Categories
Legal Analysis

What is a Cover Up ?

Cover Up

A coverup is an attempt to conceal wrongdoing, mistakes, or embarrassing information, usually by those in positions of power or authority. It involves:

  1. Suppression or Destruction of Evidence: Hiding, altering, or destroying documents, footage, or other evidence that could reveal the truth.
  2. Misinformation: Spreading false or misleading information to divert attention or to create a narrative that distracts from or contradicts the real events.
  3. Silence or Intimidation: Preventing individuals from speaking out through threats, bribes, or other coercive measures.
  4. Limited Hangout: Admitting to minor faults to distract from the more severe issues, making it seem like the problem has been addressed when it hasn’t.
  5. Official Secrecy: Using legal or procedural means like classification or ‘national security’ claims to keep information under wraps.

Coverups can occur in various contexts, from government and corporate sectors to personal or organisational levels, often aiming to protect reputations, avoid legal consequences, or maintain power.

Here are some notable examples of coverups in the UK…

  1. Hillsborough Disaster (1989):
    • Initially, there was an attempt to blame the tragedy on Liverpool fans. It took years, multiple investigations, and the persistence of the victims’ families to reveal the police’s role and their subsequent coverup of their errors and mistakes during the event.
  2. Bloody Sunday (1972):
    • The initial Widgery Report largely exonerated the British soldiers involved in the shooting of 13 unarmed civilians in Derry, attributing some blame to the victims. It wasn’t until the Saville Inquiry in 2010 that a more truthful account was acknowledged, terming the actions of the soldiers as “unjustified and unjustifiable.”
  3. The Birmingham Six and Guildford Four:
    • These were high-profile miscarriages of justice where individuals were wrongly convicted for IRA bombings in the 1970s. There’s been significant critique and evidence suggesting that judicial processes failed, with police and prosecution potentially withholding evidence that could have proven their innocence. The convictions were eventually overturned, but not before those involved served years in prison.
  4. The Profumo Affair (1963):
    • John Profumo, the Secretary of State for War, initially denied having an affair with Christine Keeler, who was also linked to a Soviet naval attaché. His deceit led to a political scandal and his resignation. The coverup attempt involved misleading statements to Parliament and the public.
  5. Carl Beech Case (Operation Midland):
    • This case involved allegations of a VIP paedophile ring which were later proven to be fabrications by Carl Beech. The police and the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) faced criticism for their handling of the case, including possibly overlooking evidence that could have discredited Beech sooner, thereby indirectly facilitating a coverup of the truth about the allegations.
  6. The Post Office Horizon IT Scandal:
    • Over many years, sub-postmasters were wrongly prosecuted due to faults in the Horizon IT system. The Post Office maintained the system’s integrity, leading to wrongful convictions, financial ruin, and jail time for many. The coverup involved denial of system errors, aggressive legal tactics against sub-postmasters, and suppression of whistleblower information. The judicial system’s role in prosecuting sub-postmasters based on flawed evidence from the Horizon system can also be seen as part of a broader coverup.
  7. Child Abuse in Care Homes:
    • There have been numerous instances where abuse in children’s homes was covered up. For example, the Rotherham child sexual exploitation scandal saw widespread abuse that was known to authorities but not adequately acted upon for many years due to fear of being labelled racist or due to incompetence.
  8. Kincora Boys’ Home:
    • Allegations have persisted that abuse at Kincora was known to authorities, including MI5, who allegedly used one of the abusers for intelligence purposes. The lack of thorough investigation or prosecution for years could be seen as a form of coverup, although direct judicial involvement in hiding the truth has not been conclusively proven.
  9. Undercover Police Scandals:
    • Undercover police infiltrated various protest groups, forming long-term relationships with activists under false pretenses. The extent of these operations, including fathering children with activists without revealing their true identity, was hidden from public knowledge for decades.
  10. Royal Sussex County Hospital:
    • The hospital and trust are well known for scandal, controversy and medical negligence. It has also been accused of bullying whistle-blowers and turning a blind eye to serious complaints about nursing staff.

These examples highlight a spectrum of coverup activities from misdirection and denial to active suppression of information, illustrating the complexities and implications of such actions in public and legal spheres.

Check out our related articles on Rule of Law, Open Justice, Policing by Consent, Innocent until Proven Guilty, R v Sussex Justices, What is Sub Judice ?, What is a Non-Crime Hate Incident (NCHI) ?, What is Christophobia ?, What is Islamophobia ? and the highly questionable Sussex Family Justice Board.

The Ministry of Injustice is not the Ministry of Justice nor is it affiliated in any way with the justice system, legal profession, police or any other law enforcement agencies.

Latest Articles ↓

Most Popular ↓

You should always seek formal legal advice from a qualified and reputable lawyer (solicitor or barrister).

There are a number of links to Free and Paid For Legal Resources and Legal Organisations on the Free Legal Advice , Legal Aid and Pro Bono pages.

[post_title] was last updated on the 23rd June 2026

By Dom Watts

Dom Watts founded the Ministry of Injustice in July 2021. Dom is an IT Professional with 30+ years experience in Tier 1 Banking, Government, Defence, Healthcare and Global Blue Chips. Dom has no legal training and is not a lawyer but has previously consulted for a Magic Circle Law Firm. You can find Dom on X or Google.

Dom Watts publishes the Ministry of Injustice as a citizen journalist. The journalism exemption is detailed in the Data protection and journalism code of practice published by the ICO and Section 124 of the Data Protection Act 2018.

Section 2 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of truth. Section 3 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of honest opinion. Section 4 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the defence of public interest. Section 8 of the Defamation Act 2013 sets out the single publication rule.

Section 4a of The Limitation Act 1980 defines the time limit for actions for defamation or malicious falsehood as one year from the date on which the cause of action accrued.

Article 10 of the Human Rights Act 1998 gives the right to freedom of expression. "This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."

"Free speech encompasses the right to offend, and indeed to abuse another." - Para 43 Scottow v CPS [2020] EWHC 3421 (Admin)

"Free speech is a fundamental common law right" - Para 21 R v Shayler [2002] UKHL 11 [2003] 1 AC 247 per Lord Bingham and Para 42 Phillips -v- Secretary of State for Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Affairs [2024] EWHC 32 (Admin)

Dom is a member of The Free Speech Union

“A key issue here is the need to distinguish between conduct which, however objectionable, does not justify invoking the criminal law and conduct which crosses the line and results in criminal liability" - Para 31 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

“Harassment is generally understood to involve improper oppressive and unreasonable conduct that is targeted at an individual and calculated to produce alarm and distress” - Para 38 R v O’Neill [2016] EWCA Crim 92 [2016]

"The behaviour said to amount to harassment must reach a level of seriousness passing beyond irritations, annoyances....The gravity of the misconduct must be of an order which would sustain criminal liability" - Paras [40-44] Hayden v Dickenson [2020] EWHC 3291 (QB)

"If you tell the truth, you don't have to remember anything"

In 2002 Dom Watts was an unlikely consumer champion. The dad of three from Croydon took on the power and might of Kodak – and won...Dom on BBC Working Lunch

Rule of Law - Open Justice - Policing By Consent