Det Con Jim Boyling / Jim Sutton is the creature mentioned, for those interested
Anyone who can download the episode and make it available, or rovide a download link, that will be useful.
Thanks

that's it - just clarifying for record

Good to see this blatant morass of police corruption getting further exposure, but why is it some BBC "revelation" and why now? Everyone involved at the time (at least a couple of hundred people) knew that Jim "The Van" got nicked in the RTS support action for the tube workers and was later acquitted. So this has all been known, and its implications obvious, since Boyling was exposed months ago. I didn't know, or had forgotten, that he was represented by Bindmans.

I'm not complaining about the cops' dirty laundry getting another public washing and emerging grubbier than before, but about the BBC taking credit for "exposing" what many people already knew. The fact that they've got the cops jumping around and pulling whatever bucket of whitewash they were about to pour over the situation with the report due tomorrow (as if they didn't know already -ha!) illustrates the sad fact that there are still no "facts" until they're on the Beeb or in the Grauniad etc.

It got entertainingly ludicrous at the point of: Shock! Horror! Police officer lies on oath in court. Well I never! How awful! That's never happened before.

Maybe we spend too much time on Indymedia and elsewhere talking to each other and not enough campaigning? Did we all just shrug and take Boyling's arrest, like Kennedy's, as just another aspect of all this shite? Did we miss the crucial difference that he was charged and stood trial? I think I did. Were we distracted by his bizarre marriage to an activist? It looks like there were a few people who weren't and nagged Bindmans to dredge 15 year-old records out of deep storage, so well done to them, not the fucking BBC.

" I didn't know, or had forgotten, that he was represented by Bindmans."

It is the fact that he had state backing to commit perjury, along with the fact that as an undercover cop he was attending privileged lawyer/client meetings where defence cases were being put together that makes it newsworthy and even further undermines the legitimacy of the undercover operations. Clearly in addition to this, there was yet another failure to discuss information available to the crown that was relevant to the defence.

You can find the content here

 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15379882

I entirely concur, m'lord. Your lordship expresses it admirably. I'm obliged m'lord.

Grovel, grovel 'cos I wanna be a judge, too, when I grow up.

Just remember what we can, especially about anything that people are looking into - such as arrests of anyone outed. There's a lot of people working on different aspects of all this it seems. Collating memories, sifting through legalities, with varying degrees of trauma, it's all gotta take time. Some of these things must need legal preparation before hitting the media. It seems they are hitting the press when they are good and ready. It's better when our side control the timing not them. Yeah, it is annoying the whole Guardian BBC revelation thing, but..I doubt people are worried about not getting enough back patting in the midst of bigger things at stake. Maybe there's more the cops have legally transgressed and that can be run with too. We have a vast library of memories between us.