A WOMAN deceived into a sexual relationship with an undercover police officer brought legal proceedings against the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) today for not bringing criminal charges against him.

Jim Boyling, who was an officer in the Met Police’s notorious Special Demonstration Squad (SDS), had three long-term intimate relationships with women while infiltrating Reclaim the Streets in the late 1990s under the cover name Jim Sutton.

One of the three women, known as Monica, is now challenging the CPS decision not to prosecute him, arguing that Mr Boyling should be charged with sexual offences and misconduct in public office.

The CPS decision followed an investigation of a complaint by Rosa, whose relationship with Mr Boyling began in 1999.

She was in a relationship with Mr Boyling until August 2000, when he left the SDS, before Rosa tracked him down in November 2001 and they resumed their relationship, having two children and marrying in 2005, before divorcing in 2008.

Both women instigated their victim’s right of review but received replies which implied the abusive relationships were condoned and suggested that officers operating for five years in activist groups “may well have sexual contact or intimate relationships whilst maintaining his cover.”

Monica said she was “appalled by the hypocrisy of police and government,” adding: “The whitewashing of these serious human rights abuses must stop.”

Her lawyer Harriet Wistrich said that, “when it comes to wholesale deception as to identity by police officers, [the CPS] entirely excuse behaviour which has been demonstrated to have caused significant psychological damage to all the women concerned.”

Mr Boyling is not contesting a secret misconduct hearing this week for pursuing a sexual relationship “without authorisation and without policing purpose” between 2001 and 2005.

He accused former Scotland Yard bosses of “selective amnesia,” saying: “The position of the Met appears to be that a relationship entered into as an operational tactic is acceptable, but a genuine one resulting in marriage and children constitutes misconduct.”

Mr Boyling also claims that he used his real name and listed his occupation as police officer on the marriage certificate and both birth certificates and that Rosa knew he had worked undercover.