No sex please, I'm working undercover

  oresome 20:58 29 Oct 13
Locked

New rules will stop undercover officers having intimate relationships with people they are investigating, following concern over series of cases.

I appreciate that there is considerable disquiet over the revelation that officers formed relationships and even had children with those under surveillance, but this ruling will provide a means of easily flushing out anyone suspected of being an undercover officer.

Perhaps long term infiltration of activists by undercover officers will be made impossible as a result of the ruling which may be no bad thing considering the distress caused when the deception is revealed.

click here

  namtas 21:42 29 Oct 13

I don't follow your reasoning, how will this ruling provide an easy means of flushing out anyone of being an undercover officer ?

  Dragon_Heart 04:04 30 Oct 13

Working undercover ( even that has a double meaning in this instance ) requires you to act naturally. What's more natural than forming an intimate relationship with someone you are 'working' closely with ? If the undercover cop then shows what looks like ;cold feet; those under investigation may get suspicious.

ALSO

Police blocked from porn and gambling websites 2,700 times in just three months

  morddwyd 08:12 30 Oct 13

"how will this ruling provide an easy means of flushing out anyone of being an undercover officer ?"

If a major crime figure suspects someone is an undercover cop he gets one of his female staff to proposition him.

If he fails to take up the offer he dies.

Cops' lives are at risk from this stupid piece of political correctness.

  fourm member 10:13 30 Oct 13

morddwyd

I think you've been watching too much TV.

The cases that have brought about this involve police officers joining legal protest movements.

  finerty 16:04 30 Oct 13

I thought flack999 would be have inside inof on this matter

  Pine Man 16:55 30 Oct 13

I thought flack999 would be have inside inof on this matter

..and he's not the only one. It's absolute nonsense to suggest that to be an undercover officer you have to jump into be with the people you are keeping tabs on.

  oresome 17:13 30 Oct 13

I don't think it's nonsense for normal human behaviour to occur when infiltration of a group over months or even years takes place.

Indeed if it doesn't, it will raise suspicions amongst those being watched.

The morality of the situation is something else and I can see why it's causing a dilemma for the top brass.

  bumpkin 18:37 30 Oct 13

oresome, "I don't think it's nonsense for normal human behaviour to occur when infiltration of a group over months or even years takes place."

I agree with you on the above but having children with them for the purpose of an undercover operation must surely be wrong in my opinion.

  Flak999 18:41 30 Oct 13

finerty

'I thought flack999 would be have inside inof on this matter'

I'm intrigued! Why would you think that I would have any inside information?

  HondaMan 18:57 30 Oct 13

namtas If all serving surveillance officers obeyed that rule, I would have thought the answer would be obvious, or perhaps too simple

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Nintendo Switch review: Hands on with the intuitive modular console and its disappointing games…

1995-2015: How technology has changed the world in 20 years

Here's what should be coming to Adobe Project Felix in 2017

Apple AirPods review: Apple's beautiful new Bluetooth headphones bring true intelligence to…