In 2011, I began a legal challenge against the Metropolitan police after one of their undercover officers deceived me into a personal and intimate relationship. Thirteen long years have passed, and yet, I still haven’t received clarity on why Mark Jenner was sent into my life under the guise of Mark Cassidy. However, as the public inquiry into undercover policing unfolds, I’ve finally been exposed to some of the flimsy excuses given by his manager, Bob Lambert MBE. Lambert, under the pseudonym Bob Robinson, manipulated four women into romantic relationships.
Lambert’s narrative resembles a modern tragedy where opportunities for redemption were repeatedly ignored. His personal story is tragic, having lost two children, and later having the chance to reconnect with a son he fathered and abandoned while undercover. I once held a naive hope that these experiences might spark some honesty and responsibility in him. I wanted him to admit to his deceitful relationships, his abandonment of his child and child’s mother, and the baseless allegations against the activists he spied on. Instead, I was met with what felt like a carefully orchestrated performance from a seasoned manipulator. He appeared so frail that if you didn’t know he participated in a 5km run just last month, you might be fooled. It was clear that his main concern was his own self-preservation.
I’ve been present at as many of these inquiry hearings as possible, and the past two weeks have been particularly shocking. We’ve heard firsthand accounts from Jacqui and Belinda, two of Lambert’s victims, as well as Helen Steel, who became another victim under John Dines, known to her as John Barker. The bravery of these women in the inquiry has been remarkable, providing straightforward accounts backed with evidence. Watching from the public gallery, I felt incredibly proud of their integrity and their significant role in uncovering this scandal of misogynistic policing.
In stark contrast was Lambert’s testimony. Unlike the articulate women, he stumbled over his words, hesitated, and seemed to suffer from significant memory lapses about a career he was highly praised for. Where they offered evidence, he provided none. He frequently avoided giving straightforward answers, opting instead for elaborate diversions that led nowhere, all in an apparent attempt to dodge incrimination.
As Lambert’s elusive testimony grew more frustrating, I couldn’t help but wonder if Jenner might follow this example when it’s his turn next year. What story will he spin about me? Will he claim the relationship was sincere, and not part of his intelligence-gathering mission? Perhaps he might even argue he treated me with kindness and respect, despite all evidence pointing to the contrary. How will he reconcile his supposed love for me with the Met Commissioner’s apologies for these deceitful, abusive, and wrong relationships? Maybe only a seasoned psychiatrist could explain the deep divide between his real self and the persona he adopted.
Lambert’s alter ego, “Robinson”, is described as charismatic and engaging – a figure who could light up a room. In stark contrast, Lambert’s slow and meandering speech drained the energy from the room. His long pauses and repeated inability to recall events were met with sighs and yawns from the public gallery.
For four days, Lambert attempted to portray himself as a wrongly judged retired police officer. By the fifth day, he seemed to understand the need to appear more remorseful. He finally admitted to letting down his family, including both wives, his deceased children, and his living son. He acknowledged that deceiving the women was wrong, offering a “genuine” apology. Yet, apart from Jacqui, Lambert hadn’t apologized to any of the women directly before the inquiry. Neither had he reached out to me or the other women deceived by officers under his leadership as detective inspector. His apologies felt insincere and were undoubtedly too little, too late.
Despite the frustration and anger, there’s a silver lining. The solidarity in the public gallery is palpable. Watching David Barr, the inquiry’s chief barrister, meticulously deconstruct Lambert’s narrative has been gratifying. While I manage my expectations, these developments, along with the interventions from inquiry chair Sir John Mitting, have somewhat restored my faith in the process.
Alison is among the eight women who initiated legal action against the Metropolitan police for undercover officers’ behavior and is a founder member of Police Spies Out of Lives. A key participant in the Public Inquiry into Undercover Policing, she co-authored Deep Deception – The Story of the Spycop Network by the Women who Uncovered the Shocking Truth.
If you have thoughts on the issues discussed in this article and would like to share a response of up to 300 words for publication in our letters section, please click here.
