Talk:Operation Countryman

Thatcher quote

In 1979, The Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher said:

""No action will be taken against any police officer of the Metropolitan Police Force as a result of the (Operation Countryman) enquiry because to do so would damage the morale of the Metropolitan Police Force" http://www.portia.org/chapter06/police.html

Source? Googling [1] finds this quote solely on a handful of polemical websites. Do we have any official/news reportage? 86.139.249.49 (talk) 18:19, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

Confusing Facts

The opening paragraph says :-

The operation was conducted between 1978–1982 at a total cost of £3 million and led to eight police officers being prosecuted although none were convicted

however the Aftermath section says :-

Despite Countryman's recommendation that some officers should face criminal charges, no officer was ever charged with a criminal offence as a result of the investigation

While they might be talking about different investigations, but it makes it sound like Operation Countryman resulted both in eight officers being prosecuted and no officers facing charges, which is not possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:A88:1:E:FFFF:0:0:84F6 (talk) 10:26, 8 April 2014 (UTC)

There is a statement no officer was ever charged with a criminal offence as a result of the investigation. which has the following citation:

"The Lancet Files". 13 September 2004. Archived from the original on 13 October 2004.

This is a web archive of what is now a dead link. I cannot find anything relevant on the archived link.-- Toddy1 (talk) 13:09, 21 April 2017 (UTC)

Two officers were convicted as a result of Operation Countryman. But I do not know whether that was in a separate trial from the 8 unconvicted it refers to, as I cannot consult references 1 and 2. DCI Phil Cuthbert and DS John Goldburn were convicted on 20 July 1982, sentenced to 3 years and 2 years respectively (Guardian, 21 July 1982, reproduced at https://www.nickdavies.net/1982/07/21/detectives-cuthbert-and-goldbourn-are-jailed/. This fact was also repeated in a recent BBC TV documentary, Bent Coppers. But it is hard for me to edit the statement, as I cannot see what the sources say, and so redraft it consistent with those sources. It may be that the 8 refer to a separate trial. Or else maybe it means that no Metropolitan Police were convicted: Cuthbert and Goldbourn were City of London Police, a separate force. Ivan Viehoff (talk) 22:08, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

Clarify, please

Much of the investigation's evidence was obtained by police officers going undercover as police officers.

What does this mean? Valetude (talk) 17:43, 2 February 2019 (UTC)

"It's the way they tell em". Yeah, I wondered that too. Odd phrasing. ——SN54129 16:34, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

It means the following: The investigators were police officers, just like the people they were investigating. Quit a lot of evidence was collected by investigators who posed as normal police officers. They pretended they were investigating normal crimes. Toddy1 (talk) 17:23, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Cheers Toddy1, you're probably right, and it's certainly clearer. Unfortunatey it's still for now... :) ——SN54129 17:46, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Operation Ohio

This was a team of Met detectives based at Swanley in Kent overseen by DCI Snape and was tasked to arrest the Chainsaw gang led by career criminal Jimmy MOODY who attacked Security Express cash in transit vans, usually on a Thursday, and used petrol driven chainsaws to enter the vans and successfully steal £2m. Many of the villians were arrested, charged and sentenced but serious allegations against the detectives of planting or stealing evidence and fabricating interview records. 2A02:C7E:317D:F200:91C9:E4B9:8446:7D42 (talk) 17:53, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

CIB LINE OF DUTY

Ch Supt Alan Longhurst and Supt Bernie Davis working at Scotland Yard under Cmmder Mark Taylor and assisted by D/Sgt Joe Glass "investigated" the complaints against the Ohio Detectives but conveniently found they were all unsubstantiated... 2A02:C7E:317D:F200:91C9:E4B9:8446:7D42 (talk) 17:59, 24 April 2024 (UTC)

WP:FRINGE content

Fringe anti-masonic content has been repeatedly added to this article, the only source for the information being Hansard, a primary source. There is no secondary coverage of this information beyond a few conspiratorial websites. Allan Nonymous (talk) 21:33, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

• It's a primary source
• dale campbell-savours speaks not just about the problems with freemasons in the police-force in his own opinion, but also relyed on:

1. sir kenneth newman's (most important police officer of the country at that time) book The Principles of Policing and Guidance for Professional Behaviour, where the problems are mentioned, too. (you can search and find that book easily on the internet, buy and read it)
2. his successor and multiple police-chiefs shared the views of sir kenneth newman
3. a study about the number of freemasons in the police force

where exactly is the problem now? Wikiprediger (talk) 21:48, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

Primary sources are generally not used on Wikipedia (for more info, see WP:PRIMARY). Allan Nonymous (talk) 22:13, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

And even as primary sources go, Hansard is a poor one. Speeches made in parliament tend to be largely off-the-cuff, with little if anything in the way of notes. And without evidence that Campbell-Savours comments received secondary commentary, inclusion is undue. We could fill whole articles with comments made by politicians during debates, and push more or less any opinion we liked doing so. We don't do that. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:25, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

I understand. because I have the book The Principles of Policing and Guidance for Professional Behaviour from sir kenneth newman (produced from the information department, metropolitian police and new scotland yard in 1985), i can add some details campbell-savours speaks about next days. with that additional source, would that be good enough for you, to prove some statements of the speech? Wikiprediger (talk) 22:39, 7 September 2024 (UTC)

You misunderstand what we need. Not proof of statements, but evidence that other commentators have considered what Campbell-Savours said to be of significance to the topic of our article - which is Operation Countryman and not freemasonary in general. AndyTheGrump (talk) 22:47, 7 September 2024 (UTC)