Spycops abuse exposed as inquiry hears partner’s account

Published: 09 December 2025. The English Chronicle Desk. The English Chronicle Online.

The latest hearing of the long-running spycops inquiry has brought a disturbing account to the forefront, as a woman deceived into a prolonged relationship by an undercover police officer described behaviour she believes revealed deep and troubling “sadistic tendencies.” Her testimony delivered a painful narrative about trust, manipulation and institutional failings that spanned years, leaving lasting damage and raising fresh questions about the culture surrounding covert policing in the United Kingdom. The evidence centred on her relationship with Mark Jenner, a former Special Demonstration Squad officer who infiltrated several political groups during the late 1990s and led a personal double life that remained hidden until her persistent investigation uncovered his real identity after many years.

The woman, known publicly as Alison, recounted how she met Jenner in the mid-1990s, when she was an active participant in left-leaning campaigns focused on anti-fascist work and social justice causes. Her testimony painted a vivid picture of a relationship built on apparent affection and shared values, while concealing a professional mission designed to infiltrate activist networks. She explained how Jenner entered her life with confidence and charm, forming bonds with her friends and family while embedding himself in her social world with remarkable ease. She believed deeply in the authenticity of their partnership, seeing him as the person with whom she planned a future and hoped to raise children.

Throughout the period between 1995 and 2000, Jenner lived with her in Hackney, fully immersed in her household and functioning as a committed long-term partner. He accompanied her to holidays abroad and attended intimate family events, including weddings and a funeral, which strengthened the illusion of a shared life. She described how his integration into her daily routines felt natural and reassuring, which made the eventual discovery of his true identity far more devastating. It emerged later that Jenner had a wife and children with whom he continued to live when not in his undercover role, a fact completely hidden from Alison throughout their relationship.

When she reached her mid-thirties in 1998, she began discussing her desire to have a child, believing the relationship represented a stable and loving foundation for parenthood. Jenner expressed agreement initially, suggesting he wanted the same outcome but preferred to delay the decision. As time passed, he grew increasingly evasive, an evasion she later understood as calculated manipulation used to extend his deployment while managing her emotional expectations. She persuaded him to attend counselling, hoping that professional support might help them address their differing timelines and create a clear path forward. Instead, she endured continuous uncertainty as he repeatedly stalled conversations, creating a cycle of hope and disappointment that caused great emotional strain.

Her testimony included painful reflections about how his behaviour during this period revealed what she called “a sadistic streak.” She found it incomprehensible that someone could knowingly create such emotional turmoil for reasons tied to operational objectives rather than personal truth. She described the distress caused by his long pattern of delays, the confusion created by his shifting behaviour and the grief that emerged when she eventually realised his position had never been genuine. The inquiry heard her describe these actions as deeply manipulative, showing disregard for the emotional safety of someone who trusted him wholeheartedly.

In 2000, Jenner abruptly withdrew from her life, claiming to be suffering a mental breakdown, which he suggested made continued contact impossible. She became increasingly worried, fearing he might harm himself, and attempted to support him through what she believed was a genuine crisis. The inquiry has since shown that feigned breakdowns were a common method used by undercover officers to exit their roles without raising suspicion among those they infiltrated. She said the tactic was “absolutely shameful,” particularly because it exploited her concern for his wellbeing at a moment when she believed he was vulnerable and suicidal. His disappearance left her with unanswered questions and an overwhelming sense of abandonment that lingered for years.

Suspicion began to grow soon after he vanished, as she noticed inconsistencies in the stories he had told during their relationship. Her professional and political involvement had sharpened her critical thinking, and she undertook what she described as “obsessive” research to uncover the truth. She spent thousands of hours searching for clues, consulting records and piecing together details from memory. These efforts took a tremendous emotional toll and brought her into what she called “very dark” years shaped by uncertainty and grief. Eventually, after almost a decade, she succeeded in confirming that Jenner had been an undercover police officer assigned to monitor political groups rather than the man she had believed him to be.

Her evidence highlighted the lengths undercover officers went to in order to preserve their fabricated identities and the lack of oversight that allowed these practices to continue for decades. Jenner himself received a formal commendation from senior officers for his deployment, an achievement that stood in stark contrast to the emotional devastation experienced by those deceived by his methods. The inquiry is investigating how approximately 139 officers infiltrated thousands of groups between the late 1960s and 2010, with intimate relationships emerging as a recurring and deeply troubling pattern. At least fifty women are now known to have been drawn into intimate relationships with officers who maintained secret professional lives and loyal ties to the policing organisations they served.

One of the most contentious issues explored in the inquiry is whether the use of intimate relationships formed an unofficial tool for gathering intelligence or emerged from a culture of insufficient supervision that enabled officers to act with considerable autonomy. Alison argued that the lack of scrutiny allowed officers like Jenner to make personal choices that caused serious long-term harm without ever facing consequences. She suggested that some behaviour was shaped by more than operational pressures, describing traits she believed reflected personal tendencies that were incompatible with ethical policing.

Her testimony forms an important part of a growing archive of accounts that reveal the emotional, psychological and social damage caused by covert policing practices during this period. While the inquiry continues to assess policy failures and operational systems, it is also attempting to understand the personal impact of these long-running deceptions. Alison expressed a desire for the inquiry to produce meaningful structural change and ensure future covert operations cannot replicate the abuses experienced by her and many other women. She emphasised the need for accountability, transparency and stronger protections to prevent the misuse of power within undercover units.

Her determination to expose the truth, despite years of emotional hardship, remains central to her narrative. Today her evidence stands not only as an account of personal betrayal but also as a powerful reminder of the consequences of unrestricted covert policing. The inquiry’s final conclusions are expected to shape new guidelines for future operations while acknowledging the suffering endured by those misled in the name of public order and national security.