Revealed: undercover UK police officer deceived woman into 19-year relationship
theguardian.com
An undercover police officer used his fake identity to deceive a woman into a 19-year relationship in which they became partners and had a child together, the Guardian can reveal.
The officer concealed his real identity from the woman for the duration of that period, never telling her his real occupation, and using his fictitious identity on the birth certificate of their son.
In 2020, after the couple were engaged to be married, the woman discovered that her fiance, whom she believed to be a businessman, was in fact a police officer who had subjected her to a sophisticated deception lasting almost two decades.
IMO, the sketchiest part is that the department knew about the relationship, let him continue using the fake identity for years after leaving the force, and pressured the family to keep quiet after learning the truth.
Now that is commitment to the bit.
I'm not sure it was a bit.
He wasn't investigating her. If you are an undercover agent and meet someone new - off duty and unrelated to work - are you allowed to tell them your real name?
If not, if a single person is forced to choose between no intimate relationships and relationships only under a pseudonym, then the latter is the predictable choice.
I think the ethical choices are not what you laid out. In this case choose between relationship and job. People do it all the time.
Or choose both. You may consider that unethical, but that doesn't mean it was insincere. People do unethical things all the time with sincere motivations.
Sincerity is a poor defense of bad behavior.
I'm not necessarily defending it, I'm pointing out that his commitment to her was quite possibly sincere and not a "bit".
Lying and manipulation are not evidence of commitment to anyone but but his own selfish desires.
To argue the opposite is ingenuine at best.
Being in a relationship with someone for 10+ years and raising a child with that person is strong evidence of commitment. Lying about one's birth name is not enough to prove otherwise.
Noooonooonooo, He once did something... Let's say unwise, so naturally after 17 years it is all a pure lie! Some people really need to go out and touch grass. So disconnected form reality.
This isnt even the first time this has happened in the UK. A group of officers held fake relationships with a climate protester group too.
Say more.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UK_undercover_policing_relationships_scandal
Wow! That poor kid! Poor woman too but I can't imagine that kid learning all this and some imaginary person is on his birth certificate!? Trust issues forever. Fucking wow. Can anyone put a fictitious person down on a birth certificate? Can you do that for both parents? Does this get him out of child support? I have sooo many more questions.
No, it does not get you out of child support. Just as taking your spouse's last name does not get you out of debt.
Learning "all this"? That the father has a different name and job? Is that even relevant to their relationship? It has been 19 years. You can blame him for not telling her in the first months, after his undercover thing was over. After that he just rolled with it. That is it. Zero trust issues.
I agree. Your name is the least important part of your identity.
If my spouse told me that she actually had a different name on her birth certificate then I wouldn't bat an eye. In fact, I would probably continue using the "fake" name, because why not.
This sounds more like intelligence agency than police...
Regardless of agency or police, the important bit is he left the job 9 years ago. And they let him keep using the identity for 7 years after that.
I mean when the real identity is known by people that do not like him too much it could also be like whiteness protection program...
As the article states it was a police officer from the "Avon and Somerset police" and not any special intelligence agency.
Articles say much when the day is long...