Will of man believed to be Stakeknife will not be made public, High Court rules
Scappaticci, from west Belfast, had always denied the claims before his death aged 77 in 2023.
In a ruling on Monday, Sir Julian Flaux ordered that Scappaticci's will should be sealed for 70 years, meaning that its contents will not be made public.
The judge said that this is the first time, except for members of the royal family, where a court has ordered that a will not be made open to public inspection in the way the document would usually be.
He said: 'There is nothing in the will, which is in fairly standard form, which could conceivably be of interest to the public or the media.'
A hearing to decide whether the will should be sealed was held on July 21 and was closed to the public and the media.
Barristers for the Attorney General, who represents the public interest in such matters, supported the will being sealed at the hearing in London, Sir Julian said.
The court heard that a man named Michael Johnson was prepared to represent Scappaticci's interests provided that the will was sealed.
Christopher Buckley, representing Mr Johnson, said that making Scappaticci's will publicly available would be 'undesirable' and 'inappropriate', and that Mr Johnson feared his life being put at risk if the will was made open to inspection.
Sir Julian said that there was 'the need to protect (Mr Johnson) and those named in the will from the real risk of serious physical harm or even death because they might be thought to be guilty by association' with Scappaticci.
He said: 'The real risk to his life and wellbeing which the deceased faced in his lifetime is amply demonstrated.'
He continued: 'Publication of the will would be both undesirable and inappropriate.'
The judge concluded that holding the hearing in public would have 'defeated the whole object' of the bid to have the will sealed.
Sir Julian said in his 18-page ruling that Scappaticci was alleged to have been a leading member of the Provisional IRA, and was part of the 'Nutting Squad' from around 1980 until the mid-1990s, which interrogated suspected informers during the Troubles.
In 2003, media reports claimed that Scappaticci had spied on the IRA for the British government, and that while working for both organisations, 'was responsible for the torture and murder of dozens of alleged IRA informers'.
Scappaticci always denied the claim but failed in a legal bid to force the British government to publicly state that he was not Stakeknife, forcing him to move to England in 2003.
Sir Julian said: 'He could not have remained in Northern Ireland, as he could have been killed by one side or the other.
'Even after he moved to England and changed his name, he continued to receive death threats.
'Such was their nature that he had to relocate at short notice several times over the years.'
Operation Kenova was then launched to probe the activities of Stakeknife within the Provisional IRA and crimes such as murder and torture, as well as the role played by the security services.
The probe, which was undertaken by Bedfordshire Police and cost tens of millions of pounds, reported its interim findings last year, after Scappaticci's death.
While it stopped short of naming him as Stakeknife, it found that more lives were probably lost than saved by the agent's actions.
The former Chief Constable of Bedfordshire Police and author of the interim report, Jon Boutcher, said that the identity of Stakeknife 'will have to be confirmed at some point' but that he would 'have to leave this to my final report'.
He said: 'For now, it suffices to say that Mr Scappaticci was and still is inextricably bound up with and a critical person of interest at the heart of Operation Kenova.'
He continued: 'I believe that we found strong evidence of very serious criminality on the part of Mr Scappaticci and his prosecution would have been in the interests of victims, families and justice.'
Prosecutors said at the time the interim report was published that the examination of files containing evidence of serious criminality by Scappaticci was at an advanced stage at the time of his death.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
North Wales Chronicle
43 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Fact check: Recognising a Palestinian state, misleading tsunami video and deportations vs returns
Is the Government on track with its pledge to recognise a Palestinian state? On July 29, the Prime Minister announced that the UK would recognise Palestine as a state in September, ahead of the United Nations (UN) General Assembly, unless Israel meets certain conditions. Labour's manifesto committed to formally recognising a Palestinian state 'as a contribution to a renewed peace process which results in a two-state solution'. A 'two-state solution' refers to a proposed framework to resolve the ongoing Israeli-Palestinian conflict, in which a sovereign Palestinian state is established alongside Israel. Previous efforts at a peace process did not result in a sovereign Palestinian state. UK governments have long been in favour of a two-state solution, as well as recognising a Palestinian state as part of a process towards that goal. All members of the G7 group of countries have pledged support for a two-state solution, as has the EU and China. Palestine is currently designated by the UN as a 'permanent observer state', a form of non-member state, meaning it cannot vote on decisions made by the UN's main organs and bodies, such as the General Assembly. However, the majority of UN member states have formally recognised Palestine. According to media reports, as of July 2025, some 147 UN member states formally recognised Palestinian statehood, not including France, which in the same month committed to recognising Palestine at the General Assembly in September. The UK is not included in this figure, although it does have a Consulate General in Jerusalem to assist British nationals in the Occupied Palestinian Territories. It has been reported that a number of UK peers have questioned the legal basis for any recognition of a Palestinian state. Full Fact has contacted the Government for comment on this. How fact checkers helped set the record straight on PM's viral video When 31-year-old Abby Raworth first realised her photo and name were being shared online – falsely linked to a viral video involving the Prime Minister – she assumed it was a mix-up. Posts on social media claimed that the woman in the video was not mum-of-three Nicola but was really a 'paid actress' or 'actress and agent' named Abby Raworth. Full Fact's investigation brought to light how much was being written about her online 'without any regard for if it was correct or not.' Abby has spoken to Full Fact about her experience, telling us: 'What shocks me is how little people bothered to do regarding checks before they used someone's name and accused them of something. There is a lack of accountability for what comes out of peoples' mouths and if it had happened to any of those people they would have a different opinion on it.' We're grateful to Abby for sharing her story to help show exactly why Full Fact exists to counter the harm caused by misinformation. Old tsunami video circulates amid Pacific evacuations A video circulating online amid major evacuations across the Pacific is claimed to show a tsunami which has taken 'thousands of lives'. But this is misleading. The footage shows three people, including the person filming, narrowly escape huge waves that crash into some small boats on a shore. It was shared online following news of an 8.8 magnitude earthquake off the coast of Russia, which triggered the evacuation of almost two million people across Japan. Warnings were also put in place in other locations including Hawaii, Ecuador, Indonesia, Peru and China. A caption shared with the video said: 'Massive Earthquake triggers Tsunami taking thousands of lives in seconds with little to no warning.' But this footage is not current, or related to the earthquake in Russia or the subsequent tsunami warnings. It actually showed a tsunami which occurred on the west coast of Greenland in 2017, triggered by a landslide. That tsunami did not kill 'thousands', as stated in the social media posts. Four people were killed, and nine others were injured. The same footage has been wrongly shared in the wake of other earthquakes before. Has Labour carried out 'record deportations'? Labour MP Mike Tapp recently claimed that the Government has carried out 'record deportations'. We've frequently seen MPs and ministers using the word 'deportations' when referring to all immigration returns. Not all immigration returns are 'deportations'. We don't actually know how many meet the official definition of a deportation, which the Home Office defines as 'a specific subset of returns which are enforced either following a criminal conviction or when it is judged that a person's removal from the UK is conducive to the public good'. We do know, however, that enforced returns – the category of returns which includes deportations – account for a minority (26%) of all returns carried out under Labour during its first year in office. According to ad-hoc figures published by the Home Office, during Labour's first year in office a total of 35,052 returns were recorded. We don't have the data to compare this exact period to the same period in previous years, but official immigration statistics show that this figure is not a record for the number of immigration returns over a 12-month period, going back to 2004 when this data series began. These figures show that immigration returns over a 12-month period were consistently above 40,000 between 2010 and 2016, for example. It does appear, however, that the 35,052 returns in the first year of this Labour government represents the highest 12-month figure since 2017. While we don't know how many of these returns were official 'deportations', the figures show that the 9,115 enforced returns carried out between 5 July 2024 and 4 July 2025 also do not represent a record. While this figure is the highest number of enforced returns carried out over a 12-month period since 2018, prior to 2018 enforced returns were consistently above 10,000 over a 12-month period. MPs should use statistics transparently and with all relevant context and caveats, and quickly rectify oversights when they occur.
Metro
44 minutes ago
- Metro
Ghislaine Maxwell quietly moved out of Florida prison while seeking Trump pardon
Jeffrey Epstein's accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell has been quietly transferred from a Florida federal prison to a lower-security facility in Texas as she seeks a pardon from President Donald Trump. Maxwell's move out of Federal Correctional Institution Tallahassee was confirmed by the Bureau of Prisons on Friday, amid her push for a deal to speak on the late Epstein and be released. 'We can confirm, Ghislaine Maxwell is in the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) at the Federal Prison Camp (FPC) Bryan in Bryan, Texas,' stated BOP inmate locator official Benjamin O'Cone. The reason Maxwell, 63, was moved was not immediately clear. Maxwell's attorney David Oscar Markus also confirmed that his client was sent to the Texas facility but said 'we have no other comment', according to USA Today. The disgraced British socialite in 2022 was sentenced to 20 years for helping convicted sex offender Epstein sexually abuse underage girls. About a month after her sentencing, she was transferred from the Metropolitan Detention Center in Brooklyn to FCI Tallahassee, which is a 'low security' prison for men and women. FCP Bryan is a 'minimum security' camp only housing women. Maxwell was interviewed by Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche of the Justice Department for two straight days last week. She 'answered every single question' and 'never invoked a privilege, never declined to answer', Markus said. The Justice Department brokered the interview despite asking the US Supreme Court to reject Maxwell's appeal of her conviction. The Trump administration continues to face criticism after the Justice Department and FBI last month said there is no incriminating Epstein client list, breaking from an earlier promise to disclose the documents. More Trending Trump has not ruled out pardoning Maxwell. 'I'm allowed to do it, but it's something I haven't thought about,' he said a week ago. Markus said of a possible commutation for Maxwell: 'The president said earlier he has the power to do so, we hope he exercises that power in the right way.' Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: What is 'flysky', the new lethal drug that could be the new fentanyl MORE: White House reveals £151,000,000 plans for a new ballroom MORE: Full list of Donald Trump's new tariffs set to come into force next week
Powys County Times
44 minutes ago
- Powys County Times
Hostage families: Releases will play ‘no part' in UK plan to recognise Palestine
Sir Keir Starmer announced earlier this week that the UK would take the step of recognising Palestine in September ahead of the UN General Assembly unless Israel meets certain conditions. Members of four British families met with Foreign Office officials on Thursday night seeking clarification on whether conditions would also be placed on Hamas, their lawyers said in a statement. 'However, it was clear from the meeting last night that the British Government's policy will not help the hostages, and could even hurt them,' they said. 'We do not say this lightly, but it was made obvious to us at the meeting that although the conditions for recognising a Palestinian state would be assessed 'in the round' in late-September, in deciding whether to go ahead with recognition, the release or otherwise of the hostages would play no part in those considerations. 'In other words, the 'vision for peace' which the UK is pursuing… may well involve our clients' family members continuing to rot in Hamas dungeons.' Sir Keir had said the UK would only refrain from recognising Palestine if Israel allows more aid into Gaza, stops annexing land in the West Bank, agrees to a ceasefire, and signs up to a long-term peace process over the next two months. While he also called for Hamas to immediately release all remaining Israeli hostages, sign up to a ceasefire, disarm and 'accept that they will play no part in the government of Gaza', he did not explicitly say these would factor into whether recognition would go ahead. The families have a range of views on what the future political settlement should look like but their priority is to keep the hostages 'above political games,' their lawyers said. They are now urging the Prime Minister to 'change course before it is too late'. 'At a minimum, the British hostage families request that the Government confirm that without the hostages being released, there can be no peace, and that this will be an important part of its decision as to whether to proceed with recognition and its current plan.' Sir Keir said that he 'particularly' listens to hostages after criticism of his plans from Emily Damari, a British-Israeli who was held captive by Hamas. The families of Ms Damari and freed hostage Eli Sharabi were among those who met with the Foreign Office. Also present were relatives of Nadav Popplewell, who died while held captive, as well as those of Oded Lifshitz, who died, and Yocheved Lifschitz, who was released. Business Secretary Jonathan Reynolds has said that the UK will not get into a 'to and fro' with Hamas over the recognition plans and that 'we don't negotiate with terrorists, Hamas are terrorists'. US President Donald Trump disagrees with Sir Keir's plans, as well as those of France and Canada, which have also pledged their countries will recognise Palestine. 'He feels as though that's rewarding Hamas at a time where Hamas is the true impediment to a ceasefire and to the release of all of the hostages,' White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said.
