of consent to be brought about by judges rather than the legislature”.

Reclaim The Streets was a protest group. I have always maintained the police have no right in infiltrating such groups as long as they are not violent or a real threat to society. There is enough ‘real crime’ out there to justify infiltration by undercover officers. 

You may read the full article here.

%d bloggers like this: