Overview
  • For more see Theft of Deceased Children’s Identities in the thematic pages.

Many undercover officers, particularly with the Special Demonstration Squad (SDS), stole the identity of a dead child as the basis for their cover identity. This is one of the topics of investigation by the Inquiry. It was estimated by Operation Herne that the cover identities of around 42 SDS officers were based on those stolen from deceased children.

A number of families of the deceased children are core participants in the Inquiry, and given their own category: F.

As part of its investigation, the Inquiry issued a public notice in November 2016, calling on those who thought their children’s identities had been used in this way to come forward by 22 December 2016. However, without identifying the officers likely to have used this tradecraft, it was not considered an effective exercise as it was limited to only those undercovers whose cover names had already been confirmed by activists. 

At that time, the Inquiry had yet to go through the anonymity orders and publish the cover names of the undercovers. The Inquiry did later tell a number of other families that their dead child’s identity had been stolen and used in this way, and some were designated core participants as a result.

The fifth procedural hearing of the Undercover Policing Inquiry (22 June 2016) focused on the legal issues and obligations in relation to the identities of dead children which had been stolen and used by undercover police as part of their cover and to enhance their legend. In particular, the hearing was to determine:

whether the use of a deceased child’s identity by a police service should be disclosed and, if so, in what circumstances.

The discussion was mostly technical in nature, covering legal issues around data protection, what rights next-of-kin had to be informed their relative’s identity had been stolen and used (including that the Inquiry was proactive in reaching out to affected families rather than waiting to be contacted), and how next-of-kin was defined. 

The hearing also touched on a circumstance in which the Inquiry wanted to place a restriction order over the cover identity of an undercover, and how that impacted on the rights of affected relatives. Known as the ‘Restricted Family’, they are prevented from revealing their identity publicly as that could lead to the identification of the officer.

Prior to the establishment of the Inquiry, the issue was addressed by the Home Affairs Select Committee as part of its 2013 investigation into the issue. In its critical report, it wrote:

The practice of "resurrecting" dead children as cover identities for undercover police officers was not only ghoulish and disrespectful, it could potentially have placed bereaved families in real danger of retaliation. The families who have been affected by this deserve an explanation and a full and unambiguous apology from the forces concerned. We would also welcome a clear statement from the Home Secretary that this practice will never be followed in future.

Category F Core Participants

In the Inquiry, the core participants in this category are:

  • Barbara Shaw (deceased); mother of Rod Richardson whose identity was taken by NPOIU undercover HN596/EN32.  Ms Shaw died in 2021 and Rod’s sister Emma Richardson was designated core participant in her place. This was the subject of a police inquiry known as Operation Riverwood.
  • Lewis family – family of Anthony Lewis whose identity was taken in part by HN78 Tevor Morris / ‘Anthony “Bobby” Lewis’.
  • Faith Mason – mother of Neil Robin Martin whose identity was taken in part by HN122 ‘Neil Richardson’.
  • Frank Bennett and Honor Robson – siblings of Michael Hartley whose identity was taken by HN12.
  • Liisa Crossland and Mark Crossland – stepmother and brother of Kevin John Crossland whose name was appropriated by HN16 James Thomson (also known as ‘James Straven’).
  • The Restricted Family – “bereaved relatives of a child who died and whose name was appropriated by an officer deployed by the SDS. The Restricted Family have been required to participate in this Inquiry anonymously by reason of a Restriction Order covering their own identities as well as that of the deceased child and officer who appropriated the identity”.

Also in this category are two individuals:

  • RCDA
  • Gordon Peters

It is unknown if their children had their identities stolen by undercovers. Accordingly:

They want to know whether the identities of their deceased children were appropriated as part of the practice of the SDS and/or NPOIU. Although not carrying formal CP status, they have been accepted as having a “close and personal interest” in this aspect of the Inquiry’s investigation.

All the families are represented by Jules Carey of Bindmans Solicitors.

Speakers at hearing of 22 June 2016
  • David Barr KC, for the Undercover Policing Inquiry
  • Heather Williams, for Families of Deceased Individuals (Category F)
  • Jonathan Hall KC, for the Metropolitan Police
  • Ben Brandon, for Slater & Gordon

Transcripts

Title
Hearing Day
Index
Transcript of UCPI Procedural Hearing 5: Use of Deceased Children’s Identities

Procedural

Date
Title
Document Type
Topic
Police and NSCPs – Core Participants (Ruling 1)
Ruling
Core participants, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Core Participants – Recognised Legal Representatives (Ruling 1)
Ruling
Core participants, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Directions on restriction order approach and deceased children’s identities (Direction 4)
Direction
Restriction order approach, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
NSCPs – Cost of Legal Representation Awards (Ruling 6)
Ruling
Core participants, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural), Costs
NSCPs – Recognised Legal Representatives (Ruling 6)
Ruling
Core participants, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
CTI – Note on the principles applicable to disclosure of deceased children’s identities (Note 1)
Counsel note
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
MPS – Submissions on principles re deceased children’s identities
Submissions
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
NPCC – Submissions on the principles applicable to the disclosure of deceased children’s identities
Submissions
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Home Office – Skeleton argument re disclosure of deceased children’s identities
Submissions
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Category F – Submissions re principles applicable to disclosure of deceased children’s identities
Submissions
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Directions for submissions and hearing on issue of deceased children’s identities
Direction
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
CTI – Further note on the principles applicable to disclosure of deceased children’s identities (Note 2)
Counsel note
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
NCA – Submissions re principles applicable to the disclosure of deceased children’s identities
Submissions
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
MPS – Further submissions re principles applicable to to disclosure of deceased children’s identities
Submissions
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Category F – Skeleton argument on disclosure of the use of deceased children’s identities
Submissions
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Operational note for hearing of 22 June 2016
Operational Note
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Press Notice: background – 22 June Preliminary Hearing
Press Notice
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Transcript of UCPI Procedural Hearing 5: Use of Deceased Children’s Identities
Transcript
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Disclosure of deceased children’s identities (Ruling)
Ruling
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Note in respect of disclosure of deceased children’s identities: Ruling of 14 July 2016
Overview Note
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Press Notice: Ruling in respect of disclosure of deceased children’s identities
Press Notice
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Second Communications Update Note
Update
Core participants, Anonymity, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural), Restriction order approach
Public notice relating to the use of the identities of deceased children by police officers for undercover purposes
Consultation
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Question and Answer sheet for those contacting the Inquiry re deceased children’s identities
To accompany the public notice issued on 2 November 2016 relating to the use of deceased children’s identities of by police officers for undercover purposes
General
Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Two Year Update
Update
Assurance, Core participants, Anonymity, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural), Miscarriages of Justice, Costs
Press Notice: Cover names - Peter Francis
Providing cover identites: ‘Peter Johnson’, ‘Peter Daley’ and ‘Peter Black’.
Press Notice
Anonymity, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
NSCPs – Core Participants (Ruling 20)
Ruling
Core participants, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Francis Bennett, Honor Robson (NSCP) – legal representation and costs rulings
Recognised Legal Representatives (Ruling 17) & Costs of Legal Representation Awards (Ruling 16)
Ruling
Core participants, Costs, Legal Representation, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
NSCPs – Core Participants (Ruling 21)
Ruling
Core participants, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
NSCPs – Recognised Legal Representatives (Ruling 18) and Costs of Legal Representation Awards (Ruling 17)
Ruling
Core participants, Costs, Legal Representation, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Press Notice: HN16’s cover names released
Press Notice
Anonymity, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Bea, Jenny, Faith Mason (NSCPs) – Rulings on core participancy, legal representation and costs
Core Participants (Ruling 31), Recognised Legal Representatives (Ruling 25), Costs of Legal Representation Awards (Ruling 24)
Ruling
Core participants, Costs, Legal Representation, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Family of Anthony Lewis (NSCPs) – Rulings on core participancy, legal representation and costs
Core Participants (Ruling 36), Recognised Legal Representatives (Ruling 30), Costs of Legal Representation Awards (Ruling 29)
Ruling
Core participants, Costs, Legal Representation, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
Category F (NSCP) – Submissions for Procedural Hearing of 26 January 2021
Submissions
Conduct of evidence hearings
NSCPs and Police – Rulings re core participancy, legal representation and costs
Core Participants (Ruling 42), Recognised Legal Representatives (Ruling 34), Costs of Legal Representation Awards (Ruling 33)
Ruling
Core participants, Costs, Legal Representation, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)
The Restricted Family (NSCP) – core participancy, legal representation and costs ruling
Core Participants (Ruling 46), Recognised Legal Representatives (Ruling 38), Costs of Legal Representation Awards (Ruling 35)
Ruling
Core participants, Costs, Legal Representation, Deceased Children’s Identities (procedural)

References

Author(s)
Title
Publisher
Year
Paul Lewis, Rob Evans
Police spies stole identities of dead children
The Guardian
Home Affairs Committee - Undercover Policing: Interim Report (Thirteenth Report of Session 2012-2013)
Parliament.UK
Paul Lewis, Rob Evans
Met chief sorry for police spies using dead children's identities
The Guardian
Operation Riverwood (complaint of Barbara Shaw re UCO 'Rod Richardson')
Metropolitan Police Service