HN91

From Powerbase
Revision as of 20:37, 15 July 2018 by Peter Salmon (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{Undercover_Police_Officer_sidebar|Name='HN72'|Alias=unknown|Series=undercover police officers|Image=Male_silhouette.png |Unit=Special Demonstration Squad|DatesDeployed=short...")
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search


URG logo 1.png

This article is part of the Undercover Research Portal at Powerbase - investigating corporate and police spying on activists



Part of a series on
undercover police officers
'HN72'
Male silhouette.png
Alias: unknown
Deployment: short period in 'last period' of the SDS
Unit:
Targets:
two groups, unknown

HN92 is the cipher given to a former undercover officer with the Special Demonstration Squad who was deployed against two groups in the 'last period of existence of the SDS'.[1]

In the Undercover Policing Inquiry

  • 19 April 2018: directed that applications for HN91 were to be filed by 24 April 2018 by MPS legal team, or 27 April for the Designated Lawyers team.[2]
  • 21 June 2018: Application over real and cover name made which the Chair of the Inquiry, John Mitting, is minded to grant.[3] Open material to be published in due course to allowing responses to Mitting's position.[4] In his 'Minded To' note, Mitting wrote:[1]
HN91 was deployed against two groups in the last period of existence of the Special Demonstration Squad. None f the members of the target groups posed or pose a threat to the safety of HN91. But for the factor referred to below, I would not have made a restriction order in respect of the cover name. Evidence about the deployments must be received to permit the Inquiry to fulfil its terms of reference. Some, at least, of it will have to be given in closed session.
HN91 is a serving police officer, performing a valuable and sensitive role. If the cover name were to be published, there is a high risk that the real identity would be disclosed, in which event, HN91 could not continue to perform current duties. The risk of disclosure, by itself, would be likely to lead senior officers to transfer HN91 to other duties. It would not be in the public interest that this should occur. That interest outweighs the interests of the Inquiry in receiving public evidence about all aspects of the deployments of HN91.
Publication of the real name of HN91 is, in any event, not required to permit the Inquiry to fulfil its terms of reference.

There was also a closed note accompanying this.

Notes