51 years ago. The 1974 attempted kidnapping of Princess Anne.

This previously unpublished eye-witness account from former police firearms officer, Geoff Cadman, casts an intriguing light on a significant event in UK policing history and reveals a previously unknown secret.

Photographs taken following the 1974 attempted abduction of Princess Anne showing her car and the Ford Escort used by the erstwhile kidnapper.

During the evening of March 20th 1974, HRH Princess Anne was in the back of a Vanden Plas limousine with her husband, Captain Mark Phillips. Up front, sat protection officer Jim Beaton, as they were being driven along The Mall towards Buckingham Palace.

Without warning, a white Ford Escort swerved in front of their car, blocking their path and forcing their chauffeur to bring the luxury car a rapid halt. A lone figure emerged from the Escort. He was holding a gun. Within seconds, both chauffeur and protection officer had been shot and disabled.

“I want you to come with me for a day or two, because I want 2 million,” her erstwhile kidnapper, Ian Ball, is said to have told the Princess as he pulled open the rear door of the Vanden Plas. With him, Ball had two pairs of handcuffs, Valium tranquillisers and a prepared ransom note for Queen Elizabeth.

“Not bloody likely,” Princess Anne replied.

A reporter, who recognised the Royal car, tried to intervene. Ball responded by shooting him in the chest. A police officer, Constable Michael Hills, then arrived at the scene and he too was shot in the stomach.

Surrounded by blood, injured men and broken glass, Princess Anne later told the police she wondered if she would have to fight Ball off herself. “It was all so infuriating; I kept saying I didn’t want to get out of the car, and I was not going to get out of the car,” she said.

The account that follows has not previously been published. An extract from his personal memoir, it was provided to me by former police firearms officer, Geoff Cadman and is reproduced with his permission.

Alpha Delta…I’ve Been Shot…

March 20th, 1974, two weeks after the General Election that ousted the Conservative Government of
Edward Heath, one of my colleagues, Pc Michael Hills, was on a 2-10 pm shift, patrolling on foot
near St. James’s Palace in The Mall.  It was dark, but Buckingham Palace was bathed in light, a few
minutes walk away; day or night it always impressed. Mick was young in service, still in his two-year probationary period.  A quietly spoken young man, he was always very smartly turned out and
sported a neatly trimmed beard.  It had been a fairly quiet shift with about two hours remaining, when
he heard what he thought was a car backfiring followed by a brief burst of raised voices.  He was
some distance away but decided to investigate and turned towards the noise.  Within a minute, he
could make out stationary vehicles and a familiar looking black limousine, a car of the Royal
Household. Mick reached for his radio, pressed the talk button and radioed Cannon Row to report that
he thought a Royal car may have been involved in a traffic accident and that he was going to
investigate.  The first reserve officer acknowledged the message and awaited an update.   The next
message that came over the airwaves was a chiller, ‘Alpha Delta from 736 I’ve been shot…. I’ve been
shot
’.

Unbeknown to Pc Hills, a man named Ian Ball had executed a plan that he had been developing for
several years. His intention was to kidnap HRH Princess Anne and demand a £3 million ransom.  Ball
was cunning and resourceful; he had also been diagnosed as schizophrenic and suffering from chronic
depression.  Despite his medical condition his plan was remarkably detailed, and he had even acquired
two handguns and plenty of ammunition; he was a very dangerous man. Earlier that evening he had
followed the Royal car containing Princess Anne, her personal protection office and her husband of
four months, Captain Mark Phillips. They had driven from their home to a scheduled charity film
event in the city. Having watched them arrive, Ball waited patiently for them to leave the cinema and
as they commenced the return journey he was again on their tail, looking for an opportune moment to
strike. As the veteran Royal car headed up The Mall, Ball knew his moment had arrived. He made his
move, accelerating past the slow-moving Daimler and then cut in front of it, braking sharply and
forcing it to stop.  He jumped out, guns in both hands, and confronted the chauffeur.  The Princess’s
personal protection officer, 31-year-old Inspector Jim Beaton, assumed it was an irate motorist and
prepared to intervene.  You might wonder why he did not report this immediately via radio. The
answer is simple, the Queen did not allow police radios to be fitted in her cars.  As Beaton approached
Ball, he failed to notice a handgun being pointed at the Royal chauffeur, even as Ball turned to face
him. It was very dark, and street lighting was minimal. Ball immediately fired two shots from a .38
revolver hitting Beaton in the shoulder, the bullet puncturing his right lung.  Even after the impact from the bullet hitting him at 900 feet per second, Beaton was unaware that he had been shot, let alone
seriously injured.  The human body is quite remarkable in how it deals with damage.

Armed with a 9mm Walther, Jim Beaton had undergone exactly the same basic firearms training as I
had, although it didn’t include wound ballistics or the effects of gunshot wounds. For those of us who
carried firearms on a daily basis, there was no body armour.  With the instant release of adrenaline into
his body, Beaton was reacting on instinct. He felt for his pistol. If he had performed his ‘make-ready’
drills correctly there would be a round ready and waiting in the breech, and with the safety catch off, it
only needed a squeeze of the trigger.  His drills were correct, and he drew the Walther and got off a
shot towards Ball, but it was not a good one.

Beaton, now in shock, was still unaware of his weakened right arm and so his shot was wide of the
mark, shattering a window as it entered the Royal car.  Some years later Princess Anne would recount
that near miss during a television interview.  Recalling the moment she heard the bullet hit the car and
shower her with glass, she was convinced the police bullet passed near her head; it may well have
done.  Still running on adrenalin, Beaton was trying to make sense of his predicament, but in these
moments of high stress the human brain’s superpowers come into play, one of which causes
something called perceptual distortion. Jim Beaton now realises he’s been shot and that he must fight
to survive but, in his own words, he was in a drunken-like state perceiving everything in slow motion,
not hearing properly because his brain was prioritising his actions, filtering out the unnecessary.  His
weapon drills came into play as he tried to re-position for a second shot.  As he brought the pistol up,
supporting his weakened arm by his fully functional one, he squeezed the trigger.  Nothing happened.
Looking down he noticed the slide half closed. The second bullet of seven had failed to feed fully into
the breech due to the magazine spring having failed to feed it into position. A fresh magazine was the
only option because from the moment he holstered that Walther at the start of his duty it was only ever
going to fire once.  Had both hands been fully functional he might have swapped magazines in
seconds, but Jim Beaton did not have those precious, life-saving seconds. The Royal chauffeur
suddenly grabbed Ball’s arm but was immediately shot in the chest at point blank range and
incapacitated – and all this was happening without the alarm being raised.  They were on their own.

Ball’s frustration was on the rise. He wrenched open the passenger door, reached in and grabbed the
Princess by the arm.  A tug of war started as Princess Anne refused to get out of the car.  Beaton made
one last gallant effort to protect the Princess.  It was adrenaline and will power that drove him to crawl
back into the Royal car and place himself between the Princess and the gunman who was still standing
by the door, frustrated and desperate.  Ball, still stood in the road, aimed his gun at Beaton who
instinctively raised his hand just as another shot was fired, the bullet shattering another window and
lodging in Beaton’s hand.  Ball then wrenched the door open and shot him a third time, the bullet passing through his stomach and intestines before lodging in his pelvis. It was Ball’s last shot with the
.38 – but he still had the second gun.  Beaton was now grievously wounded and in urgent need of
emergency surgery and still the alarm hadn’t been raised, but all that was about to change.  Enter Pc
Michael Hills.

Still unaware of the horror that was unfolding in the darkness, Mick Hills crossed The Mall from near
Clarence House, then home to Her Majesty The Queen Mother.  Coming up behind Ball he tapped
him on the shoulder just as someone shouted ‘gun’.  Ball turned and on seeing Hills immediately shot
him in the midriff causing the officer to stagger to the rear of the car where he passed the first
shocking radio message, “Alpha Delta, I’ve been shot”. The Reserve officer was my former tutor
constable Dick Lee who didn’t quite believe his ears and responded with, “736 say again” to which
Mick, now collapsed by the side of the Royal car, repeated his message adding as much information
as his racing mind and rapidly weakening body would allow. He had been shot in the gut from a .22
handgun, the chrome-jacketed high velocity bullet zipping through three layers of clothing and into
his abdomen before embedding itself next to his liver.  At last, the alarm was raised.  Hills showed
great presence of mind and his message to Cannon Row was immediately re-broadcast to police units
across Central London.  Assistance would be coming at last.  Cannon Row’s armed response vehicle,
call sign Alpha 102, happened to be in the rear yard and within seconds it was full of officers who had
dropped everything and piled in. It roared into Whitehall, a blue light and sound show, as other units
from neighbouring divisions were doing the same, the increasing sound of their approach sending the
message of hope Mick Hills was desperately waiting for; ‘hang on chum, we’re coming for you’.

Courage is not a clear-cut quality and although much aggrandised in novels or when such actions are
lauded in post incident accounts, often written by those who weren’t there, it manifests in many
ways.  Some have it in abundance, some definitely don’t, while it remains a latent quality in others
and there are many variables in between that can both incite or erode it.  Many acts of courage result
from an adrenaline rush enabling the responses of ‘fight or flight’ and, as was the case on this night, it
can be fuelled by scant information and an abundance of confusion.  The ironic expression often used
by American pro-gun owners, “when seconds count, the police are only minutes away” could not
have been more appropriate in this situation. My Cannon Row colleague Geoff Jackson recalled:
“I was working [in the reserve office] with First Reserve Dick Lee. It was coming up to 8pm, when a
radio call was made by PC Mick Hills “Alpha Delta, I think there has been an accident involving a
Royal car
”. Dick answered. I went to the front office to let the Station Sergeant Bruce Peardon know.
 Bruce let out a couple of expletives. As I re-entered the Reserve room I heard Mick on the radio
again, it was very serious, “Alpha Delta, I’ve been shot, I’ve been shot”.  I ran across the room to the
open window and leapt through to the inner yard and into the drivers’ room. I burst into the room where three of the drivers were sitting and shouted what was happening. We all ran to one of the
police cars and left Cannon Row at high speed for the Mall”.

With her personal protection officer critically injured, a uniformed police officer shot and
incapacitated and a useless police pistol lying in the road, things were not looking good for the
Queen’s only daughter.  PC Hills spotted Beaton’s Walther on the ground and picked it up with the
intention of having a crack at Ball, but he wasn’t firearms trained and even if he were the weapon’s
unserviceable magazine spring had rendered it useless.  Hills had a bullet in his liver, was bleeding
internally and coughing blood.  Now in shock, he too was out of the fight.  An intervention, divine or
otherwise, was needed to fill the critical gap until the rapidly advancing cavalry arrived.  Just when all
appeared lost, along came some unsuspecting members of the British public, soon to become heroes. 
Another chauffeur in a Jaguar had stopped just as Ball fired his first shots.  The driver, Glenmore
Martin, approached Ball and was threatened with the gun. He wisely backed away but had the
presence of mind to reverse the Jaguar right up to Ball’s car to block it in.  Then on seeing the injured
PC Hills lying in the road he immediately went to his assistance.  Two other members of the public
had seen the disturbance as they drove along The Mall in separate vehicles. Both stopped to
intervene.  Brian McConnell, a journalist, was passing in a taxi when he spotted the commotion and
ordered his driver to stop.  He walked over to Ball and tried to speak nicely to him, but Ball was in no
mood for conversation and fired another shot. Down went his fourth victim with a bullet in the chest.

Then came a knight-in-shining-armour by the name of Ron Russell, a six feet five inches tall amateur
heavyweight boxer.  He had seen PC Hills gunned down and with no thought for his own safety he
strode towards Ball who, having just shot McConnell, had returned to the Royal car still intent on the
kidnap. As The Princess continued to remonstrate with Ball, big Ron struck him a hefty punch to the
head, but it wasn’t enough to stop him; he turned and immediately fired his pistol.  The .22 bullet
narrowly missed Ron but hit the windscreen of a passing London taxi, a lucky escape for the
unsuspecting driver.  Ball then ran around the limousine after Ron who had now recognised the
Princess and was lifting her out with the intention of walking her to safety. Ball confronted Ron and at
arm’s length he levelled the gun at him.  Realising this was his ‘do or die’ moment Ron instinctively
delivered a mighty uppercut to Ball’s chin and down he went, just as police units arrived in a
crescendo of two-tone horns and squealing tyres. It was less than two two minutes after PC Hills
crucial radio message.  The scene that greeted those responding officers was utterly bewildering.  The
only thing they knew for certain was that a PC had been shot and a gunman was on the loose in the
vicinity. Geoff Jackson describes his arrival:
We all dived out and dispersed.  I saw a man sitting with his back against a tree; he was holding his
chest. There was a lady with him. This man was journalist Brian McConnell. The lady later
complained that police had taken a long time to arrive [she would not have known that the alarm had only been raised less than 2 minutes earlier] further up was a male lying on his back half on the
pathway with an injury to his right hand, which was bleeding. PC Steve Rose was looking after him.  I
ran up to the Royal Car where I saw the chauffeur. He was injured, still sitting in the driver’s seat. He
told me to go to the back of the car.  As I reached the door I stood back in disbelief as HRH The
Princess Ann said, “Get an Ambulance, get an ambulance quick”.  I told her that one had been called
already.  Princess Anne moved back into the car along with Captain Mark Phillips and her Lady in
Waiting.  My lasting memory of Princess Anne was that she was in ‘full colour’ and knew exactly
what she was doing. She was totally in control
”.

Geoff and his colleagues were acting on their initiative.  As with all fast-moving incidents, especially
where lives are at risk from gunfire or knives, there is no time to stop for a detailed briefing or to read
a policy manual; immediate action is required.  We called it planning on the hoof. There is always an
initial lack of cohesion that the casual observer might see as ‘chaotic’, but police officers are trained
to act on their own initiative as well as with each other.   More police units were arriving from several
directions including an Area Car with three PCs on board who, although they didn’t realise it, were
about to bring this dramatic incident to a desperately needed close. That Area Car, callsign ‘Delta 1’
was a powerful Triumph 2.5pi from Marylebone Lane police station and driven by PC Ivor
MacGregor QPM, a dependable and experienced officer. The R/T operator was PC Mick Ball, with 18
months service and in the back seat was a former cadet buddy of mine, PC Phil Harris, who had
completed his crucial first two years’ service that very day.  Phil recently told me of his part in the
incident, something that until now he had never openly discussed.  The story of Phil and his comrades
in Delta 1 shines a whole different light on the incident and deserves to come out of the shadows. Phil
takes up the story:
I was posted foot patrol that day from Marylebone Lane police station on the Marble Arch beat. 
Delta 1 had stopped for me to have a short break. Over the mains radio came a call to a ‘fight’ in the
Mall’ and immediately my ears pricked up albeit I wasn’t officially posted to Delta 1, but given how
near it was..Park Lane, Hyde Park Corner, Constitution Hill and into the Mall, I made the decision to
stay in the car as Mick accepted the call. We took off at speed and I remember hearing another
message from Cannon Row reserve room saying someone had been shot
”.

Phil’s words took me straight back to the buzz of Area Car duty. I know from personal experience the
feeling that hits you on hearing such a chilling message.  It’s like an electric shock; the physiological
reaction being automatic, commonly known as the ‘fight or flight’ response preparing you for action. 
There are no higher thought processes. Adrenaline is released causing the heart rate to increase, senses
are heightened, unnecessary functions like taste, smell, even hearing can be filtered out.  Time
becomes meaningless and things appear to play out in slow motion.  The officers responding to that
call chose the ‘fight’ response, as all good cops do, and they all knew they were racing into danger.

There was no clear picture of what lay ahead; the one and only call for assistance was a four second
radio message from a police officer who had just been shot in the gut and was struggling to remain
lucid. Delta 1 arrived mere seconds after Geoff Jackson, with other units close behind them.  As they
dived out of their car, all three officers had adrenaline coursing through their veins, with all their
senses working flat out. They acted quickly, cutting through the confusion, prioritising their actions.
Scanning the scene, they see a taxi; a fancy limousine with shattered windows, glass everywhere; an
empty Ford Escort; people lying in the road bleeding; one’s police; one’s slumped against a tree
bleeding; others are lying bleeding on the road; where’s the gunman; a dark figure gets to his feet;
someone shouts, “there he goes”. It was a very short pursuit; Ball had barely gone a few paces before
he was rugby tackled to the ground, spread-eagled; there’s a revolver in his hand. He’s quickly
disarmed. It’s all over in seconds.  Ian Ball, the highly dangerous chronic schizophrenic who had just
shot four people and attempted to shoot a fifth whilst attempting to kidnap Princess Anne was
detained at last, his rampage was over and yet those who had just caught him were still totally
unaware of the sheer magnitude of events that had taken place just ten minutes before. 

With Ball detained and disarmed, the breathless crew of Delta 1 took stock of the situation.  They
were still holding Ball on the ground, still full of adrenaline and breathing heavily, when a man in
plain clothes appears right next to them. Where did he come from? They didn’t see him before, but
then they probably wouldn’t have, totally focussed as they were in flattening Ball. He identifies
himself as CID. They get to their feet and realising this is definitely a job for CID, Phil hands their
prisoner over to him. He is Temporary Detective Constable (T/DC) Peter Edmonds who, with others,
escorts Ball to Cannon Row police station. Edmonds had been on duty with a Detective sergeant and a
plain clothes Pc driving in an unmarked CID ‘Q’ car.  These were essentially unmarked Area Cars,
high performance vehicles, always driven by a Class 1 driver also in plain clothes.  They had heard
the call for assistance and had immediately responded, arriving seconds behind Delta 1. Lots of very
serious incidents often have an amusing moment and this one was no exception. As Ball was being
marched out of the park to a police car, the taxi driver whose windscreen had just been shattered by
the stray bullet intended for Ron Russell, came storming up and gave the restrained Ball a right old
cockney dressing down for damaging his cab, having no idea of the enormity of what had just
happened; a surreal moment.  Several years later on the “Parkinson” TV show, Princess Anne would
describe Ball’s capture as him being “smothered by the local rugby team”, after which she was
quickly ushered from the scene by officers from Cannon Row, as Geoff Jackson observed:
“.. there was a commotion at the front of the Royal Car and several officers, some in plain clothes,
came past me with Ball and loaded him into the back of a Police Traffic Division car with my Cannon
Row colleague Alan Minis.  Geoff Fitzsimmons had got Princess Anne into another police car and
whisked her off at speed to Buckingham Palace”.

With the Royals safely inside Buckingham Palace and Ball in custody at Cannon Row, a different type
of hard graft was about to begin. A case against Ball had to be prepared starting with answers to some
basic but vital questions:  Who is this man?  Is he a terrorist? Was he acting alone? Why was he doing
this?  This would be a job for experienced investigators; one must remember that, in the eyes of the
Law, Ball was only a suspect who remained innocent until proven guilty.  Enter the CID and the
‘Guv’nors’. Geoff Jackson again:
More officers turned up of various ranks and took over the running of the scene. I was surprised at
how some had arrived, one being PC Alex Rozmus, who had been on duty at Wellington Arch police
station [Hyde Park Corner] and who’d raced to the scene on his own motorcycle, in his shirt sleeves
and minus a crash helmet.  A CID Car or ‘Q’ boat’ as we called it, had also arrived, and it was with
the plain clothes officers that we surveyed the scene, locating the weapons in the gutter. Inspector Jim
Beaton’s Walther seemed to be jammed with a round facing inwards jammed in the slide.  We also saw
a revolver and some empty cartridges. This all stayed where it was and kept secure waiting for
forensic support
”.

The following day the three officers from Delta 1 were stood before their boss (the Chief
Superintendent of D Division).  A highly respected man, he was clearly very proud of his three men
and having praised them for their actions he commented briefly about a discrepancy that he knew was
developing within the investigation team.  A few days later he had his personal driver deliver the three
officers to New Scotland Yard in his official car, a rare honour for the young constables. They had
been summoned to see the Commissioner, Sir Robert Mark.  Also present at this meeting was Peter
Edmonds, who they learnt had been immediately elevated from a ‘temporary’ to a ‘substantive’
detective as a reward for his part in the arrest.  Official photographs were taken of the ceremony with
the Commissioner commending his men.  Phil Harris recalled how DC Edmonds appeared
uncomfortable on meeting them.  The incident was world news but that would start to ebb, as news
generally does, however it would flow again at the subsequent trial and the award ceremonies at
Buckingham Palace.

Several days after his audience with The Commissioner, PC Phil Harris was seen by a detective from
the investigation team who wanted to discuss what he referred to as ‘discrepancies’ as to what had
taken place.  This must have caused some anxiety for the twenty-one-year-old officer and his
colleagues in Delta 1.  The statement that was released to the media, and which eventually became the
official account of Ball’s arrest, stated that T/DC Edmonds, “saw a man with a gun running across
St James’s Park. Edmonds gave chase and, although threatened with the gun, threw his coat over
the fugitive’s head, forced him to the ground and arrested him”? (The Daily Telegraph, March 15th, 2005 –
Obituary, Peter Edmonds). 

That was quite some discrepancy; hardly a smothering by the local rugby team as described by
Princess Anne.  As deferential as he was to the high-ranking detective, twenty-one-year-old constable
Harris remained steadfast as to what had happened and that his original statement, made before he and
his colleagues went off duty, was an accurate account of the events and therefore he had no cause to
correct, alter or add anything. There was no doubt that Edmonds was in close proximity to the pursuit,
because he quickly appeared next to Phil Harris and the Delta 1 crew whilst they were still holding
Ball on the ground.  He certainly assumed responsibility for the prisoner from the moment Ball was
handed into his custody by Phil Harris. So what happened in the ensuing stages of the CID
investigation that resulted in that alternative version being presented to the news media? This
information, with its juxtaposition of the actions of the Delta 1 officers and DC Edmonds, was
received with much surprise and indignation by Phil and his colleagues and may have explained the
discomfiture detected in DC Edmonds when they’d all met in the Commissioner’s office. One must
remember that they were all very young in service and that challenging their senior officers was out of
the question.  None of them were the type that would seek conflict.

Regardless of who did what the police got the right man, of that there is no doubt. Ian Ball had a
severe psychological disorder diagnosed several years before the attempted kidnapping and also had
several minor criminal convictions.  He had never been jailed for them, but neither was he
successfully treated for his illness.  Exactly how someone with a record of petty criminal offences and
a chronic mental illness managed to travel to Spain, obtain two firearms, lots of ammunition and then
smuggle them back into the UK was never fully established, but mental illness is something that
confronts the police on a daily basis.  After questioning and initial enquiries, Ball was taken to Bow
Street Magistrates Court.  I was on duty that day and as he was taken from the cells, I was among the
small group who escorted him across the yard to the van. He was bluntly asked, ‘why did you shoot
our mate
?’  With his expressionless eyes staring straight ahead and in a monotone voice he replied,
He was in the way.’ After what was quite a short period on remand in custody, he appeared before
Lord Chief Justice Widgery at The Old Bailey on charges of attempted murder, attempted kidnapping
and other serious crimes associated with that night.  After his plea of guilty, and on hearing from a
Home Office psychiatrist of his severe mental illness, he was sentenced to be detained under the
Mental Health Act in one of the UK’s three high-security psychiatric hospitals, where he remains to
this day.

Princess Anne visits the badly injured Jim Beaton at Westminster Hospital.

In the aftermath, Inspector Jim Beaton was awarded the George Cross, sometimes referred to as the
civilian VC.  PC Mick Hills and Mr Ron Russell got the George Medal.  Mr. Callander the Royal
chauffeur, Mr McConnell the journalist and DC Peter Edmonds each received The Queens Gallantry
Medal (QGM).   The driver of the Jaguar, Glenmore Martin, got a Queens Commendation.  PC Phillip
Harris, PC Ivor MacGregor QPM and PC Mick Ball (Princess Anne’s local rugby team) received

Commissioners high commendations rather than The Queens Gallantry Medal as DC Edmonds had. 
Jim Beaton retired at the rank of Chief Superintendent having received an additional award from the
US Secret Service and is still drawing his hard-earned pension.  He is a quiet, unassuming and modest
gentleman and has publicly stated that the preparation he received for that role was virtually nil, apart
from passing the standard four-day firearms course. As for post incident trauma counselling, there was
no such thing.  Jim Beaton took three bullets protecting Princess Anne who through it all acquitted
herself with calm confidence; the epitome of grace under pressure. Beaton earned his George Cross
and was lucky to survive.  In the years that followed, police firearms training changed dramatically.
Today, the initial course to train an Armed Response Vehicle officer takes eleven weeks; for close
protection officers, which includes defensive/offensive driving, it is even longer. Radio
communication has improved dramatically.  Advanced first aid training in trauma management is
standard and the kit to deal with it readily available. An attempt at such a crime today would have a
very different outcome.

Ron Russell well and truly earned his George Medal.  Believing he would never part with it, he
eventually fell on hard times and was forced to auction it a few years ago, but it fetched £50,000,
much to his amazement and delight.  During a TV interview after the auction, he recounted the
moment he saw PC Hills getting shot, telling the reporter, “I thought, you can’t do that, that’s a liberty,
I can’t have that, you’re not getting away with that one
”, before wading into Ball. The interview
concluded with him saying how when the police arrived in strength after his heroic action he was,
thrown in the back of a Triumph 2000 with something over me head, like a cloth”.  Those officers
were acting on minimal information with no idea who or where the bad guys were, except for the
injured PC Hills who was in full uniform, so anyone not shot and bleeding would be detained as a
precaution.  As for something thrown over Ron’s head, there was only one other mention of that
particular tactic. The arresting officers would continue their careers in the Met.  Phil Harris ended a
varied and successful career at the rank of Inspector.  PC Ivor MacGregor’s long and exemplary
service would be recognised with the award of The Queens Police Medal.  DC Peter Edmonds QGM
became a career detective and would once again be involved in the pursuit of a gunman intent on
carrying out an armed robbery on a post office. DC Edmonds and a colleague would be shot at during
that pursuit.  Undeterred, they got their man.  Edmonds would receive seven Commissioners
commendations during his service, two of them for ‘outstanding courage’, leaving no doubt that he
was a tough, courageous and forthright officer.  After twenty-seven years’ service he took his pension
retiring at the rank of detective sergeant.  He should have enjoyed a long and well-deserved
retirement, but he tragically passed away three years later aged fifty-six. To my knowledge he never
spoke publicly of The Mall incident.

To reach a coherent and credible conclusion, this story needs to be considered in the context of the
intense scrutiny and reforms that the Met CID was being subjected to at that time.  Their reputation
for professionalism and expertise was world-renowned.  In the era I joined, the CID was widely
perceived as a ‘force within the force’, a powerful brotherhood. It was well known that if you wanted
to be a detective you had to apply early, as they liked to get their future detectives on board whilst
young in service. I was told that if you had more than eight years service you’d struggle to be
accepted. Senior detective officers were not to be messed with. Even middle ranking detective
inspectors were powerful figures within their own command and could make or break a detective’s
career.  The police generally, and particularly the CID, was not a place for ‘shrinking violets’ and that
remains true to this day. The Commissioner at that time was Sir Robert Mark, a former army officer
and D-Day veteran whose police career started in Manchester where he served as a detective sergeant
and inspector but was fast-tracked through the ranks becoming the chief constable of Leicester in
1957.  Ten years later he was in the Met and was made Commissioner in 1972.  But all was not well. 

There had been some serious corruption cases involving some very senior detectives, several of whom
were tried, convicted and jailed.  Mark promised reforms and his new broom started sweeping through
the CID with a vengeance.  Several hundred detectives were sacked or required to resign.   Many
others amongst the vast majority of good detectives suffered badly in the process by being transferred
to uniform posts, so it wasn’t surprising that the Commissioner was referred to by some in the CID as
‘Black Mark’. In short, the CID hierarchy were feeling bruised, indignant and threatened, a feeling
that permeated the department.  With their reputation badly damaged, the news media falling over
itself to hang them out to dry at every opportunity and with what many felt was grossly unfair action
taken against them by a Commissioner they resented, a siege mentality had developed. 
With that as a backdrop, one could argue that when the chance for some much-needed restorative
kudos presented itself in The Mall, the opportunity to grab it and run may have been irresistible.  Was
a friendly arm placed around Peter Edmonds’ shoulder with a quiet voice in his ear suggesting a nice
win-win? He too was a very junior officer, respectfully deferential to the upper echelons of a
hierarchical system. If that was the case, then faced with such a dichotomy, and on the cusp of his
passage into the CID, the pressure on him to comply would have been immense.

Do I believe the official account of the arrest that has the lone detective chasing Ball, being threatened
with the gun then throwing his coat over the fugitive and bringing him to the ground, with no mention
of the other officers?  No, I do not. I believe it is fanciful.  The statements of the Delta 1 officers
contained not a trace of bravado; on the contrary they were typical of most doers of brave deeds;
matter of fact and dismissive of their courage, knowing that in the company of their comrades
boasting was no route to popularity. Discrepancies aside, that rugby team hit the ground running with
no thought for their own safety and Edmonds was very close by. However, something happened to the post-arrest narrative that set aside the Delta 1 crew’s statements and denied them their rightful
recognition of a QGM. The military call that ‘stolen valour’. But their initial feelings of hurt and
indignation soon passed; they simply took it in their stride and got on with the job, satisfied that those
who really mattered to them knew and understood.  I, for one, remain immensely proud of them. 

In researching these events I have taken great care to write empirically and personally, setting out
each scene so that the story evolves coherently.  I mention this, in conclusion, for two reasons; the
first being a reiteration that the final moments leading up to Ball’s arrest that I have described, was not
what appeared in the press in the hours and days that followed; that account has remained the official
version, to this day. The second reason is that a TV documentary about the event was broadcast on
Channel 4 on June 25 th , 2023. The documentary included two key witnesses; Princess Anne’s former
protection officer, James Beaton GC and Ron Russell GM. Curiously, and perhaps crucially, it didn’t
feature any of the officers from Delta 1. In the programme, Russell stated that the first time he saw
Peter Edmonds was at the ceremony where they were officially congratulated. He stated, When I saw
him, I went and stood alongside him and I said, ‘You’re here under false pretences, aren’t you?’ And
he just looked at me and he went, ‘If you’re ever in any trouble, you don’t talk to anyone until you talk
to me.’ I said, ‘Fair enough.’ But I’ve never been in trouble, so I’ve never needed it. What he meant
by that is, don’t tell anyone else what you’ve just said.”

Falklands and Gulf War veteran, Captain Chris Craig RN, summarised my feelings about this incident
perfectly in his book “Call For Fire”when, in praise of his gallant team in The Falklands and first
Gulf War, he wrote, ‘the gap between those aglitter with medals and those who ‘merely’ fought is
often much smaller than folklore would have us believe’.

Geoff Cadman.

Reproduced with permission.

Unsung heroes

In the United Kingdom, police officers stand as sentinels of peace, safeguarding communities and upholding law and order. These men and women, often referred to as the “thin blue line,” are a family, a family that exhibits remarkable heroism and bravery in the face of adversity, dedicating themselves to protecting the public and ensuring justice prevails.

The origins of modern policing in the UK can be traced back to the Metropolitan Police Service, established in 1829 by then Home Secretary Sir Robert Peel. Peel’s principles of policing emphasised community cooperation, crime prevention, and professionalism, shaping the foundation of the UK’s law enforcement approach. From its inception, the police force has embodied these principles, with countless officers demonstrating extraordinary courage in their efforts to maintain public safety.

The tragic death of 46-year-old Sergeant Graham Saville will have hurt the police family. Few officers, serving or retired, will have known Graham personally, but all will recognise him for the job he did, the duty he performed and the risks he was prepared to take to save the life of a complete stranger. The reason, we’ve all been there. We’ve all asked ourselves how we would face that moment when duty requires you to risk your life to save another. We’ve all received training on risk, be it the live railway line, the burning building where people are believed trapped, the frozen lake where a child has slipped into the dark, icy water, the crazed sword wielding madman, the armed terrorist bent on murder, the suicide bomber, and any number of other times where police officers may be called to place themselves in harm’s way. Some of us have taken those risks and survived. Others are not so fortunate. But knowledge of their mortality doesn’t stop those young men and women from taking such risks.

One remarkable example of heroism in recent memory is the response to the 2017 London Bridge attack. In the face of terror and an apparent suicide bomber , UK police officers demonstrated incredible bravery and selflessness.

Armed only with batons and minimal protective gear, several officers rushed towards danger, engaging the attacker carrying what appeared to be a bomb despite the imminent threat to their own lives. Their quick and decisive actions saved numerous lives and prevented further tragedy. These qualities reflect the real character of the men and women of our police services and the commitment, and dedication they exhibit each day.

While high-profile incidents like London Bridge and this week’s death of Graham Saville highlight the extraordinary courage of UK police officers, countless instances of bravery occur daily, often away from the public eye. These unsung heroes respond to emergencies, diffuse tense situations, and protect vulnerable individuals. From intervening in domestic violence situations to rescuing individuals from accidents, their willingness to place themselves in harm’s way for the greater good remains unwavering.

Tragically, some police officers will pay the ultimate price in the line of duty. The UK remembers these fallen heroes through various memorials and ceremonies. The National Police Memorial, located in London, stands as a solemn tribute to officers who lost their lives while serving the public.

These memorials serve as poignant reminders of the risks officers face and the sacrifices they make to ensure the safety and wellbeing of their fellow citizens. The next time you pass one of these, do stop for a moment to think what they represent.

The heroism and bravery displayed by UK police officers reflects an unwavering commitment to upholding the principles of justice, safety, and public order. From confronting immediate threats in high-stress situations to fostering trust within communities, these officers exemplify the true essence of public service. As the custodians of peace, they navigate complex challenges with courage, empathy, and professionalism. The police is a service that has rightly come in for significant criticism of late when some, not fit to wear the uniform, have been exposed. However, we who do not run towards danger, who are not called to enter that burning building or frozen lake or, indeed, to pull a man from the path of an oncoming train; we must remember the legacy of Sir Robert Peel’s principles lives on through their actions, reminding us that the “thin blue line” is not just a symbol, but a steadfast embodiment of bravery in the face of adversity.

Sergeant Graham Saville, I salute you. As I salute each and every police officer prepared to do the job you did.

The photograph above shows former PC John Murray at the first police memorial, dedicated in 1984 to the memory of WPC Yvonne Fletcher. The story of Yvonne’s murder and of John’s incredible 40-year campaign to secure justice for her has now been published. It’s called No Ordinary Day. More about it here.

Betrayal and Manipulation: The Devastating Politicisation of the Thin Blue Line

The recent decision by the Metropolitan Police to ban the wearing of the thin blue line badge has stirred significant controversy and debate. A symbol that has traditionally been used to represent solidarity and support for law enforcement officers, and a salute to those killed in the line of duty, the thin blue line badge, featuring a black-and-white union flag with a blue line, has become a popular national symbol representing the role of law enforcement as a barrier between the monsters and the weak, a force separating society from chaos and disorder. Supporters argue the badge symbolises respect for the fallen and appreciation for the difficult and often dangerous work performed by police officers.

And, I would argue, to assess the probity of this badge or patch, it is very relevant to consider when and how the expression ‘thin blue line’ first became popular. It was about twenty years ago when a United States marine called Michael Marks wrote a poem by that name, reputedly while sitting in a shell-hole during a tour of Iraq. The poignant ending to that poem resulted in it becoming hugely popular in policing and military circles.

These are final words of that poem; –



The decision by the Met to ban the public wearing of this patch at a demonstration has prompted discussions regarding the implications of its display, potential political affiliations, and its impact on community relations. In February this year, it was reported that a Nottingham based police officer had been referred for possible disciplinary action following a complaint by a member of the public alleging the thin blue line patch he had been wearing was now ‘associated with racism’ following its misuse at a protest against a Black Lives Matter rally in the United States. Rather than choosing to robustly defending the officer concerned or to point out that no such association exists in the UK, local senior officers chose to ban all local officers from wearing the patch.

It wasn’t long before political agitators and critics of the police jumped on the bandwagon to use this precedent to attack other police services in the UK. Their rather disingenuous argument maintained the suggestion that the thin blue line symbol had increasingly been associated with the aforementioned undesirable political ideology present in the US. It was said that, in some instances, the patch has been adopted by groups with controversial or divisive agendas, leading to concerns about the potential for the symbol to be seen as a statement of opposition to a number of social justice movements. If the police wore the patch, it was claimed, they were associating themselves with that ideology.

As Nottingham had done before them, senior officers in the Met caved in to this view. The ban they imposed appears to be an attempt to address concerns about perceived bias or favouritism within law enforcement, their acceptance being that the display of the badge could indeed suggest an affinity with such ideologies and, therefore, a lack of impartiality and fairness that could erode trust between the police and the communities they serve.

Not all Chief Officers have shared this view with one or two of the bravest being prepared to stand up and defend the badge for what it truly represents. The Met decision, however, raises complex issues surrounding symbolism, political associations, community relations, and trust. While the ban may be intended to address concerns about bias and impartiality, it also risks alienating officers and their supporters, driving a wedge between rank and file officers and management. Is it the case that the hijacking of a police patch by a group in the United States should have such an immediate and telling impact on thinking and decision-making in the UK? Is this a reflection of the manner in which policing has become increasingly influenced and controlled in accordance with political expediency rather that public desire and need? Or is this a line in the sand, a point at which the police service needs to stand up and be counted?



Even twenty years ago, the police service in the United Kingdom was regarded as a pillar of impartiality and professionalism. In recent years, however, concerns have been raised in many quarters over the increasing politicisation of the police, their priorities, their style of management, their performance and their ability to deliver the quality of service the UK public is entitled to expect.To understand the current state of affairs, it is important to examine the historical context. The UK’s police service once operated with a strong emphasis on political neutrality and independence. This principle was enshrined in what the Baroness Casey report recently referred to as ‘Peelian Principles’, reputedly established by Sir Robert Peel, the founder of modern UK policing.


Factors such as increased political scrutiny, constraining legislation, the introduction of Police and Crime Commissioners, budget cuts, and government demands for specific outcomes have raised justified concerns about the erosion of police independence.


Several incidents have highlighted the politicisation of the police service. One notable example is the handling of very kind of demonstration that saw the removal of thin blue line patches. The police’s inconsistent response to politically charged gatherings has drawn criticism, with accusations of biased treatment based on political leanings. This has fuelled concerns the police are being directed to prioritise political considerations when maintaining public order with what might be described as ‘light-touch’ policing applied only where political expediency supersedes a need to maintain public order.


The appointment of senior police officers has also come under increasing scrutiny. Critics argue that the selection process is now too greatly influenced by political considerations, compromising the meritocratic principles that should guide these appointments. Similarly, the ease with those Chief Officers who have demonstrate a reluctance to accede to the demands of their political masters, have been dismissed has contributed to a growing feeling that the credibility and independence of the police service is effectively compromised. Toe the line, Chief Constable, or I’ll replace you with someone who will.

The politicisation of the police service has had far-reaching consequences for public trust and confidence. The impartiality and fairness of the police are fundamental to their effectiveness in maintaining law and order. When the perception of bias (for whatever reason) takes root, public trust in the police is eroded. This can lead to reduced cooperation, reluctance to report crime, and a breakdown of community relations – all factors we see present in today’s society.

Several factors have contributed to the politicisation of the police service. One is the increased centralisation of power in policing, with policy being set and decisions being made at national level rather than locally. This concentration of power has made the police service more susceptible to political interference. Another is budget cuts which have put pressure on police forces, making them more vulnerable to political influence. When resources are limited, there is inevitable temptation to prioritise certain issues or appease political interests to secure funding or support.


Is it too late?

To address the issue of politicisation, it is crucial to reinforce the principles of independence, impartiality, and accountability within the police service. This might be achieved through greater transparency in decision-making processes, robust safeguards against political interference, and clear guidelines on the handling of politically sensitive situations. Moreover, a renewed commitment to the training and education of both politicians and police officers on the importance of political neutrality and impartiality is essential. This would help foster a culture that values professionalism and integrity above political considerations. The issue preventing this, however, is political will. Now our police service has been brought under political control, will our politicians ever be prepared to allow it to regain its independence?

Or is the banning of the Thin Blue Line badge a symptom of a service broken beyond repair?


For more on the history of police independence, when the Peelian principles were first brought into question and how our police services were systematically brought under political control, please do read No Ordinary Day – how one of the greatest tragedies in UK policing history triggered the end of an independent UK police service.

No Ordinary Day – available from today!

The truth behind the murder, in 1984, of WPC Yvonne Fletcher, and how events that day shaped the future of UK policing for the next four decades.

On 17th April 2024, it will be forty years since the greatest tragedy and the longest siege in UK policing history. Today, 8th June 2023, sees the publication by Ad Lib of No Ordinary Day.

Below are links to enable you to purchase the book. Matt Johnson and John Murray will also be appearing at CrimeCon on 10th June, at Hatchards, Piccadilly on 27th June and at the Bow Street Museum on 29th June.

No Ordinary Day reveals, for the first time, why two gunmen opened fire on demonstrators outside the Libyan People’s Bureau, how the attack was planned, who carried it out and who gave the orders. And it reveals why, in the aftermath of the attack and with the attackers under siege, the UK Government were so keen to avoid prosecutions and have the perpetrators removed from UK soil.

Hatchards

Waterstones

W H Smith

Hive

Amazon UK

No Ordinary Day – the story of the shooting of WPC Yvonne Fletcher

On 8th June this year, Ad Lib will be publishing No Ordinary Day, the long-awaited story of former Met PC John Murray’s 40 year campaign to secure justice for Yvonne’s murder, together with an inside account of the longest siege in UK policing history, of the hostages seized in Libya, of the politics, the diplomacy and what really happened on the day Yvonne Fletcher was killed.


ISBN 9781802471441 ~ Paperback £9.99


‘An important book, especially now – both an intensely personal story, and a sober analysis of a political scandal’ – Lee Child


On 17 April 1984, as police and anti-Gaddafi demonstrators gathered in the street outside the Libyan People’s Bureau in London, they had no way of knowing they were about to become part of one of the greatest tragedies in British policing history. At 10.17am automatic gunfire rained down on them. WPC Yvonne Fletcher was hit in the back and later died from her injuries. Twelve demonstrators were wounded. The gunmen were Libyans, both concealed behind a first-floor window of the Bureau.
Two weeks later, all those present inside the Bureau, including everyone suspected of involvement in the attack, were deported from the UK. Men guilty of terrorism and murder were neither arrested nor prosecuted.

matt johnson yvonne fletcher libyan people bureau
Severely injured WPC Yvonne Fletcher being helped by colleagues John Murray, Howard Turner and Pete Rogers.

As Yvonne Fletcher lay dying, her colleague and close friend PC John Murray cradled her in his arms. Before she lost consciousness, he promised her he would not rest until those responsible for her murder had been brought to justice.

Thirty-seven years would pass before John was able to fulfil that promise. Whilst writing John Murray’s story, Matt Johnson identified UK government duplicity, secret service deals and how a plan to finally defeat the all-powerful National Union of Mineworkers would place the government in an invidious position when pro- and anti-Gaddafi elements brought their fight to the streets of the UK. He was able to discover why, in 1984, her killers had been allowed to go free. His extensive research also revealed how events on 17 April resulted in a 30-year government campaign to bring the police services of the UK under political control, a campaign that has driven our police service into the state of disarray we see today.

‘Espionage, betrayal, terrorism, corruption and murder. All the ingredients of a Le Carré novel, only it’s real’ – Matthew Hall, crime writer and screenwriter

The story behind what happened outside the Libyan People’s Bureau is complex, shocking and revealing. Matt Johnson’s compelling account pulls together a series of seemingly unconnected threads into a coherent whole, incorporating all the inter-related elements of politics, business, secret service missions and chance.

For some, this will be a very uncomfortable read. For many, it may confirm what they already suspect, that we, the public, know very little of the decisions being made by our elected representatives and the actions taken by official bodies, supposedly in our best interests.

‘A powerful and timely account of one of the darkest chapters in British policing history’ – John Sutherland, author of Blue, A Memoir

The TV option to No Ordinary Day has been sold and is being developed with a BAFTA award-winning producer.

For further information please contact Ad Lib Publicity Manager Mel Sambells Mel@Mardlebooks.com

Links to pre-order are below

What is justice?

One day, at one of our law schools, a learned professor walked into a lecture hall ready to address a large assembly of law students.

He looked around.

“You there in the 8th row. Can you tell me your name?” he said, pointing to one student.

“My name is Sandra” she replied.

The professor turned and indicated the exit. “Please leave the hall,” he said. “I don’t want to see you in my lecture.”

Everyone remained quiet, stunned by the unexpected development. The student, although clearly irritated, slowly packed her things and stood up.

“Faster please,” the Professor called to her, impatiently.

Meekly, her head bowed, the female student left the lecture hall.

The professor kept looking around.

The remaining students appeared scared. Some glanced at their friends, uncertain what had happened or whether they too had transgressed in some way and would suffer a similar fate

“Why are there laws?” the Professor said, as the students settled down.

There was no response to the question. Once more, students looked at each other. Some lowered their heads, seemingly concentrating on their note books, desperate not to incur the wrath of this unpredictable tutor.

“What are laws for?” the Professor asked again.

“Social order,” came a tentative voice from the back row

Another brave student spoke up. “To protect a person’s personal rights,.” she called out.

“So that you can rely on the state,” said another voice.

The professor appeared unmoved.

“Justice,” called out a student from the anonymous centre of the assembly.

The professor smiled.

“Thank you very much, ” he said. “Tell me. Did I behave unfairly towards your classmate?”

Everyone nodded.

“Indeed I did,” he continued. “So, why didn’t anyone protest? Why didn’t any of you try to stop me? Why didn’t you want to prevent this injustice?” he demanded.

Nobody answered.

The Professor smiled again. “What you have just learned, you wouldn’t have understood in a thousand hours of lectures if you hadn’t lived it. Despite the apparent injustice, you didn’t say anything on behalf of your fellow student because you weren’t affected yourself. This attitude speaks against us and against life. People generally think as long as it doesn’t concern them, it’s none of their business. I’m telling you, if you don’t say anything today and don’t bring about justice, then one day you too will experience injustice and no one will stand up for you. Justice doesn’t just exist. We have to fight for it.”

“In life and at work, we often live next to each other instead of with each other. We console ourselves that the problems of others are none of our business. We go home and are glad we were spared. Justice is about standing up for others. Every day an injustice happens somewhere, in public and in private. Relying on someone else to sort it out is not enough. It is our duty to be there for others. Speaking for others when they cannot.”

The Professor then asked the ejected student, who had been party to the his ruse, to return to the lecture hall.

This was a simple lesson, to young lawyers who’s role it would become to speak up for others. There is a lesson here for society, however. It’s one we fail to heed at our peril.

Dogs are companions not meat

I heard the rumours, scarcely believing it could be true.

Today, thanks to an article on the BBC, I learned it is. And it’s happening now.

People are eating dog meat, here in the UK. And yes, it is legal! Sale and purchase of dog meat is banned. Consumption is not. Provided a dog is killed humanely – complying with animal cruelty laws – there is nothing to stop people eating an animal we think of as a pet.

Unbelievable, isn’t it? 2018, in the UK, you can kill your dog and eat it, and the law cannot touch you.

Indonesians-Taste-for-Dog-Meat-Grows-In-Popularity

I’m not going to post any more pictures here. When I began looking for images to support this article I found them so horrifying, so disgusting and upsetting that I will not share them.

My views are not impartial, I’ll admit. Dogs have been my pet and working companions for most of my life. I still remember those that have passed with fondness, think about their characters, recall the goodness they brought into my life. My two present friends sit here with me now as I write this. Their walk is delayed, so pressed did I feel to complete this article.

I accept, there are countries around the world – mostly in Asia – where dog meat is a staple part of the diet. It’s also seen as cuisine, traditional and part of ritual. Organisations such as The World Dog Alliance and Humane Society International run campaigns to have it banned, but with limited success.

And, in the meantime, it has spread. Now, here in the UK, we cannot assume that dog sold as a pet, re-homed to a new family or taken in by a kind new owner is destined to be safe. Some of them are intended for consumption – not many I accept, but enough to justify a ban.

Scottish MP, Dr Lisa Cameron, is heading a move to have the consumption of dog meat banned here in the UK. I urge you to support her. Tweet this article, copy in your own MP, point out they have the power to do this and … let’s get this awful practise banned.

Dogs are our companions, not our next meal.

#donteatdog

That man – and why you should ignore him.

I’d like to thank Shahida Arabi, the author of some incredible work on Narcissism for much of the content to this article. I’ve adapted it, edited and cut parts to suit the particular circumstances relevant to this situation.

Having seen some of the arguments and frustration that people have experienced, I wondered if some context might help.

I’ve cut off all contact with this particular narcissist, and this is why. You may recognise some behaviours you have experienced yourself with this particular individual.

In popular culture, the term “narcissistic” is thrown about quite loosely, usually referring to vanity and self-absorption. While narcissism does exist on a spectrum, narcissism as a full-fledged personality disorder is quite different.

People who meet the criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder or those who have traits of Antisocial Personality Disorder  can operate in extremely manipulative ways due to their deceitfulness, lack of empathy and their tendency to be interpersonally exploitative.

You may have seen the following covert manipulation tactics when you first had contact with this person.

  1. The Idealization-Devaluation-Discard Phase

Narcissists and those with antisocial traits tend to subject new relationships through three phases. The idealization phase consists of ‘putting you on a pedestal’, making you the centre of their world, being in contact with you frequently, and showering you with flattery and praise. You are convinced that the narcissist can’t operate without you. Think: constant texting, flattery and wanting to be in regular and frequent contact. Familiar?

This is a technique known as “lovebombing” and it is how most victims get sucked in: They might be tired of the “games” other people play with each other in communication and are flattered by the constant attention they get from this person – the narcissist. You may be fooled into thinking that this means a narcissist is truly interested in you, when in fact, he is actually interested in making you dependent on his constant praise and attention.

The devaluation phase is subsequent to this idealization phase, and this is when you’re left wondering why you were so abruptly thrust off the pedestal. The narcissist will suddenly start to blow hot and cold, criticizing you, covertly and overtly putting you down, comparing you to others, emotionally withdrawing from you and giving you the silent treatment when you’ve failed to meet their “standards.” You are mislead into thinking that if you just learn not to be so “needy,” “clingy,” or “jealous,”  the narcissist will reward you with the  friendly behaviour he demonstrated in the beginning. The narcissist may use these and other similar words to gaslight victims when they react normally to being provoked. It’s a way to maintain control over your legitimate emotional reactions to their stonewalling, emotional withdrawal and inconsistency.

Narcissists love conflict. They thrive on it. They create it, perpetuate it and repeat it. It seems to others to be a very odd way to behave, and it is. But not to them.

Unfortunately, it is during the devaluation phase that a narcissist’s true self shows itself. The true colours are only now beginning to show, so it will be a struggle as you attempt to reconcile the image that the narcissist presented to you with his new behaviours.

  1. Gaslighting.

A technique narcissists use to convince you that your perception of their unpleasant behaviour is inaccurate.

During the devaluation and discard phases, the narcissist will often remark upon your “issues,” and displace blame of his/her abuse as your fault. Frequent use of phrases such as “You provoked me,” “You’re too sensitive,” “I never said that,” or “You’re taking things too seriously” after the narcissists’ abusive outbursts are common and are used to gaslight you into thinking that their behaviour is your fault or that it never even took place.

Narcissists are masters of making you doubt yourself and the abuse. This is how they fool people, take them in, make them feel part of their ‘group’.

  1. Smear campaigns.

Narcissists keep harems because they love to have their egos stroked and they need constant validation from the outside world to feed their need for excessive admiration and confirm their grandiose sense of self-importance. They are clever chameleons who are also people-pleasers, morphing into whatever personality suits them in situations with different types of people. It is no surprise, then, that the narcissist begins a smear campaign against you not too long after the discard phase, in order to paint you as the unstable one, and that this is usually successful within the narcissist’s support network which also tends to consist of other narcissists, people-pleasers, empaths, as well as people who are easily charmed.

This smear campaign accomplishes three things: 1) it depicts you as the problem or as an unstable person and deflects your accusations of bad behaviour, 2) it provokes you, thus ‘proving’ your instability to others when trying to argue his depiction of you, and 3) serves as a hoovering technique in which the narcissist seeks to pull you back into the trauma of the argument (remember that they love conflict) as you struggle to reconcile the stories or accusations made about you.

The only way to not get pulled into this tactic is by going full No Contact with both the narcissist and his harem.

Don’t argue with them. They cannot be wrong, they will never be persuaded. And remember – the love conflict, they enjoy it, thrive on it. It is their life-blood.

  1. Triangulation.

Healthy relationships thrive on security; unhealthy ones are filled with provocation, uncertainty and infidelity. Narcissists like to manufacture triangles and bring in the opinions of others to validate their point of view. They do this to an excessive extent in order to play puppeteer to your emotions. This triangulation can take place over social media, in person, or even through the narcissist’s own verbal accounts of the other woman or man. Unlike ‘normal’ people, the narcissist will belittle your feelings and continue inappropriate flirtations and behaviours without a second thought.

  1. The false self and the true self.

The narcissist hides behind the shield of a “false self,” a construct of qualities and traits that he or she usually presents to the outside world. Due to this shield, you are unlikely to comprehend the full extent of a narcissist’s inhumanity and lack of empathy until you are in the discard phase. This can make it difficult to pinpoint who the narcissistic abuser truly is – the sweet, charming and seemingly remorseful person that appears shortly after the poor behaviour is exposed, or the abusive individual who ridicules, invalidates and belittles you? People connected to narcissists can suffer a great deal of cognitive dissonance trying to reconcile the illusion the narcissist first presented to them with the tormenting behaviours he subjects them to later. During the discard phase, the narcissist reveals the true self – the genuinely abusive and abrasive personality beneath the shallow veneer rears its ugly head and you get a glimpse of the cruelty that was lurking within all along. You bear witness to his cold, callous indifference as you are discarded. You might think this is only a momentary lapse into inhumanity, but actually, it is as close you will ever get to seeing the narcissist’s true self.

The manipulative, conniving charm that existed in the beginning is no more – instead, it is replaced by the genuine contempt that the narcissist felt for you all along. See, narcissists don’t truly feel empathy for others – so during the discard phase, they feel absolutely nothing for you except the excitement of having exhausted another source of supply. You were just another source of supply, so do not fool yourself into thinking that the connection that existed in the beginning was in any way real. It was an illusion, much like the identity of the narcissist was fake and created, to attract, and to fill their needs.

If you’re interested in learning more about narcissistic behaviour and how to deal with it, maybe check out Shahida’s work.

Meeting @Harryonthebrink Bingham

Harry Bingham 2

7th October 2017 8pm at Crickhowell Literary Festival I get to meet and interview Harry Bingham.

At the time of writing, I’ve had quite limited contact with Harry but I’ve already concluded he is quite a character. I also confess that, until now, I hadn’t read any of his DC Fiona Griffiths crime novels.

But I have heard of Harry.  Harry Bingham 1

Many of you will have seen this incredible picture on social media and wondered who it was. Well, now you know.

Harry Bingham is a character himself, and as sure as eggs are eggs, when he turned his mind to crime-fiction, he was going to come up with a protagonist the likes of whom people will have never seen before.

And so was born Fiona Griffiths.

Harry Bingham 4

We first meet Detective Constable Griffiths in ‘Talking to the Dead’, a novel set in Cardiff. Griffiths is a relatively inexperienced CID officer who, due to a link with a fraud she is looking into, finds herself helping out on a team investigating two very unpleasant murders, of a mother and her daughter.

I’m familiar with Cardiff and the surrounding city so, for me, it made a nice change to see areas and streets I know feature and to learn something about the region as the story unfolded.

We also learn a lot about Fiona Griffiths; her family links to the criminal underworld, her unusual yet focussed personality, her ability to think outside the box, her struggle with inter-personal relationships and, perhaps most interestingly, her struggle with overcoming a childhood mental illness.

Griffiths is a maverick, the kind of detective that senior officers love and loathe in equal measure. She does things that most police officers would consider crazy and which we would never risk doing ourselves. She does the things we would like to do, but which fear of the law and the police disciplinary system prevents almost all of us from doing. And she gets results.

Harry asked me before I read the book if, as an ex-detective, I might cast an eye over his police procedure. I was more than happy to and I will tell him when I see him that yes, there are one or two rather unusual police related decisions and methods that I haven’t personally seen before. But I will also tell him this, and that is my impression that it matters not one jot. This book delivers and it thrills, just as a crime-thriller should. I’ve abandoned rather too many books recently and was so pleased to find one that kept me reading and kept me hooked.

I’m looking forward to October 7th, I hope you’ll join us.

Harry Bingham 5