title
stringlengths 28
112
| published_date
stringlengths 10
10
| authors
stringclasses 6
values | description
stringlengths 0
239
| section
stringclasses 95
values | content
stringlengths 178
42.3k
| link
stringlengths 34
77
| top_image
stringlengths 53
143
| news_id
stringlengths 13
55
|
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Johnny Depp lawyers say Amber Heard giving 'performance of her life' - BBC News
|
2022-04-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Amber Heard "concocted a role as a victim", the former spouses' defamation trial is told.
|
US & Canada
|
Johnny Depp and Amber Heard divorced in May 2016
Lawyers for Johnny Depp branded Amber Heard a liar, "obsessed" with her image, in opening arguments of the defamation trial between the former spouses.
The case was brought after an article by Ms Heard in which she claimed to be a victim of domestic abuse.
But Ms Heard's team argued Mr Depp brought her to court simply to "destroy her".
Mr Depp, 58, has denied any abuse and has sued his ex-wife for $50m (£38m).
Ms Heard has in turn, sued him, with a $100m counterclaim.
Hordes of fans have already gathered outside the Virginia court for the trial, expected to last up to seven weeks.
At issue in the trial is Ms Heard's 2018 opinion piece in the Washington Post, describing herself as a "public figure representing domestic abuse". Mr Depp says the article - which does not mention him by name - is defamatory and derailed his career.
Beginning a day of opening arguments, Camille Vasquez, a lawyer for Mr Depp, told jurors Ms Heard had been the aggressor throughout the relationship.
Ms Heard concocted a role for herself as victim, Ms Vasquez said, once Mr Depp had asked her for a divorce in attempt to "avoid humiliation".
"She is obsessed with her public image," she said. "She has been living and breathing this role for years now and she is preparing to give the performance of her life."
Lawyers for Ms Heard instead claimed the actress had endured emotional, verbal and physical harassment at the hands of Mr Depp.
Mr Depp wants to "haunt her, to wreck her career", attorney Ben Rottenborn said.
Christi Dembrowski, Mr Depp's older sister, was first on the witness stand. Responding to questions from Mr Depp's lawyer, Ms Dembrowski described a volatile childhood, shaped by their mother's abuse.
"Mom would, she would scream, she would yell. She would hit [Dad], call him names," Ms Dembrowski said. Mr Depp never fought back, she said.
Ms Dembrowski described her famous sibling as a gentle and loving brother, son and father to his two children.
According to Ms Dembrowski, her brother's demeanour changed when he became involved with Ms Heard. "He seemed sadder," she said.
Ms Heard would often insult Mr Depp, Ms Dembrowski said, recalling an instance when Dior wanted to hire Mr Depp for an advertisement campaign.
"She [Ms Heard] said, 'Dior, why would Dior want to do business with you? You don't have style... She called him an old fat man," Ms Dembrowski said.
Mr Depp's sister told jurors she was "devastated" by the news that Mr Depp would marry Ms Heard, and fearful that her brother's relationship was mirroring that of their parents.
"If I'm honest, I debated going [to the wedding]," she said. "I wanted to make sure that I showed up anyway, because I wanted to make sure, honestly, that my little brother knew I was going to be there no matter what."
Ms Dembrowski is the first of an estimated 120 witnesses who will be called to testify in Virginia in the coming weeks, helping to sketch competing accounts of Mr Depp and Ms Heard's relationship.
On Sunday, ahead of the trial, Ms Heard released a statement to Instagram, writing that she has "always maintained a love for Johnny".
"It brings me great pain to have to live out the details of our past life together in front of the world," she said.
The words were delivered with a flourish, the beginning of a case about how Johnny Depp had been wounded, emotionally and materially by the words of Amber Heard. Benjamin Chew, leading Johnny Depp's legal team, laid out what we are about to witness, a case that will try to portray Amber Heard as a liar, a "troubled" and "manipulative" woman who was, they say, the real abuser.
The opening statement was delivered with all the slickness of a Hollywood movie, you almost felt there was going to be a round of applause at the end but, inside the court, all was calm.
Johnny Depp sat silently, carefully watching the lawyers' presentations to the jury of 11. Amber Heard, impassive, attentive, occasionally appearing to take notes.
Watching was a crowd made up largely of Depp fans. Before court proceedings began they were warned to keep phones hidden, not to take pictures, there would be no shouting of 'we love you, Johnny.' But as it began there was not a murmur or a sign of movement. Confidence was high that this would vindicate their idol.
This is going to be, they feel, the full story with evidence from forensic experts, a counsellor, the police and friends. Johnny Depp may have lost his case in London - this they feel will be different.
Amber Heard's legal team then presented the challenge. Yes, she had accused him of abuse but that was not what her article in the Washington Post was about. She did not name Johnny Depp, she did not write the headline and in America there is a special constitutional protection for words written in the newspapers.
Most lawyers would agree that bringing a successful libel action in America is much harder than in the UK and in the case in Britain, the judge came down firmly on the side of Amber Heard's version of events.
Today, however, was just an overture. Jurors were warned that what was to come would be graphic, neither side said they wanted to reveal the details of their turbulent private life and celebrity friends but that is now where we are.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61082790
|
news_world-us-canada-61082790
|
|
Kemarni Watson Darby: Man guilty of murdering partner's son, 3 - BBC News
|
2022-04-12
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Kemarni Watson Darby suffered weeks of beatings before the fatal attack at his West Bromwich home.
|
Birmingham & Black Country
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
A man has been found guilty of murdering his partner's three-year-old son after inflicting more than 20 rib fractures over weeks of beatings.
Nathaniel Pope left Kemarni Watson Darby with injuries comparable to a car crash or fall from height.
Kemarni's mother Alicia Watson was convicted of causing or allowing her son's death at her West Bromwich flat.
Watson and Pope were also found guilty of child cruelty charges at Birmingham Crown Court.
Several jurors were in tears as the verdicts were read out after the 20-week trial.
Judge Mrs Justice Tipples also became emotional as she ordered the panel to be discharged from future jury service for life due to the "awful nature of the facts" they had had to consider.
Kemarni, who was known as a noisy, energetic and cheerful three-year-old, had been the victim of what was described in court as a "brutal assault".
Jurors heard it was one of several attacks the boy had suffered while living with Watson, 30, and her partner Pope, 32, at the flat in West Bromwich.
Kemarni's body had 34 separate areas of external injuries which acted as a "silent witness" to the crimes, the court was told.
The pair had tried to pass this off as accidental and Watson told the police he was a "boisterous boy" who was "always running into things".
Jurors were shown a photograph of Kemarni with an injury to his right eye as well as one showing him eating near a clump of his own hair, which Watson claimed he had cut off.
Prosecutors said they deliberately beat the boy's abdomen rather than more obviously visible areas of his body.
Prosecutor Tony Badenoch QC said: "It's Kemarni's body that spoke the loudest, with the most clarity, in this courtroom. His squeezed, battered and lifeless, oxygen-starved body cannot lie."
The three-year-old died on the afternoon of 5 June 2018 after his ribcage was "crushed" at the two-bedroom flat.
Alicia Watson and Nathaniel Pope blamed each other from the witness box
Kemarni had expressed a wish not to go back to his mother's flat after contact visits with his dad, the court heard.
A safeguarding review by Sandwell Children's Safeguarding Partnership will reveal whether opportunities were missed to save him.
No safeguarding concerns about Kemarni had been identified before his death and he had had no involvement with children's social care, the partnership said.
Their chair, Lesley Hagger, said the case was "deeply upsetting" and they would look to publish their report "as soon as possible".
"It is vital that sad cases like these are thoroughly looked at and, where there are areas for improvement, that any necessary changes are made," she added.
Although in its statement the Sandwell Safeguarding Partnership said there had been no prior contact with children's services, the review it's carrying out will want to ask why? This was a vulnerable three-year-old who was living with his mother - a regular cannabis user - and her partner - a convicted drug dealer.
We learned during the trial that the nursery which Kemarni had attended had raised some concerns about his well-being, but it's not clear to whom those concerns were raised and what action, if any, was taken.
Kemarni's tragic and short life seems to have been lived under the radar, and perhaps if any lessons are learned from the safeguarding review it will be to see whether more can be done to pick up on cases like his.
Alicia Watson said Kemarni's injuries had been caused by accidents or fights with other children
Both adults routinely abused drugs, the prosecution told the court, and neighbours said there had been a "constant smell of weed from the flat".
Pope, a former warehouse worker, had been jailed for four months for smashing a mother's head repeatedly into a rail on a bus in London in 2011 in front of her children and then dragging her off by her hair.
But the details were kept from the jury after legal arguments.
He had also previously been convicted of burglary and possession of heroin with intent to supply.
Pope told jurors he had "just told some of the truth" about himself in evidence but insisted he had never hurt Kemarni in any way.
Watson was said in court to have a "zero to a 100" temper and it emerged she spent money on cannabis and driving lessons at a time when her son lost his nursery place due to a lack of funds.
During her six days of evidence she accused barristers of lying and dismissed the case against her as "disgustingly wrong".
Kemarni lived in a small flat with drug users Alicia Watson and Nathaniel Pope
Watson insisted Pope must have attacked Kemarni while she was away and claimed to be horrified at "learning" of his internal injuries.
But Mr Badenoch told her she had acted with him in the abuse "for days, months and hours on end".
The pair, who blamed each other from the witness box, were also convicted of one count of child cruelty, relating to rib fractures and an abdominal injury before Kemarni's death.
They were also separately found guilty of two further counts of child cruelty in relation to other children. Watson was cleared of murdering her son.
Det Insp James Mahon described the investigation as a "horrific case for everyone involved".
"It's absolutely awful that the two people who were supposed to look after him the most were those that caused injury, and in the end his death," he added.
Their sentencing will take place at a later date.
Follow BBC West Midlands on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Send your story ideas to: newsonline.westmidlands@bbc.co.uk
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-60996115
|
news_uk-england-birmingham-60996115
|
|
Rwanda asylum seekers: What does the UK's deal mean? - BBC News
|
2022-04-16
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Some asylum seekers arriving in the UK will be sent to Rwanda but what's in the deal for the two nations?
|
UK
|
Home Secretary Priti Patel travelled to Rwandan capital Kigali to sign the deal
There was only muted applause from a handful of officials as the politicians shook hands in the Kigali Conference Centre, smiling awkwardly for the cameras.
But Home Secretary Priti Patel hailed the Rwandan deal as a world first, a major milestone. And it is. Potentially.
Some nations have attempted to outsource their asylum processing offshore. But no country has ever tried to export its asylum responsibilities before.
What the deal envisages is an end to the system of protection for those fleeing war and persecution that Britain signed up to more than 70 years ago.
Last year 28,526 people crossed the Channel in small boats
Instead of claiming asylum when they arrive in Britain, those fleeing persecution or war will have to find a legal and safe route to the UK or, for most, face being packed off to Africa. There are currently very few such routes and none available to the citizens of countries that make up the bulk of those granted refugee status in Britain.
What is an asylum seeker form Iraq or Iran, say, supposed to do? They are faced with Catch 22. They can only claim asylum to Britain on British soil. But in reaching the UK, they make themselves inadmissible for asylum.
For the home secretary and the prime minister, that appears to be the long-term aim: to stop all asylum seekers from coming to Britain. Instead, we are promised a network of safe routes from UN-run refugee camps.
As things stand, the UK is a passive recipient of those asking for sanctuary. The government has no control over who the asylum seekers are. The new plan would mean politicians could pick and choose.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
"It's a striking fact that around seven out of 10 of those arriving in small boats last year were men under 40, paying people smugglers to queue jump and taking up our capacity to help genuine women and child refugees," was how the prime minister put it.
Boris Johnson knew what buttons he was pressing when he said: "We can't ask the British taxpayer to write a blank cheque to cover the costs of anyone who might want to come and live here."
There is concern the UK is being taken for a ride by people simply seeking a better life.
He conflated the thousands of people risking their lives to reach the Kent coast in small boats with "economic migrants taking advantage of the asylum system".
The problem with this argument is that a substantial majority of those who cross the channel are subsequently granted refugee status by the UK government. Home Office officials decide they do indeed have a well-founded fear of persecution in their country of origin.
It was noticeable how upbeat the home secretary was as she jetted to Kigali to sign on the dotted line.
Priti Patel has faced a great deal of criticism in recent weeks, often from MPs on her own side. But she sees the Rwandan deal, nine months in the making, as an opportunity to defeat the "evil people smugglers" whose activities in the Channel are so humiliating for a government that promised to take back control of Britain's borders.
I sense this home secretary relishes the opportunity of a battle against "the naysayers", her "political opponents" who "condemn everything" without a plan of their own, and the asylum "lawyers who are fleecing the British taxpayer".
That is an argument that would play well with her core support, burnish her Brexit credentials, and helpfully change the conversation from visa delays and "partygate".
One can see, then, why the UK government would want this deal, but what about the Rwandans? Are they happy about it?
We don't know all the details of the arrangement, but there is an initial £120m for educational projects and other money to assist with processing sent by the UK.
Rwandan ministers believe the arrival of motivated migrants will help boost their economy and the deal itself will encourage further investment.
But one wonders what the ordinary Rwandan will think of a rich European country sending its problem to a small African state.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61114542
|
news_uk-61114542
|
|
Russia's war ignites Orban's tightest election challenge in Hungary - BBC News
|
2022-04-02
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
For the first time since 2010, Hungary's prime minister faces a real fight for election victory.
|
Europe
|
Ukrainians have fled the war across Hungary's eastern border
"Peace or War" is at stake screams the headline in the tabloid Metropol, handed out to morning commuters flocking through the Western Station in Budapest. And there's a neat blue cross in the box next to the "peace" option.
That's the slogan of Viktor Orban's Fidesz party, as it battles to win a record fourth consecutive term in office in elections on Sunday.
After 12 years in power, they face their first genuine challenge from an opposition alliance of six parties that has united under one candidate: Peter Marki-Zay.
And Russia's war in Ukraine has given added impetus to the race.
Hungary shares a border with Ukraine and has taken in more than half a million refugees so far. Mr Orban insists that by helping the people, but refusing to supply weapons to Ukraine, only he can keep Hungary out of the war.
His party's slogan of peace or war may be simplistic, but it is effective. And it is broadcast, printed, and lit up in bright letters wherever you look in Hungary.
It interrupts any music you play on YouTube, and even videos that include international coverage of the war in Ukraine.
The government has spent eight times more on its campaign than all the opposition parties combined, according to a group of critical monitoring organisations. It helps that the ruling party has the support of a largely pliant media.
The opposition's catch-phrase, on the other hand, is "Orban or Europe".
Their candidate Peter Marki-Zay argues that Hungary should join Poland, the UK and others in supplying arms to Ukraine. And if called upon, and only within a Nato framework, should even consider sending troops.
The opposition complains that Fidesz has isolated Hungary from the European mainstream, from consensual democracy, fairness and decency. And that in this war Mr Orban has even alienated Hungary's closest allies - Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia - the other members of the Visegrad-4 group.
A V4 defence ministers' meeting was abruptly cancelled this week, with the Czech defence minister accusing Mr Orban of valuing Russian oil over Ukrainian blood.
But it was Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky whose message hit home hardest.
"There can be no Russian branches in Europe that divide the EU from within," he said in an address to the Danish parliament on Wednesday. "This must stop, and Europe must stop listening to the excuses of Budapest."
Hungary gets 85% of its gas and 64% of its oil from Russia, through a pipeline that deliberately circumvents Ukraine. However, a Hungary-Russia deal to expand the Paks nuclear power station south of Budapest with Russian finance and technology looks increasingly jeopardised by the war.
And with Hungary's election campaign reaching its peak, President Zelensky chose the recent EU summit to address a very personal message to Mr Orban.
"Listen, Viktor, do you know what's going on in Mariupol? And you hesitate whether to impose sanctions or not? And you hesitate whether to let weapons through or not? And you hesitate whether to trade with Russia or not? There is no time to hesitate. It's already time to decide."
Mr Zelensky also made a poignant reference to Budapest's famous shoe monument on the banks of the Danube.
Look at those shoes. And you will see how mass killings can happen again in today's world. That's what Russia is doing today. The same shoes. In Mariupol, there are the same people
The 60 pairs of bronze shoes remember Hungary's Jews, murdered and pushed into the river by Hungarian fascists in the winter of 1944.
Days after his speech, Ukrainians in Budapest arranged new shoes among the bronze ones on the Danube embankment, decorated with flowers and the blue and yellow ribbons of the Ukrainian flag - in memory of all the dead in Mariupol and elsewhere in Ukraine, victims of the Russian invasion.
Hungarians laid shoes beside the Danube this week in memory of the victims of Russia's bombardment of Mariupol
The idea that Hungary is isolated from an otherwise pro-Ukraine Europe is an argument the government side bitterly rejects.
Ahead of the vote, Mr Orban told his final campaign rally: "If the opposition wins on Sunday, the next day they will start delivering weapons to Ukraine, and close the taps on the Russian gas pipelines. Our heart is with [the Ukrainians], but Hungary has to stand up for its own interests."
The election arithmetic suggests a closer race than the government would like.
According to opposition paper Nepszava, Fidesz is assured of victory in 41 of the country's 106 individual constituencies, while the opposition alliance can count on 33.
That leaves 32 battleground districts where the opposition has to break through. The remaining 93 seats in Hungary's 199 seat Parliament are divided according to party lists.
Different polling agencies suggest a record turnout - perhaps as high as 80%, compared with 70% four years ago.
In a country of 9.7 million, the electorate was split almost evenly - 2.6 million apiece - four years ago. Pollsters reckon that this election will be decided by between 300,000 and 600,000 voters who are either undecided or uncommitted, and who are in the cross-hairs of campaigners from both sides.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Hungarian PM Viktor Orban says the country could host peace talks
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60952882
|
news_world-europe-60952882
|
|
Who allowed the energy price cap to rise so much? And other questions - BBC News
|
2022-04-02
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
As a new price cap takes effect, causing energy bills to soar, we answer your questions.
|
Business
|
Millions of households are facing a £700 a year rise in energy costs, alongside hikes in the cost of council tax, water bills and other utilities.
It has led to warnings that many people on lower incomes will be forced to choose between paying for heating, or food.
A selection of your questions have been answered by:
Why do we pay more using a prepayment meter? - Gary Steventon
For the 4.5 million people on prepayment meters, the price of energy has now risen by an average £708 - to £2,017 a year.
That compares to an annual rise of £693 - to £1,971 - for those on standard tariffs, paid by direct debit.
Energy regulator Ofgem's argument is that there are higher fixed costs associated with running a prepayment meter.
Charities and some suppliers have said that these customers are often among the most vulnerable and should be given more help by the government.
Who allowed the price cap to increase by so much, especially when the energy companies have made record profits? - Chris Yaxley
The price cap, covering England, Wales and Scotland, is set every six months by energy regulator Ofgem. It is designed to reflect the costs faced by suppliers and to prevent profiteering.
There has been a huge rise this time, owing to the rising cost energy companies pay for gas. This is now being passed on to customers.
There has been a debate about whether energy companies should be taxed more, with the money raised used to help those struggling with bills.
Energy companies argue that their retail arms are making very little, or no, profit. While the energy generation business is having a much better time of it, they argue that they are already heavily taxed.
Gas prices do not increase by themselves. What is causing the increase? - John Ashburn
There are a host of reasons why the wholesale price of gas - paid by energy companies - has been volatile. At present it is about six times higher than it was a year ago.
One reason is the surge in demand for energy, as businesses and economies get going again after the lifting of Covid restrictions. There is also the ongoing issue of a shortage of gas storage across Europe.
A further rise in the price cap - predicted to push up the typical household energy bill by another £600 a year - is expected in October.
This is mainly because of the potential restriction of Russian gas supplies - linked to the war in Ukraine.
While we get very little gas from Russia in the UK, we are affected by the global price of gas.
Can people forced to work from home ask employers to contribute to energy bills? - Andrew Green
There is nothing to stop you asking. What response you get from your employer is down to them.
Some employers have offered temporary grants and payments, to help their staff pay their energy bills.
Unions and employees themselves are likely to point to the rising cost of living - including higher energy bills - to ask for higher salaries.
Will giving up Netflix, Amazon Prime, alcohol and mobile phones offset the rising cost? - Leslie Cox
The average UK household spends about £916 on alcohol each year.
Some mobile phone deals exceed £80 a month but, depending on your contract, you may be able to switch to a SIM-only deal for as little as £36 a year.
Giving up all of these costs could save between £1,132 and £2,056 a year.
A 54% rise in the energy price cap means a household using a typical amount of gas and electricity will now pay £1,971 per year.
So, going without could make a difference.
But even then, a further rise pushing the annual bill up to £2,600 should be expected in October, analysts have told the BBC.
How is the assistance provided going to help pensioners who have been robbed of a triple-lock increase? Dave
The triple-lock, a policy used to set the rise in state pensions, was suspended last year because it followed the average rise in wages and would have meant an increase of 8%.
At the time that seemed like a big increase, but inflation is now 6.2%.
Instead of the state pension going up by 8%, it's going up by 3.1% - based on the rate of inflation in September last year, which is a much smaller pay rise for state pensioners.
Changes announced by Chancellor Rishi Sunak in the Spring Statement were mostly aimed at working people who pay National Insurance. There has not been any specific new support for pensioners.
Why have tariffs on 100% renewable electricity gone up? - Karl Oldham
Eco providers are still affected by wholesale prices, which are driving bill rises.
These providers try to buy in advance from renewable sources, and invest in schemes for renewable generation.
But ultimately, at present, they have to source electricity from the National Grid - some of which is generated from gas.
As a result, they are not immune to the situation in the wider market, and prices charged by renewable generators have been going up too.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-60954102
|
news_business-60954102
|
|
Concerns over handling of fines for Covid breaches - BBC News
|
2022-04-02
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
An ex-insider told the BBC it would be "disgraceful" if junior, but not senior, staff received fines.
|
UK Politics
|
Concerns have been expressed by current and former Whitehall staff about fines issued to those who broke Covid laws by going to parties in government offices.
The government has not confirmed reports that attendees at a leaving party in June 2020 have been fined.
But one former insider told the BBC they had heard junior members of staff had been fined, while senior staff had not, and that this was "disgraceful".
No 10 has confirmed the prime minister has not received a fine so far.
One other government source said police had targeted "low-hanging fruit", and another agreed this appeared to be the police's approach.
But a Whitehall insider cautioned it was too early to say until the process was complete and all the fines had been issued.
The Metropolitan Police launched an investigation earlier this year following reports of parties in Downing Street and other government buildings in breach of coronavirus lockdown rules.
On Tuesday, the police confirmed they were issuing 20 fines as a result of the inquiry and said more could follow.
Reports have suggested the first tranche of fines related to a leaving do on 18 June 2020 for a No 10 adviser.
The police have said they will not be disclosing the names of those who are receiving a fine, nor the events to which the fines relate.
Civil servants have not been provided with help for legal costs and are being advised to pay any fines they receive.
Senior staff and politicians have paid for private legal advice.
A recipient can contest a fine, in which case the police will review the case to decide whether or not to withdraw the fine or take the matter to court.
The prime minister is known to have attended at least three of the events being investigated by police and his wife Carrie Johnson is also reported to have been at some of them.
Speaking to the BBC, Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer said he agreed with the "general argument" that families should not be dragged into politics.
But he said the public was entitled to know if the wife of the prime minister who had set the rules the rest of the country was following had been fined for breaking them.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-60957670
|
news_uk-politics-60957670
|
|
The heavy losses of an elite Russian regiment in Ukraine - BBC News
|
2022-04-02
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The 331st Guards Parachute Regiment based in Kostroma, Russia, has lost many soldiers in Ukraine.
|
Europe
|
Some of the 39 Russian soldiers from the 331st regiment who are known to have died
In any war, there are units that distinguish themselves and others that become symbolic of failure. The 331st Guards Parachute Regiment had high hopes of being the first, but now represents the disintegration of Russia's plan for a quick war.
The regiment's commanding officer, Col Sergei Sukharev, was killed in Ukraine on 13 March, and was posthumously awarded the Hero of the Russian Federation medal. At his funeral, deputy defence minister Gen Yuri Sadovenko said the colonel "lived for the future, for the future of our people, a future without Nazism".
Col Sergei Sukharev, commander of the Kostroma 331st regiment, was also killed
Casualties among Russian forces are not widely reported in Russia itself, but using open source material, the BBC has pieced together the story of their advance, and found that at least 39 other members of the elite 331st regiment have died.
The men were part of a column that advanced into Ukraine from Belarus, led by Russia's airborne forces, known by the acronym VDV. Their presence underlined the priority of their objective - advancing on the capital, Kyiv.
That advance swiftly got drawn into a destructive stalemate in districts on the outskirts of Kyiv which soon became synonymous with the viciousness of the war: Bucha, Irpin, and Hostomel.
Videos that emerged online from these battles showed combat vehicles used by Russian airborne forces with "V" signs painted onto them.
One video we found shows several damaged light armoured vehicles from the VDV, abandoned after an attack by Ukrainian special forces. Another shows several vehicles from the Russian airborne forces apparently abandoned.
The men in the 331st regarded themselves as the pick of Russia's army. In a video posted online last May, a general tells soldiers of the 331st Parachute Regiment that they are "the best of the best". The unit served in the Balkans, Chechnya, and the 2014 Russian intervention in the Donbas region of Ukraine, and regularly took part in Red Square parades in Moscow.
The 331st was also a showcase for Russia's policy of replacing national service soldiers with contraktniki - professionals under contract. It is understandable why the generals should have given it an important role in the invasion.
A comment on a post mourning Maj Sergei Krylov reads: "We are proud of you, thank you for supporting peace. Russian hero Major Krylov. RIP" - this post is no longer public
From early March, reports began to circulate of deaths in the 331st. It took time for bodies to be returned to Kostroma, the community where it is based, 300km north-east of Moscow.
As the funerals started, an anguished conversation began playing out on social media. Memorial walls on V'Kontakte - the Russian equivalent of Facebook - pledge "eternal memory" and feature pictures of candles.
The wife of Sergei Lobachyov mourns her "reliable, loving and caring husband"
A woman who says she was the wife of Warrant Officer Sergei Lobachyov writes: "Seryozha, my most reliable, loving and caring husband. Now you are in heaven and you will protect us from there! You will always live in our hearts and you will forever be a real hero to me!"
Although many posts appear to accept Kremlin explanations that the war is being waged against Ukrainian fascists, some also display anxiety about the lack of reliable information.
On the memorial wall for Sergeant Sergei Duganov, one woman wrote: "Nobody knows anything. The 331st regiment is disappearing. Almost every day, photos of our Kostroma boys get published. It sends shivers down my spine. What's happening? When will this end? When will people stop dying?"
Her post was followed by another, which exclaimed: "Kostroma has lost so many young men, what a tragedy". Another pleaded: "God, how many more death notifications shall we receive? Please have mercy on our boys, help them survive, return them back home to their wives and mothers. I'm begging you!"
Yanosh Leonov's partner writes: You are a real hero, you are the best father, a loved and loving husband, a loyal friend and a real fighter.
Speaking out about the war in Russia carries great risks, but there are hints of a loss of faith in the Kremlin's arguments for war. On the memorial page for one sergeant, a woman asks: "Why aren't children of MPs on the frontline? The majority of them live in Europe anyway. Ordinary boys are dying for no good reason." Another uses an expletive to describe President Vladimir Putin, and goes on to say that by deciding to "play war" he has "sent thousands of guys to die".
For the most part though, those reacting on social media remain true to the official narrative.
The top Ukrainian comment on a post mourning Ravshan Zhakbayev reads: Everyone who steps on our soil to occupy it will get buried in it. Welcome to hell! A later comment reads: Eternal memory to you, our hero, our protector. Thanks for all.(((
On some V'Kontakte memorial walls, Ukrainians have posted comments mocking the dead men. "Over 15,000 have died already and they will continue on dying as long as they'll keep on marching on our land. Nobody invited you freaking saviours," reads one.
"Alexander, go away you bloody Nazi," a Russian responds to another mocking post. "Our soldiers are real heroes. Russians have never killed civilians nor children, which is something you can't say about Ukrainians."
The fury of those online exchanges is nothing, though, to the experiences of the VDV forces, who have been hit by Ukrainian artillery, ambushes, and infantry assaults during weeks of bloody combat.
In these close-quarter battles, they have discovered what earlier VDV units learned in Afghanistan - that armoured vehicles designed to be light enough to be carried on planes do not give much protection from enemy fire. From the roads outside Hostomel airfield, to a side street in Bucha, or a road junction in Irpin, videos taken by Ukrainians have shown burnt out and abandoned vehicles belonging to the airborne group.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Rob Lee This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’s cookie policy, external and privacy policy, external before accepting. To view this content choose ‘accept and continue’. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
These scraps of phone footage also speak to a more basic failure. In these shattered neighbourhoods around Kyiv, the Russian paratroopers were outmatched by the Ukrainians. And given that the defenders were in many cases simply local defence units or reservists, that speaks to a basic failure in the VDV's system of training and recruitment.
Ukrainians have latched on to the 331st's losses, making excited claims that the regiment has been "wiped out". Ilya Ponamarev, a former Russian MP and opposition figure who now lives in Kyiv, says people there see the regiment's fate "as a perfect example of karma".
During the 2014 fighting in the Donbas, the 331st was held responsible by Ukrainians for killing hundreds of Ukrainian soldiers at Ilovaisk, in breach of a ceasefire agreement.
However, while the regiment has suffered considerably, Ukrainian claims that they have been wiped out are an exaggeration. It is likely, though, that the 331st Parachute Regiment may have been withdrawn from Ukraine recently - certainly unidentified elements of the VDV task force to which it belonged were filmed on 29 March pulling back into Belarus.
Photographs of some of the Russian soldiers from the 331 regiment who have died
As for the price of failure, it mounts daily. At the time of writing, BBC Newsnight had compiled a list of 39 named members of the 331st Parachute Regiment killed in Ukraine. But since none of those fatalities is more recent than the 13 March, it can be supposed that dozens more will emerge in the coming weeks.
Kostroma locals have told us they believe that around 100 members of the regiment may have died. And many families will never receive their loved one's body because it was left behind on the battlefield.
Even a conservative projection of the deaths we now know about, and their dates, suggest that the town's losses in a few weeks in Ukraine already exceed those from the conflicts in Afghanistan and Chechnya.
The regiment that set off full of confidence in February has acquired the type of reputation that no soldiers would ever want.
The BBC has so far verified the deaths of 39 soldiers from the 331st regiment: Klim Abramov, Cpl Artem Arbuzov, Oleg Bedoshvili, Capt (Co Cdr) Yurii Borisov, Snr Lt Ilya Chernyshev, Cpl Yuri Degtaryov, Konstantin Dobrynin, Sasha Dolkin, Sgt Sergei Duganov, Kiril Fedoseyev, Andrey Kovalevsky, Maj Sergei Krylov, Stanislav Kutelev, Cpl Yanosh Leonov, Sgt Alexander Limonov, Snr WO Sergei Lobachyo, Cpl Ivan Mamzurin, Cpl Ilya Martynenko, Lt Lev Ovchinnikov, Maksim Ovchinnikov, Cpl Leonid Panteleyev, Maj Oleg Patskalyev, Sgt Stanislav Petrutik, Sgt Roman Pomelov, Snr WO Pavel Rudenko, Snr Lt Alexander Shalygin, Sgt Nikolai Smirnov, Col Sergei Sukharev, Maxim Svetlenko, Snr Lt Nikolai Symov, Daniil Titov, Maxim Trokai, Ivan Turyev, Sgt Maxim Vorotyntsev, Capt Alexei Vyshegorodtsev, Alexei Yelimov, Cpl Artem Yergin, Sgt Ravshan Zhakbaev, Cpl Danila Zudkov
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-60946340
|
news_world-europe-60946340
|
|
Mariupol: The 80 days that left a flourishing city in ruins - BBC News
|
2022-05-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Ukrainian port which has seen some of the most intense fighting is now under Russian control.
|
Europe
|
The theatre has often been described as the heart of the city
After almost three months of relentless assault, Mariupol has fallen. Ukraine's military says its combat mission in the besieged port is over. More than any other Ukrainian city, Mariupol has come to symbolise the ferocious brutality of Russia's assault and the stubbornness of Ukraine's resistance.
On Wednesday 23 February, Ivan Stanislavsky left his camera bag at the office. He was on his way to see the layout of his new book on Mariupol's Soviet-era murals at a colleague's house, and didn't want to lug the gear around. He could always pick it up the next day.
But on Thursday, as he stood in the street outside his locked and deserted office, he could hear thunderous sounds rolling in from the east. The city was under fire.
As the conflict intensified, and gunfire became audible to the west too, Ivan moved his mattress into the hall. He piled up his large collection of art books - including the Encyclopaedia of Ukrainian Rock Music - against the windows of his flat in the district of Primorsky.
"Let's say it was not a waste of a library," says the 36-year-old photographer, who is also a press officer at Ukrainian premier league football club FC Mariupol.
Ivan Stanislavsky loved to photograph his city of Mariupol
Across town in the neighbourhood of Kalmiusky, businessman Yevhen was also taking precautions. The 47-year-old had told his family to pack so they could escape the city. But when he returned from the office, he found no packing had been done. His family refused to leave.
In an apartment in the same block, metallurgists from the nearby steelworks, Nataliia, 43, and Andrii, 41, were already slicing the last two loaves they had been able to buy, leaving them to dry out so they could eat them piece by piece over the weeks ahead.
The Illich steel plant dominates this view of Mariupol
Volodymyr, a 52-year-old paramedic in Kalmiusky, was also in his kitchen, trying to absorb the news. When reports came in of Russians marching through the village of Chonhar - on a strategic road out of Crimea to the west - he choked. This was a coordinated attack, he realised.
The ambulance dispatcher was on the phone. She instructed Volodymyr to ignore routine calls. "Find the wounded", he was told.
Twenty-two-year-old engineering graduate Mariia thought the first explosion she heard was simply a storm. Then she heard a second.
"We didn't know what to do," says Mariia, who like Ivan, lived in Primorsky. "I didn't have time to think about my future, my plans. I had to think about what I'd eat and drink... [And] what to do with the cats."
It suddenly dawned on her why, in the past few days, soldiers had appeared in the paint shop where she worked, asking to buy blue and yellow tape. They needed it to mark their uniforms.
Four days into the war, with the fighting closing in, Ivan and his wife sought shelter in a basement underneath his local supermarket. It offered good protection, and Ivan found that the muffling of sound dulled his sense of mounting anxiety.
Daily life was being stripped down to bare essentials.
"We lived like primitive people," he told the BBC from Lviv, where he has now fled. "We broke trees, made fires, cooked food on fires. I even heard of people eating pigeons."
He watched as order gradually broke down all around him. He kept a vivid diary, later published online.
"The Stone Age has arrived," he says in his 6 March entry.
He writes of watching his fellow Ukrainian citizens raiding abandoned shops, making off with everything from computers and freezers to swimsuits and underwear.
One evening a drunk woman interrupts a session of evening gossip in the basement. "Treat yourself," she says, as a flashlight revealed a bottle of Californian Merlot, taken from Wines of the World on nearby Italiiska Street.
But aware that even medical supplies and cash tills were being taken, Ivan says he felt disgust.
"We are our own worst enemies," he writes.
But is this, he wonders, how the fittest survive? After a while, each day became a "combat mission".
Over a few short weeks, Mariupol fell apart. The Russian military laid siege to the city, attacking power and water supplies. A Russian airstrike hit the maternity hospital on 9 March, and a plane bombed its theatre - clearly marked as a civilian shelter - a week later.
Ivan was stunned at how quickly it all happened.
The theatre after it was bombed
"The whole city, all its infrastructure, supply system, logistics, energy supply were destroyed in a matter of days," he says.
Sitting underground at night, he sensed people becoming passive.
"You can only wait in the shelter," he writes in his diary. "Some are waiting for spring, some - for the morning to come, some - for the end of the war. And someone is waiting for the bomb to come and kill everyone."
And all this just as Mariupol had seemed destined to turn a corner. Money began to pour in, adding lustre to a city previously associated mainly with heavy industry - and war.
"It was a city aspiring to something," Ivan says. It hadn't always been this way.
Long before this year's invasion, Mariupol had a ringside seat to Ukraine's simmering conflict with Russian-backed separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk, the two regions that make up the neighbouring area known as Donbas.
An activist guards a barricade outside the Mariupol government building seized by pro-Russia activists on 17 April 2014
When fighting first broke out there in 2014, the government briefly lost control of Mariupol after clashes with pro-Russian protesters. In January 2015, a devastating rocket attack by the rebels on the eastern edge of the city killed almost 30 civilians.
Even though the war gradually receded, the sound of artillery booming in the distance was part of Mariupol's daily soundscape.
But the city moved on. The Ukrainian government briefly made Mariupol the administrative capital of the Donetsk Oblast. People migrated from rebel-held areas and the city started attracting investment.
"It started receiving all of the resources and all of the attention," Ivan says.
A view of Mariupol along its coast
Public buildings were renovated, cafés opened, and new parks created. In a podcast last October, the city's mayor Vadym Boychenko boasted of creating the best municipal services in the country, opening an IT school, and promoting contemporary art and sports.
Plans were afoot, he said, for the largest water park in Ukraine and a version of Disneyland "which will probably be called Mariland". In fact, Mariupol was declared Ukraine's "Big Capital of Culture" in 2021.
But while Mariupol flourished, rebel-held Donetsk mouldered. When the rebels returned to Mariupol, Volodymyr, the paramedic, believed they were driven by revenge to destroy the city.
"'If we live in shit, then you will live in shit as well,'" Volodymyr says they told him at a checkpoint as he finally escaped the city. "They just looked at us and envied how we lived."
Volodymyr thinks the Russian-backed separatists were motivated by revenge
Yevhen, the businessman, describes life in Mariupol in the past five years as "a fairytale". "The city was being reconstructed," he says, "all roads were renovated, public transport was improved."
His buildings restoration firm was responsible, among other projects, for the reconstruction of Mariupol's iconic water tower in time for the city's 240th birthday.
"This is a city of hard workers… It was hard for me to explain that my workers should finish at 6pm - they wanted to work longer."
Like many others, weekends would be spent with family in the city's revived parks or on the seafront.
"For me, this is a [key] question - if you want to capture the city, why destroy it? [The Russians] don't need thinking people, they need territory," he says.
And, he adds, he is now getting calls from the Russians to return to Mariupol to help rebuild it.
"But if Mariupol is occupied by Russia, there will be no future there… there will be nothing to live for. To live in unrecognised territory is to bury your children's future."
About 150,000 people remain in the city, from a population of almost half a million. Most of those left there, he says, are also trying to escape.
"I left Mariupol but my soul is there," he says, tears in his eyes.
Businessman Yevhen is already getting calls from Russians to rebuild Mariupol
Nataliia and her husband Andrii worked at the Illich plant, one of two iron and steel works which tower over the city's skyline and loom large in Ivan Stanilavsky's photographs.
They spent long days at work, and leisure time was precious.
"The city authorities laid out marble tiles, made piers [so that] it was possible to sit on a bench right in the sea," Andrii says.
"It was a wonderful warm city with parks, concerts, fountains," his wife says. "A European city."
This recent blossoming was captured by Ivan, but as a photographer with a passion for his city's past, his pet project was documenting Mariupol's remarkable collection of Soviet murals, one of the most extensive in Ukraine.
The cultural importance of preserving such remarkable works seems undeniable, but in Mariupol nostalgia for the Soviet Union jostled uneasily with Ukraine's modern, increasingly European identity, Ivan says.
"Politics was already preventing this cultural heritage from being integrated into Ukraine's artistic context," he says.
So inevitably, when the war came, culture found itself fought over too.
On 28 April, Mariupol's city council denounced the alleged theft by Russia of more than 2,000 exhibits from the city's museums, including ancient icons, a handwritten Torah scroll and more than 200 medals.
The director of Mariupol's Local History Museum, Natalia Kapustnikova, later told Russian newspaper Izvestia that she had personally handed over paintings to the Russians by Ivan Aivazovsky and Arkhip Kuindzhi, and claimed that Ukrainian "nationalists" had burned 95% of the museum's exhibits.
She wasn't the only local official harbouring pro-Russian sentiments. On 9 April, Ukraine's prosecutor general charged a member of Mariupol's city council, Kostyantyn Ivashchenko, with treason after he was declared mayor by pro-Russian separatists in Donetsk.
Ivashchenko's pro-Russian party had been well supported in the city's last elections, coming second, while President Volodymyr Zelensky's party came a distant fifth place.
In a poll conducted just before the elections by the Kyiv-based Centre for Social Indicators, almost half the city's population identified themselves as "Russian", though 80% also described themselves as "Ukrainian".
More tellingly, perhaps, fewer than 20% self-identified as "European", while more than 50% said they were "Soviet".
Mariia says that after the invasion she began to hate all things Russian
Nataliia, whose father is Russian, says she asked her husband for forgiveness when the bombing started. "I was ashamed that I was Russian."
Mariia, the engineer, says that before the war her first language was Russian, but when the bombing began "I started to hate all things Russian - language, movies, objects".
Mariupol's complex identity is hardly unique in today's Ukraine, a country which formed an integral part of the Soviet Union until the collapse of communism at the end of the 1980s. And it's doubtful that any of those who described themselves as "Russian" or "Soviet" wanted to see their city destroyed in a violent effort to pull it back into Moscow's orbit.
Ironically, when the moment arrived to defend the city from Russian invaders, it was another part of Mariupol's Soviet-era legacy that came to play an almost iconic role.
This legacy, buried deep underground, is the maze of bunkers beneath Mariupol's other steel works, Azovstal, built by the Soviet authorities during the Cold War.
The 36 bomb shelters provided room for more than 12,000 people. After independence in 1991, no-one thought that much about them. But then the fighting in 2014 began.
"We started thinking about what we would do if fighting spread further into the city," Enver Tskitishvili, Azovstal's director general, says.
Training on the use of the bunkers and their connecting tunnels went on every day for years.
In early February, as the fear of renewed conflict loomed larger, preparations swung into high gear. Food and water were brought in the week before Russia's invasion.
Officials at the plant knew the bomb shelters would soon be occupied, but had little idea that Azovstal, surrounded by water on three sides, would become the scene of Mariupol's last stand.
An injured Ukrainian serviceman inside the Azovstal iron and steel works factory
As the days went by, the war got closer and closer to Ivan Stanislavsky's apartment. Excursions in search of food, even to the nearby Dzerkalnyy store, just 400m up the road, were increasingly perilous. Sometimes, a Ukrainian mortar team would arrive by truck, fire off a few rounds, and leave before the inevitable Russian reply.
There was little communication between civilians and soldiers.
One day, a tank from the Azov Regiment arrived near Dzerkalnyy, sending locals running, fearful of an impending battle. The regiment emerged in 2014 as a highly effective volunteer militia with far right and, in some cases, neo-Nazi affiliations, before being folded into Ukraine's National Guard.
Vladimir Putin has made extensive use of the Azov's controversial origins, in an effort to bolster his argument that he is trying to "de-Nazify" Ukraine. Ukrainian authorities say the regiment's origins are a thing of the past and points out that far-right parties have had very little electoral success.
In his diary Ivan describes the members he knows as a motley assortment of Mariupol natives - bikers, lawyers, football hooligans, and an amateur actor - driven not by ideology, but by a fierce hatred of those who were trying to ruin their lives.
"Together they formed a 'Nazi' battalion and intimidated the entire Russian army," he writes.
Intimidating and effective, but not enough, eventually, to stem the Russian tide.
While the city's defenders fought their losing battle, Ivan heard voices in his basement starting to curse President Zelensky for leaving Mariupol to its own devices.
President Volodymyr Zelensky (L) and children play in a fountain during his first official visit to Mariupol on 15 June 2019
For all the praise heaped on the city's defenders, it was clear from the start that Mariupol was not the government's main priority. Faced with Russian threats on a number of fronts, the Zelensky government chose to secure the capital, thwarting what was arguably Vladimir Putin's top priority.
Ultimately, that meant letting Russian forces achieve another of their pre-war goals: the establishment of a land corridor between Crimea - annexed by Moscow in 2014 - and the separatists in the Donbas.
But for those trapped in the city, fighting or just trying to survive, it was a bitter pill.
"Some say Mariupol was given the status of a hero city," Ivan wrote in his diary on 13 March.
"It looks like the award will be posthumous."
Ivan's photo of the inside of the water tower
By now, Ivan couldn't stand any more. Outside Dzerkalnyy supermarket, he saw corpses neatly stacked under a wall. People who once queued for food were now in "the queue of the dead", waiting to be buried.
So on 15 March Ivan bundled four family members and his cat into his miraculously unscathed Skoda Fabia and joined a convoy for the tortuous journey north-west to government-held Zaporizhzhia.
At an observation point on Markelova St looking towards the port and the beach, Ivan allowed himself a brief moment of reflection.
"In my head I'm saying goodbye to this place," he writes in his diary. "I have a feeling we will never return here."
A day later, Mariia and five relatives also left by car, carrying just personal belongings and the family's dog. As they made their way out of Mariupol, their convoy came under attack and the cars had to accelerate out of danger, headed first to Zaporizhzhia, then to Dnipro.
The following day, Nataliia and Andreii left, after a neighbour offered them a space in his car. The couple eventually reached the city of Khmelnytskyi where they have been selling the family's coin collection in order to survive.
In that same convoy, Yevhen travelled with his wife and two other relatives. He's now in Dnipro, helping other residents who escaped Mariupol, and trying to reach those who remain.
The apartment block where Ivan lived has been destroyed
Volodymyr, the paramedic, stayed in Mariupol as long as he could, to look after his elderly mother. But deprived of food and special medicine, she died. He then left the city on 21 April, and is volunteering at a hospital in Dnipro.
"There are thousands and thousands of families like mine," he says. "How many people have died? How many families have been lost?"
Two months after escaping, Ivan is still watching the death throes of Mariupol from the relative safety of Lviv.
In his diary's poignant epilogue, he writes of flashbacks, text messages about deaths or lucky escapes, and phone calls that go unanswered.
"The subscriber is out of range."
With additional reporting by Kateryna Khinkulova and Illia Tolstov
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61480988
|
news_world-europe-61480988
|
|
Northern Ireland: UK and EU's row risks Western unity, top US official warns - BBC News
|
2022-05-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
US state department warns against "a big fight between the UK and the EU" amid the Ukraine war.
|
UK Politics
|
The UK's dispute with the European Union over Northern Ireland trade risks undermining Western unity during the Ukraine war, a senior US official says.
Derek Chollet told the BBC the US hoped the row over Northern Ireland's post-Brexit trade deal could be resolved.
He said "a big fight between the UK and the EU" was "the last thing" Washington wanted.
Vladimir Putin would "use any opportunity he can to show that our alliance is fraying", he added.
Mr Chollet, the most senior adviser to US Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, said: "We want to see this issue resolved and we want to see the temperature lowered and no unilateral acts.
"And it's particularly important right now where we need to send a message of unity to the world and not undermine all the things that we've been so successful in working on together over the last several months and showing unity in Ukraine."
Mr Chollet's intervention is significant. It is rare for senior US officials to comment on the UK's domestic affairs given the historically close relationship between the two nations.
But his comments build on recent concerns expressed by senior US politicians, including President Joe Biden and US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, about the UK government threatening to override the Northern Ireland Protocol.
These concerns have so far largely focused on what the US sees as the possible risks to peace in Northern Ireland.
But the senior State Department official is making a new argument, that now is not the time for the UK and the EU to be having a fight. There are bigger fish to fry over Ukraine.
The US wants its allies united, not scrapping over legacy Brexit issues.
Read more: Guide to the Brexit border problem
Derek Chollet, a senior adviser to the US secretary of state, has urged the UK and the EU to cool tensions
On Thursday Ms Pelosi said she was "deeply concerned" that the UK was seeking to "unilaterally discard" Northern Ireland's post-Brexit trade arrangements, set out in the protocol.
She said the US Congress would not support a trade agreement with the UK if its actions jeopardised the peace process in Northern Ireland.
The UK government has argued that changes to the way goods are shipped from Great Britain to Northern Ireland are needed to restore its devolved government.
A power-sharing administration cannot be formed without the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), which has refused to join one until significant changes are made to the protocol.
The DUP says the protocol, which was agreed by the UK and the EU in December 2020, has created economic barriers between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
On Tuesday Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said the UK government would introduce a law to change the protocol unilaterally should negotiations with the EU fail.
Ms Pelosi warned against any action that might endanger the Good Friday Agreement, the peace deal that ended decades of conflict in Northern Ireland.
In the first of several tweets, she wrote: "Ensuring there is no physical border between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland is necessary for upholding this landmark agreement, which transformed Northern Ireland."
But the UK's former Brexit minister, Lord Frost, has criticised Ms Pelosi for making what he called an "ignorant" statement about the situation in Northern Ireland.
Lord Frost, who negotiated the protocol with the EU, said there was no plan to put a physical border in place on the island of Ireland.
"Nobody's ever suggested that. So I don't know why she's suggesting that in her statement," Lord Frost told the Week in Westminster on BBC Radio 4.
US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she was concerned about the UK's actions
He also denied that making changes to the arrangements would undermine the Good Friday Agreement.
"It is the protocol itself that's undermining [the Good Friday Agreement] and people who can't see that really shouldn't be commenting on the situation in Northern Ireland," said the former minister.
On Friday afternoon DUP leader Sir Jeffrey Donaldson said he thought Ms Pelosi's contributions were "entirely unhelpful, offer no solution, offer no help and merely repeat a mantra that frankly is hopelessly out of date."
He spoke as the Irish Taoiseach Micheál Martin met Northern Ireland's main parties to discuss the protocol and the political crisis.
Meanwhile, a US Congress delegation flew to Brussels for a meeting with European Commission vice-president Maros Sefcovic, who has been leading negotiations with the UK.
"We're equally committed to protecting the Good Friday (Belfast) Agreement," he tweeted. "Joint solutions implementing the Protocol are the only way to do so."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61521540
|
news_uk-politics-61521540
|
|
Biden plan to end US migrant expulsion policy blocked - BBC News
|
2022-05-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
A US judge says the policy that allows migrants to be expelled over Covid fears must stay in place.
|
US & Canada
|
More than 1.7 million people have been expelled under the controversial policy widely known as Title 42
A US judge has blocked plans by Joe Biden's administration to lift a policy allowing migrants to be swiftly expelled at the Mexico border over concerns about spreading Covid.
District Judge Robert Summerhays granted an injunction to Republican state attorneys challenging the halting of checks known as Title 42.
The policy, introduced by Donald Trump in 2020, was due to expire on 23 May.
The US Department of Justice said it would appeal.
Aimed at stopping virus spread in migrant holding facilities, Title 42 was twice extended by President Biden.
More than 1.7 million people have been expelled under the policy.
On Friday, Judge Summerhays in Lafayette, Louisiana, ruled that the policy would stay in place while a lawsuit by more than 20 states played out in court.
He backed the states' argument that the Biden administration had failed to follow procedures requiring notification and time to gather public comment on the plans to end the policy.
And the judge also said that states had made the case that they would suffer harm if the restrictions ended.
The White House said it would comply with the ruling, but would also launch an appeal.
"The authority to set public health policy nationally should rest with the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), not with a single district court," White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre said in a statement.
Mr Biden had been under pressure from his Democratic Party to end the controversial order, with critics arguing that its public health benefits failed to outweigh harm to the rights of migrants.
Title 42 allows US authorities to expel migrants seeking asylum without being given the chance to put forward their case. Children and some families are exempt.
Though Mr Biden had pledged to reverse Trump-era immigration policies while in office, the CDC under his administration extended Title 42 in August 2021, and again in January, due to the spread of the Delta and Omicron variants, respectively.
But in April, the CDC said it was ready to rescind the policy given the current, more favourable public health outlook and after consulting with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
However, Republicans - and some Democrats - warned that repealing Title 42 could lead to a surge in migrants at the US-Mexico border.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61532326
|
news_world-us-canada-61532326
|
|
Abortion ruling: US Supreme Court says leak is real as investigation launched - BBC News
|
2022-05-03
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The leak has stirred expectations that the 1973 decision legalising US abortion could be overturned.
|
US & Canada
|
A leaked document suggesting millions of US women could lose the legal right to abortion is genuine, the Supreme Court's chief justice has confirmed.
But it does not represent the court's final decision, said John Roberts.
The leak has stirred expectations that the 1973 decision which legalised abortion in the US could be overturned, allowing individual states to ban it.
President Joe Biden has argued that the decision - if it goes ahead - could call other freedoms into question.
The leaked document - labelled "1st Draft" - appears to reflect the majority opinion of the court.
Written by Justice Samuel Alito, it calls the 1973 Roe v Wade ruling - which legalised abortion across the US - "egregiously wrong from the start".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: US Senators react to leaked draft opinion on abortion
The draft is not a final ruling, and opinions could change. But if Roe v Wade is overturned, around half of US states could ban abortion.
In a statement, Chief Justice Roberts described the leak of the draft - first published by US website Politico - as "a singular and egregious breach" and asked the Marshal of the Supreme Court to launch an investigation.
The work of the court would "not be affected in any way", he added.
The draft's release has caused a wave of reaction from both sides. Anti-abortion law firm Americans United for Life urged the court to disregard "the expectations of pro-abortion activists or proxy media allies".
Planned Parenthood - the largest provider of reproductive health services in the US - has said it would "continue to fight like hell to protect the right to access safe, legal abortion".
It says its research found that 36 million women could lose abortion access if Roe v Wade were struck down.
The ruling is in the court's sights because Mississippi is asking for it to be overturned, with a final decision expected in late June or early July.
Thirteen states have already passed so-called trigger laws that will automatically ban abortion if Roe is overruled this summer. A number of others would be likely to pass laws quickly.
On Tuesday, Oklahoma's governor signed into law an anti-abortion measure based on one passed in Texas last year. The law allows any private citizen to sue anyone who aids in an abortion after six weeks of gestation - before many women even know they are pregnant.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
President Joe Biden warned that such a legal change - if the decision stays the same - would have far-reaching implications.
"It concerns me a great deal that we're going to, after 50 years, decide a woman does not have a right to choose," he said.
"But even more, equally profound is the rationale used. It would mean that every other decision relating to the notion of privacy is thrown into question."
Mr Biden said he wanted legislation to enshrine the existing guarantees of abortion access.
"If it becomes the law, and if what is written remains, it goes far beyond the concern of whether or not there is the right to choose," he said.
"It goes to other basic rights - the right to marriage, the right to determine a whole range of things."
BBC North America reporter Anthony Zurcher says the basis for this lies in distinctions drawn by Justice Samuel Alito in the leaked opinion, which he wrote.
Some rights are spelt out in the US Constitution, the judge wrote, while others, such as access to abortion, are mere "unenumerated rights".
Our reporter points out that the same argument could be used in the case of gay marriage, in vitro fertilisation or certain forms of contraception.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61313517
|
news_world-us-canada-61313517
|
|
Covid breach court case criticised by Bedford gym owner - BBC News
|
2022-05-03
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Alex Lowndes is among 23 people who overturned prosecutions for gym-related Covid breaches.
|
Beds, Herts & Bucks
|
Alex Lowndes said gyms should never have been closed
A gym boss who is among more than 20 people who overturned a prosecution for a gym-related Covid breach said the case against him was a waste of time.
Alex Lowndes refused to close his Gainz Fitness & Strength in Bedford in November 2020, when restrictions were imposed in England.
Bedford Borough Council's case collapsed but the authority said it had acted in the public interest.
A lawyer told the BBC she had successfully defended 23 similar cases.
Under Covid regulations at the time - the second national lockdown in England - sports venues could only open in limited circumstances, such as for the training of elite athletes.
Police gave a prohibition notice to Gainz Fitness & Strength in Bedford in November 2020
Infection rates and hospital admission were rising in the area but Mr Lowndes said he felt strongly that gyms should remain open.
"It became clear it was an airborne disease, you're more prone to it if you're unhealthy, overweight, etc, and gyms contributed a very small amount to the spread of the virus," he said.
"From a mental health point of view, gyms are really important, people depend on them, and I think people underestimate that.
"[Contesting the case] was based on principle. We should never have shut in the first place and we stand by what we did at the time."
The gym was raided in November 2020 and Mr Lowndes charged with a breach of lockdown regulations, which he denied.
He faced a £10,000 fine and was due to stand trial last in March but the council failed to gather enough evidence.
The authority requested an adjournment, which was rejected by magistrates.
Lucinda Nicholls said the prosecutions "make no sense"
Gyms in England and Wales were forced to close over various periods during the pandemic but many defied the measures to stay open.
London-based criminal defence lawyer Lucinda Nicholls said she had represented 25 cases involving an alleged gym-related Covid breach, 23 of which were found in favour of her client.
In most cases, a fixed penalty notice was issued when there was an exception or reasonable excuse argument, she said.
"The biggest issue is enforcement of the legislation - the law hasn't been followed, but councils and prosecutors doggedly insist on proceeding, it makes no sense," she added.
"We've been in scenarios where costs have just added and added, and we've written to the local authority saying, 'Why are you doing this?' This is completely unnecessary'."
Local Authorities as well as the police or Crown Prosecution Service have the power to issue and pursue fixed penalty notices in the courts.
The CPS said each case was considered based on its "individual merits" and prosecutions followed "whenever our legal test is met".
The Local Government Association did not wish to comment.
Mr Lowndes claimed the council case was "flimsy" and "inept", and that it was also "ludicrous" to continue to prosecute people for exercising after details of the "partygate" gatherings in Westminster emerged.
"They [the council] should have looked at it even six months in and gone 'this is a waste of time'," he added.
"But they kept going and they kept going, they brought in an external barrister, they kept spending money, and it just got out of control."
Bedford Borough Council said regulations were enforced in line with its duty at the time.
"We brought this case because there was ample evidence for a successful prosecution following the non-payment of a fixed penalty notice and because it was in the public interest," said a council spokesman.
"It is important that we remember that the threat posed by the virus then was very different to that which we face now."
"The pandemic isn't over but the combination of immunity from prior infection, vaccinations and antivirals has made it possible for us to return cautiously to the activities that we love."
Find BBC News: East of England on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. If you have a story suggestion email eastofenglandnews@bbc.co.uk
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-61276303
|
news_uk-england-beds-bucks-herts-61276303
|
|
Amber Heard denies striking Johnny Depp and doctoring photos - BBC News
|
2022-05-17
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Johnny Depp's lawyer has accused Ms Heard of being "the jealous one" in the ex-couple's marriage.
|
US & Canada
|
Amber Heard in court on 17 May
Johnny Depp's legal team has accused Amber Heard of using drugs, striking him and manipulating photos she has used as evidence of his alleged abuse.
Ms Heard, 36, was being cross-examined about her allegations that Mr Depp could be violent while using alcohol and drugs.
The 58-year-old actor is suing his ex-wife for $50m (£40m) for a column she wrote in which she claimed to be a victim of domestic abuse.
He has denied ever assaulting her.
Mr Depp's lawyers cross-examined Ms Heard on her version of events related to a lengthy 2015 argument between the former couple, which took place while in Australia.
That argument has been raised repeatedly over the course of the trial.
Mr Depp has claimed his ex-wife severed his fingertip by throwing a vodka bottle at him. Ms Heard has told jurors that Mr Depp sexually violated her with a bottle.
In court on Tuesday, Mr Depp's lawyer questioned why Ms Heard did not seek medical attention despite claiming she suffered cuts and bruises during the chaotic fight.
"You're the one who assaulted someone with a bottle in Australia, isn't that right Ms Heard," attorney Camille Vasquez said.
In response, Ms Heard said that she "didn't assault Johnny, ever".
But she did acknowledge that she struck Mr Depp on several instances, which she said happened after "years of not defending myself". She made similar statements on Monday, saying she "reactively" hit him during physical altercations.
Jurors were also shown an extract from a journal - which Ms Heard described as "love notes" - in which she appears to have apologised to Mr Depp.
"I'm sorry I can get crazy. I'm sorry I hurt you," she wrote. "I can get wicked when I'm hurt".
Explaining the entry, Ms Heard said that "it's important to apologise when you're trying to move past fights".
Jurors also heard audio in which Ms Heard can be telling her then husband that "she gets so mad, she loses it" and that she can't promise "she won't get physical".
Ms Vasquez also questioned the veracity of a May 2016 photograph that Ms Heard has said shows the aftermath of Mr Depp's alleged physical abuse.
"Isn't it true you just edited these photographs?" Ms Vasquez said.
During the gruelling cross-examination, jurors were also shown an itinerary for the couple's wedding, which included plans for a "dance party and drugs and music".
Ms Heard has repeatedly characterised Mr Depp's drug use as problematic and a source of tension in their marriage.
"So, your original idea was to do drugs on an island after your rehearsal dinner to the drug-fueled monster that you were about to marry?" Ms Vasquez asked.
In response, Ms Heard said it was a draft itinerary and that there was "going to be weed" at the event. She also admitted to drug use on her 30th birthday.
Over several days of testimony earlier this month, Ms Heard repeatedly said that Mr Depp had attempted to control her career, did not like her taking on new roles, and sometimes became jealous of her co-stars.
During cross-examination, Ms Vasquez accused Ms Heard of being the "jealous one", who had landed her role in the high-profile Aquaman film thanks to Mr Depp.
"No, Ms Vasquez, I got that role by auditioning," she responded.
Mr Depp's defamation case against his former wife hinges on a 2018 opinion piece in the Washington Post newspaper in which she described herself as a victim of abuse, though the piece did not name Mr Depp.
She has countersued him for $100m.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Amber Heard and Johnny Depp - the trial so far, in their own words
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61485616
|
news_world-us-canada-61485616
|
|
Johnny Depp hit me on honeymoon, says Amber Heard - BBC News
|
2022-05-17
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The actress says she believes that she wouldn't have survived if their marriage had continued.
|
US & Canada
|
Amber Heard in court on 16 May
Amber Heard feared her ex-husband Johnny Depp would accidentally kill her during an alleged assault on their honeymoon, a US court has heard.
Testifying in a defamation case Mr Depp has brought against her, Ms Heard, 36, painted a picture of the actor as an abuser plagued by drug addiction, jealousy and self-harm.
Mr Depp is suing Ms Heard for $50m (£40m) over an article in which she claimed she was the victim of domestic violence.
He has repeatedly denied any abuse.
The high profile case in Virginia has resumed for a fifth week after a pause, before which Mr Depp had told his side of the story and Ms Heard had begun some of her testimony.
In court on Monday, Ms Heard tearfully told jurors that she believed she'd likely "not survive" if she had remained married to Mr Depp, 58.
"I was so scared that it was going to end really badly for me," she said. "I really didn't want to leave him. I loved him so much."
Ms Heard has accused Mr Depp of repeated instances of physical abuse. On Monday, she alleged that he attacked her while aboard the Orient Express train in Asia after their February 2015 wedding, claiming that he struck her and held her by the neck while in their sleeper compartment.
"He was squeezing my neck against the railway car for what felt like a very long time," she said.
She said she recalled thinking he could "kill me".
"I remember being scared that he wouldn't mean to do it," she said.
In another instance, Ms Heard described a "week of hell" after Mr Depp allegedly became jealous after she was offered a role with James Franco. She claimed he punched her and threw her into furniture.
While Ms Heard said that the marriage was "at times, very loving", it deteriorated over time to a point in which tension and violence became "almost normal". They divorced in 2017, after two years.
During their increasingly frequent arguments, Ms Heard claimed that Mr Depp would frequently self-harm.
"In fights he often would cut his arms or hold his knife to his chest or draw blood, superficially at first," she said. "He also put cigarettes out on himself."
Lawyers for Mr Depp challenged Ms Heard's version of events as they began their cross-examination on Monday afternoon.
Attorney Camille Vasquez skewered the witness' prior testimony, questioning why there were so few photos and medical records to back up claims of physical injuries from her alleged beatings.
Ms Heard countered that, embarrassed to be a victim of abuse, she did not seek medical treatment "other than my therapist", relying instead on makeup to cover bruises and ice to reduce swelling.
In a heated back-and forth, Ms Vasquez forced Ms Heard to acknowledge that she had "pledged" to donate the entirety of her $7m divorce settlement with Mr Depp to charity but was yet to make any donation.
She also noted that her client had not once looked Ms Heard in the eye over the course of the trial. "He can't," Ms Heard responded.
In his own testimony earlier in the trial, Mr Depp said that he never struck Ms Heard and told jurors that she had a "need" for conflict and violence.
On Monday, jurors heard a number of audio clips of the former couple arguing. In one clip - which went viral ahead of the trial - Ms Heard can be heard saying she hit Mr Depp.
"I was hitting you. I was not punching you," she can be heard saying. "You're not punched."
According to Ms Heard, she sometimes "reactively" hit Mr Depp and claimed that she was referring to the "disparity" of their strength.
The defamation case against Ms Heard stems from a 2018 piece she wrote for the Washington Post in which she characterised herself as a victim of abuse. The piece did not name Mr Depp.
His attorneys, however, have said that the article "incalculably" damaged his reputation and career. She has countersued him for $100m.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Amber Heard and Johnny Depp - the trial so far, in their own words
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61467766
|
news_world-us-canada-61467766
|
|
Kate Moss: Johnny Depp never pushed or kicked me - BBC News
|
2022-05-25
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The model has testified via video-link for Mr Depp in a defamation case against his ex-wife Amber Heard.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch Kate Moss testify: "Did Mr Depp push you down the stairs?"
British supermodel Kate Moss has testified that her ex-boyfriend Johnny Depp never abused her, contradicting a claim made by the actor's ex-wife.
Amber Heard, 36, had claimed that she heard rumours that Mr Depp once pushed Ms Moss down a flight of stairs.
Mr Depp is suing Ms Heard for $50m (£40m) for an opinion article she wrote in which she said she was an abuse victim.
On the stand, he said that it has been "insane" to hear Ms Heard's claims.
Over the course of the six week trial, the court has heard vastly different versions of what transpired between the two during their volatile two year marriage.
Ms Heard and witnesses for her side painted a picture of Mr Depp as an abuser plagued by drug use, jealous and self-harm and Mr Depp's side putting forward a story of the actress as the aggressor and her claims as untrue.
In brief testimony on Wednesday, Ms Moss - who dated Mr Depp between 1994 and 1998 - said that he never pushed her, but rather that he once came to her aid after she fell down the stairs.
"As I left the room, I slid down the stairs and I hurt my back," Ms Moss said. "And I screamed because I didn't know what happened to me and I was in pain".
"He came running back to help me and carried me to my room and got me medical attention," she added.
Mr Depp never pushed or kicked her throughout the years they spent together, Ms Moss said.
Taking the stand on Wednesday, Mr Depp accused Ms Heard of turning the story "into a very ugly incident, all in her mind."
The claim he had pushed her was brought up earlier in the trial by Ms Heard, who said the image of her then-husband abusing the model had popped into her head when she witnessed an altercation between Mr Depp and her sister.
"[Her] back was to the staircase and Johnny swings at her," Ms Heard said. "I don't hesitate. I don't want. I just, in my head, think of Kate Moss and stairs".
Her concerns prompted her to "swing" at Johnny to defend her sister, she said, hitting him "square in the face".
Her lawyers chose to not cross-examine Ms Moss.
During his testimony, Mr Depp denied several other allegations made by Ms Heard during the trial, including her claim that he assaulted her while on their honeymoon on the Orient Express.
"Ms Heard hit me," he said. "I had a sort of shiner [black eye], but it all ended and everything got fine again".
In previous testimony, Ms Heard said she feared that Mr Depp would accidentally kill her during the same incident and that "he wouldn't mean to do it".
Mr Depp said it was "insane" to hear "heinous accusations" of violence and abuse his ex-wife attributes to him.
"I don't think anyone enjoys having to split themselves open and tell the truth," he said. "But there are times one simply has to".
The defamation case against Ms Heard stems from a 2018 comment article she wrote for the Washington Post in which she said she was a victim of abuse.
While the piece did not identify Mr Depp by name, his attorneys have said it "incalculably" damaged his career. She has countersued him for $100m.
A source close to Ms Heard told the BBC that they believe Ms Moss's testimony will have little impact on the case when it comes to the "central issue" of "whether Amber Heard can exercise her right of freedom of speech".
Closing arguments will begin on Friday, followed by jury deliberations.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61569652
|
news_world-us-canada-61569652
|
|
'How the state tried to silence my abusive agent expose' - BBC News
|
2022-05-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
BBC News reporter Daniel De Simone on his courtroom fight to reveal how an MI5 agent abused women.
|
UK
|
Much of the evidence was kept secret from Daniel De Simone and the BBC team
No journalist enjoys attempts at censorship. We often face restrictions, but I had never encountered anything like this - a vast list of things the government wanted to ban me saying about an abusive MI5 agent I had spent a long time investigating.
I received the list during the months-long legal battle between the BBC and the government. I had been investigating a state informant for some time, and when we put the findings to the government, they took us to court. It eventually ran to 54 pages and included a series of arguments about the government's demands. They wanted to stop our story about the agent who can only be referred to as X.
The right-wing extremist had used his security service role to terrorise and coerce his British girlfriend, who we are calling Beth. In one incident, which she recorded on her mobile phone, he attacked her with a machete. Evidence we gathered establishes he had also threatened to kill women and children, and was a sexual threat to young girls.
I was the main witness in the legal case to defend reporting on the story. The litigation process took over my life. The pressure was significant and I had many low moments. My journalism was under scrutiny - with government lawyers critically examining every detail in the large volume of evidence, and challenging the accuracy of our work.
We argued that it was important to identify X so that other women he encountered could be warned about him and the abusive behaviour our investigation had uncovered. The security service, however, argued that naming X would create an unacceptable danger to him from extremists and discourage other people from acting as informants, which would damage national security.
The government initially asked for the right to exercise written approval over our reporting. This would have amounted to ministers having editorial control over our story, which we argued in court would be "repugnant" to any media organisation but particularly the BBC, with its charter obligation of independence from government.
This demand was eventually dropped and the judge later said he would have required "great persuasion" to have granted it.
This is the story of a dangerous MI5 agent, which the government tried to keep secret.
There were several stages to the court case. In one, the judge ruled - after receiving secret evidence that I was not allowed to see - that X could not be identified.
The next stage involved an argument over what other details should be kept from the public. I thought even if X was anonymised, our news report could still reveal a great deal and generate public debate about important issues, particularly the state's response to violence against women and girls. But it was clear that everything we had uncovered could potentially be censored.
Very little had been agreed between the parties, the judge noted, and the number of issues in dispute was "dispiritingly large".
The BBC's legal team outside the High Court in London
As he put it, MI5 was seeking to limit "practically everything known about [X] that is not already in the public domain". That was an awful lot, given the only things known publicly had emerged from the court case itself.
However, after receiving a judgement in the case this week, we were able to broadcast and publish a significant report on Thursday.
The legal case itself had been draining, with much of the evidence entirely secret and kept from me and the BBC team.
I was anonymous in the proceedings, but I cannot tell you why. My name was redacted in public documents, and when I was pointed at and referred to in open court - even when I was actually sitting there - my name was not used.
There was a challenge from MI5 on the reliability of the story, but the judge ultimately found I had taken "proper steps to assess whether its various elements were true" and that it was "comfortably" shown to have a credible evidential foundation.
The investigation had been lengthy and complicated. It started simply with the account of Beth and went from there. Eventually we found another abused former partner of X's - who, in our reporting, we called Ruth. Everything that could be, was tested and corroborated, with every new discovery subjected to the same process. The research would ultimately drag in MI5, the government, a foreign intelligence agency, police, prosecutors, and the High Court.
Hardly anyone within the BBC knew what was going on.
The whole thing felt like a parody of a spy film. I would sneak off from my normal tasks to carry out research and have meetings in odd locations. The small BBC team involved - investigations editor Ed Campbell, producer Sira Thierij and lawyer Lucy Moorman - used a random codename for the project and each element of the investigation was meticulously planned.
During the legal proceedings, my main opposite number was a senior MI5 officer, who could only be referred to as Witness A. On various issues, it was my evidence against his.
But the case involved another bewildering element.
The government had applied for something called a closed material procedure, where secret evidence is put before a judge, including during a closed hearing in a secure courtroom behind locked doors. This part of the case excluded the BBC team and our lawyers, with what are known as special advocates - security cleared barristers - appointed to act on our behalf.
The procedure is designed to let the security and intelligence agencies present evidence that is too secret for almost anyone to hear. I've reported on cases involving terrorism suspects where this process is central. But I effectively now found myself in the same position - blind to the evidence being presented against me. It will remain secret.
We met our special advocates and explained our case. However, once they had seen the secret evidence we were banned from communicating with them.
This meant we could not provide any instructions in response to the evidence they were seeing. Any further messages between us had to be channelled through an official go-between - a civil servant - to check that nothing secret was being disclosed. In court we could nod and smile at them, but have no conversations.
The two women we interviewed both think X could kill a woman - and I formed the same view.
Counter terrorism investigations are typically focused on preventing harm. Why wait for a terrorist to hurt people if you can stop him before? The same principle applied to investigating and challenging X.
The judge eventually ruled that we were allowed to publish and broadcast the story, and it came as a huge relief to finally be out there reporting on it so prominently. Since it went into the public domain on Thursday, it's led to the issues being debated and the story being referenced by leading politicians. One described the revelations as "harrowing and horrific" - the deputy prime minister, whose government had taken me and the BBC to court.
Do you have information about this story that you want to share?
Get in touch using SecureDrop, a highly anonymous and secure way of whistleblowing to the BBC which uses the TOR network.
Or by using the Signal messaging app, an end-to-end encrypted message service designed to protect your data.
Please note that the SecureDrop link will only work in a Tor browser. For information on keeping secure and anonymous, here's some advice on how to use SecureDrop.
|
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61528286
|
news_uk-61528286
|
|
Ukraine War: Putin gives few clues in Victory Day speech - BBC News
|
2022-05-10
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Prior to Victory Day, Moscow was full of rumours about what Putin might announce in his speech.
|
Europe
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Ahead of Victory Day, Moscow was full of rumour and speculation.
Was Vladimir Putin preparing a major announcement on Russia's offensive in Ukraine? Would he declare some kind of victory? Or signal an escalation?
In the end, he did neither.
In his Red Square address to Russian troops - and the Russian nation - the Kremlin leader repeated his frequently voiced justification for attacking Ukraine: an argument that appears to blame everyone but Russia for what's happening.
He criticised (as usual) America, Nato and the government in Kyiv, claiming that their actions had put the security of Russia itself in danger. He made references (as usual) to "neo-Nazis" in Ukraine. We hear that a lot from Russian officials, who regularly voice the baseless claim that Ukraine has been overrun by fascists, ultra-nationalists and Nazi sympathisers.
President Putin admitted that Russia had suffered military losses, but he gave no details. The last official figures released by Russia's defence ministry were 1,351 Russian soldiers killed. But that was six weeks ago. There has been no update since.
Curiously, Mr Putin didn't employ his familiar phrase - "Special Military Operation" - to describe Russia's offensive. Neither did he call it a war. But he tried to draw parallels between current hostilities and World War Two. An attempt, perhaps, to mobilise patriotic sentiment over Hitler's defeat to boost support amongst the Russian public for the invasion of Ukraine.
There was plenty of military hardware on show on Monday, although less than in 2021
Following the speech, thousands of Russian soldiers marched across Red Square, although there were fewer troops here than in last year's Victory Day parade. Military hardware was put on show, too. But a planned military fly-over was cancelled, officially due to poor weather.
The Kremlin had been expecting a swift victory in Ukraine, possibly within days of sending in its troops. It didn't happen.
Many here believe President Putin's Plan B was to secure a victory by 9 May. That hasn't happened, either.
Where does President Putin go from here? There were few clues in today's speech. But there was no signalling of an end to hostilities. For now, they will continue.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61380727
|
news_world-europe-61380727
|
|
Abortion ruling: US Supreme Court says leak is real as investigation launched - BBC News
|
2022-05-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The leak has stirred expectations that the 1973 decision legalising US abortion could be overturned.
|
US & Canada
|
A leaked document suggesting millions of US women could lose the legal right to abortion is genuine, the Supreme Court's chief justice has confirmed.
But it does not represent the court's final decision, said John Roberts.
The leak has stirred expectations that the 1973 decision which legalised abortion in the US could be overturned, allowing individual states to ban it.
President Joe Biden has argued that the decision - if it goes ahead - could call other freedoms into question.
The leaked document - labelled "1st Draft" - appears to reflect the majority opinion of the court.
Written by Justice Samuel Alito, it calls the 1973 Roe v Wade ruling - which legalised abortion across the US - "egregiously wrong from the start".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: US Senators react to leaked draft opinion on abortion
The draft is not a final ruling, and opinions could change. But if Roe v Wade is overturned, around half of US states could ban abortion.
In a statement, Chief Justice Roberts described the leak of the draft - first published by US website Politico - as "a singular and egregious breach" and asked the Marshal of the Supreme Court to launch an investigation.
The work of the court would "not be affected in any way", he added.
The draft's release has caused a wave of reaction from both sides. Anti-abortion law firm Americans United for Life urged the court to disregard "the expectations of pro-abortion activists or proxy media allies".
Planned Parenthood - the largest provider of reproductive health services in the US - has said it would "continue to fight like hell to protect the right to access safe, legal abortion".
It says its research found that 36 million women could lose abortion access if Roe v Wade were struck down.
The ruling is in the court's sights because Mississippi is asking for it to be overturned, with a final decision expected in late June or early July.
Thirteen states have already passed so-called trigger laws that will automatically ban abortion if Roe is overruled this summer. A number of others would be likely to pass laws quickly.
On Tuesday, Oklahoma's governor signed into law an anti-abortion measure based on one passed in Texas last year. The law allows any private citizen to sue anyone who aids in an abortion after six weeks of gestation - before many women even know they are pregnant.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
President Joe Biden warned that such a legal change - if the decision stays the same - would have far-reaching implications.
"It concerns me a great deal that we're going to, after 50 years, decide a woman does not have a right to choose," he said.
"But even more, equally profound is the rationale used. It would mean that every other decision relating to the notion of privacy is thrown into question."
Mr Biden said he wanted legislation to enshrine the existing guarantees of abortion access.
"If it becomes the law, and if what is written remains, it goes far beyond the concern of whether or not there is the right to choose," he said.
"It goes to other basic rights - the right to marriage, the right to determine a whole range of things."
BBC North America reporter Anthony Zurcher says the basis for this lies in distinctions drawn by Justice Samuel Alito in the leaked opinion, which he wrote.
Some rights are spelt out in the US Constitution, the judge wrote, while others, such as access to abortion, are mere "unenumerated rights".
Our reporter points out that the same argument could be used in the case of gay marriage, in vitro fertilisation or certain forms of contraception.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61313517
|
news_world-us-canada-61313517
|
|
Sarah Everard killer: Wayne Couzens appeals whole-life sentence - BBC News
|
2022-05-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Court of Appeal is considering the sentences of several killers as it reviews whole-life orders.
|
UK
|
Wayne Couzens' lawyer said his remorse should have been taken into account in sentencing
The killer of Sarah Everard is challenging a sentencing order that said he should not be released from prison until he dies.
Wayne Couzens' appeal is part of a major review by the Court of Appeal of whole-life orders, including arguments for their wider use.
His lawyer said his remorse and guilty plea should be taken into account.
Lawyers for the Attorney General are also trying to increase sentences in two murder cases.
The lawyer for Couzens, Jim Sturman QC, said the former Metropolitan Police officer accepted his crimes were "abhorrent" and nothing in his arguments was intended to minimise the impact on his victim's friends and family, some of whom were present at the hearing.
But he said the sentencing judge's finding that he was not remorseful was "untenable".
"He was too ashamed to meet anyone's eye. He was not brazen, staring down at the court in the way sometimes seen," the lawyer said.
Mr Sturman said it was accepted that Couzens deserved "decades in jail" but his remorse and guilty plea should balance out the aggravating factor of having carried out the kidnap, rape and murder while he was a serving police officer.
There are 64 people currently in prison in England and Wales under whole-life orders, which are reserved for exceptional cases and mean they will never be released.
Couzens was the first person to be given such a term for a single murder of an adult not committed as part of a terror attack.
Mr Sturman said in written submissions: "Whilst this may well be considered by the public and the court to be a case of equal seriousness to a political, religious or ideological murder, it is not such an offence, not does it fall into any other category listed in the schedule."
Representing the Attorney General, Tom Little QC said Couzens' offending was of the "utmost seriousness" and his criminality was a "fundamental attack in reality on our democratic way of life".
He said the sentencing judge was entitled to the view that there was a "lack of general contrition" and a whole-life order was right in this "wholly exceptional case".
Couzens, who appeared at the hearing by video-link from prison, is one of two with whole-life terms involved in the Court of Appeal review, along with Ian Stewart, convicted of murdering his wife and later his fiancee.
Ian Stewart, convicted of murdering his wife and fiancee six years apart, is also appealing his whole-life order
Earlier this year, Stewart was handed a whole-life term for the 2010 murder of his first wife Diane. Previously, in 2017, he was sentenced to life in prison with a minimum term of 34 years for the murder of his fiancee, children's book author Helen Bailey.
His barrister, Amjad Malik QC, said a whole-life sentence was not justified, adding that the aggravating features of the killings did not fall into the category of "an exceptionally high-seriousness case".
Many serial killers have received whole-life orders but this was not such a case, he argued.
However, Mr Little said: "It is difficult to say that this sentence was either manifestly excessive or wrong in principle."
Today's super-appeal is the second time in a decade that top judges in England and Wales have considered the law and practice of whole-life terms, after ruling in 2012 that they were compatible with human rights safeguards.
Today's cases concern which offenders should be eligible for the sentence outside the basic rules set by Parliament.
Wayne Couzens' murder of Sarah Everard was an exceptional case for a whole-life order because it was a single killing - but the judge said his betrayal of uniform and duty undermined trust in society itself.
The Emma Tustin case is more complex. Her lawyers argued that the killer's own mental ill health and experience as a victim were factors that counted against a whole-life term.
The panel will now wrestle with these complex and tragic cases before potentially coming up with some guiding principles. But it's already clear where the judiciary stand in general - on average, they've imposed far more whole-life orders since taking over the job from ministers some 20 years ago.
Three more sentences are also being considered by the judges:
Tom Little QC, for the Attorney General, said Tustin's case "merited at the very least consideration of a whole-life order".
He said Arthur was "forced to live a solitary and lonely life" and "subjected to the most unimaginable suffering".
In written submissions, he said the murder was "sadistically motivated", with "systematic brutality amounting to torture".
The sentences of Emma Tustin and Thomas Hughes for the killing of Arthur Labinjo-Hughes are also being reviewed
Tustin's lawyer, Mary Prior QC, said the sentence was given by a highly experienced trial judge after considering all the evidence.
He concluded the starting point should be 30 years because of the sadistic elements of the killing, and then took into account the murderer's background of growing up around violence, history of mental health issues and suicide attempts, she said.
Ms Prior said: "This was the right, fair and proper approach in this very difficult and exceptional case."
In the case of Monaghan - who at the age of 30 was given a 40-year term for killing his baby daughter, toddler son and a new partner, as well as attempting to kill another child - Mr Little said the sentence was "unduly lenient".
There was "no mitigation at all" for triple-murderer Jordan Monaghan, the court heard
His crimes, over a seven-year period, were of "exceptionally high" seriousness and there was "no mitigation here at all", the lawyer for the Crown said.
Benjamin Myers QC, representing the killer as he listened in from HMP Wakefield, said the decision not to impose a whole-life order was at the discretion of the sentencing judge.
The hearing into all five sentences, at the Royal Courts of Justice, has now concluded and a decision will come in writing at a later date.
The Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett said: "We propose to take time to consider our decisions in these very difficult and tragic cases."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61317609
|
news_uk-61317609
|
|
NI election 2022: Leaders' debate raises energy levels of campaign - BBC News
|
2022-05-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The debate was the final opportunity for leaders to go head-to-head before polling day on Thursday.
|
Northern Ireland
|
Trailing from the first leg of the TV debate and falling further behind in the polls, Democratic Unionist Party leader Sir Jeffrey Donaldson needed a big performance.
He knew how his opponents would line up and take it in turn to attack his party over the protocol - the special Brexit deal for Northern Ireland designed to prevent the return of a hard land border with the Republic of Ireland - and its decision to walk out of the executive.
But he was ready with his counter press, snapping back at every challenge and sucking up most of the airtime in the process.
He came prepared with figures and paperwork to back up his arguments, even counting the days of the last assembly suspension triggered by Sinn Féin: 1,044 to be exact he told the party's deputy leader Michelle O'Neill
He also had figures ready to bring the cost of living crisis back to the Northern Ireland Protocol, insisting consumers here were paying up to 19% more for some goods than in other parts of the UK
That didn't go unchallenged, with Alliance leader Naomi Long calling out for someone to "fact check" the DUP leader's figures.
SDLP leader Colum Eastwood was more scathing, dismissing them as "makey up stuff".
SIGN UP FOR ALERTS: Get extra updates on BBC Northern Ireland election coverage
Figures aside we then got a rerun of the debate over the parties' ability to govern without a power sharing executive after it collapsed when the DUP withdrew Paul Givan as first minister in February.
Sir Jeffrey was once again outnumbered, insisting decisions could be made while the other leaders said they could not.
It almost became a battle over whose legal advice was correct, but on this occasion no paperwork was produced and no definite answer was arrived at.
In to the ring then stepped the Ulster Unionist Party leader.
Having been accused of by standing in the first debate, Doug Beattie was out to make his mark.
He accused Sir Jeffrey of using the threat of Sinn Féin pushing for border poll - a vote on Irish unification - as a "scare tactic" to get unionists to row in behind the DUP.
"There is no border poll on this ballot," declared Mr Beattie
Sir Jeffrey responded by insisting his fellow unionist leader didn't recognise the threat the protocol posed to the union.
But the spat between them was over before it started, perhaps both mindful they may need each other's transfer votes to protect vulnerable seats.
A modern browser with JavaScript and a stable internet connection is required to view this interactive. More information about these elections Who won in my area? Enter your postcode, or the name of your English, Scottish or Welsh council area or Northern Ireland constituency to find out.
That desire to ring fence potential transfers explains why there was no green-on-green action
Unlike in previous debates, Michelle O'Neill and Colum Eastwood targeted their fire solely at the DUP and not each other.
Now was not the time to alienate SDLP voters considering a second preference vote for Sinn Féin, and vice versa.
The DUP was an easy and popular hit for both leaders and while not landing a memorable blow they will be pleased with their respective performances.
Keeping the heat on the DUP meant there was little time to scrutinise the policies of the other parties
When the other four leaders did get asked about dealing with the cost-of-living crisis and how to fix the health service they adopted much the same language.
Even Sir Jeffrey in a brief moment of harmony talked about sitting down with his "colleagues to agree a programme for government "
Though the DUP leader cut a lonely and isolated figure with just one supporter prepared to raise his hand in the audience, Sir Jeffrey was more battle ready which always plays well with the party faithful.
Ms O'Neill was more measured in her contribution, perhaps mindful of the "first minister for all" tag which her party has been promoting.
As for Mrs Long and Mr Eastwood, their swipes at the DUP struck more of a chord with the audience while Mr Beattie's effort to "humanise" the debate played to his strengths.
Though it may not have swung too many voters the debate did raise the energy levels in what so far has been a lacklustre campaign if even for just an hour.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-61313894
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-61313894
|
|
As it happened: Johnny Depp slapped me again and again, says Amber Heard - BBC News
|
2022-05-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
For the first time, the actress takes the stand in the defamation trial with her ex-husband Johnny Depp.
|
US & Canada
|
Heard now alleges Depp became violent during a flight to Russia, in which he convinced a flight attendant to do drugs with the couple.
According to Heard, Depp became heated when the flight attendant became "MDMA friendly".
"After all, she's on drugs," she says, adding that Depp grabbed the flight attendant's arm in a fit of jealousy.
"He grabbed her by the wrist and slammed it down on the table, and told her he could break her wrist," Heard adds. "These things would happen."
Depp later accused Heard of having caused the incident, Heard adds.
Once in Russia, Heard says an argument about the drug-induced incident on the flight eventually turned violent, with Depp allegedly shoving her into a glass table and striking her in the face.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/world-us-canada-61318961
|
news_live_world-us-canada-61318961
|
|
Cost of living: Chancellor Rishi Sunak confirms U-turn on windfall tax - BBC News
|
2022-05-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The chancellor says it is right to "fairly" tax the "extraordinary" profits of oil and gas companies.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Rishi Sunak says eight million households will get £1,200 in support, when combining measures announced on Thursday and before
The government has U-turned on its opposition to a windfall tax on oil and gas firms, announcing it will introduce a levy to help tackle rising bills.
Ministers had rejected the idea - put forward by opposition parties - that would see a one-off charge imposed on the company's record profits.
But Chancellor Rishi Sunak said his levy would "tax extraordinary profits fairly and incentivise investments".
Labour's Rachel Reeves said Mr Sunak had "finally come to his senses".
The chancellor said new tax would raise £5bn over the course of the next year, allowing the government to "help families with the cost of living", while avoiding "having to increase our debt burden further".
He added: "There is nothing noble in burdening future generations with ever more debt today because politicians of the day were too weak to make the tough decisions."
The new tax will help fund a £15bn package from the government, which includes a £650 one-off payment for eight million low income households, and a change to the £200 loan scheme for energy bills for all homes in the autumn - increasing it to £400 without the need to pay it back.
But Liberal Democrat Treasury spokeswoman Christine Jardine said the measures were "too little, too late".
The plans received a mixed reaction from the Conservative backbenchers, with some calling it "tripe" and others saying it did not go far enough.
The government faced accusations that it had timed the announcement to distract from the release of the Sue Gray report into lockdown-breaking parties in Downing Street during the pandemic.
But the claims were denied by No 10.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Rachel Reeves says the Conservative windfall tax is a "policy that dare not speak its name".
Households across the country have faced soaring costs in recent months as the prices of food, fuel and energy have all rocketed, with inflation hitting a 40-year high.
The government has been under growing pressure to act, especially after energy regulator Ofgem warned of an additional rise to bills of £800 in the autumn.
The Liberal Democrats first put forward the idea of a windfall tax on the profits of oil and gas companies - which have peaked as the economy restarted after the pandemic - in November, with Labour outlining its own version in January.
The SNP has also called for such a measure.
The parties said the money raised could go towards helping those households hardest hit by the cost of living increases.
Initially, the idea was rejected by ministers, including Boris Johnson, who warned it could "deter" investment.
But both Mr Johnson and Mr Sunak subsequently softened their stance, and now the policy U-turn has been confirmed.
Making a statement in the Commons, the chancellor said the inflation faced by the UK was causing "acute distress for the people of this country" and he knew people were worried.
But, Mr Sunak added: "This government will never stop trying to help people, to fix problems where we can, to do what is right - as we did during the pandemic."
He confirmed the government would introduce a "temporary targeted energy profits levy" charged at a rate of 25% on profits of oil and gas companies to fund "significant support for the British people".
However, he said his "sensible middle ground" plan included a new investment allowance, so "for every pound a company invests they will get back 90% in tax relief - the more the company invests the less tax they will pay".
Mr Sunak said: "We should not be ideological about this, we should be pragmatic.
"It is possible to both tax extraordinary profits fairly and incentivise investments."
The chancellor said the tax would then be removed when energy prices returned to normal levels.
Shadow chancellor Ms Reeves said the government had been "dragged kicking and screaming" to its new policy position.
She added: "The chancellor has finally come to his senses, U-turned, and adopted Labour's plan for a windfall tax on oil and gas producer profits to lower bills."
But Ms Reeves claimed the government "still have no long term plan to grow our economy and pull us out of the mess they've got us into".
What does this change of tack signal?
The cabinet was split on whether to bring in a windfall tax
Ministers have been facing calls to do more to help with the cost of living for quite some time. So why today?
As recently as the weekend, Downing Street sources were indicating there would be no imminent announcement on windfall taxes.
And it was only a couple of weekends ago Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng called it a "bad idea".
So why the change of heart?
Well, ministers have been clear for some time that more help is on the way. And they did get a clearer idea of future energy prices this week.
But - to be more cynical - the government had a particularly uncomfortable day on Wednesday with the publication of the Sue Gray report into Downing Street gatherings.
Boris Johnson has made it clear that he's desperate to stop talking about parties. An announcement of billions of pounds of assistance for households certainly helps to move the agenda on.
Downing Street deny that the timing of this has anything to do with Partygate. But plenty of opposition MPs won't buy that argument.
The package of measures announced by Mr Sunak was attacked by many of his opponents for not going far enough.
Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey criticised the government for failing to cut taxes for workers, pointing to the new health and social care levy introduced in April amid the cost of living crisis.
He tweeted: "Sunak's like a thief who steals your car and then wants you to be grateful when he returns the steering wheel."
The SNP's Kirsty Blackman said the government had "listened to a certain extent", but had "failed" on a number of measures, especially her party's call to uprate benefits in line with inflation.
She told the BBC the one-off payment was "kicking the can down the road" and those hit hardest could face more difficulties in the future.
When it came to Mr Sunak's own benches, Conservatives appeared split on both the policies and how to fund them.
Richard Drax accused the chancellor of "throwing red meat to the socialists by raising taxes on businesses", adding a windfall tax was "not the Conservative way" of doing things.
Another backbench Tory, Craig Mackinlay, said he was "appalled that a Conservative chancellor could come up with this tripe", calling the tax "outrageous" and "inherently wrong".
Former party leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, however, called the chancellor's statement "a good start and welcome", but added: "More needs to be done.
"Our response to this economic crisis should have three goals at its centre: adequate financial support for the poorest, helping those who are able into work, and reducing the burden of taxation."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61590957
|
news_uk-politics-61590957
|
|
Kate Moss: Johnny Depp never pushed or kicked me - BBC News
|
2022-05-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The model has testified via video-link for Mr Depp in a defamation case against his ex-wife Amber Heard.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch Kate Moss testify: "Did Mr Depp push you down the stairs?"
British supermodel Kate Moss has testified that her ex-boyfriend Johnny Depp never abused her, contradicting a claim made by the actor's ex-wife.
Amber Heard, 36, had claimed that she heard rumours that Mr Depp once pushed Ms Moss down a flight of stairs.
Mr Depp is suing Ms Heard for $50m (£40m) for an opinion article she wrote in which she said she was an abuse victim.
On the stand, he said that it has been "insane" to hear Ms Heard's claims.
Over the course of the six week trial, the court has heard vastly different versions of what transpired between the two during their volatile two year marriage.
Ms Heard and witnesses for her side painted a picture of Mr Depp as an abuser plagued by drug use, jealous and self-harm and Mr Depp's side putting forward a story of the actress as the aggressor and her claims as untrue.
In brief testimony on Wednesday, Ms Moss - who dated Mr Depp between 1994 and 1998 - said that he never pushed her, but rather that he once came to her aid after she fell down the stairs.
"As I left the room, I slid down the stairs and I hurt my back," Ms Moss said. "And I screamed because I didn't know what happened to me and I was in pain".
"He came running back to help me and carried me to my room and got me medical attention," she added.
Mr Depp never pushed or kicked her throughout the years they spent together, Ms Moss said.
Taking the stand on Wednesday, Mr Depp accused Ms Heard of turning the story "into a very ugly incident, all in her mind."
The claim he had pushed her was brought up earlier in the trial by Ms Heard, who said the image of her then-husband abusing the model had popped into her head when she witnessed an altercation between Mr Depp and her sister.
"[Her] back was to the staircase and Johnny swings at her," Ms Heard said. "I don't hesitate. I don't want. I just, in my head, think of Kate Moss and stairs".
Her concerns prompted her to "swing" at Johnny to defend her sister, she said, hitting him "square in the face".
Her lawyers chose to not cross-examine Ms Moss.
During his testimony, Mr Depp denied several other allegations made by Ms Heard during the trial, including her claim that he assaulted her while on their honeymoon on the Orient Express.
"Ms Heard hit me," he said. "I had a sort of shiner [black eye], but it all ended and everything got fine again".
In previous testimony, Ms Heard said she feared that Mr Depp would accidentally kill her during the same incident and that "he wouldn't mean to do it".
Mr Depp said it was "insane" to hear "heinous accusations" of violence and abuse his ex-wife attributes to him.
"I don't think anyone enjoys having to split themselves open and tell the truth," he said. "But there are times one simply has to".
The defamation case against Ms Heard stems from a 2018 comment article she wrote for the Washington Post in which she said she was a victim of abuse.
While the piece did not identify Mr Depp by name, his attorneys have said it "incalculably" damaged his career. She has countersued him for $100m.
A source close to Ms Heard told the BBC that they believe Ms Moss's testimony will have little impact on the case when it comes to the "central issue" of "whether Amber Heard can exercise her right of freedom of speech".
Closing arguments will begin on Friday, followed by jury deliberations.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61569652
|
news_world-us-canada-61569652
|
|
Amber Heard: It's easy to forget I'm a human being - BBC News
|
2022-05-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Heard found herself in a tense exchange with Johnny Depp's attorney as the trial nears its end.
|
US & Canada
|
Amber Heard in court on 26 May
Amber Heard says she felt humiliated and had faced hundreds of daily death threats after testifying at Johnny Depp's trial against her.
Speaking on the final day of the trial before closing statements, the actress said: "Perhaps it's easy to forget, but I am a human being."
Mr Depp, 58, is suing Ms Heard, 36, over an article she wrote in which she said she was the victim of abuse.
He has repeatedly denied her claims.
Over more than a month of testimony, jurors have been presented with starkly different versions of incidents that took place throughout the couple's troubled two years together.
Both actors accuse the other of being the aggressor in the relationship and have called witnesses to testify on their behalf. A number of the witnesses called by Mr Depp's team have directly contradicted Ms Heard's claims.
"I know how many people will come out and say whatever for him," Ms Heard said in court on Thursday. "That's his power. That's why I wrote the op-ed. I was speaking to that phenomenon."
Ms Heard's testimony on Wednesday also led to a tense exchange with Camille Vasquez - Mr Depp's now viral lawyer - over an image of spilled wine. It is one of several pictures Ms Heard has presented, allegedly from a huge fight the couple had in 2016 which ended with Mr Depp assaulting her.
At one point, Ms Heard turned to jurors and claimed the photos had been redacted or edited by Mr Depp's lawyers to benefit her ex-husband's case.
"I'd appreciate if you wouldn't be making arguments to the jury," Ms Vasquez said sternly. "I didn't ask you about anything."
Throughout her testimony, Ms Heard repeatedly denied accusations she was lying or misled jurors during the trial.
Her testimony, she added, had led to "hundreds" of death threats on a daily basis and forced her to "relive the trauma" of her marriage.
"This is horrible... this is humiliating for any human being to go through and perhaps it's easy to forget, but I am a human being," she said. "As I stand here today, I can't have a career. I can't even have people associate with me because of the threats and the attacks that they will have to endure."
Mr Depp is suing Ms Heard for $50m (£40m) for a 2018 comment article she wrote in the Washington Post in which she said she was the victim of abuse.
While he wasn't named, his attorneys have said it "incalculably" damaged his career. She has countersued him for $100m.
Closing arguments will begin on Friday, followed by jury deliberations.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch Kate Moss testify: "Did Mr Depp push you down the stairs?"
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61599667
|
news_world-us-canada-61599667
|
|
Every household to get energy bill discounts of £400 this autumn - BBC News
|
2022-05-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The poorest will also get a lump-sum of £650 to help with the cost of living, Rishi Sunak says.
|
Business
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. BBC Political Editor Chris Mason asks the chancellor why he uses “energy profits levy" phrase - and not say windfall tax.
Every household in the UK is to get an energy bill discount of £400 this October as part of a package of new measures to tackle soaring prices.
The poorest households will also get a payment of £650 to help with the cost of living, Chancellor Rishi Sunak said.
It follows warnings that millions could be left struggling if energy prices rise again in October as expected.
Mr Sunak said he had offered "significant support" for households who were facing "acute distress".
The package of new measures, worth £15bn in total, will also offer more targeted help to pensioners and the disabled.
The cost will be partly offset by 25% windfall tax on oil and gas firms' profits, which have soared in recent months.
It comes a day after Sue Gray's critical report into lockdown parties in Downing Street and follows intense pressure on the government to do more to help people with the cost of living crisis.
Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank, said the support was a "genuinely big package".
"Put these benefit increases alongside the tax rises just implemented, and Mr Sunak is engaging in some serious redistribution from rich to poor - albeit against a backdrop of rising inequality."
Mr Sunak said the government had "a collective responsibility to help those who are paying the highest price for the high inflation we face."
Earlier this week, UK energy regulator Ofgem said the typical household energy bill was set to rise by £800 in October, bringing it to £2,800 a year. Bills had already risen by £700 on average in April.
Households will still face rises in bills even with the further government support.
Mr Sunak told the BBC the new measures will have a "minimal impact" on inflation.
The prices of food, fuel and other goods have surged in recent months, pushing inflation - the rate at which prices rise - to a 40-year high.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Rachel Reeves says the Conservative windfall tax is a "policy that dare not speak its name".
Mr Sunak blamed the war in Ukraine, recent lockdowns in China and the post-pandemic recovery for the surging prices. But he said the situation had "evolved and become more serious" pushing the government to act.
Under the new measures, the government will scrap a plan to give everyone in England, Scotland and Wales £200 off bills from October which would be repaid over five years.
Instead, that sum will be doubled to £400 and will not need to be paid back. Direct debit and credit customers will have the money credited to their accounts, while customers with pre-payment meters will have the money applied to their meter or paid via a voucher.
While the £400 discount should be UK wide, the lack of an Executive at Stormont in Northern Ireland means people there must wait before they find out when will they receive the discount.
The measures add to around £17bn of support already given by the government, including one-off £150 council tax rebates for most homes in England and Wales.
The government had until now rejected the idea of a windfall tax on energy firms' profits, saying it could deter investment in the UK.
But Mr Sunak said the oil and gas sector was "making extraordinary profits" and that he was "sympathetic to the argument to tax those profits fairly".
He said the tax would raise about £5bn this year and be scrapped when oil and gas prices - which have surged recently - return to normal levels.
However, in seeking a "sensible middle ground" energy suppliers will be able to apply for tax relief of 90p for every pound they invest in UK oil and gas projects.
Mr Sunak also said he believed there was a case for taxing electricity suppliers more, announcing a consultation on the idea.
Rachel Reeves, Labour's shadow chancellor, said: "After five months of being dragged kicking and screaming, the chancellor has finally come to his senses, U-turned, and adopted Labour's plan for a windfall tax on oil and gas producer profits to lower bills."
But business lobby group the CBI warned the windfall tax would be damaging to investment needed for Britain's "energy security and net zero ambitions".
Oil giant BP said the new tax was "a multi-year proposal" rather than a "one-off tax". "Naturally we will now need to look at the impact of both the new levy and the tax relief on our North Sea investment plans," it warned.
Zoe, a single mum who lives on The Wirral with her four year old daughter, and who receives universal credit will get £400 off her energy bills and also the £650 one-off payment.
She said she was "over the moon that the government is finally making us feel like we're being listened to".
"My big worry was going through the summer holidays with a young one and obviously not having the money to take them out too much," she told the BBC.
"With that payment coming through that has lifted a lot of stress and anxiety, because I was really panicked about this."
Debt charity Turn2Us called the support package "a much-needed step in the right direction in making sure people on the lowest incomes are able to weather this financial crisis".
But Michael Clarke, its head of information programmes, added: "For people who are in crisis currently, one-off payments will only act as a sticking plaster until longer term investment is made to boost their overall income."
Think tank the Resolution Foundation, which campaigns to end poverty, called the measures "progressive", adding that twice as much of the £15bn package would go to low-income households than high income ones.
Chief executive Torsten Bell said: "The decision to provide one-off payments this year to poorer households, pensioners and those with a disability is a good attempt to target those with higher energy bills - although the relative lack of support for larger families stands out."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61583651
|
news_business-61583651
|
|
Amber Heard denies striking Johnny Depp and doctoring photos - BBC News
|
2022-05-18
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Johnny Depp's lawyer has accused Ms Heard of being "the jealous one" in the ex-couple's marriage.
|
US & Canada
|
Amber Heard in court on 17 May
Johnny Depp's legal team has accused Amber Heard of using drugs, striking him and manipulating photos she has used as evidence of his alleged abuse.
Ms Heard, 36, was being cross-examined about her allegations that Mr Depp could be violent while using alcohol and drugs.
The 58-year-old actor is suing his ex-wife for $50m (£40m) for a column she wrote in which she claimed to be a victim of domestic abuse.
He has denied ever assaulting her.
Mr Depp's lawyers cross-examined Ms Heard on her version of events related to a lengthy 2015 argument between the former couple, which took place while in Australia.
That argument has been raised repeatedly over the course of the trial.
Mr Depp has claimed his ex-wife severed his fingertip by throwing a vodka bottle at him. Ms Heard has told jurors that Mr Depp sexually violated her with a bottle.
In court on Tuesday, Mr Depp's lawyer questioned why Ms Heard did not seek medical attention despite claiming she suffered cuts and bruises during the chaotic fight.
"You're the one who assaulted someone with a bottle in Australia, isn't that right Ms Heard," attorney Camille Vasquez said.
In response, Ms Heard said that she "didn't assault Johnny, ever".
But she did acknowledge that she struck Mr Depp on several instances, which she said happened after "years of not defending myself". She made similar statements on Monday, saying she "reactively" hit him during physical altercations.
Jurors were also shown an extract from a journal - which Ms Heard described as "love notes" - in which she appears to have apologised to Mr Depp.
"I'm sorry I can get crazy. I'm sorry I hurt you," she wrote. "I can get wicked when I'm hurt".
Explaining the entry, Ms Heard said that "it's important to apologise when you're trying to move past fights".
Jurors also heard audio in which Ms Heard can be telling her then husband that "she gets so mad, she loses it" and that she can't promise "she won't get physical".
Ms Vasquez also questioned the veracity of a May 2016 photograph that Ms Heard has said shows the aftermath of Mr Depp's alleged physical abuse.
"Isn't it true you just edited these photographs?" Ms Vasquez said.
During the gruelling cross-examination, jurors were also shown an itinerary for the couple's wedding, which included plans for a "dance party and drugs and music".
Ms Heard has repeatedly characterised Mr Depp's drug use as problematic and a source of tension in their marriage.
"So, your original idea was to do drugs on an island after your rehearsal dinner to the drug-fueled monster that you were about to marry?" Ms Vasquez asked.
In response, Ms Heard said it was a draft itinerary and that there was "going to be weed" at the event. She also admitted to drug use on her 30th birthday.
Over several days of testimony earlier this month, Ms Heard repeatedly said that Mr Depp had attempted to control her career, did not like her taking on new roles, and sometimes became jealous of her co-stars.
During cross-examination, Ms Vasquez accused Ms Heard of being the "jealous one", who had landed her role in the high-profile Aquaman film thanks to Mr Depp.
"No, Ms Vasquez, I got that role by auditioning," she responded.
Mr Depp's defamation case against his former wife hinges on a 2018 opinion piece in the Washington Post newspaper in which she described herself as a victim of abuse, though the piece did not name Mr Depp.
She has countersued him for $100m.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Amber Heard and Johnny Depp - the trial so far, in their own words
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61485616
|
news_world-us-canada-61485616
|
|
Mariupol: The 80 days that left a flourishing city in ruins - BBC News
|
2022-05-18
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Ukrainian port which has seen some of the most intense fighting is now under Russian control.
|
Europe
|
The theatre has often been described as the heart of the city
After almost three months of relentless assault, Mariupol has fallen. Ukraine's military says its combat mission in the besieged port is over. More than any other Ukrainian city, Mariupol has come to symbolise the ferocious brutality of Russia's assault and the stubbornness of Ukraine's resistance.
On Wednesday 23 February, Ivan Stanislavsky left his camera bag at the office. He was on his way to see the layout of his new book on Mariupol's Soviet-era murals at a colleague's house, and didn't want to lug the gear around. He could always pick it up the next day.
But on Thursday, as he stood in the street outside his locked and deserted office, he could hear thunderous sounds rolling in from the east. The city was under fire.
As the conflict intensified, and gunfire became audible to the west too, Ivan moved his mattress into the hall. He piled up his large collection of art books - including the Encyclopaedia of Ukrainian Rock Music - against the windows of his flat in the district of Primorsky.
"Let's say it was not a waste of a library," says the 36-year-old photographer, who is also a press officer at Ukrainian premier league football club FC Mariupol.
Ivan Stanislavsky loved to photograph his city of Mariupol
Across town in the neighbourhood of Kalmiusky, businessman Yevhen was also taking precautions. The 47-year-old had told his family to pack so they could escape the city. But when he returned from the office, he found no packing had been done. His family refused to leave.
In an apartment in the same block, metallurgists from the nearby steelworks, Nataliia, 43, and Andrii, 41, were already slicing the last two loaves they had been able to buy, leaving them to dry out so they could eat them piece by piece over the weeks ahead.
The Illich steel plant dominates this view of Mariupol
Volodymyr, a 52-year-old paramedic in Kalmiusky, was also in his kitchen, trying to absorb the news. When reports came in of Russians marching through the village of Chonhar - on a strategic road out of Crimea to the west - he choked. This was a coordinated attack, he realised.
The ambulance dispatcher was on the phone. She instructed Volodymyr to ignore routine calls. "Find the wounded", he was told.
Twenty-two-year-old engineering graduate Mariia thought the first explosion she heard was simply a storm. Then she heard a second.
"We didn't know what to do," says Mariia, who like Ivan, lived in Primorsky. "I didn't have time to think about my future, my plans. I had to think about what I'd eat and drink... [And] what to do with the cats."
It suddenly dawned on her why, in the past few days, soldiers had appeared in the paint shop where she worked, asking to buy blue and yellow tape. They needed it to mark their uniforms.
Four days into the war, with the fighting closing in, Ivan and his wife sought shelter in a basement underneath his local supermarket. It offered good protection, and Ivan found that the muffling of sound dulled his sense of mounting anxiety.
Daily life was being stripped down to bare essentials.
"We lived like primitive people," he told the BBC from Lviv, where he has now fled. "We broke trees, made fires, cooked food on fires. I even heard of people eating pigeons."
He watched as order gradually broke down all around him. He kept a vivid diary, later published online.
"The Stone Age has arrived," he says in his 6 March entry.
He writes of watching his fellow Ukrainian citizens raiding abandoned shops, making off with everything from computers and freezers to swimsuits and underwear.
One evening a drunk woman interrupts a session of evening gossip in the basement. "Treat yourself," she says, as a flashlight revealed a bottle of Californian Merlot, taken from Wines of the World on nearby Italiiska Street.
But aware that even medical supplies and cash tills were being taken, Ivan says he felt disgust.
"We are our own worst enemies," he writes.
But is this, he wonders, how the fittest survive? After a while, each day became a "combat mission".
Over a few short weeks, Mariupol fell apart. The Russian military laid siege to the city, attacking power and water supplies. A Russian airstrike hit the maternity hospital on 9 March, and a plane bombed its theatre - clearly marked as a civilian shelter - a week later.
Ivan was stunned at how quickly it all happened.
The theatre after it was bombed
"The whole city, all its infrastructure, supply system, logistics, energy supply were destroyed in a matter of days," he says.
Sitting underground at night, he sensed people becoming passive.
"You can only wait in the shelter," he writes in his diary. "Some are waiting for spring, some - for the morning to come, some - for the end of the war. And someone is waiting for the bomb to come and kill everyone."
And all this just as Mariupol had seemed destined to turn a corner. Money began to pour in, adding lustre to a city previously associated mainly with heavy industry - and war.
"It was a city aspiring to something," Ivan says. It hadn't always been this way.
Long before this year's invasion, Mariupol had a ringside seat to Ukraine's simmering conflict with Russian-backed separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk, the two regions that make up the neighbouring area known as Donbas.
An activist guards a barricade outside the Mariupol government building seized by pro-Russia activists on 17 April 2014
When fighting first broke out there in 2014, the government briefly lost control of Mariupol after clashes with pro-Russian protesters. In January 2015, a devastating rocket attack by the rebels on the eastern edge of the city killed almost 30 civilians.
Even though the war gradually receded, the sound of artillery booming in the distance was part of Mariupol's daily soundscape.
But the city moved on. The Ukrainian government briefly made Mariupol the administrative capital of the Donetsk Oblast. People migrated from rebel-held areas and the city started attracting investment.
"It started receiving all of the resources and all of the attention," Ivan says.
A view of Mariupol along its coast
Public buildings were renovated, cafés opened, and new parks created. In a podcast last October, the city's mayor Vadym Boychenko boasted of creating the best municipal services in the country, opening an IT school, and promoting contemporary art and sports.
Plans were afoot, he said, for the largest water park in Ukraine and a version of Disneyland "which will probably be called Mariland". In fact, Mariupol was declared Ukraine's "Big Capital of Culture" in 2021.
But while Mariupol flourished, rebel-held Donetsk mouldered. When the rebels returned to Mariupol, Volodymyr, the paramedic, believed they were driven by revenge to destroy the city.
"'If we live in shit, then you will live in shit as well,'" Volodymyr says they told him at a checkpoint as he finally escaped the city. "They just looked at us and envied how we lived."
Volodymyr thinks the Russian-backed separatists were motivated by revenge
Yevhen, the businessman, describes life in Mariupol in the past five years as "a fairytale". "The city was being reconstructed," he says, "all roads were renovated, public transport was improved."
His buildings restoration firm was responsible, among other projects, for the reconstruction of Mariupol's iconic water tower in time for the city's 240th birthday.
"This is a city of hard workers… It was hard for me to explain that my workers should finish at 6pm - they wanted to work longer."
Like many others, weekends would be spent with family in the city's revived parks or on the seafront.
"For me, this is a [key] question - if you want to capture the city, why destroy it? [The Russians] don't need thinking people, they need territory," he says.
And, he adds, he is now getting calls from the Russians to return to Mariupol to help rebuild it.
"But if Mariupol is occupied by Russia, there will be no future there… there will be nothing to live for. To live in unrecognised territory is to bury your children's future."
About 150,000 people remain in the city, from a population of almost half a million. Most of those left there, he says, are also trying to escape.
"I left Mariupol but my soul is there," he says, tears in his eyes.
Businessman Yevhen is already getting calls from Russians to rebuild Mariupol
Nataliia and her husband Andrii worked at the Illich plant, one of two iron and steel works which tower over the city's skyline and loom large in Ivan Stanilavsky's photographs.
They spent long days at work, and leisure time was precious.
"The city authorities laid out marble tiles, made piers [so that] it was possible to sit on a bench right in the sea," Andrii says.
"It was a wonderful warm city with parks, concerts, fountains," his wife says. "A European city."
This recent blossoming was captured by Ivan, but as a photographer with a passion for his city's past, his pet project was documenting Mariupol's remarkable collection of Soviet murals, one of the most extensive in Ukraine.
The cultural importance of preserving such remarkable works seems undeniable, but in Mariupol nostalgia for the Soviet Union jostled uneasily with Ukraine's modern, increasingly European identity, Ivan says.
"Politics was already preventing this cultural heritage from being integrated into Ukraine's artistic context," he says.
So inevitably, when the war came, culture found itself fought over too.
On 28 April, Mariupol's city council denounced the alleged theft by Russia of more than 2,000 exhibits from the city's museums, including ancient icons, a handwritten Torah scroll and more than 200 medals.
The director of Mariupol's Local History Museum, Natalia Kapustnikova, later told Russian newspaper Izvestia that she had personally handed over paintings to the Russians by Ivan Aivazovsky and Arkhip Kuindzhi, and claimed that Ukrainian "nationalists" had burned 95% of the museum's exhibits.
She wasn't the only local official harbouring pro-Russian sentiments. On 9 April, Ukraine's prosecutor general charged a member of Mariupol's city council, Kostyantyn Ivashchenko, with treason after he was declared mayor by pro-Russian separatists in Donetsk.
Ivashchenko's pro-Russian party had been well supported in the city's last elections, coming second, while President Volodymyr Zelensky's party came a distant fifth place.
In a poll conducted just before the elections by the Kyiv-based Centre for Social Indicators, almost half the city's population identified themselves as "Russian", though 80% also described themselves as "Ukrainian".
More tellingly, perhaps, fewer than 20% self-identified as "European", while more than 50% said they were "Soviet".
Mariia says that after the invasion she began to hate all things Russian
Nataliia, whose father is Russian, says she asked her husband for forgiveness when the bombing started. "I was ashamed that I was Russian."
Mariia, the engineer, says that before the war her first language was Russian, but when the bombing began "I started to hate all things Russian - language, movies, objects".
Mariupol's complex identity is hardly unique in today's Ukraine, a country which formed an integral part of the Soviet Union until the collapse of communism at the end of the 1980s. And it's doubtful that any of those who described themselves as "Russian" or "Soviet" wanted to see their city destroyed in a violent effort to pull it back into Moscow's orbit.
Ironically, when the moment arrived to defend the city from Russian invaders, it was another part of Mariupol's Soviet-era legacy that came to play an almost iconic role.
This legacy, buried deep underground, is the maze of bunkers beneath Mariupol's other steel works, Azovstal, built by the Soviet authorities during the Cold War.
The 36 bomb shelters provided room for more than 12,000 people. After independence in 1991, no-one thought that much about them. But then the fighting in 2014 began.
"We started thinking about what we would do if fighting spread further into the city," Enver Tskitishvili, Azovstal's director general, says.
Training on the use of the bunkers and their connecting tunnels went on every day for years.
In early February, as the fear of renewed conflict loomed larger, preparations swung into high gear. Food and water were brought in the week before Russia's invasion.
Officials at the plant knew the bomb shelters would soon be occupied, but had little idea that Azovstal, surrounded by water on three sides, would become the scene of Mariupol's last stand.
An injured Ukrainian serviceman inside the Azovstal iron and steel works factory
As the days went by, the war got closer and closer to Ivan Stanislavsky's apartment. Excursions in search of food, even to the nearby Dzerkalnyy store, just 400m up the road, were increasingly perilous. Sometimes, a Ukrainian mortar team would arrive by truck, fire off a few rounds, and leave before the inevitable Russian reply.
There was little communication between civilians and soldiers.
One day, a tank from the Azov Regiment arrived near Dzerkalnyy, sending locals running, fearful of an impending battle. The regiment emerged in 2014 as a highly effective volunteer militia with far right and, in some cases, neo-Nazi affiliations, before being folded into Ukraine's National Guard.
Vladimir Putin has made extensive use of the Azov's controversial origins, in an effort to bolster his argument that he is trying to "de-Nazify" Ukraine. Ukrainian authorities say the regiment's origins are a thing of the past and points out that far-right parties have had very little electoral success.
In his diary Ivan describes the members he knows as a motley assortment of Mariupol natives - bikers, lawyers, football hooligans, and an amateur actor - driven not by ideology, but by a fierce hatred of those who were trying to ruin their lives.
"Together they formed a 'Nazi' battalion and intimidated the entire Russian army," he writes.
Intimidating and effective, but not enough, eventually, to stem the Russian tide.
While the city's defenders fought their losing battle, Ivan heard voices in his basement starting to curse President Zelensky for leaving Mariupol to its own devices.
President Volodymyr Zelensky (L) and children play in a fountain during his first official visit to Mariupol on 15 June 2019
For all the praise heaped on the city's defenders, it was clear from the start that Mariupol was not the government's main priority. Faced with Russian threats on a number of fronts, the Zelensky government chose to secure the capital, thwarting what was arguably Vladimir Putin's top priority.
Ultimately, that meant letting Russian forces achieve another of their pre-war goals: the establishment of a land corridor between Crimea - annexed by Moscow in 2014 - and the separatists in the Donbas.
But for those trapped in the city, fighting or just trying to survive, it was a bitter pill.
"Some say Mariupol was given the status of a hero city," Ivan wrote in his diary on 13 March.
"It looks like the award will be posthumous."
Ivan's photo of the inside of the water tower
By now, Ivan couldn't stand any more. Outside Dzerkalnyy supermarket, he saw corpses neatly stacked under a wall. People who once queued for food were now in "the queue of the dead", waiting to be buried.
So on 15 March Ivan bundled four family members and his cat into his miraculously unscathed Skoda Fabia and joined a convoy for the tortuous journey north-west to government-held Zaporizhzhia.
At an observation point on Markelova St looking towards the port and the beach, Ivan allowed himself a brief moment of reflection.
"In my head I'm saying goodbye to this place," he writes in his diary. "I have a feeling we will never return here."
A day later, Mariia and five relatives also left by car, carrying just personal belongings and the family's dog. As they made their way out of Mariupol, their convoy came under attack and the cars had to accelerate out of danger, headed first to Zaporizhzhia, then to Dnipro.
The following day, Nataliia and Andreii left, after a neighbour offered them a space in his car. The couple eventually reached the city of Khmelnytskyi where they have been selling the family's coin collection in order to survive.
In that same convoy, Yevhen travelled with his wife and two other relatives. He's now in Dnipro, helping other residents who escaped Mariupol, and trying to reach those who remain.
The apartment block where Ivan lived has been destroyed
Volodymyr, the paramedic, stayed in Mariupol as long as he could, to look after his elderly mother. But deprived of food and special medicine, she died. He then left the city on 21 April, and is volunteering at a hospital in Dnipro.
"There are thousands and thousands of families like mine," he says. "How many people have died? How many families have been lost?"
Two months after escaping, Ivan is still watching the death throes of Mariupol from the relative safety of Lviv.
In his diary's poignant epilogue, he writes of flashbacks, text messages about deaths or lucky escapes, and phone calls that go unanswered.
"The subscriber is out of range."
With additional reporting by Kateryna Khinkulova and Illia Tolstov
|
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61480988
|
news_world-europe-61480988
|
|
Sarah Everard killer: Wayne Couzens appeals whole-life sentence - BBC News
|
2022-05-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Court of Appeal is considering the sentences of several killers as it reviews whole-life orders.
|
UK
|
Wayne Couzens' lawyer said his remorse should have been taken into account in sentencing
The killer of Sarah Everard is challenging a sentencing order that said he should not be released from prison until he dies.
Wayne Couzens' appeal is part of a major review by the Court of Appeal of whole-life orders, including arguments for their wider use.
His lawyer said his remorse and guilty plea should be taken into account.
Lawyers for the Attorney General are also trying to increase sentences in two murder cases.
The lawyer for Couzens, Jim Sturman QC, said the former Metropolitan Police officer accepted his crimes were "abhorrent" and nothing in his arguments was intended to minimise the impact on his victim's friends and family, some of whom were present at the hearing.
But he said the sentencing judge's finding that he was not remorseful was "untenable".
"He was too ashamed to meet anyone's eye. He was not brazen, staring down at the court in the way sometimes seen," the lawyer said.
Mr Sturman said it was accepted that Couzens deserved "decades in jail" but his remorse and guilty plea should balance out the aggravating factor of having carried out the kidnap, rape and murder while he was a serving police officer.
There are 64 people currently in prison in England and Wales under whole-life orders, which are reserved for exceptional cases and mean they will never be released.
Couzens was the first person to be given such a term for a single murder of an adult not committed as part of a terror attack.
Mr Sturman said in written submissions: "Whilst this may well be considered by the public and the court to be a case of equal seriousness to a political, religious or ideological murder, it is not such an offence, not does it fall into any other category listed in the schedule."
Representing the Attorney General, Tom Little QC said Couzens' offending was of the "utmost seriousness" and his criminality was a "fundamental attack in reality on our democratic way of life".
He said the sentencing judge was entitled to the view that there was a "lack of general contrition" and a whole-life order was right in this "wholly exceptional case".
Couzens, who appeared at the hearing by video-link from prison, is one of two with whole-life terms involved in the Court of Appeal review, along with Ian Stewart, convicted of murdering his wife and later his fiancee.
Ian Stewart, convicted of murdering his wife and fiancee six years apart, is also appealing his whole-life order
Earlier this year, Stewart was handed a whole-life term for the 2010 murder of his first wife Diane. Previously, in 2017, he was sentenced to life in prison with a minimum term of 34 years for the murder of his fiancee, children's book author Helen Bailey.
His barrister, Amjad Malik QC, said a whole-life sentence was not justified, adding that the aggravating features of the killings did not fall into the category of "an exceptionally high-seriousness case".
Many serial killers have received whole-life orders but this was not such a case, he argued.
However, Mr Little said: "It is difficult to say that this sentence was either manifestly excessive or wrong in principle."
Today's super-appeal is the second time in a decade that top judges in England and Wales have considered the law and practice of whole-life terms, after ruling in 2012 that they were compatible with human rights safeguards.
Today's cases concern which offenders should be eligible for the sentence outside the basic rules set by Parliament.
Wayne Couzens' murder of Sarah Everard was an exceptional case for a whole-life order because it was a single killing - but the judge said his betrayal of uniform and duty undermined trust in society itself.
The Emma Tustin case is more complex. Her lawyers argued that the killer's own mental ill health and experience as a victim were factors that counted against a whole-life term.
The panel will now wrestle with these complex and tragic cases before potentially coming up with some guiding principles. But it's already clear where the judiciary stand in general - on average, they've imposed far more whole-life orders since taking over the job from ministers some 20 years ago.
Three more sentences are also being considered by the judges:
Tom Little QC, for the Attorney General, said Tustin's case "merited at the very least consideration of a whole-life order".
He said Arthur was "forced to live a solitary and lonely life" and "subjected to the most unimaginable suffering".
In written submissions, he said the murder was "sadistically motivated", with "systematic brutality amounting to torture".
The sentences of Emma Tustin and Thomas Hughes for the killing of Arthur Labinjo-Hughes are also being reviewed
Tustin's lawyer, Mary Prior QC, said the sentence was given by a highly experienced trial judge after considering all the evidence.
He concluded the starting point should be 30 years because of the sadistic elements of the killing, and then took into account the murderer's background of growing up around violence, history of mental health issues and suicide attempts, she said.
Ms Prior said: "This was the right, fair and proper approach in this very difficult and exceptional case."
In the case of Monaghan - who at the age of 30 was given a 40-year term for killing his baby daughter, toddler son and a new partner, as well as attempting to kill another child - Mr Little said the sentence was "unduly lenient".
There was "no mitigation at all" for triple-murderer Jordan Monaghan, the court heard
His crimes, over a seven-year period, were of "exceptionally high" seriousness and there was "no mitigation here at all", the lawyer for the Crown said.
Benjamin Myers QC, representing the killer as he listened in from HMP Wakefield, said the decision not to impose a whole-life order was at the discretion of the sentencing judge.
The hearing into all five sentences, at the Royal Courts of Justice, has now concluded and a decision will come in writing at a later date.
The Lord Chief Justice Lord Burnett said: "We propose to take time to consider our decisions in these very difficult and tragic cases."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61317609
|
news_uk-61317609
|
|
Jealous Depp kicked me over Franco 'affair' - Heard - BBC News
|
2022-05-05
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Amber Heard says jealousy of actor James Franco sent Johnny Depp into a rage on a plane.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Depp 'slapped and kicked' Heard on a plane over 'affair'
Amber Heard says a perceived affair with fellow actor James Franco led to ex-husband Johnny Depp assaulting her on a cross-country flight in 2014.
Taking the stand for a second day as part of a multi-million dollar defamation trial, Ms Heard cast Mr Depp as deeply troubled by jealousy and drugs.
Mr Depp is suing Ms Heard for $50m (£40m) over an article in which she said she was a victim of abuse.
She is countersuing for $100m.
On Thursday, Ms Heard alleged that much of her ex-husband's anger was caused by his belief that she was seeing James Franco, whom she said Mr Depp "hated".
Mr Franco starred alongside Ms Heard in Pineapple Express and The Adderall Diaries.
That jealousy, she claimed, led an angry Mr Depp to repeatedly question her on a flight from Boston to Los Angeles, in which he allegedly kicked her.
"He just kicked me in the back. I fell on the floor," she said. "No one said anything. No one did anything. It's like you could hear a pin drop on that plane."
James Franco and Amber Heard, pictured in April 2015 in New York City
The court also heard a recording allegedly of Mr Depp on the flight, which Ms Heard said showed him "howling" while suffering from the effects of drug use.
Following the incident, Ms Heard said he met her in New York to apologise and to prove he was sober and committed to change.
Jurors have repeatedly heard about the incident on the flight. In his own testimony, Mr Depp said that he took Oxycodone pills and fell asleep to avoid her.
During her testimony, Mr Depp could sometimes be seen closing his eyes or donning his sunglasses. At one point, he shook his head quietly.
Ms Heard alleged she had the fight with Mr Depp after an argument about his daughter Lily-Rose, who was about 14 at the time.
"She was so young," Ms Heard said. "I felt protective."
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Depp 'slapped me across the face' over Wino tattoo
Ms Heard also recounted exchanging wedding vows in Mr Depp's mother's living room, followed by a ceremony on his private island.
"It was complicated but he was the love of my life," she said of her desire to marry him.
Detailing a discussion over a prenuptial agreement with Mr Depp, she claimed that Mr Depp told her that "the only way out of this is death".
"I didn't care either way, but I did feel it [the agreement] would eliminate suspicion or doubt, and it would make things easier," she added.
Earlier in the trial, Mr Depp claimed he never struck Ms Heard, or any women. Instead, he said she was often abusive herself and had a "a need for conflict".
At several points in her testimony, Ms Heard claimed that Mr Depp attempted to control her career, becoming angry at her efforts to find new roles.
These arguments, she added, would often end in Mr Depp taking things "too far" by striking her or breaking things in their home before leaving and eventually apologising.
His abuse "was always so much worse when I went to work," she said.
"He would never have to deal with the clean-up. He would never have to deal with the destruction, or see me or the house that he'd destroyed," she added.
Before she wore dresses to red carpet events, she said she would check for bruises on her body first.
In one apology e-mail shown to jurors, Mr Depp described himself as "savage" who was sorry for the disappointment he caused. She said this was "typical" of his apologies.
"I was encouraged because I thought it meant he could really hurt me," she added. "Sometimes I didn't think he understood how much he could hurt me."
The defamation cases stems from a December 2018 opinion piece in the Washington Post, in which she said she was a victim of abuse but did not name Mr Depp.
His lawyers have said that the piece "incalculably" damaged his career prospects.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61339174
|
news_world-us-canada-61339174
|
|
Cost of living: Chancellor Rishi Sunak confirms U-turn on windfall tax - BBC News
|
2022-05-27
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The chancellor says it is right to "fairly" tax the "extraordinary" profits of oil and gas companies.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Rishi Sunak says eight million households will get £1,200 in support, when combining measures announced on Thursday and before
The government has U-turned on its opposition to a windfall tax on oil and gas firms, announcing it will introduce a levy to help tackle rising bills.
Ministers had rejected the idea - put forward by opposition parties - that would see a one-off charge imposed on the company's record profits.
But Chancellor Rishi Sunak said his levy would "tax extraordinary profits fairly and incentivise investments".
Labour's Rachel Reeves said Mr Sunak had "finally come to his senses".
The chancellor said new tax would raise £5bn over the course of the next year, allowing the government to "help families with the cost of living", while avoiding "having to increase our debt burden further".
He added: "There is nothing noble in burdening future generations with ever more debt today because politicians of the day were too weak to make the tough decisions."
The new tax will help fund a £15bn package from the government, which includes a £650 one-off payment for eight million low income households, and a change to the £200 loan scheme for energy bills for all homes in the autumn - increasing it to £400 without the need to pay it back.
But Liberal Democrat Treasury spokeswoman Christine Jardine said the measures were "too little, too late".
The plans received a mixed reaction from the Conservative backbenchers, with some calling it "tripe" and others saying it did not go far enough.
The government faced accusations that it had timed the announcement to distract from the release of the Sue Gray report into lockdown-breaking parties in Downing Street during the pandemic.
But the claims were denied by No 10.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Rachel Reeves says the Conservative windfall tax is a "policy that dare not speak its name".
Households across the country have faced soaring costs in recent months as the prices of food, fuel and energy have all rocketed, with inflation hitting a 40-year high.
The government has been under growing pressure to act, especially after energy regulator Ofgem warned of an additional rise to bills of £800 in the autumn.
The Liberal Democrats first put forward the idea of a windfall tax on the profits of oil and gas companies - which have peaked as the economy restarted after the pandemic - in November, with Labour outlining its own version in January.
The SNP has also called for such a measure.
The parties said the money raised could go towards helping those households hardest hit by the cost of living increases.
Initially, the idea was rejected by ministers, including Boris Johnson, who warned it could "deter" investment.
But both Mr Johnson and Mr Sunak subsequently softened their stance, and now the policy U-turn has been confirmed.
Making a statement in the Commons, the chancellor said the inflation faced by the UK was causing "acute distress for the people of this country" and he knew people were worried.
But, Mr Sunak added: "This government will never stop trying to help people, to fix problems where we can, to do what is right - as we did during the pandemic."
He confirmed the government would introduce a "temporary targeted energy profits levy" charged at a rate of 25% on profits of oil and gas companies to fund "significant support for the British people".
However, he said his "sensible middle ground" plan included a new investment allowance, so "for every pound a company invests they will get back 90% in tax relief - the more the company invests the less tax they will pay".
Mr Sunak said: "We should not be ideological about this, we should be pragmatic.
"It is possible to both tax extraordinary profits fairly and incentivise investments."
The chancellor said the tax would then be removed when energy prices returned to normal levels.
Shadow chancellor Ms Reeves said the government had been "dragged kicking and screaming" to its new policy position.
She added: "The chancellor has finally come to his senses, U-turned, and adopted Labour's plan for a windfall tax on oil and gas producer profits to lower bills."
But Ms Reeves claimed the government "still have no long term plan to grow our economy and pull us out of the mess they've got us into".
What does this change of tack signal?
The cabinet was split on whether to bring in a windfall tax
Ministers have been facing calls to do more to help with the cost of living for quite some time. So why today?
As recently as the weekend, Downing Street sources were indicating there would be no imminent announcement on windfall taxes.
And it was only a couple of weekends ago Business Secretary Kwasi Kwarteng called it a "bad idea".
So why the change of heart?
Well, ministers have been clear for some time that more help is on the way. And they did get a clearer idea of future energy prices this week.
But - to be more cynical - the government had a particularly uncomfortable day on Wednesday with the publication of the Sue Gray report into Downing Street gatherings.
Boris Johnson has made it clear that he's desperate to stop talking about parties. An announcement of billions of pounds of assistance for households certainly helps to move the agenda on.
Downing Street deny that the timing of this has anything to do with Partygate. But plenty of opposition MPs won't buy that argument.
The package of measures announced by Mr Sunak was attacked by many of his opponents for not going far enough.
Lib Dem leader Sir Ed Davey criticised the government for failing to cut taxes for workers, pointing to the new health and social care levy introduced in April amid the cost of living crisis.
He tweeted: "Sunak's like a thief who steals your car and then wants you to be grateful when he returns the steering wheel."
The SNP's Kirsty Blackman said the government had "listened to a certain extent", but had "failed" on a number of measures, especially her party's call to uprate benefits in line with inflation.
She told the BBC the one-off payment was "kicking the can down the road" and those hit hardest could face more difficulties in the future.
When it came to Mr Sunak's own benches, Conservatives appeared split on both the policies and how to fund them.
Richard Drax accused the chancellor of "throwing red meat to the socialists by raising taxes on businesses", adding a windfall tax was "not the Conservative way" of doing things.
Another backbench Tory, Craig Mackinlay, said he was "appalled that a Conservative chancellor could come up with this tripe", calling the tax "outrageous" and "inherently wrong".
Former party leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, however, called the chancellor's statement "a good start and welcome", but added: "More needs to be done.
"Our response to this economic crisis should have three goals at its centre: adequate financial support for the poorest, helping those who are able into work, and reducing the burden of taxation."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61590957
|
news_uk-politics-61590957
|
|
Texas shooting: America's gun control debate that never goes away - BBC News
|
2022-05-27
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Stricter gun control in the US is unlikely despite the grief and anger, the BBC's Sarah Smith writes.
|
US & Canada
|
American flags flew half mast in New Jersey this morning
This tragedy has reignited the debate over gun control in the US. But realistically, it is unlikely to result in significant reform. The argument over guns has simply become too politically divisive and culturally entrenched to allow for meaningful change.
It is important to remember that guns are normal in many parts of America. They are not seen as exceptional or frightening as they do to outsiders. They are a part of everyday life.
American gun owners - and there are an estimated 80 million of them - see their firearms as protection: a way to defend their own freedoms and property.
In a country where there is a real prospect of an armed criminal breaking into your home or assaulting you on the street, many consider carrying one to be a sensible precaution.
Guns are so ubiquitous in America that no one will be able to get them out of the hands of felons. And so the argument goes: the good guys should have them too.
We all know that the right to bear arms is protected by the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. What is less clear to those on the outside is why a document written nearly 250 years ago in response to a revolutionary war still has such resonance in 2022.
Freedom and the right to defend yourself is fundamental not just to America's origin story - but to how many in America think about their country and their values today.
Some of the most vociferous arguments in favour of guns are made by the rich and powerful National Rifle Association (NRA) who want to defend their supporters' profits. But many of the arguments come from ordinary citizens too.
A Texas ranger takes up a woman's offer of hugs in Uvalde yesterday
For many, your right to carry a gun is considered as fundamental as your right to free speech. Banning or restricting guns is viewed as a breach of your rights as an American.
Those rights have been up for debate before, especially in the wake of tragedies like the one in Texas.
Back in 2012 a lone gunman rampaged through Sandy Hook primary school - killing six adults and 20 children. Afterwards there was a groundswell of support for gun control similar to what we're seeing now.
President Barack Obama vowed to do everything in his power to act and his Democrats proposed US-wide laws banning specific models of firearms and enhancing background checks.
Some of those measures received Republican support - but it was never enough to make it through Congress and into law.
The families of the Sandy Hook dead were so frustrated by the failure of gun reform that they took matters into their own hands - choosing to directly sue the manufacturer of the AR-15 rifle used in the 2012 attack.
Earlier this year Remington Arms settled with nine of the families for $73m (£53.9m), which makes more of these lawsuits likely in the future.
Tears run down President Obama's face as he calls for gun reform in the wake of the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting
Huge numbers of Americans are sickened by the high rates of gun violence in their country and calls today are louder to at least tighten restrictions on gun ownership.
Reform advocates talk about other types of freedom - like a child's right to go to school without fear of being shot. All in a country where guns are now the leading cause of death amongst children and teens.
The numbers are staggering. More than 4,300 under-18s died from firearm-related injuries in 2020. By comparison, some 50 American police officers died from gunfire injuries in the same year.
But do not expect the kind of political response provoked in 1996 by the Dunblane massacre in the UK - which MPs responded to by effectively outlawing all privately-owned handguns.
Arguments will rage across US cable shows and on social media in the coming days over who should be allowed to buy guns and what kinds of weapons they are permitted - but not over their right to bear arms.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61585716
|
news_world-us-canada-61585716
|
|
Amber Heard: It's easy to forget I'm a human being - BBC News
|
2022-05-27
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Heard found herself in a tense exchange with Johnny Depp's attorney as the trial nears its end.
|
US & Canada
|
Amber Heard in court on 26 May
Amber Heard says she felt humiliated and had faced hundreds of daily death threats after testifying at Johnny Depp's trial against her.
Speaking on the final day of the trial before closing statements, the actress said: "Perhaps it's easy to forget, but I am a human being."
Mr Depp, 58, is suing Ms Heard, 36, over an article she wrote in which she said she was the victim of abuse.
He has repeatedly denied her claims.
Over more than a month of testimony, jurors have been presented with starkly different versions of incidents that took place throughout the couple's troubled two years together.
Both actors accuse the other of being the aggressor in the relationship and have called witnesses to testify on their behalf. A number of the witnesses called by Mr Depp's team have directly contradicted Ms Heard's claims.
"I know how many people will come out and say whatever for him," Ms Heard said in court on Thursday. "That's his power. That's why I wrote the op-ed. I was speaking to that phenomenon."
Ms Heard's testimony on Wednesday also led to a tense exchange with Camille Vasquez - Mr Depp's now viral lawyer - over an image of spilled wine. It is one of several pictures Ms Heard has presented, allegedly from a huge fight the couple had in 2016 which ended with Mr Depp assaulting her.
At one point, Ms Heard turned to jurors and claimed the photos had been redacted or edited by Mr Depp's lawyers to benefit her ex-husband's case.
"I'd appreciate if you wouldn't be making arguments to the jury," Ms Vasquez said sternly. "I didn't ask you about anything."
Throughout her testimony, Ms Heard repeatedly denied accusations she was lying or misled jurors during the trial.
Her testimony, she added, had led to "hundreds" of death threats on a daily basis and forced her to "relive the trauma" of her marriage.
"This is horrible... this is humiliating for any human being to go through and perhaps it's easy to forget, but I am a human being," she said. "As I stand here today, I can't have a career. I can't even have people associate with me because of the threats and the attacks that they will have to endure."
Mr Depp is suing Ms Heard for $50m (£40m) for a 2018 comment article she wrote in the Washington Post in which she said she was the victim of abuse.
While he wasn't named, his attorneys have said it "incalculably" damaged his career. She has countersued him for $100m.
Closing arguments will begin on Friday, followed by jury deliberations.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch Kate Moss testify: "Did Mr Depp push you down the stairs?"
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61599667
|
news_world-us-canada-61599667
|
|
Every household to get energy bill discounts of £400 this autumn - BBC News
|
2022-05-27
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The poorest will also get a lump-sum of £650 to help with the cost of living, Rishi Sunak says.
|
Business
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. BBC Political Editor Chris Mason asks the chancellor why he uses “energy profits levy" phrase - and not say windfall tax.
Every household in the UK is to get an energy bill discount of £400 this October as part of a package of new measures to tackle soaring prices.
The poorest households will also get a payment of £650 to help with the cost of living, Chancellor Rishi Sunak said.
It follows warnings that millions could be left struggling if energy prices rise again in October as expected.
Mr Sunak said he had offered "significant support" for households who were facing "acute distress".
The package of new measures, worth £15bn in total, will also offer more targeted help to pensioners and the disabled.
The cost will be partly offset by 25% windfall tax on oil and gas firms' profits, which have soared in recent months.
It comes a day after Sue Gray's critical report into lockdown parties in Downing Street and follows intense pressure on the government to do more to help people with the cost of living crisis.
Paul Johnson, director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies think tank, said the support was a "genuinely big package".
"Put these benefit increases alongside the tax rises just implemented, and Mr Sunak is engaging in some serious redistribution from rich to poor - albeit against a backdrop of rising inequality."
Mr Sunak said the government had "a collective responsibility to help those who are paying the highest price for the high inflation we face."
Earlier this week, UK energy regulator Ofgem said the typical household energy bill was set to rise by £800 in October, bringing it to £2,800 a year. Bills had already risen by £700 on average in April.
Households will still face rises in bills even with the further government support.
Mr Sunak told the BBC the new measures will have a "minimal impact" on inflation.
The prices of food, fuel and other goods have surged in recent months, pushing inflation - the rate at which prices rise - to a 40-year high.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Rachel Reeves says the Conservative windfall tax is a "policy that dare not speak its name".
Mr Sunak blamed the war in Ukraine, recent lockdowns in China and the post-pandemic recovery for the surging prices. But he said the situation had "evolved and become more serious" pushing the government to act.
Under the new measures, the government will scrap a plan to give everyone in England, Scotland and Wales £200 off bills from October which would be repaid over five years.
Instead, that sum will be doubled to £400 and will not need to be paid back. Direct debit and credit customers will have the money credited to their accounts, while customers with pre-payment meters will have the money applied to their meter or paid via a voucher.
While the £400 discount should be UK wide, the lack of an Executive at Stormont in Northern Ireland means people there must wait before they find out when will they receive the discount.
The measures add to around £17bn of support already given by the government, including one-off £150 council tax rebates for most homes in England and Wales.
The government had until now rejected the idea of a windfall tax on energy firms' profits, saying it could deter investment in the UK.
But Mr Sunak said the oil and gas sector was "making extraordinary profits" and that he was "sympathetic to the argument to tax those profits fairly".
He said the tax would raise about £5bn this year and be scrapped when oil and gas prices - which have surged recently - return to normal levels.
However, in seeking a "sensible middle ground" energy suppliers will be able to apply for tax relief of 90p for every pound they invest in UK oil and gas projects.
Mr Sunak also said he believed there was a case for taxing electricity suppliers more, announcing a consultation on the idea.
Rachel Reeves, Labour's shadow chancellor, said: "After five months of being dragged kicking and screaming, the chancellor has finally come to his senses, U-turned, and adopted Labour's plan for a windfall tax on oil and gas producer profits to lower bills."
But business lobby group the CBI warned the windfall tax would be damaging to investment needed for Britain's "energy security and net zero ambitions".
Oil giant BP said the new tax was "a multi-year proposal" rather than a "one-off tax". "Naturally we will now need to look at the impact of both the new levy and the tax relief on our North Sea investment plans," it warned.
Zoe, a single mum who lives on The Wirral with her four year old daughter, and who receives universal credit will get £400 off her energy bills and also the £650 one-off payment.
She said she was "over the moon that the government is finally making us feel like we're being listened to".
"My big worry was going through the summer holidays with a young one and obviously not having the money to take them out too much," she told the BBC.
"With that payment coming through that has lifted a lot of stress and anxiety, because I was really panicked about this."
Debt charity Turn2Us called the support package "a much-needed step in the right direction in making sure people on the lowest incomes are able to weather this financial crisis".
But Michael Clarke, its head of information programmes, added: "For people who are in crisis currently, one-off payments will only act as a sticking plaster until longer term investment is made to boost their overall income."
Think tank the Resolution Foundation, which campaigns to end poverty, called the measures "progressive", adding that twice as much of the £15bn package would go to low-income households than high income ones.
Chief executive Torsten Bell said: "The decision to provide one-off payments this year to poorer households, pensioners and those with a disability is a good attempt to target those with higher energy bills - although the relative lack of support for larger families stands out."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61583651
|
news_business-61583651
|
|
Johnny Depp: Jury deliberations begin in Amber Heard defamation trial - BBC News
|
2022-05-27
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The high profile celebrity defamation case comes to a close six weeks after it began.
|
US & Canada
|
Jury deliberations in the high-profile defamation battle between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard have begun after six weeks of trial in Virginia.
Mr Depp, 58, sued his ex-wife for $50m (£40m) for an article she wrote in which she claims to be an abuse victim. Ms Heard, 36, counter-sued for $100m.
Mr Depp's lawyer asked jurors to "hold Ms Heard accountable for her 'lies'".
Ms Heard's team, in turn, said it was Mr Depp who is a bully and abuser, not to be trusted.
The jury of seven must come to an unanimous decision for a verdict. They began their deliberations shortly after both sides delivered their closing arguments.
Benjamin Rottenborn, a lawyer for Ms Heard, reminded jurors of explicit text messages between Mr Depp and his friends, telling them he wanted to visit harm upon his ex-wife.
"This is a window into the heart and mind of America's favourite pirate," Mr Rottenborn said. "This is the real Johnny Depp."
Mr Depp's lawyer Camille Vasquez, in contrast, called Ms Heard's allegations of abuse "wild, over the top and implausible".
"There is an abuser in this courtroom, but it is not Mr Depp," Ms Vasquez said, replaying an audio recording in which the actress admits to hitting her then-husband.
"Mr Depp experienced persistent verbal, physical and emotional abuse by Ms Heard," she said.
Friday's arguments echoed much of the past six weeks of trial, where both sides presented warring accounts of the former couple's five-year relationship.
Ms Heard and her lawyers told the court of an erratic and cruel Mr Depp, prone to drug and alcohol binges and violent behaviour.
Taking the stand on Thursday, Ms Heard became emotional as she told jurors of the "harassment, the humiliation, the campaign against me that's echoed every single day on social media and now in front of cameras, in this room".
Mr Depp offered a starkly different picture, alleging that Ms Heard was a volatile spouse who abused and demeaned him. On the stand, he told jurors his ex-wife had a "need" for conflict and violence and caused him bodily injury by severing the tip of one of his fingers.
The case stems from a 2018 op-ed written by Ms Heard, in which she described her experience as a "public figure representing domestic abuse".
"I felt the full force of our culture's wrath for women who speak out," she wrote. "I had the rare vantage point of seeing, in real time, how institutions protect men accused of abuse."
On Friday, Ms Vasquez said the article amounted to a lie which had tarnished Mr Depp's reputation - though the piece did not directly name him.
Ms Heard's lawyer, Mr Rottenborn, asked the jury to focus on Ms Heard's words in the story when making their decision.
The case is "not about who's the better spouse," he said. "It's not about whether you think Ms Heard may have been abusive to Mr Depp".
"If you think they were both abusive to each other... then Amber wins," he said. "If Amber was abused even one time, then she wins".
Mr Depp arrived Friday morning greeted by hundreds of screaming fans outside, as had happened most days of the trial.
The celebrity case - broadcast live every day - garnered intense public interest as both actors lobbed serious accusations of emotional, physical and verbal abuse at the other.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61610470
|
news_world-us-canada-61610470
|
|
Energy bills: More help may be expected next year, says think tank - BBC News
|
2022-05-27
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The government will face pressure to give more support if energy prices do not fall, a think tank says.
|
Business
|
The government is likely to come under pressure to help households with soaring energy bills again next year, the Institute of Fiscal Studies think tank has warned.
The IFS said calls for help were likely to continue for "at least" another year if oil and gas prices do not fall.
Energy bills are expected to keep rising until at least spring 2023.
But the government insisted the support package announced by the chancellor on Thursday was a "temporary" measure.
The £15bn package means every UK household will get an energy bill discount of £400 from October, with further support for the poorest households, pensioners and disabled people.
The new measures add to around £17bn of support already given by the government. This included one-off £150 council tax rebates for most homes in England and Wales and matched funding for the other devolved nations.
A steep rise in the cost of living, in particular a jump in energy prices in April, and a second one scheduled for October, had put growing pressure on the government to take action.
The announcement, which came a day after the publication of Sue Gray's report into rule-breaking at Downing Street during the pandemic, was on a larger scale than many expected.
The support was broadly welcomed and described as a "genuinely big package" by the IFS.
However, the think tank warned that it could prompt calls for additional support again next year, which in turn could contribute to further inflation.
"I think the biggest risk is that the chancellor will be tempted to do this again and again, and I think if that happens then we really could be in for a bit of trouble," IFS director Paul Johnson told the BBC's Today programme.
"He's got the most extraordinarily difficult decisions to make later this year on public sector pay, and then he'll be under pressure I suspect again this time next year when energy prices will still be high.
"I think if he's tempted to continue putting money in to an economy where inflation is very high then that becomes a significant risk."
Adam Scorer, chief executive of fuel poverty charity National Energy Action, said the chancellor's measures averted "the darkest of outcomes" but warned "millions will still be struggling and the energy crisis is far from over".
He said a "large, more targeted intervention is what was needed ahead of winter", and said the government needed to plan for energy prices to remain high for some time.
The cost of living is set to continue to rise, with inflation - the rate at which prices go up - at a 40-year high and forecast to hit 10% later this year.
Concerns have also been raised that the extra support for households could contribute to further inflation, by providing more spending power in the economy at a time when supply chains and the labour market are struggling to meet demand.
However, Chancellor Rishi Sunak insisted that his new measures would have a "minimal impact" on inflation.
Higher energy prices, caused in part by the war in Ukraine, have been a key factor driving inflation and analysts expect energy costs to remain high.
Cornwall Insight, has predicted the energy price cap, which limits how much providers can raise prices, will be marginally higher in spring 2023 to around £2,818 than the price cap this autumn at £2,791.
The cost of the extra support for energy bills will be partly offset by a 25% additional tax on oil and gas firms' profits, which have soared in recent months.
Opposition parties had been calling for a windfall tax on energy firms for several months.
A windfall tax is a one-off levy imposed by a government on a company. The idea is to target firms that were lucky enough to benefit from something they were not responsible for - in other words, a windfall.
Mr Sunak said the "energy profits levy" had been designed so it would "incentivise and encourage investment".
But Dan Atzori, research partner at Cornwall Insight, warned the tax came with "risks to both investment and energy security".
If windfall taxes were repeated over time, Mr Atzori said, it risked "creating an unstable environment, and may lead to energy producers, who operate globally, investing and relocating to other areas".
The government had previously rejected the idea of a windfall tax on energy firms' profit, but Mr Sunak said with the sector "making extraordinary profits" he was "sympathetic to the argument to tax those profits fairly".
However, energy giant BP said while it knew "how difficult things are for people" Thursday's announcement was "not for a one-off tax" but a "multi-year proposal".
"Naturally we will now need to look at the impact of both the new levy and the tax relief on our North Sea investment plans," it said.
The body which represents oil and gas firms, Offshore Energies UK, said the levy would "drive away" investors and cut UK energy production.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-61600185
|
news_business-61600185
|
|
Nature loss: Watchdog highlights 'precarious state' of environment - BBC News
|
2022-05-11
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
A new report says the government must do more to protect the land, the air and waters.
|
Science & Environment
|
A report from an independent watchdog says it's very concerned about the "precarious state" of England's environment.
The Office for Environmental Protection says that existing laws are failing to slow the damage to land, air and water.
Protecting the environment should have the same urgency as efforts to reach net zero emissions, the study says.
The government says current laws will make a real difference and put nature on the road to recovery this decade.
The Office for Environmental Protection (OEP) was set up under the 2021 Environment Act to hold the government and other public bodies to account in England and Northern Ireland.
Its first report, described as a "polite demolition" of the government's track record, paints a picture of environmental crises on land, in the air and in the seas and rivers.
Among the issues identified by the OEP are the state of England's inland rivers and waterways. They face pollution from multiple sources including agricultural runoff and discharges from sewage treatment works.
While the government is praised for putting in place a 25-year environment plan in 2018, the OEP says that progress on delivery has been far too slow, and, so far, it has failed to halt the loss of species or the unsustainable use of resources.
"The 25-year environment plan was an ambitious attempt to confront the challenges facing the environment, yet we continue to see worrying and persistent trends of environmental decline," said Dame Glenys Stacey, chair of the OEP.
"Our rivers are in a poor state, bird and other species numbers are in serious decline, poor air quality threatens the health of many, and our seas and sea floor are not managed sustainably."
Of even greater concern are the potential for "tipping points", where long term, slow declines become irreversible. The OEP identifies a number of these points, including the decline in fish stocks and the widespread use of nutrients on farmland.
To tackle the problems, the report says the government needs to urgently "take stock" and set out an "ambitious vision".
The OEP highlights six "building blocks" that it believes are needed to help turn around environmental decline. These include a better understanding of environmental pressures and drivers, setting more effective targets, and having a coherent strategy and policy.
Protestors demand that sewage runoffs into the rivers and seas should end
"Our argument is that with the resources that are already available to government, for protecting, restoring and enhancing the environment, a much better job could be done, if the building blocks that we highlight are considered," said Dame Stacey.
"If there is a persistent effort, and a real attention to prioritisation in relation to environmental matters, we'll get a long way," she said.
In response to the new study, Environment Minister Rebecca Pow said: "We welcome this report, which acknowledges that our Environment Act gives us new tools to make a real difference to our environment, putting it at the heart of government and transitioning us to a sustainable future with nature on the road to recovery during this decade.
"Six months on from the Act gaining Royal Assent, we are currently consulting on legally binding environmental targets which include a world-leading target to halt species decline by 2030. We have launched a consultation to deliver the largest programme in history to tackle storm sewage discharges and we have taken action to transform the way that we deal with waste."
The government says it will formally respond to the OEP's recommendations this summer.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-61414475
|
news_science-environment-61414475
|
|
Cladding crisis: Welsh government lack of action claim - BBC News
|
2022-05-15
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Leaseholders say the political arguments are not helping those living with the problems.
|
Wales politics
|
Welsh government minister Julie James says she is "disappointed" at the UK government's "England-only" approach
The Welsh government should focus on its own response to the cladding crisis, rather than political rows with Westminster, campaigners have said.
In England about 40 construction firms have signed a UK government pledge to fund any required fire safety work.
Climate Change Minister Julie James said she was "disappointed" at the UK government's "England-only" approach.
The UK government said building safety was devolved but urged the Welsh government to take similar action.
However, leaseholders said the political arguments were not helping those living with the problems "24/7".
Following the 2017 Grenfell Tower tragedy in London, a number of apartments blocks in Wales were found to have fire safety defects and remediation work is yet to be carried out on many of them amid rows over who should pay.
Ms James said the UK government's approach to addressing building safety issues in England was making it harder to ensure developers in Wales were taking their responsibilities seriously.
Seventy-two people died in the 2017 Grenfell Tower fire, which spread due to inflammable cladding
In England the building safety levy introduced by Levelling Up Minister Michael Gove will see the industry raise £3bn over the next 10 years to address issues.
Ms James has called on the UK government to extend the developers' pledge and the levy beyond England.
"The UK government's unilateral approach to building safety issues makes it harder to ensure all developers take their responsibilities to contribute towards the cost of fixing building safety problems in Wales seriously," she said in a written statement to Members of the Senedd (MSs) on Thursday.
However campaigners frustrated by what they regard as a lack of action by the Welsh government accused Ms James of "missing the fundamental point".
The Celestia development in Cardiff Bay has been identified as having fire safety defects, including with the cladding.
Mark Thomas, chair of the Celestia Management Company, which is responsible for the running of the 450 apartment complex, said: "There's a lot discussion about conflicts between the Welsh government and the English [UK] government and consequential funding and Mr Gove's unilateral actions, but that doesn't actually help us living with the problem on a 24/7 basis".
Celestia's Mark Thomas accused Welsh ministers of failing to deal with the situation as a "matter of urgency"
Welsh Conservative MS Janet Finch-Saunders accused Ms James - who also holds responsibility for housing - of a "petulant abdication of responsibility".
"Devolution cannot mean taking responsibility when ministers fancy it - it is their duty and the job for which they are more than well paid," she added.
Redrow - the developer behind the Celestia complex, and one of the signatories to the developers' pledge in England - said it would look to treat its customers in England and Wales "fairly" while a Welsh government plan was developed.
In a statement, Redrow said: "We have consistently said that we believe the housebuilding industry, alongside main contractors and material suppliers, should play its part in resolving the issue of legacy fire safety in high rise buildings and that the financial burden should not be borne by leaseholders."
Laing O'Rourke - which was contracted to build the Celestia buildings - said it had "engaged proactively" with Redrow and the management company.
The Welsh government said work has already been carried out, or is planned, to remove non-compliant aluminium composite cladding from all affected buildings in Wales.
It has also set up a Welsh Building Safety Fund worth £375m and a Leaseholder Support Scheme to help those facing "extreme hardship" as a results of costs connected to building defects.
A UK government spokesman said: "We have been working with the devolved governments to help shape building safety policy and are in regular dialogue with the Welsh government on the issues raised.
"Our new industry wide agreement in England will make sure developers pay to fix the problems they created, including both cladding and non-cladding defects.
"While building safety is a devolved matter, we encourage the Welsh government to introduce the same legal protections as those under the Building Safety Act and are committed to supporting them in this task."
You can see more on the story on BBC Politics Wales on Sunday 15 May at 10:00 BST on BBC One Wales, or on the iPlayer.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-61440823
|
news_uk-wales-politics-61440823
|
|
Mariupol: The 80 days that left a flourishing city in ruins - BBC News
|
2022-05-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Ukrainian port which has seen some of the most intense fighting is now under Russian control.
|
Europe
|
The theatre has often been described as the heart of the city
After almost three months of relentless assault, Mariupol has fallen. Ukraine's military says its combat mission in the besieged port is over. More than any other Ukrainian city, Mariupol has come to symbolise the ferocious brutality of Russia's assault and the stubbornness of Ukraine's resistance.
On Wednesday 23 February, Ivan Stanislavsky left his camera bag at the office. He was on his way to see the layout of his new book on Mariupol's Soviet-era murals at a colleague's house, and didn't want to lug the gear around. He could always pick it up the next day.
But on Thursday, as he stood in the street outside his locked and deserted office, he could hear thunderous sounds rolling in from the east. The city was under fire.
As the conflict intensified, and gunfire became audible to the west too, Ivan moved his mattress into the hall. He piled up his large collection of art books - including the Encyclopaedia of Ukrainian Rock Music - against the windows of his flat in the district of Primorsky.
"Let's say it was not a waste of a library," says the 36-year-old photographer, who is also a press officer at Ukrainian premier league football club FC Mariupol.
Ivan Stanislavsky loved to photograph his city of Mariupol
Across town in the neighbourhood of Kalmiusky, businessman Yevhen was also taking precautions. The 47-year-old had told his family to pack so they could escape the city. But when he returned from the office, he found no packing had been done. His family refused to leave.
In an apartment in the same block, metallurgists from the nearby steelworks, Nataliia, 43, and Andrii, 41, were already slicing the last two loaves they had been able to buy, leaving them to dry out so they could eat them piece by piece over the weeks ahead.
The Illich steel plant dominates this view of Mariupol
Volodymyr, a 52-year-old paramedic in Kalmiusky, was also in his kitchen, trying to absorb the news. When reports came in of Russians marching through the village of Chonhar - on a strategic road out of Crimea to the west - he choked. This was a coordinated attack, he realised.
The ambulance dispatcher was on the phone. She instructed Volodymyr to ignore routine calls. "Find the wounded", he was told.
Twenty-two-year-old engineering graduate Mariia thought the first explosion she heard was simply a storm. Then she heard a second.
"We didn't know what to do," says Mariia, who like Ivan, lived in Primorsky. "I didn't have time to think about my future, my plans. I had to think about what I'd eat and drink... [And] what to do with the cats."
It suddenly dawned on her why, in the past few days, soldiers had appeared in the paint shop where she worked, asking to buy blue and yellow tape. They needed it to mark their uniforms.
Four days into the war, with the fighting closing in, Ivan and his wife sought shelter in a basement underneath his local supermarket. It offered good protection, and Ivan found that the muffling of sound dulled his sense of mounting anxiety.
Daily life was being stripped down to bare essentials.
"We lived like primitive people," he told the BBC from Lviv, where he has now fled. "We broke trees, made fires, cooked food on fires. I even heard of people eating pigeons."
He watched as order gradually broke down all around him. He kept a vivid diary, later published online.
"The Stone Age has arrived," he says in his 6 March entry.
He writes of watching his fellow Ukrainian citizens raiding abandoned shops, making off with everything from computers and freezers to swimsuits and underwear.
One evening a drunk woman interrupts a session of evening gossip in the basement. "Treat yourself," she says, as a flashlight revealed a bottle of Californian Merlot, taken from Wines of the World on nearby Italiiska Street.
But aware that even medical supplies and cash tills were being taken, Ivan says he felt disgust.
"We are our own worst enemies," he writes.
But is this, he wonders, how the fittest survive? After a while, each day became a "combat mission".
Over a few short weeks, Mariupol fell apart. The Russian military laid siege to the city, attacking power and water supplies. A Russian airstrike hit the maternity hospital on 9 March, and a plane bombed its theatre - clearly marked as a civilian shelter - a week later.
Ivan was stunned at how quickly it all happened.
The theatre after it was bombed
"The whole city, all its infrastructure, supply system, logistics, energy supply were destroyed in a matter of days," he says.
Sitting underground at night, he sensed people becoming passive.
"You can only wait in the shelter," he writes in his diary. "Some are waiting for spring, some - for the morning to come, some - for the end of the war. And someone is waiting for the bomb to come and kill everyone."
And all this just as Mariupol had seemed destined to turn a corner. Money began to pour in, adding lustre to a city previously associated mainly with heavy industry - and war.
"It was a city aspiring to something," Ivan says. It hadn't always been this way.
Long before this year's invasion, Mariupol had a ringside seat to Ukraine's simmering conflict with Russian-backed separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk, the two regions that make up the neighbouring area known as Donbas.
An activist guards a barricade outside the Mariupol government building seized by pro-Russia activists on 17 April 2014
When fighting first broke out there in 2014, the government briefly lost control of Mariupol after clashes with pro-Russian protesters. In January 2015, a devastating rocket attack by the rebels on the eastern edge of the city killed almost 30 civilians.
Even though the war gradually receded, the sound of artillery booming in the distance was part of Mariupol's daily soundscape.
But the city moved on. The Ukrainian government briefly made Mariupol the administrative capital of the Donetsk Oblast. People migrated from rebel-held areas and the city started attracting investment.
"It started receiving all of the resources and all of the attention," Ivan says.
A view of Mariupol along its coast
Public buildings were renovated, cafés opened, and new parks created. In a podcast last October, the city's mayor Vadym Boychenko boasted of creating the best municipal services in the country, opening an IT school, and promoting contemporary art and sports.
Plans were afoot, he said, for the largest water park in Ukraine and a version of Disneyland "which will probably be called Mariland". In fact, Mariupol was declared Ukraine's "Big Capital of Culture" in 2021.
But while Mariupol flourished, rebel-held Donetsk mouldered. When the rebels returned to Mariupol, Volodymyr, the paramedic, believed they were driven by revenge to destroy the city.
"'If we live in shit, then you will live in shit as well,'" Volodymyr says they told him at a checkpoint as he finally escaped the city. "They just looked at us and envied how we lived."
Volodymyr thinks the Russian-backed separatists were motivated by revenge
Yevhen, the businessman, describes life in Mariupol in the past five years as "a fairytale". "The city was being reconstructed," he says, "all roads were renovated, public transport was improved."
His buildings restoration firm was responsible, among other projects, for the reconstruction of Mariupol's iconic water tower in time for the city's 240th birthday.
"This is a city of hard workers… It was hard for me to explain that my workers should finish at 6pm - they wanted to work longer."
Like many others, weekends would be spent with family in the city's revived parks or on the seafront.
"For me, this is a [key] question - if you want to capture the city, why destroy it? [The Russians] don't need thinking people, they need territory," he says.
And, he adds, he is now getting calls from the Russians to return to Mariupol to help rebuild it.
"But if Mariupol is occupied by Russia, there will be no future there… there will be nothing to live for. To live in unrecognised territory is to bury your children's future."
About 150,000 people remain in the city, from a population of almost half a million. Most of those left there, he says, are also trying to escape.
"I left Mariupol but my soul is there," he says, tears in his eyes.
Businessman Yevhen is already getting calls from Russians to rebuild Mariupol
Nataliia and her husband Andrii worked at the Illich plant, one of two iron and steel works which tower over the city's skyline and loom large in Ivan Stanilavsky's photographs.
They spent long days at work, and leisure time was precious.
"The city authorities laid out marble tiles, made piers [so that] it was possible to sit on a bench right in the sea," Andrii says.
"It was a wonderful warm city with parks, concerts, fountains," his wife says. "A European city."
This recent blossoming was captured by Ivan, but as a photographer with a passion for his city's past, his pet project was documenting Mariupol's remarkable collection of Soviet murals, one of the most extensive in Ukraine.
The cultural importance of preserving such remarkable works seems undeniable, but in Mariupol nostalgia for the Soviet Union jostled uneasily with Ukraine's modern, increasingly European identity, Ivan says.
"Politics was already preventing this cultural heritage from being integrated into Ukraine's artistic context," he says.
So inevitably, when the war came, culture found itself fought over too.
On 28 April, Mariupol's city council denounced the alleged theft by Russia of more than 2,000 exhibits from the city's museums, including ancient icons, a handwritten Torah scroll and more than 200 medals.
The director of Mariupol's Local History Museum, Natalia Kapustnikova, later told Russian newspaper Izvestia that she had personally handed over paintings to the Russians by Ivan Aivazovsky and Arkhip Kuindzhi, and claimed that Ukrainian "nationalists" had burned 95% of the museum's exhibits.
She wasn't the only local official harbouring pro-Russian sentiments. On 9 April, Ukraine's prosecutor general charged a member of Mariupol's city council, Kostyantyn Ivashchenko, with treason after he was declared mayor by pro-Russian separatists in Donetsk.
Ivashchenko's pro-Russian party had been well supported in the city's last elections, coming second, while President Volodymyr Zelensky's party came a distant fifth place.
In a poll conducted just before the elections by the Kyiv-based Centre for Social Indicators, almost half the city's population identified themselves as "Russian", though 80% also described themselves as "Ukrainian".
More tellingly, perhaps, fewer than 20% self-identified as "European", while more than 50% said they were "Soviet".
Mariia says that after the invasion she began to hate all things Russian
Nataliia, whose father is Russian, says she asked her husband for forgiveness when the bombing started. "I was ashamed that I was Russian."
Mariia, the engineer, says that before the war her first language was Russian, but when the bombing began "I started to hate all things Russian - language, movies, objects".
Mariupol's complex identity is hardly unique in today's Ukraine, a country which formed an integral part of the Soviet Union until the collapse of communism at the end of the 1980s. And it's doubtful that any of those who described themselves as "Russian" or "Soviet" wanted to see their city destroyed in a violent effort to pull it back into Moscow's orbit.
Ironically, when the moment arrived to defend the city from Russian invaders, it was another part of Mariupol's Soviet-era legacy that came to play an almost iconic role.
This legacy, buried deep underground, is the maze of bunkers beneath Mariupol's other steel works, Azovstal, built by the Soviet authorities during the Cold War.
The 36 bomb shelters provided room for more than 12,000 people. After independence in 1991, no-one thought that much about them. But then the fighting in 2014 began.
"We started thinking about what we would do if fighting spread further into the city," Enver Tskitishvili, Azovstal's director general, says.
Training on the use of the bunkers and their connecting tunnels went on every day for years.
In early February, as the fear of renewed conflict loomed larger, preparations swung into high gear. Food and water were brought in the week before Russia's invasion.
Officials at the plant knew the bomb shelters would soon be occupied, but had little idea that Azovstal, surrounded by water on three sides, would become the scene of Mariupol's last stand.
An injured Ukrainian serviceman inside the Azovstal iron and steel works factory
As the days went by, the war got closer and closer to Ivan Stanislavsky's apartment. Excursions in search of food, even to the nearby Dzerkalnyy store, just 400m up the road, were increasingly perilous. Sometimes, a Ukrainian mortar team would arrive by truck, fire off a few rounds, and leave before the inevitable Russian reply.
There was little communication between civilians and soldiers.
One day, a tank from the Azov Regiment arrived near Dzerkalnyy, sending locals running, fearful of an impending battle. The regiment emerged in 2014 as a highly effective volunteer militia with far right and, in some cases, neo-Nazi affiliations, before being folded into Ukraine's National Guard.
Vladimir Putin has made extensive use of the Azov's controversial origins, in an effort to bolster his argument that he is trying to "de-Nazify" Ukraine. Ukrainian authorities say the regiment's origins are a thing of the past and points out that far-right parties have had very little electoral success.
In his diary Ivan describes the members he knows as a motley assortment of Mariupol natives - bikers, lawyers, football hooligans, and an amateur actor - driven not by ideology, but by a fierce hatred of those who were trying to ruin their lives.
"Together they formed a 'Nazi' battalion and intimidated the entire Russian army," he writes.
Intimidating and effective, but not enough, eventually, to stem the Russian tide.
While the city's defenders fought their losing battle, Ivan heard voices in his basement starting to curse President Zelensky for leaving Mariupol to its own devices.
President Volodymyr Zelensky (L) and children play in a fountain during his first official visit to Mariupol on 15 June 2019
For all the praise heaped on the city's defenders, it was clear from the start that Mariupol was not the government's main priority. Faced with Russian threats on a number of fronts, the Zelensky government chose to secure the capital, thwarting what was arguably Vladimir Putin's top priority.
Ultimately, that meant letting Russian forces achieve another of their pre-war goals: the establishment of a land corridor between Crimea - annexed by Moscow in 2014 - and the separatists in the Donbas.
But for those trapped in the city, fighting or just trying to survive, it was a bitter pill.
"Some say Mariupol was given the status of a hero city," Ivan wrote in his diary on 13 March.
"It looks like the award will be posthumous."
Ivan's photo of the inside of the water tower
By now, Ivan couldn't stand any more. Outside Dzerkalnyy supermarket, he saw corpses neatly stacked under a wall. People who once queued for food were now in "the queue of the dead", waiting to be buried.
So on 15 March Ivan bundled four family members and his cat into his miraculously unscathed Skoda Fabia and joined a convoy for the tortuous journey north-west to government-held Zaporizhzhia.
At an observation point on Markelova St looking towards the port and the beach, Ivan allowed himself a brief moment of reflection.
"In my head I'm saying goodbye to this place," he writes in his diary. "I have a feeling we will never return here."
A day later, Mariia and five relatives also left by car, carrying just personal belongings and the family's dog. As they made their way out of Mariupol, their convoy came under attack and the cars had to accelerate out of danger, headed first to Zaporizhzhia, then to Dnipro.
The following day, Nataliia and Andreii left, after a neighbour offered them a space in his car. The couple eventually reached the city of Khmelnytskyi where they have been selling the family's coin collection in order to survive.
In that same convoy, Yevhen travelled with his wife and two other relatives. He's now in Dnipro, helping other residents who escaped Mariupol, and trying to reach those who remain.
The apartment block where Ivan lived has been destroyed
Volodymyr, the paramedic, stayed in Mariupol as long as he could, to look after his elderly mother. But deprived of food and special medicine, she died. He then left the city on 21 April, and is volunteering at a hospital in Dnipro.
"There are thousands and thousands of families like mine," he says. "How many people have died? How many families have been lost?"
Two months after escaping, Ivan is still watching the death throes of Mariupol from the relative safety of Lviv.
In his diary's poignant epilogue, he writes of flashbacks, text messages about deaths or lucky escapes, and phone calls that go unanswered.
"The subscriber is out of range."
With additional reporting by Kateryna Khinkulova and Illia Tolstov
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61480988
|
news_world-europe-61480988
|
|
Imran Ahmad Khan: Ex-MP jailed for sex assault on teenage boy - BBC News
|
2022-05-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Former Wakefield Conservative MP Imran Ahmad Khan is sentenced to 18 months in jail for the assault.
|
Leeds & West Yorkshire
|
Former Wakefield Conservative MP Imran Ahmad Khan was found guilty in April of sexually assaulting the teenager in 2008
A former Conservative MP has been jailed for 18 months following his conviction for sexually assaulting a 15-year-old boy.
At a trial last month, Imran Ahmad Khan, 48, who was elected as Wakefield MP in 2019, was found guilty of groping the boy at a party in 2008.
Khan was expelled by the Conservative party following his conviction and later stood down as an MP.
The judge said he did not accept Khan had "any remorse" for what he had done.
Passing sentence at Southwark Crown Court, Mr Justice Jeremy Baker said the victim had been "profoundly psychologically affected" by Khan's actions.
He added: "The only regret you feel is towards yourself for having found yourself in the predicament you face as a result of your actions some 14 years ago."
Mr Justice Baker said there was a "significant degree of brutality" in the lead-up to Khan's assault on the teenager.
"I am satisfied the complainant was particularly vulnerable. Not only was he 15 years of age at the date of the offence, but I accept his mother's description that he was not very worldly and very young for his age," he said.
The judge told Khan: "Although it may well be, over the years, you had let yourself believe you had got away with having committed this offence, I am sure you were aware from the outset there was a risk there would be a day of reckoning."
However, Mr Justice Baker went on to say that he did not consider Khan's offence to be "sufficiently severe enough to place the assault into the most severe category".
Former Wakefield Conservative MP Imran Ahmad Khan was sentenced at Southwark Crown Court
The jury at Khan's trial heard he had forced the boy to drink gin at the party in Staffordshire, then dragged him upstairs and asked him to watch pornography before assaulting him.
The victim, now 29, told the court he was left feeling "scared, vulnerable, numb, shocked and surprised" after Khan touched his feet and legs, and was within "a hair's breadth" of his genitals.
The court was told that a police report was made at the time, but no further action was taken because the youngster did not want to make a formal complaint.
However, the victim told jurors "it all came flooding back" when he learned Khan was standing in the December 2019 general election and he went on to file a complaint.
Arriving in court with a walking stick, suitcase and carrier bag from an exclusive London parfumerie, he sat in the dock looking straight ahead throughout the hearing.
His victim sat directly behind him in the public gallery throughout the 90-minute hearing - often emotional and reacting to much of the mitigating arguments from Khan's barrister by shaking his head in disbelief.
Describing Khan as "that man" during his impact statement, he spoke of his increasingly deteriorating mental health.
The judge noted that Khan had remained remorseless throughout the trial and said the only sorrow he'd shown had been for himself and his reputation.
On a number of occasions, his barrister spoke of a life and career in tatters, but made no reference to the life of the victim.
As he was told of his custodial sentence, Khan remained emotionless, calmly getting to his feet as he was escorted from the court during which his victim kept his eyes locked on the back of the ex-MP.
Reading an impact statement in court, Khan's victim said he had had "suicidal thoughts" and had suffered difficulties in his relationship and at work due to the assault.
"Because of this assault, throughout my teenage years I found being touched in any way difficult," he said.
"My mental health has deteriorated rapidly since deciding to come forward and having to constantly relive an event I tried to bury for such a long time.
"I have struggled with the guilt of dragging my family back into a horrible ordeal they would rather forget, and watch them struggle with their own guilt for allowing that man into the house."
Khan's defence lawyer said the former MP's "fall from grace has been spectacular"
In mitigation, Khan's defence lawyer Gudrun Young QC said the former MP had gone from "high public office" to being "utterly and completely disgraced, with his life and career in ruins, shamed and humiliated at every turn".
"To say his reputation is in tatters does not do the matter justice. It has been completely destroyed," she said.
"Mr Khan's fall from grace has been spectacular. He will always be known as a disgraced former MP and he will take that to his grave."
In a statement issued after the sentencing, the NSPCC said: "We hope seeing Khan face justice for the sexual assault he committed over a decade ago offers some solace to the brave young man who spoke out against his abuser.
"Abuse can have a profound and long-lasting effect on children and young people, but no matter who the perpetrator is, it is important to remember it is never too late to speak out and get support."
Earlier this month, Khan formally lodged an appeal against his conviction.
A by-election is due to be held on 23 June to elect a new MP for Khan's former constituency.
Follow BBC Yorkshire on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Send your story ideas to yorkslincs.news@bbc.co.uk.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-61549531
|
news_uk-england-leeds-61549531
|
|
Cost of living: No option is off the table, says Boris Johnson - BBC News
|
2022-05-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Boris Johnson says he is "not attracted" to new levies, but does not rule out a windfall tax on energy firms.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Boris Johnson: I'm not attracted intrinsically to new taxes
Boris Johnson says "no option is off the table" to tackle rising living costs as pressure grows to impose a windfall tax on oil and gas firms.
The policy, as proposed by opposition parties, would see a one-off levy on company profits, with proceeds used to support hard-hit households facing surging bills.
The prime minister said he was "not attracted intrinsically to new taxes".
But he said the government was "going to put our arms round people" to help.
Mr Johnson told reporters: "There is more that we are going to do... you'll just have to wait a little bit longer."
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer said part of the answer to tackling the cost of living was a windfall tax and it was "staring the prime minister in the face".
He said ministers needed to address the situation, adding: "Every day they dither and delay, more people are struggling, really struggling, with their bills."
Earlier, the chief secretary to the Treasury, Simon Clarke, told BBC Radio 4's Today programme he was not "philosophically attracted" to a windfall tax, but he could not rule it out.
He insisted the government would be pragmatic, and added that it was "looking at the situation with real urgency and intent".
A windfall tax is a one-off tax imposed by a government on a company or group of companies - the idea being is to target firms that were lucky enough to benefit from something they were not responsible for - in other words, a windfall.
Labour, the Liberal Democrats and the SNP have all called for a such a levy on oil and gas firms, which have seen record profits since the economy restarted after the pandemic.
The parties said the money could be used to support those worse affected by the rising cost of living, with bills for food, fuel and energy rocketing, and inflation hitting a 40-year high.
The government had initially rejected the idea, warning it could deter investment from energy companies into the UK.
But as costs continue to rise - and another energy price hike looms in the autumn - the language from Downing Street has softened, with both the prime minister and chancellor leaving the policy on the table.
A number of Conservative backbenchers have also come out in favour of a windfall tax, increasing pressure on the government to act - with former Treasury minister Jesse Norman telling Today it was needed in these "extraordinary times".
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Sir Keir Starmer: Government needs to "get a grip" and bring in a windfall tax
Asked if a windfall tax went against Conservative values, Mr Johnson said: "I don't like new taxes."
He added: "No option is off the table, let's be absolutely clear about that.
"I'm not attracted, intrinsically, to new taxes.
"But as I have said throughout, we have got to do what we can - and we will - to look after people through the aftershocks of Covid, through the current pressures on energy prices that we are seeing post-Covid and with what's going on in Russia and we are going to put our arms round people, just as we did during the pandemic."
The PM pointed to support on offer already, including £9bn of funding targeted at energy bills, saying the government was providing a "continuing stream of effort to shield people".
After that once in a century pandemic and the colossal economic intervention that followed, now the question is about this almighty economic crunch and what to do about it.
What we are seeing in public - and it rages in private too - is philosophy and ideology smashing into reality. In other words Conservatives instinctively don't like windfall taxes appropriating the profits of a sector that has just happened to do very well.
But the energy companies have had a genuine windfall, and senior figures in government are pretty grumpy that in various meetings with the oil companies, they just don't seem to get it - they have raked in enormous profits and not really helped themselves, as someone put it to me last night.
So this U-turn looks increasingly likely, but there is some hesitation in grabbing the handbrake - there is a discussion on whether to do it, how to do it, when to do it and then what to do with the money that's raised.
Plus there is a nervousness too that it is it not a panacea - that if it happened, people would be back at the government's door next week saying, 'what are you going to do next?'.
There is a battle going on internally between pain relief, as it is described - short-term fixes that can help people right now; and what is seen as surgery - boosting the economy for years to come, with an argument that if you spend a pound now, you can't spend that pound again on a new train line or power station later.
The government is also facing calls from a former Conservative Party leader to increase universal credit in line with inflation.
Sir Iain Duncan Smith told BBC Radio 4 that the biggest problem the country faced was a recession which would "hit the poorest the hardest".
And he criticised the Treasury's "group think" for delaying the support that was needed.
Senior Tory backbencher Bernard Jenkin went even further, calling for a £13.5bn package of support to ease the cost of living crisis - including reviving the £20 a week uplift to universal credit that was introduced in the pandemic.
He told BBC Essex on BBC Essex that he did not believe "the Labour party or the Treasury yet get how serious this crisis is".
Treasury minister Mr Clarke said the government had already taken "decisive action" on universal credit by changing the taper rate - the amount lost by working claimants if they earn more money.
But he ruled out the return of the £20 uplift.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61549109
|
news_uk-politics-61549109
|
|
Gene-edited tomatoes could soon be sold in England - BBC News
|
2022-05-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
A bill is to be introduced in Parliament in two days' time to allow the commercial growing of gene-edited crops in England.
|
Science & Environment
|
Gene-edited tomatoes that boost vitamin D are among the foods that could be commercially developed
Tomatoes that boost the body's vitamin D could be among the first gene-edited crops allowed on sale in England.
Researchers in Norwich created the plants by turning off a specific molecule in their genetic code.
A bill will be introduced on Wednesday to allow commercial growing of gene-edited crops in England.
The technique is currently not used for food production in the UK because of rules set by the EU but Brexit has enabled the UK to set its own rules.
One in six people in the UK are deficient in vitamin D, which is vital to strong bones and muscles and helps reduce risk of cancer.
Prof Cathie Martin, who led the research at the John Innes Centre, said that the development, published in Nature Plants, could be hugely beneficial.
"With humans, half an hour in the sunshine every day is enough to make enough vitamin D. But a lot of people don't have that time outside and that's why they need supplements. The tomatoes themselves could provide another source of vitamin D in their diet."
If government legislation gets through Parliament successfully, the vitamin-boosting fruits could be among the first gene-edited crops allowed on supermarket shelves in England.
Gene editing is a relatively recent technology. It involves switching genes on and off by snipping out a small section of the plant's DNA. The older technique of genetic modification involves putting genes in, sometimes from a completely different species.
EU restrictions mean both methods have been effectively banned in Europe for a quarter century.
Both methods are used in other countries, to produce food. But the EU set stringent regulations on GM crops 25 years ago because of safety concerns and public opposition to the technology. Gene-edited crops are covered by the same regulations.
The UK currently follows European Union regulations on both technologies.
Any new GM or GE crop must undergo a scientific safety assessment, which can take around five years. Plant breeders believe that to be too onerous and expensive and so do not invest in the technology in Europe. In addition, any new variety that passes the EU's safety tests must then be approved by a majority at the European Parliament.
Plant breeders believe that political opposition is too strong for the approval of new GM or GE varieties. The regulations, say the plant industry, effectively prevented the commercial production of GM foods in Europe.
The UK government has decided that gene editing is safe to use and is to introduce a bill on Wednesday to allow its commercial development in England. The regulations on GM crops will not be relaxed at this stage.
The Environment Secretary George Eustice told BBC News that the change in the law was necessary to combat the impact of climate change.
''The reality is we're going to need more drought resistant plants and as we try and reduce the use of chemical pesticides, we need to breed in the natural resistance of plants to diseases and this precision breeding technology gives you the ability to do that; it gives you the ability to change traits in a plant faster than you could by conventional breeding but it's not the same as genetic modification''.
A new variety of barley being tested by KWS plant breeders in Hertfordshire will take twelve years to come to market using conventional breeding techniques. The firm claims that gene editing will significantly reduce that time.
The development has been welcomed by Nigel Moore, of KWS, a plant-breeding firm in Hertfordshire which produces wheat and barley.
"With the varieties we see in England, it generally takes us 12 years to produce those new ones. With gene-editing, we can respond to changing farmers' much faster."
KWS has been developing new varieties of wheat and barley for farmers for 150 years using traditional cross-breeding techniques. Mr Moore says that the firm needs to use gene-editing to produce the new varieties farmers are asking for.
"If we think about the pace of change: climate change, the need to reduce nitrogen fertilizer, need to use less pesticides; the faster we get the genetic changes we need, the faster we are able to adapt to all of that changing world around us".
Critics of the technology, such as Liz O'Neill, who is the director of the campaign group, GM Freeze, says that the government is being too hasty in lifting restrictions for gene-edited crops.
Protestors trampling a GM crop trial in 1988 over safety concerns about the technology.
"Mistakes happen. Other changes can get made. Genetics is not like Lego. It is a new set of techniques, and it has developed very quickly which means that there is an awful lot that could go wrong.
The process does involve putting genetic material in, in order to take it out, and there is a deliberate oversimplification in the description of the process in order to make people feel comfortable about it."
Ms O'Neill also wonders how the relaxation of regulations, which apply to England only, won't happen in other parts of the UK, which will make their own decisions about the use of the technology.
"The food chain doesn't operate only in England. It operates across the UK. Who is going to keep gene-edited food out of the food in Scotland and Wales?
Customers want informed choice and can only get that if GMOs in the food chain are traceable".
Nigel Moore from KWS responds by saying that new gene-edited crop varieties are analysed to ensure that there is no new DNA in them before they are approved for use and that a number of scientific assessments have judged gene-editing technology to be safe.
He also believes that English-grown GE foods won't find their way to other parts of the UK.
"Agricultural supply chains are already very competent in delivering brand requirements such as gluten free and organic foods to very high standards."
The Scottish Government has a long standing opposition to GM crops. Their argument is that they want to protect the "purity" of Scotland's food and drinks sector. But this is now is direct opposition to NFU Scotland which says it puts Scottish farmers at a competitive disadvantage.
A Welsh Government spokesperson said: "We have no plans to revise the existing GMO Deliberate Release Regulations in Wales and will maintain our precautionary approach towards genetic modification.
GM crop growing in Northern Ireland was banned at the same time as in Scotland and Wales, back in 2015, and it was said then that that decision would hold for the foreseeable future.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-61537610
|
news_science-environment-61537610
|
|
Nick Cave announces death of son, Jethro, aged 30 - BBC News
|
2022-05-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The musician issued a brief statement asking for privacy after his son, a model and actor, dies.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
Cave had already lost his teenage son, Arthur, in a tragic accident
Nick Cave has announced the death of his eldest son, Jethro Lazenby, at the age of 30.
"With much sadness, I can confirm that my son, Jethro, has passed away," the musician said in a statement.
"We would be grateful for family privacy at this time."
Lazenby, who worked as an actor and model, had recently been jailed for a violent attack on his mother, Beau Lazenby, at her home in Melbourne, Australia.
His death comes less than seven years after Cave's son Arthur died, aged 15, after falling from a cliff in Brighton.
An inquest heard that the teenager had taken LSD before the fall, which the coroner ruled as accidental.
Cave later wrote about the "vastness" of his grief, and said he felt Arthur with him all the time.
"I hear him talk to me, parent me, guide me, though he may not be there."
The musician, who is best known for his work with The Bad Seeds, later moved to Los Angeles with his wife because "Brighton had just become too sad".
"We did, however, return once we realised that, regardless of where we lived, we just took our sadness with us," he reflected.
Jethro Lazenby had recently been diagnosed with schizophrenia
Jethro Lazenby was born in Melbourne in 1991 and only learnt that Cave was his father at the age of eight.
He began modelling after being scouted in the city and had acting roles in the 2007 film Corroboree and 2011's My Little Princess, which starred Isabelle Huppert. He had also worked more recently as a photographer.
He had only been released on bail from Melbourne Remand Centre last Thursday, 5 May, after a magistrate instructed that he must undergo substance abuse treatment and avoid contact with his mother for the next two years.
Previously, a court had heard how Beau found her son at her front door on 7 March, 2022, and let him stay for the night.
The following morning, the pair had an argument, during which Lazenby kneed his mother in the face, leaving her bleeding and bruised.
She fled to a local pub and asked them to call the police, the court was told.
Lazenby's lawyer, Sean Ghattas, said that he had been diagnosed with schizophrenia, which had affected his judgement.
He had previously spent time in jail in 2018 for a number of violent attacks on his then-girlfriend.
Follow us on Facebook, or on Twitter @BBCNewsEnts. If you have a story suggestion email entertainment.news@bbc.co.uk.
• None Nick Cave: If we love, we grieve
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-61383411
|
news_entertainment-arts-61383411
|
|
How Alliance number nerds turned single digits into a surge - BBC News
|
2022-05-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The first rule of politics is knowing how to count - it's something the Alliance Party knows well.
|
Northern Ireland
|
Alliance leader Naomi Long with Eóin Tennyson and Kate Nicholl at the party's manifesto launch - both Tennyson and Nicholl were elected to Stormont
When I first started covering council elections in Northern Ireland in 1989, I realised pretty quickly it would be a good idea to get chatting to the Alliance activists.
The interminable counts involved in proportional representation elections are baffling, but the small middle-of-the-road party seemed replete with more than its fair share of "geeks" - election nerds who could explain to an inexperienced reporter the arcane mysteries of quotas and transfer votes.
In addition, they knew all about the art of tallying - the parallel operation by which party workers note down voters' preferences in order to get a picture of how a contest is going long before the results are officially announced.
Why was Alliance such a repository of psephological wisdom?
Perhaps because - apart from their first council elections in 1973 (when they got nearly 14%) - they never did very well.
The party eked out an existence on single-digit shares of the vote, getting seats only during the final stages of counts, thanks to the scraps thrown from the tables of the major parties.
Alliance volunteers got used to hanging around counts longer than anyone else, developing an expertise on where those scraps might come from.
In first-past-the-post elections, people tended to say Alliance meant well but then pronounced it a "wasted vote".
Naomi Long with husband Michael at the Titanic count centre
In 1996, when an election was held to select negotiators for peace talks, Alliance was well back in fifth place on just 6.5% of the vote.
That's why the eventual deal secured in the Good Friday Agreement treated them as an afterthought.
Unionists and nationalists were given the powerful posts and blocking vetoes, while the "others" in the middle didn't get the same kind of clout over key financial and political decisions.
It was a disappointing result for the peace broker parties, the SDLP and UUP, with the SDLP's Infrastructure Minister Nichola Mallon losing her seat
Fast forward to 2022, and it's the brokers of the peace deal, the Ulster Unionist Party (UUP) and the Social Democratic and Labour Party (SDLP), who are bringing up the rear.
Alliance, for so long a "minor" party, is now sitting on 13.5% and through clever vote management has more than doubled its team at Stormont.
Alliance actually made its key breakthrough three years ago in the 2019 European, local council and Westminster elections.
The liberal pro-European party capitalised on opposition to Brexit and exasperation over a long period of political paralysis at Stormont.
Naomi Long's 105,928 vote haul in the European election was a testament to the Alliance leader's personal popularity.
Then-first minister Peter Robinson shakes hands with Naomi Long after losing his east Belfast seat to her in 2010
A long-term advocate of building a shared society and making Northern Ireland work, Alliance has benefited from annoyance at the prospect of yet more gridlock at Stormont.
On the protocol, it now acknowledges the need for flexibility but blames Brexit rather than the EU for Northern Ireland's latest ills.
Naomi Long addresses media alongside MLA Paula Bradshaw and MP Stephen Farry in 2019. Alliance has capitalised on their pro-European position
In addition Alliance has tapped into the concerns of younger voters more worried about climate change, abortion law reform, tackling domestic violence and securing LGBT rights than wrangling over Northern Ireland's constitutional status.
However, it's worth noting Alliance doesn't have a monopoly on these issues.
The Greens, who tick all the same boxes, just found themselves wiped off the Stormont map.
In the forthcoming negotiations, Alliance will argue there's no reason the Stormont executive shouldn't get up and running while issues like the Brexit protocol are dealt with in parallel.
The party will also be looking for an end to Stormont's designation system: the green-orange voting rules which prevent Alliance and other MLAs becoming swing voters in many important matters.
The argument in favour of change might be clear, but Alliance can expect pushback from those parties who enjoy the current safeguards and vetoes.
Despite its elevated status, if Alliance is to reform the Stormont rules it will need to win over the British and Irish governments and build partnerships with some of the other parties.
It might be good for all those politicians to remember that while the current rules don't favour Alliance, the centre-ground constituency the party represents will be key should there be a vote on the Brexit protocol in 2024 and crucial in any future border poll on Irish unity.
Whether they are trying to assemble a coalition for change within the forthcoming talks or preparing for a fresh election in the event of a breakdown, the psephological geeks and nerds of Alliance now have a stronger hand to play.
They won't need reminding of Lyndon B Johnson's famous aphorism that the first rule of politics remains knowing how to count.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-61366589
|
news_uk-northern-ireland-61366589
|
|
Ukraine War: Putin gives few clues in Victory Day speech - BBC News
|
2022-05-09
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Prior to Victory Day, Moscow was full of rumours about what Putin might announce in his speech.
|
Europe
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Ahead of Victory Day, Moscow was full of rumour and speculation.
Was Vladimir Putin preparing a major announcement on Russia's offensive in Ukraine? Would he declare some kind of victory? Or signal an escalation?
In the end, he did neither.
In his Red Square address to Russian troops - and the Russian nation - the Kremlin leader repeated his frequently voiced justification for attacking Ukraine: an argument that appears to blame everyone but Russia for what's happening.
He criticised (as usual) America, Nato and the government in Kyiv, claiming that their actions had put the security of Russia itself in danger. He made references (as usual) to "neo-Nazis" in Ukraine. We hear that a lot from Russian officials, who regularly voice the baseless claim that Ukraine has been overrun by fascists, ultra-nationalists and Nazi sympathisers.
President Putin admitted that Russia had suffered military losses, but he gave no details. The last official figures released by Russia's defence ministry were 1,351 Russian soldiers killed. But that was six weeks ago. There has been no update since.
Curiously, Mr Putin didn't employ his familiar phrase - "Special Military Operation" - to describe Russia's offensive. Neither did he call it a war. But he tried to draw parallels between current hostilities and World War Two. An attempt, perhaps, to mobilise patriotic sentiment over Hitler's defeat to boost support amongst the Russian public for the invasion of Ukraine.
There was plenty of military hardware on show on Monday, although less than in 2021
Following the speech, thousands of Russian soldiers marched across Red Square, although there were fewer troops here than in last year's Victory Day parade. Military hardware was put on show, too. But a planned military fly-over was cancelled, officially due to poor weather.
The Kremlin had been expecting a swift victory in Ukraine, possibly within days of sending in its troops. It didn't happen.
Many here believe President Putin's Plan B was to secure a victory by 9 May. That hasn't happened, either.
Where does President Putin go from here? There were few clues in today's speech. But there was no signalling of an end to hostilities. For now, they will continue.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61380727
|
news_world-europe-61380727
|
|
Mariupol: The 80 days that left a flourishing city in ruins - BBC News
|
2022-05-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Ukrainian port which has seen some of the most intense fighting is now under Russian control.
|
Europe
|
The theatre has often been described as the heart of the city
After almost three months of relentless assault, Mariupol has fallen. Ukraine's military says its combat mission in the besieged port is over. More than any other Ukrainian city, Mariupol has come to symbolise the ferocious brutality of Russia's assault and the stubbornness of Ukraine's resistance.
On Wednesday 23 February, Ivan Stanislavsky left his camera bag at the office. He was on his way to see the layout of his new book on Mariupol's Soviet-era murals at a colleague's house, and didn't want to lug the gear around. He could always pick it up the next day.
But on Thursday, as he stood in the street outside his locked and deserted office, he could hear thunderous sounds rolling in from the east. The city was under fire.
As the conflict intensified, and gunfire became audible to the west too, Ivan moved his mattress into the hall. He piled up his large collection of art books - including the Encyclopaedia of Ukrainian Rock Music - against the windows of his flat in the district of Primorsky.
"Let's say it was not a waste of a library," says the 36-year-old photographer, who is also a press officer at Ukrainian premier league football club FC Mariupol.
Ivan Stanislavsky loved to photograph his city of Mariupol
Across town in the neighbourhood of Kalmiusky, businessman Yevhen was also taking precautions. The 47-year-old had told his family to pack so they could escape the city. But when he returned from the office, he found no packing had been done. His family refused to leave.
In an apartment in the same block, metallurgists from the nearby steelworks, Nataliia, 43, and Andrii, 41, were already slicing the last two loaves they had been able to buy, leaving them to dry out so they could eat them piece by piece over the weeks ahead.
The Illich steel plant dominates this view of Mariupol
Volodymyr, a 52-year-old paramedic in Kalmiusky, was also in his kitchen, trying to absorb the news. When reports came in of Russians marching through the village of Chonhar - on a strategic road out of Crimea to the west - he choked. This was a coordinated attack, he realised.
The ambulance dispatcher was on the phone. She instructed Volodymyr to ignore routine calls. "Find the wounded", he was told.
Twenty-two-year-old engineering graduate Mariia thought the first explosion she heard was simply a storm. Then she heard a second.
"We didn't know what to do," says Mariia, who like Ivan, lived in Primorsky. "I didn't have time to think about my future, my plans. I had to think about what I'd eat and drink... [And] what to do with the cats."
It suddenly dawned on her why, in the past few days, soldiers had appeared in the paint shop where she worked, asking to buy blue and yellow tape. They needed it to mark their uniforms.
Four days into the war, with the fighting closing in, Ivan and his wife sought shelter in a basement underneath his local supermarket. It offered good protection, and Ivan found that the muffling of sound dulled his sense of mounting anxiety.
Daily life was being stripped down to bare essentials.
"We lived like primitive people," he told the BBC from Lviv, where he has now fled. "We broke trees, made fires, cooked food on fires. I even heard of people eating pigeons."
He watched as order gradually broke down all around him. He kept a vivid diary, later published online.
"The Stone Age has arrived," he says in his 6 March entry.
He writes of watching his fellow Ukrainian citizens raiding abandoned shops, making off with everything from computers and freezers to swimsuits and underwear.
One evening a drunk woman interrupts a session of evening gossip in the basement. "Treat yourself," she says, as a flashlight revealed a bottle of Californian Merlot, taken from Wines of the World on nearby Italiiska Street.
But aware that even medical supplies and cash tills were being taken, Ivan says he felt disgust.
"We are our own worst enemies," he writes.
But is this, he wonders, how the fittest survive? After a while, each day became a "combat mission".
Over a few short weeks, Mariupol fell apart. The Russian military laid siege to the city, attacking power and water supplies. A Russian airstrike hit the maternity hospital on 9 March, and a plane bombed its theatre - clearly marked as a civilian shelter - a week later.
Ivan was stunned at how quickly it all happened.
The theatre after it was bombed
"The whole city, all its infrastructure, supply system, logistics, energy supply were destroyed in a matter of days," he says.
Sitting underground at night, he sensed people becoming passive.
"You can only wait in the shelter," he writes in his diary. "Some are waiting for spring, some - for the morning to come, some - for the end of the war. And someone is waiting for the bomb to come and kill everyone."
And all this just as Mariupol had seemed destined to turn a corner. Money began to pour in, adding lustre to a city previously associated mainly with heavy industry - and war.
"It was a city aspiring to something," Ivan says. It hadn't always been this way.
Long before this year's invasion, Mariupol had a ringside seat to Ukraine's simmering conflict with Russian-backed separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk, the two regions that make up the neighbouring area known as Donbas.
An activist guards a barricade outside the Mariupol government building seized by pro-Russia activists on 17 April 2014
When fighting first broke out there in 2014, the government briefly lost control of Mariupol after clashes with pro-Russian protesters. In January 2015, a devastating rocket attack by the rebels on the eastern edge of the city killed almost 30 civilians.
Even though the war gradually receded, the sound of artillery booming in the distance was part of Mariupol's daily soundscape.
But the city moved on. The Ukrainian government briefly made Mariupol the administrative capital of the Donetsk Oblast. People migrated from rebel-held areas and the city started attracting investment.
"It started receiving all of the resources and all of the attention," Ivan says.
A view of Mariupol along its coast
Public buildings were renovated, cafés opened, and new parks created. In a podcast last October, the city's mayor Vadym Boychenko boasted of creating the best municipal services in the country, opening an IT school, and promoting contemporary art and sports.
Plans were afoot, he said, for the largest water park in Ukraine and a version of Disneyland "which will probably be called Mariland". In fact, Mariupol was declared Ukraine's "Big Capital of Culture" in 2021.
But while Mariupol flourished, rebel-held Donetsk mouldered. When the rebels returned to Mariupol, Volodymyr, the paramedic, believed they were driven by revenge to destroy the city.
"'If we live in shit, then you will live in shit as well,'" Volodymyr says they told him at a checkpoint as he finally escaped the city. "They just looked at us and envied how we lived."
Volodymyr thinks the Russian-backed separatists were motivated by revenge
Yevhen, the businessman, describes life in Mariupol in the past five years as "a fairytale". "The city was being reconstructed," he says, "all roads were renovated, public transport was improved."
His buildings restoration firm was responsible, among other projects, for the reconstruction of Mariupol's iconic water tower in time for the city's 240th birthday.
"This is a city of hard workers… It was hard for me to explain that my workers should finish at 6pm - they wanted to work longer."
Like many others, weekends would be spent with family in the city's revived parks or on the seafront.
"For me, this is a [key] question - if you want to capture the city, why destroy it? [The Russians] don't need thinking people, they need territory," he says.
And, he adds, he is now getting calls from the Russians to return to Mariupol to help rebuild it.
"But if Mariupol is occupied by Russia, there will be no future there… there will be nothing to live for. To live in unrecognised territory is to bury your children's future."
About 150,000 people remain in the city, from a population of almost half a million. Most of those left there, he says, are also trying to escape.
"I left Mariupol but my soul is there," he says, tears in his eyes.
Businessman Yevhen is already getting calls from Russians to rebuild Mariupol
Nataliia and her husband Andrii worked at the Illich plant, one of two iron and steel works which tower over the city's skyline and loom large in Ivan Stanilavsky's photographs.
They spent long days at work, and leisure time was precious.
"The city authorities laid out marble tiles, made piers [so that] it was possible to sit on a bench right in the sea," Andrii says.
"It was a wonderful warm city with parks, concerts, fountains," his wife says. "A European city."
This recent blossoming was captured by Ivan, but as a photographer with a passion for his city's past, his pet project was documenting Mariupol's remarkable collection of Soviet murals, one of the most extensive in Ukraine.
The cultural importance of preserving such remarkable works seems undeniable, but in Mariupol nostalgia for the Soviet Union jostled uneasily with Ukraine's modern, increasingly European identity, Ivan says.
"Politics was already preventing this cultural heritage from being integrated into Ukraine's artistic context," he says.
So inevitably, when the war came, culture found itself fought over too.
On 28 April, Mariupol's city council denounced the alleged theft by Russia of more than 2,000 exhibits from the city's museums, including ancient icons, a handwritten Torah scroll and more than 200 medals.
The director of Mariupol's Local History Museum, Natalia Kapustnikova, later told Russian newspaper Izvestia that she had personally handed over paintings to the Russians by Ivan Aivazovsky and Arkhip Kuindzhi, and claimed that Ukrainian "nationalists" had burned 95% of the museum's exhibits.
She wasn't the only local official harbouring pro-Russian sentiments. On 9 April, Ukraine's prosecutor general charged a member of Mariupol's city council, Kostyantyn Ivashchenko, with treason after he was declared mayor by pro-Russian separatists in Donetsk.
Ivashchenko's pro-Russian party had been well supported in the city's last elections, coming second, while President Volodymyr Zelensky's party came a distant fifth place.
In a poll conducted just before the elections by the Kyiv-based Centre for Social Indicators, almost half the city's population identified themselves as "Russian", though 80% also described themselves as "Ukrainian".
More tellingly, perhaps, fewer than 20% self-identified as "European", while more than 50% said they were "Soviet".
Mariia says that after the invasion she began to hate all things Russian
Nataliia, whose father is Russian, says she asked her husband for forgiveness when the bombing started. "I was ashamed that I was Russian."
Mariia, the engineer, says that before the war her first language was Russian, but when the bombing began "I started to hate all things Russian - language, movies, objects".
Mariupol's complex identity is hardly unique in today's Ukraine, a country which formed an integral part of the Soviet Union until the collapse of communism at the end of the 1980s. And it's doubtful that any of those who described themselves as "Russian" or "Soviet" wanted to see their city destroyed in a violent effort to pull it back into Moscow's orbit.
Ironically, when the moment arrived to defend the city from Russian invaders, it was another part of Mariupol's Soviet-era legacy that came to play an almost iconic role.
This legacy, buried deep underground, is the maze of bunkers beneath Mariupol's other steel works, Azovstal, built by the Soviet authorities during the Cold War.
The 36 bomb shelters provided room for more than 12,000 people. After independence in 1991, no-one thought that much about them. But then the fighting in 2014 began.
"We started thinking about what we would do if fighting spread further into the city," Enver Tskitishvili, Azovstal's director general, says.
Training on the use of the bunkers and their connecting tunnels went on every day for years.
In early February, as the fear of renewed conflict loomed larger, preparations swung into high gear. Food and water were brought in the week before Russia's invasion.
Officials at the plant knew the bomb shelters would soon be occupied, but had little idea that Azovstal, surrounded by water on three sides, would become the scene of Mariupol's last stand.
An injured Ukrainian serviceman inside the Azovstal iron and steel works factory
As the days went by, the war got closer and closer to Ivan Stanislavsky's apartment. Excursions in search of food, even to the nearby Dzerkalnyy store, just 400m up the road, were increasingly perilous. Sometimes, a Ukrainian mortar team would arrive by truck, fire off a few rounds, and leave before the inevitable Russian reply.
There was little communication between civilians and soldiers.
One day, a tank from the Azov Regiment arrived near Dzerkalnyy, sending locals running, fearful of an impending battle. The regiment emerged in 2014 as a highly effective volunteer militia with far right and, in some cases, neo-Nazi affiliations, before being folded into Ukraine's National Guard.
Vladimir Putin has made extensive use of the Azov's controversial origins, in an effort to bolster his argument that he is trying to "de-Nazify" Ukraine. Ukrainian authorities say the regiment's origins are a thing of the past and points out that far-right parties have had very little electoral success.
In his diary Ivan describes the members he knows as a motley assortment of Mariupol natives - bikers, lawyers, football hooligans, and an amateur actor - driven not by ideology, but by a fierce hatred of those who were trying to ruin their lives.
"Together they formed a 'Nazi' battalion and intimidated the entire Russian army," he writes.
Intimidating and effective, but not enough, eventually, to stem the Russian tide.
While the city's defenders fought their losing battle, Ivan heard voices in his basement starting to curse President Zelensky for leaving Mariupol to its own devices.
President Volodymyr Zelensky (L) and children play in a fountain during his first official visit to Mariupol on 15 June 2019
For all the praise heaped on the city's defenders, it was clear from the start that Mariupol was not the government's main priority. Faced with Russian threats on a number of fronts, the Zelensky government chose to secure the capital, thwarting what was arguably Vladimir Putin's top priority.
Ultimately, that meant letting Russian forces achieve another of their pre-war goals: the establishment of a land corridor between Crimea - annexed by Moscow in 2014 - and the separatists in the Donbas.
But for those trapped in the city, fighting or just trying to survive, it was a bitter pill.
"Some say Mariupol was given the status of a hero city," Ivan wrote in his diary on 13 March.
"It looks like the award will be posthumous."
Ivan's photo of the inside of the water tower
By now, Ivan couldn't stand any more. Outside Dzerkalnyy supermarket, he saw corpses neatly stacked under a wall. People who once queued for food were now in "the queue of the dead", waiting to be buried.
So on 15 March Ivan bundled four family members and his cat into his miraculously unscathed Skoda Fabia and joined a convoy for the tortuous journey north-west to government-held Zaporizhzhia.
At an observation point on Markelova St looking towards the port and the beach, Ivan allowed himself a brief moment of reflection.
"In my head I'm saying goodbye to this place," he writes in his diary. "I have a feeling we will never return here."
A day later, Mariia and five relatives also left by car, carrying just personal belongings and the family's dog. As they made their way out of Mariupol, their convoy came under attack and the cars had to accelerate out of danger, headed first to Zaporizhzhia, then to Dnipro.
The following day, Nataliia and Andreii left, after a neighbour offered them a space in his car. The couple eventually reached the city of Khmelnytskyi where they have been selling the family's coin collection in order to survive.
In that same convoy, Yevhen travelled with his wife and two other relatives. He's now in Dnipro, helping other residents who escaped Mariupol, and trying to reach those who remain.
The apartment block where Ivan lived has been destroyed
Volodymyr, the paramedic, stayed in Mariupol as long as he could, to look after his elderly mother. But deprived of food and special medicine, she died. He then left the city on 21 April, and is volunteering at a hospital in Dnipro.
"There are thousands and thousands of families like mine," he says. "How many people have died? How many families have been lost?"
Two months after escaping, Ivan is still watching the death throes of Mariupol from the relative safety of Lviv.
In his diary's poignant epilogue, he writes of flashbacks, text messages about deaths or lucky escapes, and phone calls that go unanswered.
"The subscriber is out of range."
With additional reporting by Kateryna Khinkulova and Illia Tolstov
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61480988
|
news_world-europe-61480988
|
|
Rebekah Vardy: Case against her based on 'conspiracy theories' her lawyer says - BBC News
|
2022-05-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Rebekah Vardy's lawyer rounded off her High Court libel case against Coleen Rooney on Thursday.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
Rebekah Vardy leaving the Royal Courts of Justice in London on Thursday
The case against Rebekah Vardy is based on "conspiracy theories", her lawyer said on the final day of her High Court libel trial against Coleen Rooney.
Hugh Tomlinson said on Thursday his client had suffered "public abuse and ridicule on a massive scale" and is entitled to "substantial damages".
Mrs Vardy is suing Mrs Rooney for libel for alleging online she had leaked private stories about her to the Sun.
The claimant has denied this and her team said she has nothing to hide.
Mr Tomlinson addressed the court after his counterpart David Sherborne had earlier agued that Mrs Vardy was an unreliable witness.
He said she had brought the case as she wanted to be "vindicated" as there was no real evidence, he claimed, proving she had leaked the stories.
Mrs Vardy's barrister suggested that the libel dispute with Mrs Rooney was a "very simple case" when "one clears away the conspiracy theories".
"Has Mrs Rooney proved that Mrs Vardy leaked the information from her post that she's accused of leaking?" he asked.
"Mrs Vardy's case is and always has been that she did not leak the information nor did she authorise anyone else to leak."
"She does not know to this day what happened," he added. "She does not know where this information came from."
Mrs Rooney has defended herself on the basis of truth and public interest, but Mr Tomlinson said the latter did not apply in this case, adding: "This is really a falling-out between two individuals over what is essentially a private matter."
The lawyer said his client now accepted it was possible that her former agent Caroline Watt was the source of the leaked stories from Mrs Rooney's private Instagram account.
"She doesn't want to be in the position of accusing her friend and former long-term agent of doing something wrong," he said.
"She sees, as everybody does, the indications that point that way. Her fundamental position is she doesn't know what happened."
He said Mrs Vardy had asked Mrs Rooney, from the get-go, to "send me the evidence, send me the posts."
"The suggestion that she is trying to hide something is quite wrong".
Acknowledging how the defendant, Mrs Rooney, had said she thought Mrs Vardy was suspiciously friendly, Mr Tomlinson countered that "people behave in different ways."
Coleen Rooney, pictured with Wayne Rooney outside the court earlier this week, did not attend the last day of the trial
He noted how the Sun was "a newspaper that she [Mrs Rooney] clearly loathes" and that she may disapprove of how Mrs Vardy has sometimes featured in it, but that it was "not a basis for making an allegation of the kind that was made".
Mr Tomlinson challenged the idea that messages between Mrs Vardy and Ms Watt showed they were "obsessed" with Mrs Rooney and said they were merely "gossiping".
"There is very little about the Rooneys" in the many of the conversations given in evidence, he said.
"We don't have two women who are obsessed with Mrs Rooney, we have two women who over a period of two years mention her on a few occasions."
The court heard that Mrs Vardy had wanted to call journalists from The Sun to give evidence but they "changed their mind having taken legal advice," Mr Tomlinson said, suggesting their absence "can't be of itself evidence that Mrs Vardy is the source of the stories".
"Mrs Vardy has made mistakes," Mr Tomlinson added. "Perhaps the most serious of these may have been to trust Ms Watt as her agent.
Ms Watt did not give evidence at the trial either as she was deemed unwell. The fact that the agent's phone, containing now lost messages between her and a Sun journalist, had fallen into the North Sea had nothing to do with Mrs Vardy, the barrister said.
"We have no idea as to whether this is a genuine accidental loss of a device or whether it was something done cynically and deliberately to avoid inspection during the disclosure process. We just don't know," he went on.
"From Mrs Vardy's point of view, she does not know either."
Earlier on Thursday, David Sherborne, representing Mrs Rooney, told the court Mrs Vardy lied under oath and deliberately deleted evidence.
Coleen Rooney (left) and Rebekah Vardy, pictured at a Euro 2016 match in France
Mrs Vardy walked out of the court during Mr Sherborne's comments, returning after roughly an hour, having left it carrying her laptop, with one of her legal team.
Mr Tomlinson said the argument that his client had a "conspiracy to delete" was an "incredible theory", adding that a "completely innocent loss of messages" had occurred on both sides.
"There was an export of a very large number of WhatsApp messages," he told the court. "Why would Mrs Vardy, if she was destroying evidence, do it in that selective and complex way?"
"If she was a wicked litigant who was trying to deceive the court by getting rid of damaging evidence, the idea she would do it by getting rid of images and not text simply beggars belief."
The barrister said the exchanges that the court had heard had taken place between Mrs Vardy and Ms Watt were simply "exchanges between two people who do not know who is leaking the stories, or at least Mrs Vardy does not know who is leaking the stories."
He said the only exception to this was a post by Ms Watt which seemed to suggest she was the leak of a story about Mrs Rooney being involved in a car crash. "On analysis, it does not help the defendant's case at all," he said.
"What they show is the contemporaneous evidence that Mrs Vardy does not know what information is going to the Sun."
In his closing statement on Thursday morning, Mr Sherborne said Mrs Vardy had given "implausible, throwaway explanations" and was "lacking in candour."
Mrs Rooney's barrister David Sherborne set out his closing argument on Thursday morning
Mrs Rooney and her husband, the ex-footballer Wayne, did not attend the court due to a "long-standing travel arrangement" booked before the trial over-ran, and their apologies were passed to Mrs Justice Steyn.
Mrs Vardy's libel action was sparked by a viral social media post from October 2019, in which Mrs Rooney said she had carried out a sting operation to find out who had been passing information about her life, taken from her private Instagram account, to the Sun newspaper.
She said the fake stories she had posted on her Instagram stories in an effort to find the perpetrator had only been viewed by "Rebekah Vardy's account".
Mrs Vardy has continually denied leaking the stories in question to the press.
The fake stories featured Mrs Rooney travelling to Mexico for a "gender selection" procedure, planning to return to TV and the basement flooding at her home.
Mrs Rooney was called "Wagatha Christie" by many people online as a result of her private investigation. Wag is a term used to describe the wives and girlfriends of footballers, while Agatha Christie was a famous English detective novelist.
The case has now ended and the judge will reserve her ruling to a later date.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-61506901
|
news_entertainment-arts-61506901
|
|
Mariupol: The 80 days that left a flourishing city in ruins - BBC News
|
2022-05-19
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Ukrainian port which has seen some of the most intense fighting is now under Russian control.
|
Europe
|
The theatre has often been described as the heart of the city
After almost three months of relentless assault, Mariupol has fallen. Ukraine's military says its combat mission in the besieged port is over. More than any other Ukrainian city, Mariupol has come to symbolise the ferocious brutality of Russia's assault and the stubbornness of Ukraine's resistance.
On Wednesday 23 February, Ivan Stanislavsky left his camera bag at the office. He was on his way to see the layout of his new book on Mariupol's Soviet-era murals at a colleague's house, and didn't want to lug the gear around. He could always pick it up the next day.
But on Thursday, as he stood in the street outside his locked and deserted office, he could hear thunderous sounds rolling in from the east. The city was under fire.
As the conflict intensified, and gunfire became audible to the west too, Ivan moved his mattress into the hall. He piled up his large collection of art books - including the Encyclopaedia of Ukrainian Rock Music - against the windows of his flat in the district of Primorsky.
"Let's say it was not a waste of a library," says the 36-year-old photographer, who is also a press officer at Ukrainian premier league football club FC Mariupol.
Ivan Stanislavsky loved to photograph his city of Mariupol
Across town in the neighbourhood of Kalmiusky, businessman Yevhen was also taking precautions. The 47-year-old had told his family to pack so they could escape the city. But when he returned from the office, he found no packing had been done. His family refused to leave.
In an apartment in the same block, metallurgists from the nearby steelworks, Nataliia, 43, and Andrii, 41, were already slicing the last two loaves they had been able to buy, leaving them to dry out so they could eat them piece by piece over the weeks ahead.
The Illich steel plant dominates this view of Mariupol
Volodymyr, a 52-year-old paramedic in Kalmiusky, was also in his kitchen, trying to absorb the news. When reports came in of Russians marching through the village of Chonhar - on a strategic road out of Crimea to the west - he choked. This was a coordinated attack, he realised.
The ambulance dispatcher was on the phone. She instructed Volodymyr to ignore routine calls. "Find the wounded", he was told.
Twenty-two-year-old engineering graduate Mariia thought the first explosion she heard was simply a storm. Then she heard a second.
"We didn't know what to do," says Mariia, who like Ivan, lived in Primorsky. "I didn't have time to think about my future, my plans. I had to think about what I'd eat and drink... [And] what to do with the cats."
It suddenly dawned on her why, in the past few days, soldiers had appeared in the paint shop where she worked, asking to buy blue and yellow tape. They needed it to mark their uniforms.
Four days into the war, with the fighting closing in, Ivan and his wife sought shelter in a basement underneath his local supermarket. It offered good protection, and Ivan found that the muffling of sound dulled his sense of mounting anxiety.
Daily life was being stripped down to bare essentials.
"We lived like primitive people," he told the BBC from Lviv, where he has now fled. "We broke trees, made fires, cooked food on fires. I even heard of people eating pigeons."
He watched as order gradually broke down all around him. He kept a vivid diary, later published online.
"The Stone Age has arrived," he says in his 6 March entry.
He writes of watching his fellow Ukrainian citizens raiding abandoned shops, making off with everything from computers and freezers to swimsuits and underwear.
One evening a drunk woman interrupts a session of evening gossip in the basement. "Treat yourself," she says, as a flashlight revealed a bottle of Californian Merlot, taken from Wines of the World on nearby Italiiska Street.
But aware that even medical supplies and cash tills were being taken, Ivan says he felt disgust.
"We are our own worst enemies," he writes.
But is this, he wonders, how the fittest survive? After a while, each day became a "combat mission".
Over a few short weeks, Mariupol fell apart. The Russian military laid siege to the city, attacking power and water supplies. A Russian airstrike hit the maternity hospital on 9 March, and a plane bombed its theatre - clearly marked as a civilian shelter - a week later.
Ivan was stunned at how quickly it all happened.
The theatre after it was bombed
"The whole city, all its infrastructure, supply system, logistics, energy supply were destroyed in a matter of days," he says.
Sitting underground at night, he sensed people becoming passive.
"You can only wait in the shelter," he writes in his diary. "Some are waiting for spring, some - for the morning to come, some - for the end of the war. And someone is waiting for the bomb to come and kill everyone."
And all this just as Mariupol had seemed destined to turn a corner. Money began to pour in, adding lustre to a city previously associated mainly with heavy industry - and war.
"It was a city aspiring to something," Ivan says. It hadn't always been this way.
Long before this year's invasion, Mariupol had a ringside seat to Ukraine's simmering conflict with Russian-backed separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk, the two regions that make up the neighbouring area known as Donbas.
An activist guards a barricade outside the Mariupol government building seized by pro-Russia activists on 17 April 2014
When fighting first broke out there in 2014, the government briefly lost control of Mariupol after clashes with pro-Russian protesters. In January 2015, a devastating rocket attack by the rebels on the eastern edge of the city killed almost 30 civilians.
Even though the war gradually receded, the sound of artillery booming in the distance was part of Mariupol's daily soundscape.
But the city moved on. The Ukrainian government briefly made Mariupol the administrative capital of the Donetsk Oblast. People migrated from rebel-held areas and the city started attracting investment.
"It started receiving all of the resources and all of the attention," Ivan says.
A view of Mariupol along its coast
Public buildings were renovated, cafés opened, and new parks created. In a podcast last October, the city's mayor Vadym Boychenko boasted of creating the best municipal services in the country, opening an IT school, and promoting contemporary art and sports.
Plans were afoot, he said, for the largest water park in Ukraine and a version of Disneyland "which will probably be called Mariland". In fact, Mariupol was declared Ukraine's "Big Capital of Culture" in 2021.
But while Mariupol flourished, rebel-held Donetsk mouldered. When the rebels returned to Mariupol, Volodymyr, the paramedic, believed they were driven by revenge to destroy the city.
"'If we live in shit, then you will live in shit as well,'" Volodymyr says they told him at a checkpoint as he finally escaped the city. "They just looked at us and envied how we lived."
Volodymyr thinks the Russian-backed separatists were motivated by revenge
Yevhen, the businessman, describes life in Mariupol in the past five years as "a fairytale". "The city was being reconstructed," he says, "all roads were renovated, public transport was improved."
His buildings restoration firm was responsible, among other projects, for the reconstruction of Mariupol's iconic water tower in time for the city's 240th birthday.
"This is a city of hard workers… It was hard for me to explain that my workers should finish at 6pm - they wanted to work longer."
Like many others, weekends would be spent with family in the city's revived parks or on the seafront.
"For me, this is a [key] question - if you want to capture the city, why destroy it? [The Russians] don't need thinking people, they need territory," he says.
And, he adds, he is now getting calls from the Russians to return to Mariupol to help rebuild it.
"But if Mariupol is occupied by Russia, there will be no future there… there will be nothing to live for. To live in unrecognised territory is to bury your children's future."
About 150,000 people remain in the city, from a population of almost half a million. Most of those left there, he says, are also trying to escape.
"I left Mariupol but my soul is there," he says, tears in his eyes.
Businessman Yevhen is already getting calls from Russians to rebuild Mariupol
Nataliia and her husband Andrii worked at the Illich plant, one of two iron and steel works which tower over the city's skyline and loom large in Ivan Stanilavsky's photographs.
They spent long days at work, and leisure time was precious.
"The city authorities laid out marble tiles, made piers [so that] it was possible to sit on a bench right in the sea," Andrii says.
"It was a wonderful warm city with parks, concerts, fountains," his wife says. "A European city."
This recent blossoming was captured by Ivan, but as a photographer with a passion for his city's past, his pet project was documenting Mariupol's remarkable collection of Soviet murals, one of the most extensive in Ukraine.
The cultural importance of preserving such remarkable works seems undeniable, but in Mariupol nostalgia for the Soviet Union jostled uneasily with Ukraine's modern, increasingly European identity, Ivan says.
"Politics was already preventing this cultural heritage from being integrated into Ukraine's artistic context," he says.
So inevitably, when the war came, culture found itself fought over too.
On 28 April, Mariupol's city council denounced the alleged theft by Russia of more than 2,000 exhibits from the city's museums, including ancient icons, a handwritten Torah scroll and more than 200 medals.
The director of Mariupol's Local History Museum, Natalia Kapustnikova, later told Russian newspaper Izvestia that she had personally handed over paintings to the Russians by Ivan Aivazovsky and Arkhip Kuindzhi, and claimed that Ukrainian "nationalists" had burned 95% of the museum's exhibits.
She wasn't the only local official harbouring pro-Russian sentiments. On 9 April, Ukraine's prosecutor general charged a member of Mariupol's city council, Kostyantyn Ivashchenko, with treason after he was declared mayor by pro-Russian separatists in Donetsk.
Ivashchenko's pro-Russian party had been well supported in the city's last elections, coming second, while President Volodymyr Zelensky's party came a distant fifth place.
In a poll conducted just before the elections by the Kyiv-based Centre for Social Indicators, almost half the city's population identified themselves as "Russian", though 80% also described themselves as "Ukrainian".
More tellingly, perhaps, fewer than 20% self-identified as "European", while more than 50% said they were "Soviet".
Mariia says that after the invasion she began to hate all things Russian
Nataliia, whose father is Russian, says she asked her husband for forgiveness when the bombing started. "I was ashamed that I was Russian."
Mariia, the engineer, says that before the war her first language was Russian, but when the bombing began "I started to hate all things Russian - language, movies, objects".
Mariupol's complex identity is hardly unique in today's Ukraine, a country which formed an integral part of the Soviet Union until the collapse of communism at the end of the 1980s. And it's doubtful that any of those who described themselves as "Russian" or "Soviet" wanted to see their city destroyed in a violent effort to pull it back into Moscow's orbit.
Ironically, when the moment arrived to defend the city from Russian invaders, it was another part of Mariupol's Soviet-era legacy that came to play an almost iconic role.
This legacy, buried deep underground, is the maze of bunkers beneath Mariupol's other steel works, Azovstal, built by the Soviet authorities during the Cold War.
The 36 bomb shelters provided room for more than 12,000 people. After independence in 1991, no-one thought that much about them. But then the fighting in 2014 began.
"We started thinking about what we would do if fighting spread further into the city," Enver Tskitishvili, Azovstal's director general, says.
Training on the use of the bunkers and their connecting tunnels went on every day for years.
In early February, as the fear of renewed conflict loomed larger, preparations swung into high gear. Food and water were brought in the week before Russia's invasion.
Officials at the plant knew the bomb shelters would soon be occupied, but had little idea that Azovstal, surrounded by water on three sides, would become the scene of Mariupol's last stand.
An injured Ukrainian serviceman inside the Azovstal iron and steel works factory
As the days went by, the war got closer and closer to Ivan Stanislavsky's apartment. Excursions in search of food, even to the nearby Dzerkalnyy store, just 400m up the road, were increasingly perilous. Sometimes, a Ukrainian mortar team would arrive by truck, fire off a few rounds, and leave before the inevitable Russian reply.
There was little communication between civilians and soldiers.
One day, a tank from the Azov Regiment arrived near Dzerkalnyy, sending locals running, fearful of an impending battle. The regiment emerged in 2014 as a highly effective volunteer militia with far right and, in some cases, neo-Nazi affiliations, before being folded into Ukraine's National Guard.
Vladimir Putin has made extensive use of the Azov's controversial origins, in an effort to bolster his argument that he is trying to "de-Nazify" Ukraine. Ukrainian authorities say the regiment's origins are a thing of the past and points out that far-right parties have had very little electoral success.
In his diary Ivan describes the members he knows as a motley assortment of Mariupol natives - bikers, lawyers, football hooligans, and an amateur actor - driven not by ideology, but by a fierce hatred of those who were trying to ruin their lives.
"Together they formed a 'Nazi' battalion and intimidated the entire Russian army," he writes.
Intimidating and effective, but not enough, eventually, to stem the Russian tide.
While the city's defenders fought their losing battle, Ivan heard voices in his basement starting to curse President Zelensky for leaving Mariupol to its own devices.
President Volodymyr Zelensky (L) and children play in a fountain during his first official visit to Mariupol on 15 June 2019
For all the praise heaped on the city's defenders, it was clear from the start that Mariupol was not the government's main priority. Faced with Russian threats on a number of fronts, the Zelensky government chose to secure the capital, thwarting what was arguably Vladimir Putin's top priority.
Ultimately, that meant letting Russian forces achieve another of their pre-war goals: the establishment of a land corridor between Crimea - annexed by Moscow in 2014 - and the separatists in the Donbas.
But for those trapped in the city, fighting or just trying to survive, it was a bitter pill.
"Some say Mariupol was given the status of a hero city," Ivan wrote in his diary on 13 March.
"It looks like the award will be posthumous."
Ivan's photo of the inside of the water tower
By now, Ivan couldn't stand any more. Outside Dzerkalnyy supermarket, he saw corpses neatly stacked under a wall. People who once queued for food were now in "the queue of the dead", waiting to be buried.
So on 15 March Ivan bundled four family members and his cat into his miraculously unscathed Skoda Fabia and joined a convoy for the tortuous journey north-west to government-held Zaporizhzhia.
At an observation point on Markelova St looking towards the port and the beach, Ivan allowed himself a brief moment of reflection.
"In my head I'm saying goodbye to this place," he writes in his diary. "I have a feeling we will never return here."
A day later, Mariia and five relatives also left by car, carrying just personal belongings and the family's dog. As they made their way out of Mariupol, their convoy came under attack and the cars had to accelerate out of danger, headed first to Zaporizhzhia, then to Dnipro.
The following day, Nataliia and Andreii left, after a neighbour offered them a space in his car. The couple eventually reached the city of Khmelnytskyi where they have been selling the family's coin collection in order to survive.
In that same convoy, Yevhen travelled with his wife and two other relatives. He's now in Dnipro, helping other residents who escaped Mariupol, and trying to reach those who remain.
The apartment block where Ivan lived has been destroyed
Volodymyr, the paramedic, stayed in Mariupol as long as he could, to look after his elderly mother. But deprived of food and special medicine, she died. He then left the city on 21 April, and is volunteering at a hospital in Dnipro.
"There are thousands and thousands of families like mine," he says. "How many people have died? How many families have been lost?"
Two months after escaping, Ivan is still watching the death throes of Mariupol from the relative safety of Lviv.
In his diary's poignant epilogue, he writes of flashbacks, text messages about deaths or lucky escapes, and phone calls that go unanswered.
"The subscriber is out of range."
With additional reporting by Kateryna Khinkulova and Illia Tolstov
|
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61480988
|
news_world-europe-61480988
|
|
UK government sets out plans to rein in Big Tech - BBC News
|
2022-05-06
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
A regulator will have powers to fine firms such as Google and Meta if they fail to follow new rules.
|
Technology
|
Large tech companies such as Google and Facebook will have to abide by new competition rules in the UK or risk facing huge fines, the government said.
The new Digital Markets Unit (DMU) will be given powers to clamp down on "predatory practices" of some firms.
The regulator will also have the power to fine companies up to 10% of their global turnover if they fail to comply.
Besides boosting competition among tech firms, the rules also aim to give users more control over their data.
The BBC approached several of the big tech firms, including Apple, Meta and Google, but has received no response.
The Department for Digital, Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS) said as well as large fines, tech firms could be handed additional penalties of 5% of daily global turnover for each day an offence continues.
For companies like Apple that could be tens of billions of US dollars.
"Senior managers will face civil penalties if their firms fail to engage properly with requests for information," the government said.
However, it is unclear when exactly the changes will come into force, as the government has said the necessary legislation will be introduced "in due course".
Digital minister Chris Philp said the government wanted to "level the playing field" in the technology industry, in which a few American companies have been accused of abusing their market dominance.
"The dominance of a few tech giants is crowding out competition and stifling innovation," he said.
As well attempting to hold Big Tech to account, the DMU will look to give people more control over how their data is used by tech firms - for example with targeted personalised adverts.
It will also make it easier for people to switch between phone operating systems such as Apple iOS or Android and social media accounts, without losing data and messages.
Critics have called such closed systems "walled gardens" that lock consumers into using products from a specific company.
Google's search engine, which is currently the default search engine on Apple products, will also be looked at by the regulator, the government said.
It added it wants news publishers to be paid fairly for their content - and will give the regulator power to resolve conflicts.
This move is in response to friction between Meta, Google and news publishers. The argument is that while many local and national news organisations struggle to survive, Big Tech companies are posting record profits - and raising advertising revenue from the stories they produce.
Meta and Google argue that the relationship is symbiotic, that they direct traffic towards news organisations.
Last year the situation escalated, when a proposed law in Australia looking to "level the playing the field" resulted in Facebook temporarily blocking Australian news organisations - before an agreement was reached.
The UK government said its new rules could increase the "bargaining power" of national and regional newspapers.
The issue of big tech and competition has been troubling the authorities for quite some time.
There's no question that a handful of giants hugely dominate the market and hoover up considerable profits.
They have a captive market and they don't want to share it. Google search is so popular "to google" is a commonly used verb. Around 90% of all internet searches are on Google's search engine. But many have queried whether one company should have such a dominant position over a crucial part of the internet.
It also leaves businesses with little choice. Want to advertise to people searching for football boots in your area? Google would be the obvious choice. But critics argue that that its monopoly means the company can charge what it likes - and that's ultimately bad for a healthy and competitive economy.
The UK's new regulator has decided to focus the minds of these firms with eye-watering fines for not allowing fair competition - 10% global turnover and an extra 5% per day if the offence continues. That is mega money - even for companies worth trillions of dollars. It's enough to get their attention.
Also included in the plans is a move to give firms like Meta and Apple "strategic market status", which will mean they will have to report takeovers before they complete to the Competition Markets Authority (CMA) for potential investigation.
Big Tech has long been criticised for buying up competition, as part of a strategy to "copy, acquire, kill".
The criticism here is that fledgling business are bought up before they have the chance to get too big - and threaten the monopoly position of these companies.
Separately, it had been rumoured that the DMU would not be given a legal footing - and would therefore lack bite, however the government has said it will introduce legislation to put the regulator on a statutory footing in "due course."
The consumer group Which? said it was "essential that the Digital Markets Unit is properly empowered" for the "sake of UK consumers and businesses".
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-61342576
|
news_technology-61342576
|
|
Jealous Depp kicked me over Franco 'affair' - Heard - BBC News
|
2022-05-06
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Amber Heard says jealousy of actor James Franco sent Johnny Depp into a rage on a plane.
|
US & Canada
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Depp 'slapped and kicked' Heard on a plane over 'affair'
Amber Heard says a perceived affair with fellow actor James Franco led to ex-husband Johnny Depp assaulting her on a cross-country flight in 2014.
Taking the stand for a second day as part of a multi-million dollar defamation trial, Ms Heard cast Mr Depp as deeply troubled by jealousy and drugs.
Mr Depp is suing Ms Heard for $50m (£40m) over an article in which she said she was a victim of abuse.
She is countersuing for $100m.
On Thursday, Ms Heard alleged that much of her ex-husband's anger was caused by his belief that she was seeing James Franco, whom she said Mr Depp "hated".
Mr Franco starred alongside Ms Heard in Pineapple Express and The Adderall Diaries.
That jealousy, she claimed, led an angry Mr Depp to repeatedly question her on a flight from Boston to Los Angeles, in which he allegedly kicked her.
"He just kicked me in the back. I fell on the floor," she said. "No one said anything. No one did anything. It's like you could hear a pin drop on that plane."
James Franco and Amber Heard, pictured in April 2015 in New York City
The court also heard a recording allegedly of Mr Depp on the flight, which Ms Heard said showed him "howling" while suffering from the effects of drug use.
Following the incident, Ms Heard said he met her in New York to apologise and to prove he was sober and committed to change.
Jurors have repeatedly heard about the incident on the flight. In his own testimony, Mr Depp said that he took Oxycodone pills and fell asleep to avoid her.
During her testimony, Mr Depp could sometimes be seen closing his eyes or donning his sunglasses. At one point, he shook his head quietly.
Ms Heard alleged she had the fight with Mr Depp after an argument about his daughter Lily-Rose, who was about 14 at the time.
"She was so young," Ms Heard said. "I felt protective."
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Depp 'slapped me across the face' over Wino tattoo
Ms Heard also recounted exchanging wedding vows in Mr Depp's mother's living room, followed by a ceremony on his private island.
"It was complicated but he was the love of my life," she said of her desire to marry him.
Detailing a discussion over a prenuptial agreement with Mr Depp, she claimed that Mr Depp told her that "the only way out of this is death".
"I didn't care either way, but I did feel it [the agreement] would eliminate suspicion or doubt, and it would make things easier," she added.
Earlier in the trial, Mr Depp claimed he never struck Ms Heard, or any women. Instead, he said she was often abusive herself and had a "a need for conflict".
At several points in her testimony, Ms Heard claimed that Mr Depp attempted to control her career, becoming angry at her efforts to find new roles.
These arguments, she added, would often end in Mr Depp taking things "too far" by striking her or breaking things in their home before leaving and eventually apologising.
His abuse "was always so much worse when I went to work," she said.
"He would never have to deal with the clean-up. He would never have to deal with the destruction, or see me or the house that he'd destroyed," she added.
Before she wore dresses to red carpet events, she said she would check for bruises on her body first.
In one apology e-mail shown to jurors, Mr Depp described himself as "savage" who was sorry for the disappointment he caused. She said this was "typical" of his apologies.
"I was encouraged because I thought it meant he could really hurt me," she added. "Sometimes I didn't think he understood how much he could hurt me."
The defamation cases stems from a December 2018 opinion piece in the Washington Post, in which she said she was a victim of abuse but did not name Mr Depp.
His lawyers have said that the piece "incalculably" damaged his career prospects.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61339174
|
news_world-us-canada-61339174
|
|
SNP wins Scottish council election as Labour makes gains - BBC News
|
2022-05-06
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The SNP secures the largest number of councillors as Labour overtakes the Conservatives to become second largest party.
|
Scotland
|
Nicola Sturgeon insists the SNP's "astonishing" council election victory confirms the party continues to "command the trust" of people in Scotland.
The first minister also brushed off what she described as opponents' attempts to "de-legitimise" votes and election victories for the SNP with constitutional arguments as "really desperate".
She said the SNP won a mandate for an independence referendum in the Scottish Parliament elections last year "so that stands and we are taking forward preparations for that", but that support for her party was not just about independence.
Quote Message: "People are voting for the SNP because they judge our record and judge we are the best party to lead Scotland forward, nationally and locally. Crucially, they also judge our opponents and conclude they don’t have the leadership or ideas to take Scotland in the right direction. After 15 years of government, the SNP is the clear, emphatic winner of this election - on vote share and on numbers of councillors. That is pretty astonishing for a party that has been in government as long as we have." from Nicola Sturgeon First Minister "People are voting for the SNP because they judge our record and judge we are the best party to lead Scotland forward, nationally and locally. Crucially, they also judge our opponents and conclude they don’t have the leadership or ideas to take Scotland in the right direction. After 15 years of government, the SNP is the clear, emphatic winner of this election - on vote share and on numbers of councillors. That is pretty astonishing for a party that has been in government as long as we have."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-61310357
|
news_live_uk-scotland-61310357
|
|
Teenage girl traumatised after police strip-search, says mum - BBC News
|
2022-05-24
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The teenager was handcuffed and had her underwear cut off in front of male officers, her mum says.
|
UK
|
A 15-year-old girl who was strip-searched by police was left traumatised by the incident and later tried to kill herself, her mother says.
Olivia* was handcuffed and had her underwear cut off in the presence of male officers, she added.
London's Metropolitan Police has referred itself to the police watchdog.
This case follows that of Child Q - a 15-year-old black pupil who was strip-searched at school after she was wrongly accused of possessing drugs.
Olivia - who is mixed race and autistic - was strip-searched in December 2020, the same month as Child Q.
Olivia's mum, who we are calling Lisa to protect her daughter's anonymity, said she was given no warning that her child was going to be forcibly strip-searched.
She told Radio 4's File on 4 programme that Olivia had already spent more than 20 hours in custody when she was searched.
She said Olivia had been out with some friends when they had an argument with two boys, who called the police and alleged they were the victims of an attempted knife-point robbery. She was searched by police at the scene and nothing was discovered. Olivia and her friends were then arrested.
At the time, Lisa was isolating with Covid-19, but says she spoke to the police on the phone and told them about her daughter's autism and learning difficulties, and warned them she had been self-harming.
Her mum says Olivia handed over a small blade used for self-harming to police. Then, after spending more than 20 hours in custody, she was told she could have a shower.
A sharpened stick - also used for self-harming - fell from her clothing as she changed. Lisa says it was at that point six officers handcuffed Olivia, forcibly stripped her and carried out an intimate search in the presence of male officers.
Protests were held in London following reports about Child Q
"Olivia was actually on her period at the time too. And they cut off her underwear in front of these grown male officers." She added: "She was absolutely distraught."
Lisa said her daughter's experience had a devastating impact on her mental health. "She became quite reclusive," she added.
"She spent a lot of time in her room and she continued to self-harm in secret. And then a few weeks later, she attempted suicide." Olivia later appeared in court accused of possession of a bladed weapon and was found not guilty after magistrates accepted the items were used for self-harming.
Her family is now bringing a civil case against the force. Lawyer Gail Hadfield Grainger, who is representing them, says there are a number of rules that must be followed when searching minors.
"The legal guardian, the person that has responsibility for that child, needs to be informed," she said. "The strip-search needs to be done in front of same-sex staff only, not same-sex staff with the opposite sex on-looking.
"And that culture is set to protect your dignity, save you from embarrassment, and to put in order exactly how these things should be done correctly."
What are the police rules for strip-searching children?
The Met's Deputy Assistant Commissioner Laurence Taylor said a force investigation was looking into how appropriate the search was and how it was conducted.
The force has also referred itself to the Independent Office for Police Conduct, the police watchdog, following a complaint.
Mr Taylor told File on 4 that strip-searches helped to keep children safe while in custody.
He added: "(The) worst case scenario would be that we stop strip-searching in its entirety and a young child dies in custody because they are in possession of a knife or drugs that they use to harm themselves.
"And we have a big responsibility to people coming into our custody environment. We're responsible for their safety."
In a statement released later, he acknowledged the "distress" strip searches can cause young people and said the force was working hard to take a "safeguarding first" approach.
"This means we must always consider whether the child being searched could be a vulnerable victim of exploitation by others involved in gangs, County Lines and drug dealing or if they might be concealing weapons as they are at risk of self-harm," he added.
One pilot scheme at the Met involves getting the authority of an inspector before a search can take place, he said.
Figures obtained by the BBC have revealed police carried out more than 13,000 strip-searches of young people aged under 18 over the past five years.
The BBC sent Freedom of Information requests to 43 police forces in England and Wales, plus the British Transport Police, asking for the number of strip-searches between 2017 and 2021. However, the true number of searches is likely to be significantly higher, as only 31 of 44 forces provided data.
Separate data revealed 75% of the children who were strip-searched by the Met in custody over the past three years were from ethnically diverse backgrounds, prompting allegations of racism.
Mr Taylor defended the force's record. He said the disproportionality of young people from ethnically diverse backgrounds being searched was based on "intelligence-led policing" - both around offending rates and those falling victim to crime, including knife crime.
"It's absolutely right that police focus where that harm exists," he added.
Correction: A previous version of this story stated Olivia was 14 at the time of the search. She was 15.
*Some of the names of people mentioned in this piece have been changed to protect their anonymity.
Listen to File on 4: Searching Questions at 20:00 BST on BBC Radio 4 or download the podcast on BBC Sounds.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61523291
|
news_uk-61523291
|
|
Ava White: Boy guilty of murdering girl, 12, in Snapchat row - BBC News
|
2022-05-24
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Ava White was stabbed to death in Liverpool city centre after a Christmas lights switch-on event.
|
Liverpool
|
Ava White died after the Christmas light switch-on in Liverpool
A boy who stabbed a schoolgirl in a row over a Snapchat video has been found guilty of her murder.
Ava White, 12, was fatally stabbed in Liverpool city centre after a Christmas lights switch-on on 25 November 2021.
The 14-year-old, who cannot be named for legal reasons, told Liverpool Crown Court he accidentally stabbed her in self-defence.
He had pleaded guilty to possessing an offensive weapon but was convicted of murder after a trial.
Mrs Justice Amanda Yip told the boy that in light of the verdict, he would face a life sentence, but she was still to decide "what the shortest amount of time that you will have to serve in custody is".
The court was told the knife which the boy used to stab Ava had a 3ins (7.5cm) blade
The court heard Ava and her friends became involved in an argument with the teenager and three of his friends after the boys recorded Snapchat videos of her group.
The boy told the jury he heard one of Ava's group threaten to stab his friend if he did not delete a video of Ava.
He claimed he had wanted to "frighten her away" and had not meant to stab her.
Ava's friends said the boy "grinned" after attacking her in School Lane before fleeing.
The court heard he then discarded the knife and took off his coat, which was later found in a wheelie bin.
Shortly after, CCTV showed him and his friends in a shop where the boy took a selfie and the group bought butter, which he said was for crumpets.
He then went to a friend's home and when his mother contacted him to tell him police wanted to speak to him, he told her he was playing a computer game.
The youth was arrested at about 22:30 GMT, a few hours after the stabbing, and initially told his mother he was "not going the cells".
He told police he had not been in the city centre, but in later interviews, he went on to blame another boy for the stabbing.
A week after Ava was murdered, Liverpool and Everton fans paid tribute to her at the Merseyside derby
He told the court he had lied to police because he thought he would "get away with it", adding: "I was scared I was going to go to jail."
The boy admitted possessing the knife, which the court heard had a blade measuring 3ins (7.5cm), but denied murder and an alternative charge of manslaughter.
The jury heard edited transcripts of five police interviews carried out in the days following his arrest.
Following legal discussions, the jury was not told that in one interview, he told an officer to "shut up" and called him a derogatory term, while in another, he referred to "smoking weed".
The jury delivered its verdict after deliberating for two hours eight minutes, with one jury member wiping away a tear as they were discharged by Mrs Justice Yip.
More than 20 members of Ava's family cheered as the verdict was passed, while the boy, who was appearing on video-link, had his head in his hands.
Adjourning the case for sentencing on 11 July, the judge told the boy that "in light of the jury's verdict, I think you know I can only impose a life sentence, but what I have to do is decide what the shortest amount of time that you will have to serve in custody is".
Balloons were released at the start of the vigil in memory of Ava in December
Speaking outside court, Det Supt Sue Coombs said Ava's mother, father and sister were "completely devastated".
"Since that dreadful night they have suffered immeasurable grief and sadness," she continued.
"It has been heartbreaking for them to witness Ava's final moments during this court process."
The detective thanked the members of the public, retail staff and medics "who did everything they could to try save Ava's life".
Liverpool Mayor Joanne Anderson said the city council's thoughts were also with Ava's family and friends.
"We can only hope that the verdict brings them some comfort," Ms Anderson added.
Why not follow BBC North West on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram? You can also send story ideas to northwest.newsonline@bbc.co.uk
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-61554010
|
news_uk-england-merseyside-61554010
|
|
Imran Ahmad Khan: Ex-MP jailed for sex assault on teenage boy - BBC News
|
2022-05-24
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Former Wakefield Conservative MP Imran Ahmad Khan is sentenced to 18 months in jail for the assault.
|
Leeds & West Yorkshire
|
Former Wakefield Conservative MP Imran Ahmad Khan was found guilty in April of sexually assaulting the teenager in 2008
A former Conservative MP has been jailed for 18 months following his conviction for sexually assaulting a 15-year-old boy.
At a trial last month, Imran Ahmad Khan, 48, who was elected as Wakefield MP in 2019, was found guilty of groping the boy at a party in 2008.
Khan was expelled by the Conservative party following his conviction and later stood down as an MP.
The judge said he did not accept Khan had "any remorse" for what he had done.
Passing sentence at Southwark Crown Court, Mr Justice Jeremy Baker said the victim had been "profoundly psychologically affected" by Khan's actions.
He added: "The only regret you feel is towards yourself for having found yourself in the predicament you face as a result of your actions some 14 years ago."
Mr Justice Baker said there was a "significant degree of brutality" in the lead-up to Khan's assault on the teenager.
"I am satisfied the complainant was particularly vulnerable. Not only was he 15 years of age at the date of the offence, but I accept his mother's description that he was not very worldly and very young for his age," he said.
The judge told Khan: "Although it may well be, over the years, you had let yourself believe you had got away with having committed this offence, I am sure you were aware from the outset there was a risk there would be a day of reckoning."
However, Mr Justice Baker went on to say that he did not consider Khan's offence to be "sufficiently severe enough to place the assault into the most severe category".
Former Wakefield Conservative MP Imran Ahmad Khan was sentenced at Southwark Crown Court
The jury at Khan's trial heard he had forced the boy to drink gin at the party in Staffordshire, then dragged him upstairs and asked him to watch pornography before assaulting him.
The victim, now 29, told the court he was left feeling "scared, vulnerable, numb, shocked and surprised" after Khan touched his feet and legs, and was within "a hair's breadth" of his genitals.
The court was told that a police report was made at the time, but no further action was taken because the youngster did not want to make a formal complaint.
However, the victim told jurors "it all came flooding back" when he learned Khan was standing in the December 2019 general election and he went on to file a complaint.
Arriving in court with a walking stick, suitcase and carrier bag from an exclusive London parfumerie, he sat in the dock looking straight ahead throughout the hearing.
His victim sat directly behind him in the public gallery throughout the 90-minute hearing - often emotional and reacting to much of the mitigating arguments from Khan's barrister by shaking his head in disbelief.
Describing Khan as "that man" during his impact statement, he spoke of his increasingly deteriorating mental health.
The judge noted that Khan had remained remorseless throughout the trial and said the only sorrow he'd shown had been for himself and his reputation.
On a number of occasions, his barrister spoke of a life and career in tatters, but made no reference to the life of the victim.
As he was told of his custodial sentence, Khan remained emotionless, calmly getting to his feet as he was escorted from the court during which his victim kept his eyes locked on the back of the ex-MP.
Reading an impact statement in court, Khan's victim said he had had "suicidal thoughts" and had suffered difficulties in his relationship and at work due to the assault.
"Because of this assault, throughout my teenage years I found being touched in any way difficult," he said.
"My mental health has deteriorated rapidly since deciding to come forward and having to constantly relive an event I tried to bury for such a long time.
"I have struggled with the guilt of dragging my family back into a horrible ordeal they would rather forget, and watch them struggle with their own guilt for allowing that man into the house."
Khan's defence lawyer said the former MP's "fall from grace has been spectacular"
In mitigation, Khan's defence lawyer Gudrun Young QC said the former MP had gone from "high public office" to being "utterly and completely disgraced, with his life and career in ruins, shamed and humiliated at every turn".
"To say his reputation is in tatters does not do the matter justice. It has been completely destroyed," she said.
"Mr Khan's fall from grace has been spectacular. He will always be known as a disgraced former MP and he will take that to his grave."
In a statement issued after the sentencing, the NSPCC said: "We hope seeing Khan face justice for the sexual assault he committed over a decade ago offers some solace to the brave young man who spoke out against his abuser.
"Abuse can have a profound and long-lasting effect on children and young people, but no matter who the perpetrator is, it is important to remember it is never too late to speak out and get support."
Earlier this month, Khan formally lodged an appeal against his conviction.
A by-election is due to be held on 23 June to elect a new MP for Khan's former constituency.
Follow BBC Yorkshire on Facebook, Twitter and Instagram. Send your story ideas to yorkslincs.news@bbc.co.uk.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-leeds-61549531
|
news_uk-england-leeds-61549531
|
|
Gene-edited tomatoes could soon be sold in England - BBC News
|
2022-05-24
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
A bill is to be introduced in Parliament in two days' time to allow the commercial growing of gene-edited crops in England.
|
Science & Environment
|
Gene-edited tomatoes that boost vitamin D are among the foods that could be commercially developed
Tomatoes that boost the body's vitamin D could be among the first gene-edited crops allowed on sale in England.
Researchers in Norwich created the plants by turning off a specific molecule in their genetic code.
A bill will be introduced on Wednesday to allow commercial growing of gene-edited crops in England.
The technique is currently not used for food production in the UK because of rules set by the EU but Brexit has enabled the UK to set its own rules.
One in six people in the UK are deficient in vitamin D, which is vital to strong bones and muscles and helps reduce risk of cancer.
Prof Cathie Martin, who led the research at the John Innes Centre, said that the development, published in Nature Plants, could be hugely beneficial.
"With humans, half an hour in the sunshine every day is enough to make enough vitamin D. But a lot of people don't have that time outside and that's why they need supplements. The tomatoes themselves could provide another source of vitamin D in their diet."
If government legislation gets through Parliament successfully, the vitamin-boosting fruits could be among the first gene-edited crops allowed on supermarket shelves in England.
Gene editing is a relatively recent technology. It involves switching genes on and off by snipping out a small section of the plant's DNA. The older technique of genetic modification involves putting genes in, sometimes from a completely different species.
EU restrictions mean both methods have been effectively banned in Europe for a quarter century.
Both methods are used in other countries, to produce food. But the EU set stringent regulations on GM crops 25 years ago because of safety concerns and public opposition to the technology. Gene-edited crops are covered by the same regulations.
The UK currently follows European Union regulations on both technologies.
Any new GM or GE crop must undergo a scientific safety assessment, which can take around five years. Plant breeders believe that to be too onerous and expensive and so do not invest in the technology in Europe. In addition, any new variety that passes the EU's safety tests must then be approved by a majority at the European Parliament.
Plant breeders believe that political opposition is too strong for the approval of new GM or GE varieties. The regulations, say the plant industry, effectively prevented the commercial production of GM foods in Europe.
The UK government has decided that gene editing is safe to use and is to introduce a bill on Wednesday to allow its commercial development in England. The regulations on GM crops will not be relaxed at this stage.
The Environment Secretary George Eustice told BBC News that the change in the law was necessary to combat the impact of climate change.
''The reality is we're going to need more drought resistant plants and as we try and reduce the use of chemical pesticides, we need to breed in the natural resistance of plants to diseases and this precision breeding technology gives you the ability to do that; it gives you the ability to change traits in a plant faster than you could by conventional breeding but it's not the same as genetic modification''.
A new variety of barley being tested by KWS plant breeders in Hertfordshire will take twelve years to come to market using conventional breeding techniques. The firm claims that gene editing will significantly reduce that time.
The development has been welcomed by Nigel Moore, of KWS, a plant-breeding firm in Hertfordshire which produces wheat and barley.
"With the varieties we see in England, it generally takes us 12 years to produce those new ones. With gene-editing, we can respond to changing farmers' much faster."
KWS has been developing new varieties of wheat and barley for farmers for 150 years using traditional cross-breeding techniques. Mr Moore says that the firm needs to use gene-editing to produce the new varieties farmers are asking for.
"If we think about the pace of change: climate change, the need to reduce nitrogen fertilizer, need to use less pesticides; the faster we get the genetic changes we need, the faster we are able to adapt to all of that changing world around us".
Critics of the technology, such as Liz O'Neill, who is the director of the campaign group, GM Freeze, says that the government is being too hasty in lifting restrictions for gene-edited crops.
Protestors trampling a GM crop trial in 1988 over safety concerns about the technology.
"Mistakes happen. Other changes can get made. Genetics is not like Lego. It is a new set of techniques, and it has developed very quickly which means that there is an awful lot that could go wrong.
The process does involve putting genetic material in, in order to take it out, and there is a deliberate oversimplification in the description of the process in order to make people feel comfortable about it."
Ms O'Neill also wonders how the relaxation of regulations, which apply to England only, won't happen in other parts of the UK, which will make their own decisions about the use of the technology.
"The food chain doesn't operate only in England. It operates across the UK. Who is going to keep gene-edited food out of the food in Scotland and Wales?
Customers want informed choice and can only get that if GMOs in the food chain are traceable".
Nigel Moore from KWS responds by saying that new gene-edited crop varieties are analysed to ensure that there is no new DNA in them before they are approved for use and that a number of scientific assessments have judged gene-editing technology to be safe.
He also believes that English-grown GE foods won't find their way to other parts of the UK.
"Agricultural supply chains are already very competent in delivering brand requirements such as gluten free and organic foods to very high standards."
The Scottish Government has a long standing opposition to GM crops. Their argument is that they want to protect the "purity" of Scotland's food and drinks sector. But this is now is direct opposition to NFU Scotland which says it puts Scottish farmers at a competitive disadvantage.
A Welsh Government spokesperson said: "We have no plans to revise the existing GMO Deliberate Release Regulations in Wales and will maintain our precautionary approach towards genetic modification.
GM crop growing in Northern Ireland was banned at the same time as in Scotland and Wales, back in 2015, and it was said then that that decision would hold for the foreseeable future.
The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-61537610
|
news_science-environment-61537610
|
|
Johnny Depp hit me on honeymoon, says Amber Heard - BBC News
|
2022-05-16
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The actress says she believes that she wouldn't have survived if their marriage had continued.
|
US & Canada
|
Amber Heard in court on 16 May
Amber Heard feared her ex-husband Johnny Depp would accidentally kill her during an alleged assault on their honeymoon, a US court has heard.
Testifying in a defamation case Mr Depp has brought against her, Ms Heard, 36, painted a picture of the actor as an abuser plagued by drug addiction, jealousy and self-harm.
Mr Depp is suing Ms Heard for $50m (£40m) over an article in which she claimed she was the victim of domestic violence.
He has repeatedly denied any abuse.
The high profile case in Virginia has resumed for a fifth week after a pause, before which Mr Depp had told his side of the story and Ms Heard had begun some of her testimony.
In court on Monday, Ms Heard tearfully told jurors that she believed she'd likely "not survive" if she had remained married to Mr Depp, 58.
"I was so scared that it was going to end really badly for me," she said. "I really didn't want to leave him. I loved him so much."
Ms Heard has accused Mr Depp of repeated instances of physical abuse. On Monday, she alleged that he attacked her while aboard the Orient Express train in Asia after their February 2015 wedding, claiming that he struck her and held her by the neck while in their sleeper compartment.
"He was squeezing my neck against the railway car for what felt like a very long time," she said.
She said she recalled thinking he could "kill me".
"I remember being scared that he wouldn't mean to do it," she said.
In another instance, Ms Heard described a "week of hell" after Mr Depp allegedly became jealous after she was offered a role with James Franco. She claimed he punched her and threw her into furniture.
While Ms Heard said that the marriage was "at times, very loving", it deteriorated over time to a point in which tension and violence became "almost normal". They divorced in 2017, after two years.
During their increasingly frequent arguments, Ms Heard claimed that Mr Depp would frequently self-harm.
"In fights he often would cut his arms or hold his knife to his chest or draw blood, superficially at first," she said. "He also put cigarettes out on himself."
Lawyers for Mr Depp challenged Ms Heard's version of events as they began their cross-examination on Monday afternoon.
Attorney Camille Vasquez skewered the witness' prior testimony, questioning why there were so few photos and medical records to back up claims of physical injuries from her alleged beatings.
Ms Heard countered that, embarrassed to be a victim of abuse, she did not seek medical treatment "other than my therapist", relying instead on makeup to cover bruises and ice to reduce swelling.
In a heated back-and forth, Ms Vasquez forced Ms Heard to acknowledge that she had "pledged" to donate the entirety of her $7m divorce settlement with Mr Depp to charity but was yet to make any donation.
She also noted that her client had not once looked Ms Heard in the eye over the course of the trial. "He can't," Ms Heard responded.
In his own testimony earlier in the trial, Mr Depp said that he never struck Ms Heard and told jurors that she had a "need" for conflict and violence.
On Monday, jurors heard a number of audio clips of the former couple arguing. In one clip - which went viral ahead of the trial - Ms Heard can be heard saying she hit Mr Depp.
"I was hitting you. I was not punching you," she can be heard saying. "You're not punched."
According to Ms Heard, she sometimes "reactively" hit Mr Depp and claimed that she was referring to the "disparity" of their strength.
The defamation case against Ms Heard stems from a 2018 piece she wrote for the Washington Post in which she characterised herself as a victim of abuse. The piece did not name Mr Depp.
His attorneys, however, have said that the article "incalculably" damaged his reputation and career. She has countersued him for $100m.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: Amber Heard and Johnny Depp - the trial so far, in their own words
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61467766
|
news_world-us-canada-61467766
|
|
Mariupol: The 80 days that left a flourishing city in ruins - BBC News
|
2022-05-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Ukrainian port which has seen some of the most intense fighting is now under Russian control.
|
Europe
|
The theatre has often been described as the heart of the city
After almost three months of relentless assault, Mariupol has fallen. Ukraine's military says its combat mission in the besieged port is over. More than any other Ukrainian city, Mariupol has come to symbolise the ferocious brutality of Russia's assault and the stubbornness of Ukraine's resistance.
On Wednesday 23 February, Ivan Stanislavsky left his camera bag at the office. He was on his way to see the layout of his new book on Mariupol's Soviet-era murals at a colleague's house, and didn't want to lug the gear around. He could always pick it up the next day.
But on Thursday, as he stood in the street outside his locked and deserted office, he could hear thunderous sounds rolling in from the east. The city was under fire.
As the conflict intensified, and gunfire became audible to the west too, Ivan moved his mattress into the hall. He piled up his large collection of art books - including the Encyclopaedia of Ukrainian Rock Music - against the windows of his flat in the district of Primorsky.
"Let's say it was not a waste of a library," says the 36-year-old photographer, who is also a press officer at Ukrainian premier league football club FC Mariupol.
Ivan Stanislavsky loved to photograph his city of Mariupol
Across town in the neighbourhood of Kalmiusky, businessman Yevhen was also taking precautions. The 47-year-old had told his family to pack so they could escape the city. But when he returned from the office, he found no packing had been done. His family refused to leave.
In an apartment in the same block, metallurgists from the nearby steelworks, Nataliia, 43, and Andrii, 41, were already slicing the last two loaves they had been able to buy, leaving them to dry out so they could eat them piece by piece over the weeks ahead.
The Illich steel plant dominates this view of Mariupol
Volodymyr, a 52-year-old paramedic in Kalmiusky, was also in his kitchen, trying to absorb the news. When reports came in of Russians marching through the village of Chonhar - on a strategic road out of Crimea to the west - he choked. This was a coordinated attack, he realised.
The ambulance dispatcher was on the phone. She instructed Volodymyr to ignore routine calls. "Find the wounded", he was told.
Twenty-two-year-old engineering graduate Mariia thought the first explosion she heard was simply a storm. Then she heard a second.
"We didn't know what to do," says Mariia, who like Ivan, lived in Primorsky. "I didn't have time to think about my future, my plans. I had to think about what I'd eat and drink... [And] what to do with the cats."
It suddenly dawned on her why, in the past few days, soldiers had appeared in the paint shop where she worked, asking to buy blue and yellow tape. They needed it to mark their uniforms.
Four days into the war, with the fighting closing in, Ivan and his wife sought shelter in a basement underneath his local supermarket. It offered good protection, and Ivan found that the muffling of sound dulled his sense of mounting anxiety.
Daily life was being stripped down to bare essentials.
"We lived like primitive people," he told the BBC from Lviv, where he has now fled. "We broke trees, made fires, cooked food on fires. I even heard of people eating pigeons."
He watched as order gradually broke down all around him. He kept a vivid diary, later published online.
"The Stone Age has arrived," he says in his 6 March entry.
He writes of watching his fellow Ukrainian citizens raiding abandoned shops, making off with everything from computers and freezers to swimsuits and underwear.
One evening a drunk woman interrupts a session of evening gossip in the basement. "Treat yourself," she says, as a flashlight revealed a bottle of Californian Merlot, taken from Wines of the World on nearby Italiiska Street.
But aware that even medical supplies and cash tills were being taken, Ivan says he felt disgust.
"We are our own worst enemies," he writes.
But is this, he wonders, how the fittest survive? After a while, each day became a "combat mission".
Over a few short weeks, Mariupol fell apart. The Russian military laid siege to the city, attacking power and water supplies. A Russian airstrike hit the maternity hospital on 9 March, and a plane bombed its theatre - clearly marked as a civilian shelter - a week later.
Ivan was stunned at how quickly it all happened.
The theatre after it was bombed
"The whole city, all its infrastructure, supply system, logistics, energy supply were destroyed in a matter of days," he says.
Sitting underground at night, he sensed people becoming passive.
"You can only wait in the shelter," he writes in his diary. "Some are waiting for spring, some - for the morning to come, some - for the end of the war. And someone is waiting for the bomb to come and kill everyone."
And all this just as Mariupol had seemed destined to turn a corner. Money began to pour in, adding lustre to a city previously associated mainly with heavy industry - and war.
"It was a city aspiring to something," Ivan says. It hadn't always been this way.
Long before this year's invasion, Mariupol had a ringside seat to Ukraine's simmering conflict with Russian-backed separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk, the two regions that make up the neighbouring area known as Donbas.
An activist guards a barricade outside the Mariupol government building seized by pro-Russia activists on 17 April 2014
When fighting first broke out there in 2014, the government briefly lost control of Mariupol after clashes with pro-Russian protesters. In January 2015, a devastating rocket attack by the rebels on the eastern edge of the city killed almost 30 civilians.
Even though the war gradually receded, the sound of artillery booming in the distance was part of Mariupol's daily soundscape.
But the city moved on. The Ukrainian government briefly made Mariupol the administrative capital of the Donetsk Oblast. People migrated from rebel-held areas and the city started attracting investment.
"It started receiving all of the resources and all of the attention," Ivan says.
A view of Mariupol along its coast
Public buildings were renovated, cafés opened, and new parks created. In a podcast last October, the city's mayor Vadym Boychenko boasted of creating the best municipal services in the country, opening an IT school, and promoting contemporary art and sports.
Plans were afoot, he said, for the largest water park in Ukraine and a version of Disneyland "which will probably be called Mariland". In fact, Mariupol was declared Ukraine's "Big Capital of Culture" in 2021.
But while Mariupol flourished, rebel-held Donetsk mouldered. When the rebels returned to Mariupol, Volodymyr, the paramedic, believed they were driven by revenge to destroy the city.
"'If we live in shit, then you will live in shit as well,'" Volodymyr says they told him at a checkpoint as he finally escaped the city. "They just looked at us and envied how we lived."
Volodymyr thinks the Russian-backed separatists were motivated by revenge
Yevhen, the businessman, describes life in Mariupol in the past five years as "a fairytale". "The city was being reconstructed," he says, "all roads were renovated, public transport was improved."
His buildings restoration firm was responsible, among other projects, for the reconstruction of Mariupol's iconic water tower in time for the city's 240th birthday.
"This is a city of hard workers… It was hard for me to explain that my workers should finish at 6pm - they wanted to work longer."
Like many others, weekends would be spent with family in the city's revived parks or on the seafront.
"For me, this is a [key] question - if you want to capture the city, why destroy it? [The Russians] don't need thinking people, they need territory," he says.
And, he adds, he is now getting calls from the Russians to return to Mariupol to help rebuild it.
"But if Mariupol is occupied by Russia, there will be no future there… there will be nothing to live for. To live in unrecognised territory is to bury your children's future."
About 150,000 people remain in the city, from a population of almost half a million. Most of those left there, he says, are also trying to escape.
"I left Mariupol but my soul is there," he says, tears in his eyes.
Businessman Yevhen is already getting calls from Russians to rebuild Mariupol
Nataliia and her husband Andrii worked at the Illich plant, one of two iron and steel works which tower over the city's skyline and loom large in Ivan Stanilavsky's photographs.
They spent long days at work, and leisure time was precious.
"The city authorities laid out marble tiles, made piers [so that] it was possible to sit on a bench right in the sea," Andrii says.
"It was a wonderful warm city with parks, concerts, fountains," his wife says. "A European city."
This recent blossoming was captured by Ivan, but as a photographer with a passion for his city's past, his pet project was documenting Mariupol's remarkable collection of Soviet murals, one of the most extensive in Ukraine.
The cultural importance of preserving such remarkable works seems undeniable, but in Mariupol nostalgia for the Soviet Union jostled uneasily with Ukraine's modern, increasingly European identity, Ivan says.
"Politics was already preventing this cultural heritage from being integrated into Ukraine's artistic context," he says.
So inevitably, when the war came, culture found itself fought over too.
On 28 April, Mariupol's city council denounced the alleged theft by Russia of more than 2,000 exhibits from the city's museums, including ancient icons, a handwritten Torah scroll and more than 200 medals.
The director of Mariupol's Local History Museum, Natalia Kapustnikova, later told Russian newspaper Izvestia that she had personally handed over paintings to the Russians by Ivan Aivazovsky and Arkhip Kuindzhi, and claimed that Ukrainian "nationalists" had burned 95% of the museum's exhibits.
She wasn't the only local official harbouring pro-Russian sentiments. On 9 April, Ukraine's prosecutor general charged a member of Mariupol's city council, Kostyantyn Ivashchenko, with treason after he was declared mayor by pro-Russian separatists in Donetsk.
Ivashchenko's pro-Russian party had been well supported in the city's last elections, coming second, while President Volodymyr Zelensky's party came a distant fifth place.
In a poll conducted just before the elections by the Kyiv-based Centre for Social Indicators, almost half the city's population identified themselves as "Russian", though 80% also described themselves as "Ukrainian".
More tellingly, perhaps, fewer than 20% self-identified as "European", while more than 50% said they were "Soviet".
Mariia says that after the invasion she began to hate all things Russian
Nataliia, whose father is Russian, says she asked her husband for forgiveness when the bombing started. "I was ashamed that I was Russian."
Mariia, the engineer, says that before the war her first language was Russian, but when the bombing began "I started to hate all things Russian - language, movies, objects".
Mariupol's complex identity is hardly unique in today's Ukraine, a country which formed an integral part of the Soviet Union until the collapse of communism at the end of the 1980s. And it's doubtful that any of those who described themselves as "Russian" or "Soviet" wanted to see their city destroyed in a violent effort to pull it back into Moscow's orbit.
Ironically, when the moment arrived to defend the city from Russian invaders, it was another part of Mariupol's Soviet-era legacy that came to play an almost iconic role.
This legacy, buried deep underground, is the maze of bunkers beneath Mariupol's other steel works, Azovstal, built by the Soviet authorities during the Cold War.
The 36 bomb shelters provided room for more than 12,000 people. After independence in 1991, no-one thought that much about them. But then the fighting in 2014 began.
"We started thinking about what we would do if fighting spread further into the city," Enver Tskitishvili, Azovstal's director general, says.
Training on the use of the bunkers and their connecting tunnels went on every day for years.
In early February, as the fear of renewed conflict loomed larger, preparations swung into high gear. Food and water were brought in the week before Russia's invasion.
Officials at the plant knew the bomb shelters would soon be occupied, but had little idea that Azovstal, surrounded by water on three sides, would become the scene of Mariupol's last stand.
An injured Ukrainian serviceman inside the Azovstal iron and steel works factory
As the days went by, the war got closer and closer to Ivan Stanislavsky's apartment. Excursions in search of food, even to the nearby Dzerkalnyy store, just 400m up the road, were increasingly perilous. Sometimes, a Ukrainian mortar team would arrive by truck, fire off a few rounds, and leave before the inevitable Russian reply.
There was little communication between civilians and soldiers.
One day, a tank from the Azov Regiment arrived near Dzerkalnyy, sending locals running, fearful of an impending battle. The regiment emerged in 2014 as a highly effective volunteer militia with far right and, in some cases, neo-Nazi affiliations, before being folded into Ukraine's National Guard.
Vladimir Putin has made extensive use of the Azov's controversial origins, in an effort to bolster his argument that he is trying to "de-Nazify" Ukraine. Ukrainian authorities say the regiment's origins are a thing of the past and points out that far-right parties have had very little electoral success.
In his diary Ivan describes the members he knows as a motley assortment of Mariupol natives - bikers, lawyers, football hooligans, and an amateur actor - driven not by ideology, but by a fierce hatred of those who were trying to ruin their lives.
"Together they formed a 'Nazi' battalion and intimidated the entire Russian army," he writes.
Intimidating and effective, but not enough, eventually, to stem the Russian tide.
While the city's defenders fought their losing battle, Ivan heard voices in his basement starting to curse President Zelensky for leaving Mariupol to its own devices.
President Volodymyr Zelensky (L) and children play in a fountain during his first official visit to Mariupol on 15 June 2019
For all the praise heaped on the city's defenders, it was clear from the start that Mariupol was not the government's main priority. Faced with Russian threats on a number of fronts, the Zelensky government chose to secure the capital, thwarting what was arguably Vladimir Putin's top priority.
Ultimately, that meant letting Russian forces achieve another of their pre-war goals: the establishment of a land corridor between Crimea - annexed by Moscow in 2014 - and the separatists in the Donbas.
But for those trapped in the city, fighting or just trying to survive, it was a bitter pill.
"Some say Mariupol was given the status of a hero city," Ivan wrote in his diary on 13 March.
"It looks like the award will be posthumous."
Ivan's photo of the inside of the water tower
By now, Ivan couldn't stand any more. Outside Dzerkalnyy supermarket, he saw corpses neatly stacked under a wall. People who once queued for food were now in "the queue of the dead", waiting to be buried.
So on 15 March Ivan bundled four family members and his cat into his miraculously unscathed Skoda Fabia and joined a convoy for the tortuous journey north-west to government-held Zaporizhzhia.
At an observation point on Markelova St looking towards the port and the beach, Ivan allowed himself a brief moment of reflection.
"In my head I'm saying goodbye to this place," he writes in his diary. "I have a feeling we will never return here."
A day later, Mariia and five relatives also left by car, carrying just personal belongings and the family's dog. As they made their way out of Mariupol, their convoy came under attack and the cars had to accelerate out of danger, headed first to Zaporizhzhia, then to Dnipro.
The following day, Nataliia and Andreii left, after a neighbour offered them a space in his car. The couple eventually reached the city of Khmelnytskyi where they have been selling the family's coin collection in order to survive.
In that same convoy, Yevhen travelled with his wife and two other relatives. He's now in Dnipro, helping other residents who escaped Mariupol, and trying to reach those who remain.
The apartment block where Ivan lived has been destroyed
Volodymyr, the paramedic, stayed in Mariupol as long as he could, to look after his elderly mother. But deprived of food and special medicine, she died. He then left the city on 21 April, and is volunteering at a hospital in Dnipro.
"There are thousands and thousands of families like mine," he says. "How many people have died? How many families have been lost?"
Two months after escaping, Ivan is still watching the death throes of Mariupol from the relative safety of Lviv.
In his diary's poignant epilogue, he writes of flashbacks, text messages about deaths or lucky escapes, and phone calls that go unanswered.
"The subscriber is out of range."
With additional reporting by Kateryna Khinkulova and Illia Tolstov
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61480988
|
news_world-europe-61480988
|
|
Johnny Depp was jealous and controlling, ex-girlfriend Ellen Barkin says - BBC News
|
2022-05-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Testimony from the actress, one of Johnny Depp's ex-girlfriends and co-stars, is played in court.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
Ellen Barkin's testimony, recorded in 2019, was played in court
Johnny Depp was controlling and jealous and once threw a wine bottle across a room, one of his ex-girlfriends and co-stars said in a video played during his court case against Amber Heard.
In the video, actress Ellen Barkin said Mr Depp was "drunk a lot of the time" during their relationship in the 1990s.
The testimony, filmed in 2019, was played in court, where Mr Depp is suing his former wife for defamation.
Ms Heard has accused the Hollywood star of being violent, which he has denied.
The trial's jury watched the recorded testimony from Ms Barkin, who said her relationship with the Pirates of the Caribbean actor lasted between three and six months.
She said: "He's just a jealous man, controlling - 'Where are you going? Who are you going with? What did you do last night?'
"I had a scratch on my back once that got him very, very angry because he insisted it came from me having sex with a person who wasn't him."
She added that the actor "was always drinking and or smoking a joint".
Ms Barkin said the incident with the bottle happened while she and Mr Depp were filming the 1998 film Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, adapted from the book by Hunter S Thompson.
"Mr Depp threw a wine bottle across the room, the hotel room in Las Vegas," she said. "I don't know why he threw the bottle."
However, she recalled that he may have had an argument with friends or an assistant.
Also on Thursday, Mr Depp's former agent Tracey Jacobs told the trial that his career suffered after 2010 because of "unprofessional behaviour" including drug and alcohol use and consistently showing up late on set.
And the star's former business manager Josh Mandel said he became "extremely concerned" about Mr Depp's financial situation in 2015, with the actor spending $300,000 (£193,000) a month on full-time staff at one point.
The trial is due to resume next week.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-61526110
|
news_entertainment-arts-61526110
|
|
Northern Ireland: UK and EU's row risks Western unity, top US official warns - BBC News
|
2022-05-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
US state department warns against "a big fight between the UK and the EU" amid the Ukraine war.
|
UK Politics
|
The UK's dispute with the European Union over Northern Ireland trade risks undermining Western unity during the Ukraine war, a senior US official says.
Derek Chollet told the BBC the US hoped the row over Northern Ireland's post-Brexit trade deal could be resolved.
He said "a big fight between the UK and the EU" was "the last thing" Washington wanted.
Vladimir Putin would "use any opportunity he can to show that our alliance is fraying", he added.
Mr Chollet, the most senior adviser to US Secretary of State, Anthony Blinken, said: "We want to see this issue resolved and we want to see the temperature lowered and no unilateral acts.
"And it's particularly important right now where we need to send a message of unity to the world and not undermine all the things that we've been so successful in working on together over the last several months and showing unity in Ukraine."
Mr Chollet's intervention is significant. It is rare for senior US officials to comment on the UK's domestic affairs given the historically close relationship between the two nations.
But his comments build on recent concerns expressed by senior US politicians, including President Joe Biden and US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, about the UK government threatening to override the Northern Ireland Protocol.
These concerns have so far largely focused on what the US sees as the possible risks to peace in Northern Ireland.
But the senior State Department official is making a new argument, that now is not the time for the UK and the EU to be having a fight. There are bigger fish to fry over Ukraine.
The US wants its allies united, not scrapping over legacy Brexit issues.
Read more: Guide to the Brexit border problem
Derek Chollet, a senior adviser to the US secretary of state, has urged the UK and the EU to cool tensions
On Thursday Ms Pelosi said she was "deeply concerned" that the UK was seeking to "unilaterally discard" Northern Ireland's post-Brexit trade arrangements, set out in the protocol.
She said the US Congress would not support a trade agreement with the UK if its actions jeopardised the peace process in Northern Ireland.
The UK government has argued that changes to the way goods are shipped from Great Britain to Northern Ireland are needed to restore its devolved government.
A power-sharing administration cannot be formed without the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP), which has refused to join one until significant changes are made to the protocol.
The DUP says the protocol, which was agreed by the UK and the EU in December 2020, has created economic barriers between Great Britain and Northern Ireland.
On Tuesday Foreign Secretary Liz Truss said the UK government would introduce a law to change the protocol unilaterally should negotiations with the EU fail.
Ms Pelosi warned against any action that might endanger the Good Friday Agreement, the peace deal that ended decades of conflict in Northern Ireland.
In the first of several tweets, she wrote: "Ensuring there is no physical border between the Irish Republic and Northern Ireland is necessary for upholding this landmark agreement, which transformed Northern Ireland."
But the UK's former Brexit minister, Lord Frost, has criticised Ms Pelosi for making what he called an "ignorant" statement about the situation in Northern Ireland.
Lord Frost, who negotiated the protocol with the EU, said there was no plan to put a physical border in place on the island of Ireland.
"Nobody's ever suggested that. So I don't know why she's suggesting that in her statement," Lord Frost told the Week in Westminster on BBC Radio 4.
US House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said she was concerned about the UK's actions
He also denied that making changes to the arrangements would undermine the Good Friday Agreement.
"It is the protocol itself that's undermining [the Good Friday Agreement] and people who can't see that really shouldn't be commenting on the situation in Northern Ireland," said the former minister.
On Friday afternoon DUP leader Sir Jeffrey Donaldson said he thought Ms Pelosi's contributions were "entirely unhelpful, offer no solution, offer no help and merely repeat a mantra that frankly is hopelessly out of date."
He spoke as the Irish Taoiseach Micheál Martin met Northern Ireland's main parties to discuss the protocol and the political crisis.
Meanwhile, a US Congress delegation flew to Brussels for a meeting with European Commission vice-president Maros Sefcovic, who has been leading negotiations with the UK.
"We're equally committed to protecting the Good Friday (Belfast) Agreement," he tweeted. "Joint solutions implementing the Protocol are the only way to do so."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61521540
|
news_uk-politics-61521540
|
|
Rebekah Vardy: Case against her based on 'conspiracy theories' her lawyer says - BBC News
|
2022-05-20
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Rebekah Vardy's lawyer rounded off her High Court libel case against Coleen Rooney on Thursday.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
Rebekah Vardy leaving the Royal Courts of Justice in London on Thursday
The case against Rebekah Vardy is based on "conspiracy theories", her lawyer said on the final day of her High Court libel trial against Coleen Rooney.
Hugh Tomlinson said on Thursday his client had suffered "public abuse and ridicule on a massive scale" and is entitled to "substantial damages".
Mrs Vardy is suing Mrs Rooney for libel for alleging online she had leaked private stories about her to the Sun.
The claimant has denied this and her team said she has nothing to hide.
Mr Tomlinson addressed the court after his counterpart David Sherborne had earlier agued that Mrs Vardy was an unreliable witness.
He said she had brought the case as she wanted to be "vindicated" as there was no real evidence, he claimed, proving she had leaked the stories.
Mrs Vardy's barrister suggested that the libel dispute with Mrs Rooney was a "very simple case" when "one clears away the conspiracy theories".
"Has Mrs Rooney proved that Mrs Vardy leaked the information from her post that she's accused of leaking?" he asked.
"Mrs Vardy's case is and always has been that she did not leak the information nor did she authorise anyone else to leak."
"She does not know to this day what happened," he added. "She does not know where this information came from."
Mrs Rooney has defended herself on the basis of truth and public interest, but Mr Tomlinson said the latter did not apply in this case, adding: "This is really a falling-out between two individuals over what is essentially a private matter."
The lawyer said his client now accepted it was possible that her former agent Caroline Watt was the source of the leaked stories from Mrs Rooney's private Instagram account.
"She doesn't want to be in the position of accusing her friend and former long-term agent of doing something wrong," he said.
"She sees, as everybody does, the indications that point that way. Her fundamental position is she doesn't know what happened."
He said Mrs Vardy had asked Mrs Rooney, from the get-go, to "send me the evidence, send me the posts."
"The suggestion that she is trying to hide something is quite wrong".
Acknowledging how the defendant, Mrs Rooney, had said she thought Mrs Vardy was suspiciously friendly, Mr Tomlinson countered that "people behave in different ways."
Coleen Rooney, pictured with Wayne Rooney outside the court earlier this week, did not attend the last day of the trial
He noted how the Sun was "a newspaper that she [Mrs Rooney] clearly loathes" and that she may disapprove of how Mrs Vardy has sometimes featured in it, but that it was "not a basis for making an allegation of the kind that was made".
Mr Tomlinson challenged the idea that messages between Mrs Vardy and Ms Watt showed they were "obsessed" with Mrs Rooney and said they were merely "gossiping".
"There is very little about the Rooneys" in the many of the conversations given in evidence, he said.
"We don't have two women who are obsessed with Mrs Rooney, we have two women who over a period of two years mention her on a few occasions."
The court heard that Mrs Vardy had wanted to call journalists from The Sun to give evidence but they "changed their mind having taken legal advice," Mr Tomlinson said, suggesting their absence "can't be of itself evidence that Mrs Vardy is the source of the stories".
"Mrs Vardy has made mistakes," Mr Tomlinson added. "Perhaps the most serious of these may have been to trust Ms Watt as her agent.
Ms Watt did not give evidence at the trial either as she was deemed unwell. The fact that the agent's phone, containing now lost messages between her and a Sun journalist, had fallen into the North Sea had nothing to do with Mrs Vardy, the barrister said.
"We have no idea as to whether this is a genuine accidental loss of a device or whether it was something done cynically and deliberately to avoid inspection during the disclosure process. We just don't know," he went on.
"From Mrs Vardy's point of view, she does not know either."
Earlier on Thursday, David Sherborne, representing Mrs Rooney, told the court Mrs Vardy lied under oath and deliberately deleted evidence.
Coleen Rooney (left) and Rebekah Vardy, pictured at a Euro 2016 match in France
Mrs Vardy walked out of the court during Mr Sherborne's comments, returning after roughly an hour, having left it carrying her laptop, with one of her legal team.
Mr Tomlinson said the argument that his client had a "conspiracy to delete" was an "incredible theory", adding that a "completely innocent loss of messages" had occurred on both sides.
"There was an export of a very large number of WhatsApp messages," he told the court. "Why would Mrs Vardy, if she was destroying evidence, do it in that selective and complex way?"
"If she was a wicked litigant who was trying to deceive the court by getting rid of damaging evidence, the idea she would do it by getting rid of images and not text simply beggars belief."
The barrister said the exchanges that the court had heard had taken place between Mrs Vardy and Ms Watt were simply "exchanges between two people who do not know who is leaking the stories, or at least Mrs Vardy does not know who is leaking the stories."
He said the only exception to this was a post by Ms Watt which seemed to suggest she was the leak of a story about Mrs Rooney being involved in a car crash. "On analysis, it does not help the defendant's case at all," he said.
"What they show is the contemporaneous evidence that Mrs Vardy does not know what information is going to the Sun."
In his closing statement on Thursday morning, Mr Sherborne said Mrs Vardy had given "implausible, throwaway explanations" and was "lacking in candour."
Mrs Rooney's barrister David Sherborne set out his closing argument on Thursday morning
Mrs Rooney and her husband, the ex-footballer Wayne, did not attend the court due to a "long-standing travel arrangement" booked before the trial over-ran, and their apologies were passed to Mrs Justice Steyn.
Mrs Vardy's libel action was sparked by a viral social media post from October 2019, in which Mrs Rooney said she had carried out a sting operation to find out who had been passing information about her life, taken from her private Instagram account, to the Sun newspaper.
She said the fake stories she had posted on her Instagram stories in an effort to find the perpetrator had only been viewed by "Rebekah Vardy's account".
Mrs Vardy has continually denied leaking the stories in question to the press.
The fake stories featured Mrs Rooney travelling to Mexico for a "gender selection" procedure, planning to return to TV and the basement flooding at her home.
Mrs Rooney was called "Wagatha Christie" by many people online as a result of her private investigation. Wag is a term used to describe the wives and girlfriends of footballers, while Agatha Christie was a famous English detective novelist.
The case has now ended and the judge will reserve her ruling to a later date.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-61506901
|
news_entertainment-arts-61506901
|
|
US Supreme Court: The woman who helped to end Roe v Wade - BBC News
|
2022-06-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Lynn Fitch said she hoped to empower women by striking down the law.
|
US & Canada
|
Lynn Fitch may be the lawyer to end Roe v Wade
Millions of women in the US will lose the legal right to abortion, after the Supreme Court overturned a 50-year-old ruling that legalised it nationwide. Before the court's ruling was made public, BBC News looked at the woman whose case brought about the historic decision.
In September 2021, Mississippi's chief legal officer sat down for an interview with Pro-Life Weekly, a Catholic television programme featuring anti-abortion activists.
Lynn Fitch looked how she almost always does during public appearances: dyed-blonde hair blow-dried straight and neat, tasteful jewellery and a monochrome suit, this time in powder blue.
The attorney general was there to celebrate. The United States Supreme Court had just announced the date it would hear her state's challenge to Roe v Wade, the 1973 ruling that has, for the nearly 50 years since, served as a nationwide guarantee to abortion access.
The case, Dobbs v Jackson Women's Health Organization, centres on a Mississippi law that would ban abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy, even in cases of rape or incest. Under Ms Fitch's direction, the state asked the Supreme Court to uphold the law and slash the landmark Roe v Wade decision in the process. A ruling is expected this month. A leaked draft suggests it is likely that Mississippi's ban will be upheld, paving the way for other states to also outlaw abortion.
Ms Fitch - who declined to be interviewed - had argued that overturning Roe v Wade would be "game-changing", "uplifting" women by eliminating what she described as a false choice between family and career.
"Fifty years ago, for professional women, they wanted you to make a choice. Now you don't have to," she said on Pro-Life Weekly. "You have the option in life to really achieve your dreams, your goals, and you can have those beautiful children as well."
If she wins the case, and Roe v Wade falls, some 40 million women may lose access to abortion, pro-choice advocates warn. It could also make Ms Fitch, a single working parent of three, a Republican superstar and poster-child for her own argument: modern women don't need abortion to have it all.
Ms Fitch is facing off against Jackson Women's Health Organisation - the last remaining abortion clinic in Mississippi
Abortion was not always an animating theme of Ms Fitch's political career. When she first took public office, as Mississippi state treasurer in 2011, she pushed for legislation that would guarantee men and women were paid equally.
Her convictions were shaped in many ways by her upbringing, and her experiences as a single mother, says Hayes Dent, a long-time friend and colleague, who ran her first political campaign.
When Mr Dent first met Ms Fitch, she had just been named executive director of the Mississippi State Personnel Board, a state agency, by then-governor Haley Barbour. Mr Dent was immediately impressed.
"Having been around every major political figure in Mississippi for 40 years, I could just tell: she's going to run," Mr Dent said. "And when she pulls that trigger, she's going to be successful."
It wasn't for another couple of years that she did, launching a campaign for state treasurer.
When he launched her first political campaign, for state treasurer in 2011, "she was an underdog," said Austin Barbour, a national GOP strategist and the nephew of former Governor Barbour.
Mr Dent, who had kept tabs on Ms Fitch, reached out to her in the middle of that 2011 cycle and asked to come on board her campaign.
"I said 'Look, I think you can win this race,'" he recalled.
She accepted. The two would drive the length of the state in a day, making a handful of different stops and placing fundraiser calls in the hours between.
"Her attitude was 'what is the task at hand,'" Mr Dent said. "It'd be like 'Look, we've gotta go to the tobacco spitting festival.' And she'd do great! She wouldn't spit tobacco, but she was great."
The only reason Ms Fitch would turn down a campaign event was her kids, cutting out early to make a school basketball game or parent-teacher conference.
She was a natural campaigner, but fundraising lagged. Mr Dent drove to northern Mississippi to ask her father for a personal donation.
Attorney General Fitch may become a hero on the political right
Bill Fitch still lived in Holly Springs, the small, rural town near the state's northern edge where Ms Fitch spent most of her childhood.
Her father had inherited land on the historic Galena Plantation and used the sprawling 8,000-acre property to restore the family farm, turning it into a premier quail hunting destination. The late Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, and Mississippi governors Barbour and Phil Bryant, became frequent guests.
Visitors of Fitch Farms could elect to stay in the former home of Confederate general and first grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, Nathan Bedford Forrest, which Mr Fitch had bought and transported onto the property.
Ms Fitch has told local media of "special" childhood memories at her father's farm, riding horses and hunting quail.
As a teenager, she was the "prototypical popular girl", Mr Dent said. "Leader, cheerleader, athletic, the whole nine yards," he said.
She went to the University of Mississippi, joined a sorority and graduated with a degree in business administration and later in law.
When Mr Dent drove to her father's farm to make his pitch for a campaign donation, he said it painly: "I told him if I left there with a big cheque, she was going to win".
She won, and then won again four years later, securing a second term as state treasurer.
In this office, she targeted state debt, expanded access to financial education in the state, and advocated for equal pay laws (Mississippi remains the only state that does not ensure equal pay for equal work between men and women).
And she developed her knack for connecting to voters, leaning on both her Holly Springs upbringing and an apparent ease in the public eye.
In interviews and campaign videos, Ms Fitch looks preternaturally poised. She makes easy eye contact, her speech slow and relaxed, often thanking God and her family for the opportunity to serve her state.
"Rural roots matter to voters in this state," said Mr Barbour, the Republican strategist. "And she's very likeable, she just is."
Ms Fitch also helped bolster her conservative credentials with her support for then-presidential candidate Donald Trump, leading Mississippi's Women for Trump coalition in 2016. When Mr Trump was in Jackson for a campaign rally, she sat in the front row.
Two years later, Ms Fitch announced she would make a bid for Mississippi Attorney General - an office that had never been held by a woman.
But she wasn't the underdog this time, gliding to victory in November 2019 with nearly 60% of the vote on a promise to uphold "conservative values and principles".
Ms Fitch, pictured in white to the right of Mr Trump, led Mississippi's Women for Trump coalition in 2016
As a devoted Republican in a solidly Republican state, where Ms Fitch stood on abortion was taken as given, even if she didn't run on it.
Across the country, about 60% of Americans say abortion should be legal in all or most cases, according to data from the Pew Research Centre. But among Mississippi Republicans, nearly 70% believe abortion should illegal in all or most cases.
"You don't run in Mississippi, you don't run in rural conservative states and not want to see Roe v Wade overturned," said Mr Barbour, the Republican strategist. "It's just ingrained".
The abortion ban before the Supreme Court was passed by Mississippi's state legislature in 2018, two years before Ms Fitch took office as Attorney General. The law, which bans abortions outright after 15 weeks, was immediately challenged in court on behalf of Jackson Women's Health Organization, Mississippi's last remaining abortion clinic.
A federal district court struck down the ban, saying it was unconstitutional. In 2019, an appeals court upheld this decision.
But in June 2020, five months into the job, Attorney General Fitch petitioned the US Supreme Court to review the 15-week ban. The court, with its 6-3 conservative majority, accepted and heard the case in December of last year.
Now, she's known nationally as the lawyer expected to topple Roe v Wade.
At times, Ms Fitch has said her state is merely making an argument for the rule of law: asking the Supreme Court to turn over abortion policymaking to the states. But more often, she says the case is about women's empowerment.
Roe v Wade, she has said, made women believe they had to pick: family or career, not both.
"The court in Roe pitted women against our children, and woman against woman," she wrote in a Washington Post op-ed.
The choice is misleading and paternalistic, argued Ms Fitch. It's a position seemingly drawn from her own life: a single mother who has ascended to the highest levels of state office, while remaining devoted to her children and grandchildren.
"Being a single mom has sort of dominated her thought process, and her life experience," Mr Dent said. "I think that's one of the reasons she feels so strongly about this".
In a world without Roe v Wade, Ms Fitch said during a television interview last year, "babies will be saved" and mothers "get a chance to really redirect their lives. They have all these new and different opportunities that they didn't have 50 years ago".
Ms Fitch has said women will be empowered by abortion bans
Pro-choice activists have accused Ms Fitch of using feminist language to cover over an inherently anti-feminist policy.
Her arguments lean "heavily into false claims that they are 'empowering women'", said Dina Montemarano, research director for NARAL Pro-Choice America. This tactic, Ms Montemarano said, is often used by anti-abortion activists to assert control over women's bodies and violate their fundamental freedoms.
In an opening brief submitted to the Supreme Court, Ms Fitch wrote of "sweeping policy advancements [which] now promote women's full pursuit of both career and family".
But in a counter-argument submitted to the Supreme Court, 154 economists warned that this optimism was "premature and false".
"Mississippi's celebration of parental leave policies is particularly bizarre, as the United States is one of only two countries without a national paid maternity leave policy," the economists wrote.
Mississippi, specifically, has no state laws mandating paid family leave. It is the poorest state in the nation and has the highest rates of both infant mortality and child poverty.
But if Roe is indeed thrown out, Ms Fitch will return to Mississippi a conservative hero.
"I'm 99% sure she will run for attorney general again," Mr Dent said. "And based on how the last three years have gone, it's hard for me to imagine she'll have any Republican opposition this time".
There are also early rumblings that she may one day run for governor. She has not yet commented on this speculation.
If she wins, Ms Fitch would be the first female governor in Mississippi's history.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61789443
|
news_world-us-canada-61789443
|
|
Four Tet wins royalty battle over streaming music - BBC News
|
2022-06-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The dance act took his former record label to court - the verdict could set a new precedent.
|
Entertainment & Arts
|
Four Tet's best songs include Butterflies, Two Thousand and Seventeen, and Lush
Pioneering electronic artist Four Tet has reached a settlement in the legal battle against his former record label.
The musician, whose real name is Kieran Hebden, sued Domino Records last year over the royalties he gets paid when his music is downloaded or streamed.
He argued that the 13.5% royalty rate he was being offered was unfair, and demanded a 50% split with the label.
In a settlement, Domino agreed to the honour the 50% rate and reimbursed the musician for historic underpayments.
It was quite a reversal for the indie label, which originally responded to the case by removing several Four Tet albums from streaming services (they were later reinstated).
"It has been a difficult and stressful experience to work my way through this court case and I'm so glad we got this positive result," wrote Hebden in a statement announcing the settlement.
"Hopefully I've opened up a constructive dialogue and maybe prompted others to push for a fairer deal on historical contracts, written at a time when the music industry operated entirely differently."
The result could set a legal precedent for contract disputes in the music business; where royalty rates have been subject to heavy scrutiny since last year's inquiry into the streaming market by MPs on the Culture Select Committee.
However, Four Tet's legal challenge was ultimately decided out of court, so any future disputes would not be able to cite a legal judgement.
"Neither the courts, nor the settlement terms, have made any determination as to how streaming should be categorised or streaming income split," said Domino Records in a statement, adding it was "pleased" that Hebden had chosen to settle the case on "financial terms first offered to him in November 2021".
This YouTube post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on YouTube The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. YouTube content may contain adverts. Skip youtube video by Four Tet This article contains content provided by Google YouTube. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Google’s cookie policy, external and privacy policy, external before accepting. To view this content choose ‘accept and continue’. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. YouTube content may contain adverts. End of youtube video by Four Tet
The dispute concerned the recording contract Hebden signed with Domino in 2001, which resulted in four albums: Pause (2001), Rounds (2003), Everything Ecstatic (2005) and There Is Love In You (2010).
The deal was signed before the advent of downloads of streams - and his dispute hinged on whether those methods of accessing his music could be defined as a "sale" or a "licence" under the terms of his contract.
The difference is far from academic because most artists receive 50% of the royalties for a licence but a much lower figure, typically between 12% and 22%, for a sale.
Historically, the difference was due to the way music was distributed: selling music in the era of CDs, vinyl and cassettes incurred huge costs in manufacturing and distribution, which meant labels needed to cover their overheads. But when music is licensed to movies, television or advertisements, artists generally get a bigger payday, on the understanding that a third party is bearing the relevant costs.
After the advent of iTunes and Spotify, labels often argued that downloads and streams should be counted as sales.
This prompted a flurry of lawsuits, especially in the US. Most famously, the producers who discovered Eminem won a case against Universal Records that forced the label to pay the higher "licensing" rate when his songs were downloaded.
Four Tet's case in the UK essentially made the same argument.
Domino had argued that digital downloads, including streams, were considered a new technology format and Hebden was only entitled to the 13.5% royalty rate (although they have paid him as much as 18% on a discretionary basis).
The case quickly became complicated, with Hebden adding a claim for breach of contract after Domino withdrew his music from streaming services; and Domino saying they may to take the case to the High Court, which Hebden could not afford.
However, in a statement posted on social media today, Hebden said he had been offered the 50% rate he had sought in a settlement, the details of which were made public.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Four Tet This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’s cookie policy, external and privacy policy, external before accepting. To view this content choose ‘accept and continue’. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. End of twitter post by Four Tet
"Domino have now agreed to treat streaming and download income as licensing income and will apply the 50% rate to streaming and download income going forward, and have reimbursed Kieran for the underpayment over recent years," said his lawyer, Aneesh Patel, in a statement.
"I really hope that my own course of action encourages anyone who might feel intimidated by challenging a record label with substantial means," added Hebden.
"Unlike Domino, I didn't work with a big law firm and luckily the case took place in the IPEC [Intellectual Property and Enterprise court] where legal costs are capped, so I was able to stand my ground."
Hebden shared images of the settlement, which showed that he would receive £56,921.08 in respect of all historical streaming and download income, dated back to July 2017, in addition to interest calculated at a rate of 5% per year.
In a statement to the BBC, Domino added: "Kieran's claim arose from differing interpretations of specific clauses in a contract entered into by Kieran and Domino in 2001 in the pre-streaming era, and the application of those clauses to streaming income.
"Since 2021 Kieran has added to and pursued his claim despite numerous attempts by Domino to settle the matter.
"The case now having been settled, we are glad to be able to dedicate our full attention to resourcing and supporting our artists and we wish Kieran continued success in his career."
Follow us on Facebook, or on Twitter @BBCNewsEnts. If you have a story suggestion email entertainment.news@bbc.co.uk.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-61871547
|
news_entertainment-arts-61871547
|
|
Archie Battersbee's family can appeal life-support ruling - BBC News
|
2022-06-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Archie's family lost a High Court battle last week when a judge ruled his life support should end.
|
Essex
|
Hollie Dance and her family have won the right to have Archie's case heard at the Court of Appeal
The parents of a 12-year-old boy have been given the right to appeal against the decision to allow his life-support treatment to end.
Last week, a High Court judge ruled that Archie Battersbee was "brain-stem dead" and treatment could stop.
However, following another hearing, the same judge, Mrs Justice Arbuthnot, granted Archie's parents permission to take the case to the Court of Appeal.
His family were "delighted" at the decision, a spokeswoman said.
Archie was found unconscious at his home in Southend, Essex, on 7 April.
The court had previously heard that he suffered brain damage during an incident which his mother believed may have been related to an online challenge.
Doctors treating him at the Royal London Hospital told the High Court it was "highly likely" he was "brain-stem dead" and asked for his life-support to end.
Mrs Justice Arbuthnot ruled in favour of the hospital and against Archie's mother and father, Hollie Dance and Paul Battersbee.
But in a High Court hearing questioning that decision, she said an argument by the family's legal team that the standard of proof in relation to "declaration of death" should have been higher was a "compelling" reason for the case to be heard by appeal judges.
The Barts Health NHS Trust, which runs the Royal London, said it would not make any changes to Archie's care while his parents sought further legal hearings.
A High Court judge ruled last week that Archie Battersbee was dead
During Monday's hearing, the family's barrister Edward Devereux QC outlined nine grounds of appeal.
Mr Devereux said for a decision of such "gravity", the judge should have been satisfied "beyond reasonable doubt" and not made a decision about Archie's treatment ending on "the balance of probabilities".
He also argued that the court had failed to accommodate the religious views of Archie and his family.
Mrs Justice Abuthnot dismissed eight of the appeal grounds but said appeal judges should consider the standard of proof issue.
She said Court of Appeal judges had never considered that issue in relation to "declaration of death" cases, adding there was a "compelling" reason for them to hear it.
Speaking after the hearing, a spokeswoman for Archie's family, Ella Carter, said: "We were all really convinced that we weren't going to get permission to appeal.
"So we're more than happy at the decision - we're delighted."
Hollie Dance said she believed her son was "still in there" and would continue to fight
Following the initial High Court ruling, Archie's mother said she was "devastated".
She told BBC Breakfast that she slept by his hospital bed each night and spoke to him every day.
Ms Dance said: "He's in there, physically, for whatever reason, whether it's locked-in syndrome, whether he's paralysed... I don't know, but I feel he's in there," she said.
The High Court previously heard evidence that Ms Dance said Archie had squeezed her hand.
Find BBC News: East of England on Facebook, Instagram and Twitter. If you have a story suggestion email eastofenglandnews@bbc.co.uk
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-61869995
|
news_uk-england-essex-61869995
|
|
Is Dominic Raab's quest to reform human rights law almost over? - BBC News
|
2022-06-21
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The deputy PM says a British Bill of Rights will keep people safer, but it faces angry opposition.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Thirteen years ago, a book was published called The Assault on Liberty: What Went Wrong with Rights?
It was seen as a polemic, about the need for a new British Bill of Rights.
A lawyer called Dominic Raab, who was also chief-of staff to the then shadow home secretary, David Davis.
Mr Raab would become a Conservative MP a year later and is now deputy prime minister and justice secretary - and he's introducing a Bill of Rights.
He's not the only politician who has been keen on this for some time.
This has long been a Conservative aspiration: the party's general election manifestos in 2010 and 2015 promised it.
But, until now at least, it hasn't had the bandwidth or numbers in Parliament to do it.
European Court of Human Rights has nothing to do with the EU
At the root of plenty of Conservative gripes about all this is the Human Rights Act, introduced by Labour in 1998.
It introduced the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law.
An organisation called the Council of Europe is behind the convention. It, confusingly, has nothing to do with the European Union.
Labour's rationale at the time was that being subject to the convention without a domestic Human Rights Act meant the judgements of the European Court of Human Rights, in Strasbourg, France, couldn't be moderated by the UK courts.
But the government's rationale now is that the effect of the Human Rights Act has been to gold-plate the decisions of the court.
When I sat down for an interview with the deputy prime minister in his Commons office, he claimed the consequence of this had been what he called a "human rights inflation" - an "expansive, elastic approach to human rights" - which had not been "subject to proper democratic oversight" and had "undermined the credibility of human rights".
So why not pull out of the convention entirely?
"Well," Mr Raab said, "I don't think pulling out of the European Convention would solve all the problems that some people suggest, because we signed up to a whole range of other conventions, for example, that prevent torture - it's also part of the Good Friday Agreement."
And to test his argument from his opponents' point of view - that he is contemplating chewing up, if not scrapping, a longstanding international commitment the UK has given - he told me: "No. We're staying within the convention.
"We're availing ourselves of the leeway that the Strasbourg court itself says that state parties have. And, do you know what, the worst thing for human rights is for it to become discredited.
"Either because we see challenges which stop us dealing with the appalling flow in human misery across the Channel, or because we've got spurious elastic interpretations of human rights that allow foreign national offenders, these dangerous people, to trump the overwhelming public interest in removing them from this country.
"That's the real threat to human rights."
Mr Raab argued that the Human Rights Act made it harder to keep the most dangerous criminals isolated from other prisoners and placed a "regulatory burden" on police forces to inform gang leaders that there may be a threat to their life.
You might think that would be the job of a police force, and Mr Raab acknowledged that, but he argued that that ought to be an operational decision officers take in each individual case, rather than a "universal, judicially enforceable human right" costing some forces "thousands and thousands of pounds".
The Bill of Rights will also, I'm told, protect the "ministerial veto" over the release of the most dangerous criminals.
The aim is that some murderers, rapists, child abusers and terrorists won't be able to walk out of prison without democratic accountability.
The bill will oblige courts to "have regard to" the importance of reducing risk to the public from convicted criminals.
This is the essence of what the government is proposing, and the debate now begins in earnest, having bubbled away for some time already.
Four parliamentary committees have already demanded the plans be "subject to the fullest amount of public and parliamentary scrutiny to ensure their appropriateness, practicality, and longevity".
They wanted this to happen as soon as possible, in what is called pre-legislative scrutiny.
Before we even see the bill itself, we can see critics lining up, likely to be noisy and angry.
The Law Society of England and Wales says it represents a "collision course with the rule of law".
Labour describes the Bill of Rights as a "con" and "fraudulent", and fears it will stop victims of terrorist attacks and disasters like Hillsborough from seeking justice.
This argument will continue for months.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61886224
|
news_uk-politics-61886224
|
|
Depp-Heard trial: Why Johnny Depp lost in the UK but won in the US - BBC News
|
2022-06-03
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Experts say key factors included having a jury trial and his lawyers using a specific legal tactic.
|
US & Canada
|
In 2020, Hollywood actor Johnny Depp lost a UK libel lawsuit against the Sun newspaper. But on Wednesday, he won a similar lawsuit against his ex-wife Amber Heard in a US courtroom.
At the start of his recent trial, many legal experts suggested that Mr Depp had a weaker chance of winning than he did in the UK, because the US has very strong free speech protections.
The fact that the jury found that Ms Heard was guilty of defamation with an article in which she claimed she was a victim of domestic abuse means they didn't believe her testimony.
Mark Stephens, an international media lawyer, told the BBC that it's "very rare" that essentially the same case is tried on two sides of the pond and gets different results.
He believes the main factor that influenced Mr Depp's victory in America was the fact that his US trial was before a jury while his UK trial, over an article in the British tabloid that called him a "wife-beater", was before a judge only.
"Amber Heard has comprehensively lost in the court of public opinion, and in front of the jury," he said.
In both the UK and the US trial, Mr Depp's lawyers argued that Ms Heard was lying - to make their case, they attacked her character and claimed that she was in fact the abusive partner.
This is a common defence tactic in sexual assault and domestic violence trials called "deny, attack, and reverse victim and offender" or "Darvo", said Mr Stephens.
The strategy turns the tables on the alleged victim, shifting the conversation away from "did the accused commit abuse" to "is the alleged victim believable".
"They deny that they did anything, they deny they're the real perpetrator, and they attack the credibility of the individual calling out the abuse, and then reverse the roles of the victim and the offender," Mr Stephens said.
In the UK trial, Mr Stephens said the judge recognised that strategy, and dismissed a lot of the evidence that did not directly address whether Mr Depp committed assault or not.
"Lawyers and judges tend not to fall for it, but it's very, very effective against juries," he said. Men are more likely to believe Darvo arguments, but female jurors are also susceptible.
"People have a paradigm in their mind of how a victim of abuse might be like and how they might behave, and of course we all know that's often false."
Hadley Freeman, a Guardian journalist who covered both cases, told the BBC that another major difference was the fact that the American trial was televised, turning the court case into "almost a sports game".
Each twist and turn of the trial was watched by millions of people - many of whom turned to social media to express support for Mr Depp.
On TikTok, the hashtag #justiceforjohnnydepp got about 19 billion views. The jury was instructed not to read about the case online, but they were not sequestered and they were allowed to keep their phones.
Ms Freeman also thinks that vitriol that the general public lobbed against Ms Heard was a "a bit of #MeToo backlash".
"'Believe women' seems a very long time ago when it comes to Amber Heard," she said.
Reputation: Depp v Heard. Watch key moments from the trial on iPlayer (UK-only).
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61673676
|
news_world-us-canada-61673676
|
|
As it happened: Cost of living - Your questions answered - BBC News
|
2022-06-17
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
With prices rising for food and fuel, our correspondent answers your questions about the cost of living crisis.
|
UK
|
‘I can’t afford to help the community’
Our colleagues at Radio 5 Live have been visiting the New Parks area of Leicester since the cost of living crisis began. Donna runs a food bank in the area and says "more and more people" are coming for help, but she and her partner are struggling to keep it open. "We're having to cut down on our voluntary work in the community because we can't afford the petrol, we need it ourselves for the shopping," she says. "I personally do 300 miles a week, so that's not feasible any more... I can't afford to help the community and it makes me feel really bad."My family comes before anyone else and as much as I want to help somebody, it's coming to a time where I can't." Shaun is a dad to three young boys. He says a lack of money is causing arguments in his house. "[The kids] don't understand that once you've paid your bills, there's nothing extra to play with," he says. "We as a family go out probably once a month because that's all we can do... they don't understand it and it's hard, but once they're older I suppose they'll understand."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-61830968
|
news_live_uk-61830968
|
|
Julian Assange can be extradited, says UK home secretary - BBC News
|
2022-06-17
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange’s extradition to the US is approved by UK Home Secretary Priti Patel.
|
UK
|
Mr Assange is wanted by the American authorities over documents leaked in 2010 and 2011
Wikileaks founder Julian Assange’s extradition to the US has been approved by UK Home Secretary Priti Patel.
Mr Assange has 14 days to appeal over the decision, the Home Office said.
It said the courts found extradition would not be "incompatible with his human rights" and that while in the US "he will be treated appropriately".
Mr Assange is wanted by the American authorities over documents leaked in 2010 and 2011, which the US says broke the law and endangered lives.
The Wikileaks documents related to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
The Australian is being held at Belmarsh prison in London after mounting a lengthy battle to avoid being extradited.
Extradition allows one country to ask another to hand over a suspect to face trial.
Responding to the home secretary's order, Wikileaks confirmed it would appeal against her decision.
Mr Assange's wife, Stella, said her husband had done "nothing wrong" and "he has committed no crime".
"He is a journalist and a publisher, and he is being punished for doing his job," she said.
In a press conference outside the British Embassy in New York, his brother Gabriel Shipton said they would take his appeal to the European Court of Human Rights if not successful in the UK's High Court.
Media company Wikileaks is a whistle-blowing platform that publishes classified material provided by anonymous sources.
This decision is the most important stage so far in Mr Assange's long legal battle.
Judges in London have already ruled that the US's request was lawful and that the American authorities would care for him properly in prison.
Now, the home secretary has carried out her role in the complicated legal process by signing off the US request.
Her officials said she was legally bound to do so because Mr Assange does not face the death penalty - nor does his case fall into the other narrow range of categories for her to refuse to approve the transfer.
In practice, this means there is nothing to stop Washington sending a jet to pick up Mr Assange - unless he can win on appeal.
If his lawyers cannot get a hearing back before judges in London, he could petition the European Court of Human Rights.
Ten years ago it ruled extradition to the US would not breach human rights - but expect the Wikileaks founder to try fresh arguments not heard back then.
In May 2019, while serving a jail sentence in the UK for breaching bail, the US justice department filed 17 charges against Mr Assange for violating the Espionage Act - alleging that material obtained by Wikileaks endangered lives.
Mr Assange's legal team claimed classified documents published by Wikileaks, which related to the Iraq and Afghanistan wars, exposed US wrongdoing and were in the public interest.
Those documents revealed how the US military had killed hundreds of civilians in unreported incidents during the war in Afghanistan, while leaked Iraq war files showed 66,000 civilians had been killed, and prisoners tortured, by Iraqi forces.
Mr Assange has been in prison since he was removed from the Ecuadorian embassy in London in 2019 and arrested by British police, after Ecuador withdrew his asylum status.
He sought asylum in 2012 in the embassy, fearing US prosecution, and stayed there for seven years. He claimed he was a victim of human rights abuses and would face a life sentence if extradited.
The Supreme Court ruled in March that Mr Assange's case raised no legal questions over assurances the US had given to the UK about how he was likely to be treated.
Previously UK judges blocked his extradition because of concerns about his mental health.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: From 'teenage hacker' to fighting US extradition - the Julian Assange story
Amnesty International said enabling the extradition to take place "would put him at great risk and sends a chilling message to journalists".
"Diplomatic assurances provided by the US that Assange will not be kept in solitary confinement cannot be taken on face value given previous history," general secretary Agnes Callamard said.
Former government minister David Davis said he did not believe Mr Assange would have a fair trial in the US.
"This extradition treaty needs to be rewritten to give British and American citizens identical rights, unlike now," he said.
A Home Office spokesperson said under the Extradition Act 2003 the secretary of state "must sign" an extradition order if there were "no grounds to prohibit the order being made".
"The UK courts have not found that it would be oppressive, unjust or an abuse of process to extradite Mr Assange," the Home Office added.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61839256
|
news_uk-61839256
|
|
Nicola Sturgeon to launch fresh Scottish independence campaign - BBC News
|
2022-06-13
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Scotland's first minister says she still plans to hold a referendum by the end of next year.
|
Scotland politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. "Yes" - Nicola Sturgeon asked if she is firing the indyref2 starting gun
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon is to launch a fresh campaign for Scottish independence.
Asked whether she was now formally beginning the campaign for indyref2, the first minister replied: "Yes".
She also insisted she still planned to hold another vote before the end of next year.
Ms Sturgeon said she would unveil the first in a series of new papers setting out the case for independence on Tuesday.
She added: "Had we known in 2014 everything we know now about the path the UK would have taken then, I've got no doubt Scotland would have voted yes back then."
The first referendum on Scottish independence took place on 18 September 2014 when 55% of voters said "No" to the change while 45% said "Yes".
Supporters of the Union have accused the Scottish government of being obsessed with independence.
The first paper on the new independence push - entitled 'Wealthier, Happier, Fairer: Why Not Scotland?' - will be a "scene setter" which will compare Scotland and the UK to other European countries and set out why the government believes the country would be better off if it were independent.
Ms Sturgeon added that subsequent papers would look at a number of areas including;
The first minister told the BBC: "The conclusion very clearly is that Scotland could be doing much better as an independent country... Nobody right now can look at the UK - the mess it's in currently and its prospects for the UK outside of the European Union surely and conclude anything other than that Scotland can do better as an independent country."
She said that a bill to bring about the referendum, or a timescale for putting forward a bill, would also be set out shortly.
Ms Sturgeon acknowledged that whether Holyrood had the power to legislate for a referendum was contested, and had not yet been tested in the courts.
She said: "That is the issue we are currently navigating so that we can deliver a lawful process," - adding that more details on those plans would come soon too.
Ms Sturgeon has always said that she wants any referendum to be officially recognised, which therefore means the power to hold a fresh vote must be passed from Westminster to Holyrood (as it was to allow for the 2014 referendum - in which voters backed remaining in the UK by 55% to 45% - to take place).
However, the UK government has shown no sign it would be willing to give the formal consent that ensured the legality of the 2014 referendum again.
Ms Sturgeon insisted her government had a mandate to hold a further ballot, and accused the UK government of respecting neither democracy nor the rule of law.
Before the 2014 vote the UK government passed powers to Holyrood to hold the referendum
In a wide-ranging interview with BBC Scotland, the first minister also defended plans to make public sector cuts.
Last week, her government set out plans to cut tens of thousands of public sector jobs.
It followed a warning from a think tank that the Scottish government will face a £3.5bn gap opening up between spending and income.
Asked whether now was the right time to hold another vote, the first minister said the case for independence was not "abstract" or "separate" to the challenges the country faced.
"It's exactly about how we best equip ourselves to navigate those challenges so we don't have our budget set by Westminster, but we are in charge of these decisions ourselves," she said.
"So many of these challenges if not caused by then are absolutely exacerbated by the fact we are not independent. So yes this is the time."
In response to the new campaign for a referendum, the Scottish Conservatives' Donald Cameron said the vast majority did not want the "distraction" of another referendum next year.
He said the public wanted 100% of the government's focus to be on Covid recovery, the cost-of-living crisis, and supporting the health service.
Sarah Boyack, of Scottish Labour, said the government's attention was "still on their constitutional obsession".
She said it was an "appalling waste of time, energy and money" and that independence would "make Brexit look like a walk in the park".
Alex Cole-Hamilton, the Scottish Lib Dem leader, said the Scottish government cared "more about their independence obsession than everyone stuck on the longest NHS waiting lists in history, the cost of living crisis or the climate emergency.
"Nobody believes education is Nicola Sturgeon's top priority any more.
Nicola Sturgeon has a Holyrood majority for indyref2 when all the SNP and Green votes are added together.
What she does not have is the undisputed power to hold a referendum on Scotland's constitutional future.
That was secured in 2014 through an agreement with the UK government which lent Holyrood the power to put a referendum beyond legal challenge.
This time that will almost certainly not be forthcoming and if Holyrood legislates anyway, the bill is likely to be challenged in the UK Supreme Court.
I don't expect the bill or even a timetable for it to emerge this week.
The paper being published on Tuesday is likely to set out big picture arguments for independence rather than a process designed to break the deadlock over holding a referendum.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61785553
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61785553
|
|
Don't go to Ukraine, military boss tells Britons - BBC News
|
2022-06-13
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The head of the UK's armed forces also rejects Ukraine's call for a no-fly zone, saying it will not help.
|
UK
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Watch: We have a direct line to Moscow, says UK chief of defence staff Adm Sir Tony Radakin
Britons should not head to Ukraine to fight and should instead help however they can from the UK, the head of the armed forces has said.
Speaking to the BBC, Adm Sir Tony Radakin rejected Ukraine's call for a no-fly zone saying it would not help tactically and might escalate fighting.
He urged the West to have confidence that they were doing the "right thing".
The invasion was not going well, Russia was becoming less powerful and it cannot continue, he said.
On Britons wanting to join the fight, Adm Radakin said that the "sound of gunfire" was not "something you want to rush to", and urged people to support Ukraine in sensible ways from the UK.
Asked whether Foreign Secretary Liz Truss had been right to say she would support any Briton who wanted to fight, he said: "We can all understand that sentiment, and that sentiment needs to be channelled into support for Ukraine."
Senior UK military officers are genuinely worried that some British troops - regulars or reservists - might try to join the battle in Ukraine and, in doing so, risk handing Russia a propaganda victory.
Last week the Chief of Defence People, Lt Gen James Swift, sent out a message to the chain of command stressing that UK military personnel were "not authorised" to travel there.
He said that if there was any suspicion that troops were trying to make their way to Ukraine then it should be reported immediately to the Service Police.
The message warned that if serving British military personnel went to fight in Ukraine then they were putting not only their lives in danger but they also risked giving "the mistaken perception" to Russia that Britain had sent in troops to engage in hostilities.
Adm Sir Tony Radakin has now underlined that message, saying it would be "unlawful and unhelpful".
At present the MoD does not believe there are any examples of full-time British military personnel going absent to fight in Ukraine. But it's harder for them to keep tabs on reservists who often also have another career.
In his interview with the BBC's Sunday Morning show, the defence chief painted a picture of Russian forces suffering from heavy losses and low morale, with kit failings and a massive military convoy stalled outside the capital, Kyiv.
The Kremlin has lost more troops in a week than the UK did in 20 years in Afghanistan, he said, and some "lead elements of Russian forces" have been decimated.
He described stories of soldiers whose morale had been so knocked they had abandoned the convoy destined for Kyiv to camp in the forest.
Ukrainian servicemen near Kyiv - a huge convoy of Russian troops has stopped its advance outside the capital
On Saturday, Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky delivered a fiery speech saying the West's reluctance to implement a no-fly zone over Ukraine had given Russia "a green light" to continue bombarding towns and villages.
But Adm Radakin insisted such an intervention would not help.
"The advice that we, as senior military professionals are giving our politicians, is to avoid doing things that are tactically ineffective and definitely to avoid doing things that tactically might lead to miscalculation or escalation."
He said most of the shelling and destruction was coming from artillery, not Russian aircraft, and to police a no-fly zone could mean taking out Russian defence systems and shooting down Russian aircraft - leading to an escalation, he added.
Speaking later on the same programme, UK deputy prime minister Dominic Raab said he understood Ukraine's cri de coeur but insisted the West had been clear all along that it would not engage in direct military confrontation.
That would give succour to Russian President Vladimir Putin's argument that he was in conflict with the West, he said.
Mr Putin said on Saturday that any such move to implement a no-fly zone would be seen "as participation in an armed conflict by that country".
The West has to maintain calmness and responsibility and not react rashly to the latest "bizarre or ridiculous comment" from Mr Putin, he said.
"We are prepared, we are professional armed forces, we will approach this conflict with that level of professionalism and responsibility that you would expect.
"We will also be incredibly confident in our ability to face down President Putin," he added.
He gave an insight into relations with his counterpart, Gen Valery Gerasimov, head of Russian armed forces, explaining the Ministry of Defence has a direct line to Moscow's operational headquarters.
It is tested every day, he said, and he has used the line to tell Gen Gerasimov they need to speak. "I'm waiting for him to come back to me," he added.
Adm Radakin was also asked whether the West would know beforehand whether Mr Putin would use nuclear weapons.
He said he did not want to go into detail but there had been a "remarkable" level of intelligence in the months leading up to the invasion.
"There are some more discreet elements in terms of warning signs if this was going to start to chart a path towards nuclear escalation," he said.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-60637185
|
news_uk-60637185
|
|
Starmer investigated by standards watchdog over late gift registrations - BBC News
|
2022-06-13
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Labour leader appears to have missed the deadline in declaring Arsenal tickets and an oil painting.
|
UK Politics
|
Parliament's standards commissioner is investigating whether Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer broke the rules by being late in registering earnings and gifts.
MPs must declare within 28 days any interest which might be reasonably considered to influence their actions.
Sir Keir appears to have missed this deadline on several occasions, including over Arsenal FC tickets and a payment made for writing a book.
He said: "I am confident there is no problem here."
Gifts and payments received by MPs are regularly published fortnightly in the Register of Members' Financial Interests.
Standards commissioner Kathryn Stone is believed to be looking into tickets received by Sir Keir for football matches involving Arsenal - whom the Labour leader supports - against Crystal Palace and Watford, worth £720 and £1,416 respectively.
These were declared more than 28 days late, as was an £18,450 advance payment from publisher Harper Collins for a book outlining his early life and plans for governing the UK, and making "a fierce argument for the vital role of respect and integrity in political life".
The fee for this work is being donated to charity.
Sir Keir also received an oil painting worth £1,500 from a donor called Tim Benson on 23 November last year, which was registered on 20 December.
Food delivery firm Just Eat also gifted him tickets to the British Kebab Awards and Taste of London event, passed on to the Labour leader's staff, which were declared more than 28 days after they were received.
A spokesperson for the Labour leader said: "Keir Starmer takes his declaration responsibilities very seriously and has already apologised for the fact that administrative errors in his office have led to a small number of late declarations.
"The standards commissioner has asked for more information which we are happy to provide."
Prime Minister Boris Johnson was found by the standards commissioner to have breached the rules on late declarations in 2018 and 2019.
The first occasion involved earnings of more than £50,000 and the second involved part-ownership of a property in Somerset.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61781601
|
news_uk-politics-61781601
|
|
Rwanda asylum plan: Court allows first flight to go ahead - BBC News
|
2022-06-13
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The UK government's first flight taking asylum seekers to Rwanda will now go ahead tomorrow evening.
|
UK
|
The government's first flight taking asylum seekers to Rwanda can go ahead on Tuesday, appeal court judges say.
It supports a previous decision by the High Court that it was in the "public interest" for the government to carry out its policies.
Under the scheme, some of those entering the UK illegally will be flown to Rwanda to apply for asylum there.
Campaigners were trying to stop the flight before a full hearing on whether the policy is lawful next month.
The charity Detention Action and the PCS union that represents some Border Force staff, who were among the groups who brought the case, said they were "disappointed" by the decision.
Eight people are expected to fly to the landlocked east African country on Tuesday evening, a Home Office source told the BBC.
The numbers drastically reduced after legal challenges relating to modern slavery and human rights claims, according to a government source.
The government says the scheme will discourage dangerous journeys across the English Channel and therefore undermine smuggling gangs, but charities, religious leaders and opposition parties have criticised it.
People sent to Rwanda will be given accommodation and support while their asylum application is considered by the Rwandan government.
If they are successful, they can stay there with up to five years' access to education and support.
If they are not, they will be offered the chance to apply for other immigration routes, but could still face deportation.
At the urgent hearing on Monday, three senior judges ruled there was no error in the High Court judge's decision last week to allow the flight to go ahead.
They also refused permission for an appeal to the Supreme Court against their decision.
Just before the ruling, SNP home affairs spokesman Stuart McDonald told MPs in the Commons it was a "cash-for-deportations" policy "akin to state-sponsored trafficking and transportation".
But Home Office minister Tom Pursglove replied that the comparison was "plain wrong" and "very offensive not just to this government but also, I'd argue, hugely offensive to the Rwandans too".
Mr Pursglove said the policy offers "new opportunities for those relocated to Rwanda" and "people will no longer be able to pay evil people smugglers to go to a destination of their choice while passing through safe, sometimes several safe, countries."
Meanwhile, the head of the UN Refugee Agency, Filippo Grandi, said the plans were "all wrong" and could set a "catastrophic" precedent.
And leaders of the Church of England - including the archbishops of Canterbury and York - wrote in the Times that it was an "immoral policy that shames Britain".
Later on Monday a High Court judge dismissed a separate, similar challenge brought by charity Asylum Aid.
A lawyer for the charity argued asylum seekers were "effectively guinea pigs" for a process that hadn't been properly tested, but the judge concluded some of their arguments were "thin".
More than 10,000 people have made the dangerous journey across the Channel so far this year. Another 37 people were brought into Dover by Border Force earlier on Monday.
This is a major legal victory for Home Secretary Priti Patel.
The Court of Appeal's decision underlines one of the principles of how the law works: if a judge decides there's no pressing need for an injunction, then unless there is a major legal fault with their reasoning, more senior judges should not overturn their decision.
General concerns about the human rights of would-be passengers, in the broadest sense of the phrase, have been repeatedly raised over the last couple of days.
Yet the courts have shown, contrary to the views of some commentators, that those safeguards are not a bar to the government pursuing its policy objectives if the law appears to be correct.
Lord Justice Singh noted that the outcome of next month's full challenge to the policy could hypothetically see asylum seekers returned to the UK, were they to win the day.
But the more immediate question is this: how many asylum seekers will actually be on the flight?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61789982
|
news_uk-61789982
|
|
Rebel Wilson: Australian paper offers apology but denies outing actress - BBC News
|
2022-06-13
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Australian reporter apologises after he was accused of trying to "out" the actor last week.
|
Australia
|
Wilson revealed her new relationship on Friday, describing her partner as her "Disney princess"
An Australian newspaper has removed a gossip column and its writer has offered an apology after being accused of outing actress Rebel Wilson.
On Friday, Wilson shared a picture of her with her new partner, saying she had found her "Disney princess".
But the following day, the Sydney Morning Herald wrote they'd known about the relationship before it was public.
Their celebrity reporter said he had given Wilson 1.5 days to provide comment for a story.
That report sparked widespread criticism on social media, with LGBTQ+ campaigners saying it was unacceptable to put pressure on people to come out.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post by Sarah Holland-Batt This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’s cookie policy, external and privacy policy, external before accepting. To view this content choose ‘accept and continue’. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 2 by Sally Rugg This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’s cookie policy, external and privacy policy, external before accepting. To view this content choose ‘accept and continue’. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
A Stonewall spokesperson said: "Coming out is a deeply personal decision. Whether, when and how to come out should be decided by the individual, entirely on their terms.
"It is simply not OK to 'out' LGBTQ+ people or put pressure on us to come out. Media outlets should take care not to sensationalise LGBTQ+ lives and relationships."
In response, the newspaper denied pressuring Wilson, saying it had "simply asked questions".
But on Monday, amid continued public backlash, columnist Andrew Hornery admitted they had "mishandled steps in our approach".
"It is not the Herald's business to 'out' people and that is not what we set out to do. But I understand why my email has been seen as a threat. The framing of it was a mistake."
He also said that "as a gay man, I'm well aware of how deeply discrimination hurts" and that he would not wish to "inflict that pain on someone else".
He included in his Monday column the email he had sent Wilson's representatives last Thursday morning.
In it he had written that he had "enough detail to publish" and "several sources", before specifying a Friday 13:00 deadline.
"In the interests of transparency and fairness, before publishing I am reaching out to Rebel to see if she will engage….," he'd written.
Wilson did not respond to the email before making her own post on Friday. She has not directly acknowledged the newspaper's actions.
But in response to a Twitter post saying it wasn't her choice to come out, the 42-year-old Australian actress, who is known for roles in Bridesmaids and Pitch Perfect among others, said it was a "very hard situation but trying to handle it with grace".
Wilson's post about her relationship with leisurewear designer Ramona Agruma prompted a wave of congratulations from fans and famous friends - along with more than 1.6 million likes.
But in his original column, Hornery claimed that Wilson had "opted to gazump the story" after he'd been in touch.
He added that "her choice to ignore our discreet, genuine and honest queries was, in our view, underwhelming".
In Monday's note he acknowledged "the tone of my column on Saturday was also off".
"I got it wrong," he admitted. "I allowed my disappointment to cast a shadow over the piece. That was not fair and I apologise."
In 2022 you might rightly wonder why someone's sexuality is of interest to anyone, let alone a front-page story in a newspaper.
People within the LGBT community will probably agree that the very first time you tell family, friends or work colleagues is a day that you vividly remember. Many might want to shout it from the rooftops, others may choose to keep that part of themselves separate to other aspects of their life.
But Rebel Wilson didn't seem to get that option and announced it to the world herself, before others could.
Thanks to social media, celebrities can now have a greater control of their own narrative and Rebel made sure she got ahead to say what she wanted and has been widely welcomed and supported.
The fact that I am writing this and you're reading it shows that there is still an interest, even in the 21st century. Maybe it's more the nature of how this emerged and the way it was handled that is stoking that though.
No matter how famous a person is, there is an argument that their love life is their business alone. The criticism the Sydney Morning Herald has received does seem to show that's an opinion many appear to agree with.
The newspaper's editor, Bevan Shields, was also criticised when he issued an 'editors note' on Sunday defending the report.
In it he denied the paper had outed Wilson, saying the newsroom had made no decision on whether a report would have been published.
He wrote: "Like other mastheads do every day, we simply asked questions and as standard practice included a deadline for a response."
That response sparked further anger on social media.
This Twitter post cannot be displayed in your browser. Please enable Javascript or try a different browser. View original content on Twitter The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Skip twitter post 3 by Magda Szubanski AO This article contains content provided by Twitter. We ask for your permission before anything is loaded, as they may be using cookies and other technologies. You may want to read Twitter’s cookie policy, external and privacy policy, external before accepting. To view this content choose ‘accept and continue’. The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-australia-61780861
|
news_world-australia-61780861
|
|
Arizona police placed on leave after watching man drown - BBC News
|
2022-06-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Three Arizona officers watched a man who was begging for help drown in a reservoir.
|
US & Canada
|
Police body cam footage shows the officers interacting with Sean Bickings before he gets into Tempe Town Lake
Three police officers in Arizona have been placed on leave after they failed to rescue a homeless man from drowning.
Newly released bodycam footage and transcripts show the man, Sean Bickings, 34, getting into Tempe Town Lake last month and warning police he was "going to drown".
But none of the officers on the scene intervened to save him, with one heard saying: "I'm not jumping in after you."
Mr Bickings soon slipped underwater and was later declared dead.
Describing him as "an unsheltered Tempe community member", city authorities called his death a "tragedy".
The incident took place after 05:00 local time (12:00 GMT) on 28 May, when officers responded to a call about an alleged fight between the man and his partner in the city centre.
According to the city's statement, the couple "cooperated fully and denied that any physical argument had taken place".
However, police footage showed that while officers were checking the couple's names for outstanding arrest warrants, Mr Bickings climbed over a metal fence dividing the boardwalk from the lake and entered the water.
He told the officers he was going "for a swim", waded in and swam towards a bridge even after they informed him swimming was not allowed in the lake.
The 12-minute bodycam video ends around this time, with a message at the end saying it has been cut short "due to the sensitive nature of the remaining portion of the recording".
The city instead provided a transcript of the remainder of the exchange, in which Mr Bickings repeatedly said he was on the verge of drowning and needed to be saved.
The transcript also showed officers tried to calm down Mr Bickings' companion as she grew increasingly distraught, telling her they were getting a boat.
At one point, she shouted: "He's drowning right in front of you and you won't help."
The three officers involved in the incident have not been named.
They are on "non-disciplinary paid administrative leave" as their response is examined by the Arizona Department of Public Safety and the police department of neighbouring Scottsdale.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61712871
|
news_world-us-canada-61712871
|
|
Ukraine war: Five ways Russia's invasion may play out - BBC News
|
2022-06-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
As the offensive intensifies in the country's east, what will happen next? Here are some potential scenarios.
|
Europe
|
Residents look for belongings in the rubble of their home after a Russian strike in the eastern Ukrainian region of Donbas
Wars ebb and flow. Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine is no exception.
Early fears of a swift conquest were succeeded by Russian retreat and Ukrainian resistance. That has now been met by a more focused Russian offensive in the east.
But 100 days on, where might this war go next?
Here are five potential scenarios - they are not mutually exclusive, but all are within the bounds of plausibility.
The war might continue for months - if not years - as Russian and Ukrainian forces grind each other down.
Momentum shifts to and fro as both sides make gains and losses. Neither side is willing to give up. Russia's President Putin judges he can gain by demonstrating strategic patience, gambling that Western countries will suffer from "Ukraine fatigue" and focus more on their economic crises and the threat from China.
The West, however, shows resolve and continues to supply Ukraine with weapons. Semi-permanent front lines are established. Steadily the war becomes a frozen conflict, a "forever war".
Mick Ryan, a retired Australian general and military scholar, says: "There is little prospect of a crushing operational or strategic victory by either side in the short term. Neither belligerent has demonstrated the capacity to land a strategically decisive blow."
What if President Putin were to surprise the world with a unilateral ceasefire? He could pocket his territorial gains and declare "victory".
He could claim his "military operation" was complete: Russian-backed separatists in Donbas protected; a land corridor to Crimea established. He could then seek the moral high ground, putting pressure on Ukraine to stop fighting.
"This is a ploy which could be used by Russia at any time, if it wants to capitalise on European pressure on Ukraine to surrender and give up territory in exchange for notional peace," says Keir Giles, Russia expert at the Chatham House think tank.
Russia's President Putin may gamble on Western countries suffering from "Ukraine fatigue" and switching focus to their economies
The arguments are heard already in Paris, Berlin and Rome: no need to prolong the war, time to end the global economic pain, let's push for a ceasefire.
This, though, would be opposed by the US, the UK and much of eastern Europe, where policymakers believe Russia's invasion must fail, for the sake of Ukraine and the international order.
So a unilateral Russian ceasefire might change the narrative but not end the fighting.
What if both Ukraine and Russia conclude they cannot achieve more militarily and enter talks for a political settlement?
Their armies are exhausted, running short of manpower and munitions. The price in blood and treasure no longer justifies further fighting. Russia's military and economic losses are not sustainable. The Ukrainian people tire of war, unwilling to risk more lives for an eternally elusive victory.
What if the leadership in Kyiv - no longer trusting continued Western support - decide the time has come to talk? US President Joe Biden openly admits America's aim is for Ukraine to be "in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table".
But there may not be a battlefield stalemate for many months and any political settlement would be hard, not least because of Ukraine's lack of trust in Russia. A peace deal might not endure and could be followed by more fighting.
Could Ukraine - against the odds - achieve something close to a victory? Could Ukraine force Russian troops to withdraw to where they were before the invasion?
"Ukraine will definitely win this war," the country's President Volodymyr Zelensky told Dutch TV this week.
What if Russia fails to seize all Donbas and suffers more losses? Western sanctions hit Russia's war machine. Ukraine makes counter attacks, using its new long-range rockets, seizing back territory where Russian supply lines are stretched. Ukraine transforms its army from a defensive to an offensive force.
The US said it would supply Ukraine with weapons including medium-range High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS)
This scenario is plausible enough for policymakers to worry already about its consequences. If Mr Putin were facing defeat, might he escalate, potentially using either chemical or nuclear weapons?
The historian Niall Ferguson told a seminar at Kings College, London recently: "It seems unlikely to me that Putin is going to accept conventional military defeat when he has a nuclear option."
And what of a possible Russian "victory"?
Western officials emphasise that Russia, despite early setbacks, still plans to seize the capital Kyiv and subjugate much of Ukraine. "Those maximalist objectives remain in place," one official said.
Russia could capitalise on its gains in Donbas, freeing up forces for use elsewhere, perhaps even targeting Kyiv once again. The sheer weight of Russian numbers come to bear. Ukrainian forces continue to suffer.
Ukraine's President Zelensky met servicemen in the eastern Kharkiv region, where fighting has intensified
President Zelensky already admits up to 100 Ukrainian soldiers are dying and another 500 are wounded every day.
The people of Ukraine could divide, some wanting to fight on, others wanting to sue for peace. Some Western countries might tire of supporting Ukraine. But equally, if they thought Russia was winning, others might want to escalate.
One Western diplomat told me privately the West should test a nuclear weapon in the Pacific as a warning to Russia.
The future of this war is not yet written.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61674469
|
news_world-europe-61674469
|
|
Where does the U-turn journey end for Douglas Ross? - BBC News
|
2022-06-07
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Political editor Glenn Campbell says questions are being asked about the Scottish Tory's leadership qualities.
|
Scotland politics
|
Douglas Ross has performed two U-turns over Boris Johnson's premiership
Boris Johnson was never Douglas Ross's first choice to be UK Conservative leader but he did back him in the 2019 contest to replace Theresa May.
He has not said whether he now regrets that decision but he has certainly changed his mind about him. More than once.
In January, Mr Ross withdrew his support for Boris Johnson saying his position had become "untenable" over lockdown parties and calling for a confidence vote.
He then reversed that position when the war in Ukraine started, arguing that political upheaval at home would play into the hands of Vladimir Putin.
That no longer seems to be of primary concern, Mr Ross having now completed a double U-turn by voting for the motion of no confidence in Boris Johnson's leadership.
In a statement, he said that while the timing of the vote was not ideal, he had listened to public anger over Partygate and could not in "good faith" continue to back the PM.
That decision brings him into line with the bulk of his Tory colleagues at Holyrood, but his numerous changes in position have raised questions about his own leadership capabilities.
As one pro-Johnson MP put it, he would be reluctant to be driven anywhere by Douglas Ross for fear of not knowing where the journey might end!
The reality is that, given his flip-flopping form, the Scottish Tory leader would have faced criticism and embarrassment whichever way he'd voted.
Either for backing a law-breaking PM that the Scottish party has blamed for heavy losses in the recent local elections or - as it turns out - for abandoning him despite having insisted he should continue to lead the UK through the Ukraine crisis.
Mr Ross was one of the 148 Tory MPs who expressed no confidence and among four of the six Tories with Westminster seats in Scotland to take that position.
The Scottish rebels are fairly unusual in that they have all publicly declared how they voted in what was a secret ballot.
The MP John Lamont quit as an aide to the foreign secretary, Liz Truss, after he cast his vote against the PM.
It's not clear if former Scottish Secretary David Mundell (who was dumped from Cabinet by Mr Johnson) will be able to continue as a trade envoy to New Zealand after his rebellion.
MP Andrew Bowie - the fourth Scottish Tory MP refusing to back the PM - stepped down from his role as a vice-chair of the UK Conservative party some time ago.
This rift between MPs and their leader is not sustainable. It's hard to imagine, for example, a UK general election campaign with key Scottish Tories unable to endorse their own candidate for Number 10.
On the other side of the argument - still standing by their leader - MPs David Duguid and Alister Jack, who sits in Cabinet as Scottish secretary.
In a statement, Mr Jack said the PM's 211 votes represented a "clear majority" and that it was time to move on from Partygate and "get on with what really matters".
That may be wishful thinking on his part because having won the vote, Boris Johnson has also publicly lost the confidence of two fifths of his own MPs.
That's a worse result than his predecessor Theresa May got and she was forced to resign six months later.
It's not certain Boris Johnson will suffer the same fate, but nor is it certain that he will be able to govern effectively in the months ahead.
The trouble with rebellion is it can be habit-forming and if only a few dozen Tory MPs switch sides in certain Commons votes, the government loses. Even the threat of that could divert ministers from their course.
There is the potential for further trouble in Conservative ranks if the party suffers defeat in the forthcoming by-elections in Wakefield and in Tiverton and Honiton - which certainly look difficult for the Tories.
A privileges committee inquiry examining whether or not Boris Johnson knowingly misled parliament over Partygate is another potential flashpoint.
That does not mean the PM - protected as he is from another confidence vote for a year - is without agency. He has the power to reset policy in an effort to renew his appeal to Tory MPs and the wider public.
He is expected to bring forward new measures to cut childcare costs and help more people onto the housing ladder in the coming days.
Some have speculated that raising the prospect of an early general election might help him concentrate minds.
It is to his advantage that his critics currently lack an obvious candidate to replace him as Tory leader and PM.
Having won the confidence vote, Boris Johnson's premiership continues but with reduced authority which, as previous prime ministers have found, is not easy to regain.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61715628
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61715628
|
|
G7 face battle for unity as cost of Ukraine war mounts - BBC News
|
2022-06-25
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Russian war against Ukraine will inevitably dominate the summit of G7 nations in Bavaria.
|
Europe
|
An unexploded Russian bomb is removed from a block in Kharkiv
The Russian war against Ukraine will inevitably dominate the summit of G7 nations in Bavaria.
And the leaders of the US, UK, Germany, France, Italy, Canada and Japan face a difficult challenge.
They are aiming to put on a show of unity and resolve over the war. In recent months, the Western alliance has shown signs of strain and fatigue.
Some voices - particularly in France, Germany and Italy - have asked if it might not be better for the war to end, even if it came at the cost of Ukraine having to cede territory. A recent cross-Europe opinion poll suggested some voters put solving the cost-of-living crisis ahead of punishing Russia.
Others argue about the need to salvage some kind of relationship with Russia in the future.
Countries like the UK, Poland and the three Baltic States have been resisting these arguments, saying that any peace deal with Moscow that is not on Ukraine's terms would lead to further Russian aggression in the future. President Zelensky is likely to reinforce this argument when he addresses the summit virtually on Monday.
So the G7 leaders are expected to try to use the summit to clear these muddy waters, promising more weapons to Ukraine and more sanctions against Russia. The idea will be to send a signal to Russian President Vladimir Putin that the West has the strategic patience to maintain its support for Ukraine, even if it faces domestic political pressure at home from voters concerned about rising prices.
The problem for G7 leaders is they also face growing pressure to show they are tackling the global economic crisis. The soaring price of fuel and food is causing hunger and unrest across the world. And some countries are pointing the finger at the West.
Many countries in the global south do not share Western concerns about Russian aggression. They see the conflict as a European war and seem unmoved by Western arguments that Vladimir Putin is acting as a colonial aggressor. And they blame Western sanctions - as much as Russia's invasion - for the rising costs of gas and oil, and the massive shortage of wheat and fertiliser.
To try to resist this narrative, G7 countries are expected to use the summit to show they are acting to help countries round the world - with development aid, debt restructuring, climate finance, help finding alternative sources of energy and, of course, fresh efforts to get grain out of Ukraine's ports. That is why Germany has invited the leaders of India, Indonesia, Senegal, Argentina and South Africa to the summit, to hear their perspective and show the rest of the world the G7 is listening.
So on the one hand, these Western leaders must show resolve to keep backing Ukraine, and on the other, they must show a readiness to fix the global economic shocks that some blame, in part, on the war.
One senior US official described the dilemma thus: "How do we maximise pain on Putin's regime? How do we minimise spillbacks back to the rest of the world?"
That is quite a circle to square.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61940007
|
news_world-europe-61940007
|
|
Roe v Wade: Why this is a seismic day in America - BBC News
|
2022-06-25
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The divide in America has become even deeper after this Supreme Court ruling, writes Sarah Smith.
|
US & Canada
|
The abortion debate has divided America - and is unlikely to be settled by this Supreme Court decision
The Supreme Court just lobbed a constitutional hand grenade into the raging culture wars in the US, igniting a fresh battle in this decades-long fight over abortion.
In a 6-3 ruling, the court found that there was no constitutional right to abortion, turning the decision of whether to allow abortions or not up to the states. Millions of women are now expected to lose access.
While this legal ruling will change the law, it will not settle the arguments over abortion. It will inflame them.
Jubilant anti-abortion campaigners have achieved something that seemed practically impossible only a few years ago. They believe thousands of babies' lives will now be saved.
Pro-choice advocates are left utterly dismayed as they think women's rights have just been set back 50 years. Back to a time when women died as a result of illegal back-street abortions.
Recent polls suggest around two-thirds of Americans did not want to see the constitutional right to abortion removed.
In such contentious times, even the lofty Supreme Court itself becomes a leading character in the narrative, not just an adjudicator. Before this ruling came out, a man with a gun and knife was arrested outside the home of one of the more conservative justices, saying he was upset by a leak of the draft ruling. Supreme Court justices now have to have security protection. That's how incendiary this issue is.
This decision was based on their interpretation of constitutional law, but it's also deeply political. When the court overturns a previous ruling it inevitably looks to critics to be more political than constitutional.
The court has a 6-3 conservative super majority, thanks to the three justices appointed by Donald Trump. He made a specific campaign promise to appoint judges who would overturn Roe v Wade - and those appointments will probably be his most lasting legacy.
Donald Trump at the March for Life in 2019
The seismic political impact of the Supreme Court's ruling will be felt across all 50 states, but the immediate practical impact of much more restrictive laws is likely to happen in half of them.
One of those states is Oklahoma, which last month passed the most restrictive abortion legislation in America - a total ban from the point of conception with few exceptions.
When I met state representative Wendi Stearman in Tulsa, she told me it is her honour and privilege to have authored the bill. She says she will be helping 4,000 unborn children every year "to have a chance at life".
When I asked her if she believed the legislation will stop abortions happening in Oklahoma she said no - but that it will make them more difficult to obtain.
She argues that in all but a tiny minority of cases women can choose not to become pregnant before conception and that "most women just use abortion as a form of contraception".
That's an argument vehemently refuted by Andrea Gallego,, who runs an abortion clinic in Tulsa. She says the decision to have an abortion is often the hardest decision any woman will ever make.
A few weeks ago her clinic was treating around 40 pregnant patients every day. When I visited, the waiting rooms and treatment facilities were completely empty. Only a few staff remain - answering calls and giving out information about clinics in other states.
"Patients have been begging for help," she says. "It's devastating. These laws don't prevent abortion. They just add extra burdens to patients."
What is already happening in Oklahoma will now be replicated in other states.
Now that Roe v Wade is overturned, 26 states could further restrict abortion access, including 13 states that have passed so-called trigger laws, which would introduce bans immediately upon the court's decision. Less than a third of those states would include exceptions for rape of incest, according to the legislation they have already passed, or are trying to pass.
Democratic-controlled states like California and New York will cast themselves as abortion sanctuaries, welcoming women from places where the procedure has been outlawed. There are 20 states in all where abortion will remain a protected right. About 26.5 million women of childbearing age live in those states.
As abortion clinics close down in states that have outlawed the practice many more are expected to open near state borders in places where it is still allowed. Those who don't have the time or money to travel may resort to other means - such as ordering abortion-inducing pills online - even if it is illegal.
There were somewhere between 600,000 and 800,000 abortions in the US in 2019. According to the Center for Disease Control, about one in six pregnancies end in abortion, and over 90% occur in the first trimester. Over half of women who get abortions are already mothers, and for most, it is their first abortion.
The court's decision could not be more timely, as Americans are set to vote for their representatives in Congress later this year.
Facing a thrashing in November's elections, the Democrats hope the abortion issue will galvanise pro-choice women to come out and vote for them. But they have already failed in their attempt to get Congress to introduce legislation to grant a federal right to abortion, which would have stopped individual states from banning the procedure.
Even if Democrats keep control of the House and Senate, they won't be able to overturn this court ruling.
On the other side, there are plenty of Republicans who would like to legislate for a federal abortion ban that would outlaw abortion across all states. That may be the coming battle if Republicans take control of Congress after the next election.
Further fights may be had over how this ruling affects certain types of contraception or IVF treatment. And some have questioned whether similar legal arguments can be used to undermine same-sex marriage.
America today feels like one country that contains two very separate nations, inhabited by two tribes that have completely different values, beliefs and goals. Now, they have just moved farther apart.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61929438
|
news_world-us-canada-61929438
|
|
Johnson hints that new coal mine for Cumbria will get go-ahead - BBC News
|
2022-06-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The government faces a huge decision over what to do in Cumbria, amid employment and climate concerns.
|
UK Politics
|
Digging down to level up? Proposals for a new mine at Whitehaven are highly controversial
Governing is about choices - and it's about decisions.
And, every so often, a decision comes along that encapsulates the dilemmas ministers face.
Consider what the government might think of as its core, even defining priorities.
High up on the list would be what it calls "levelling up", the idea that geography shouldn't be destiny, that regional inequalities should be lessened.
Also up there would be the commitment to net-zero-carbon emissions by 2050 to restrict climate change.
And then, in light of the war in Ukraine, there is boosting energy security and reducing the UK's dependence on Russia.
Now think of the decision, being reached within government right now, on whether to allow a new coal mine to be opened near Whitehaven in Cumbria.
The black stuff in question, under the Irish Sea, is what is called metallurgical coal, which is used in making steel.
Around 40% of this type of coal the UK needs is imported from - yes, you guessed it - Russia.
Coal is widely seen as one of the dirtiest and most polluting energy sources.
But west Cumbria is crying out for skilled, long-term, well-paid private-sector jobs.
So what should ministers do?
You can imagine the criticism, whether they say yes or no.
Most of the UK's coalmining industry is gone
I've been following this for the last year or so, mesmerised by its awkwardness for those who have to decide.
It reminds me of a fundamental truth about reporting: it is a privilege to be an observer, asking sceptical questions.
But it's undeniably easier to ask questions than to answer them.
This is how the new coal mine could look
So tricky has been this, the prospect of the first new deep-coal mine in the UK in 30 years, that noisy disagreement and dither have dominated.
The government asked the Planning Inspectorate to examine the arguments. It has done that and handed its report to the government.
And a deadline of Thursday 7 July was set for a decision by the Communities Secretary Michael Gove.
That is a fortnight away.
West Cumbria is in need of high-skilled, long-term jobs
On Wednesday, tantalisingly, we got what looked like a glimpse of the government's instinct.
Deep into Prime Minister's Question Time, Conservative MP Chris Green asked about the importance of levelling up and the approach of other countries to the burning of different types of coal.
The prime minister knew the question was coming. Boris Johnson could have offered a generic answer. He could have ducked it entirely.
But instead he said this: "We can all be proud of the way in which we reduced CO2 emissions in this country, but plainly it makes no sense to be importing coal, particularly for metallurgical purposes, when we have our own domestic resources."
To supporters of the mine in and around Whitehaven, that sounded like a possible prime ministerial thumbs-up for it getting the go-ahead.
Those around Mr Gove remain tight-lipped and sources in No10 caution about reading too much into the PM's comment.
If Mr Johnson's outlook is soon reflected in the formal decision, we can expect to see opponents of the mine challenge it in court.
And the government will face questions on precisely how this will level up, as they describe it. These include:
And if they say no to the mine:
There are tough, legitimate, sceptical questions, whatever - difficult - decision is reached.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61904622
|
news_uk-politics-61904622
|
|
Kaliningrad row: Lithuania accuses Russia of lying about rail 'blockade' - BBC News
|
2022-06-22
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The prime minister says talk of a blockade is untrue and a tiny amount of goods are affected.
|
Europe
|
Ingrida Simonyte said a tiny proportion of Russian goods were affected by EU sanctions
Lithuanian Prime Minister Ingrida Simonyte has said Russian claims of a rail blockade of its territorial outpost in Kaliningrad are a lie.
Kaliningrad is on the Baltic Sea and uses a rail link to Russia via Lithuania for passengers and freight.
When Lithuania banned the transit of steel and other ferrous metals under EU sanctions last Saturday, Russia threatened to respond.
The Kremlin condemned the sanctions as illegal and unacceptable.
Ms Simonyte explained that passengers were still able to travel freely across Lithuanian territory from Russia to Kaliningrad and only about 1% of Russian freight was affected.
One senior diplomat in Brussels said that Russian talk of a blockade was disinformation and completely untrue.
"Lithuania is complying with the sanctions imposed by the European Union on Russia for its aggression and war against Ukraine," the prime minister said.
EU sanctions on steel were imposed in March, but a three-month transition period was allowed for existing contracts to wind down.
Russia annexed Kaliningrad after World War Two in 1945 and roughly one million people live there.
Diplomats say no goods trains have yet been barred from crossing Lithuania
It was not clear what Russian security council chief Nikolai Patrushev meant when he threatened a "serious negative impact on the population of Lithuania".
The foreign ministry in Moscow said merely that retaliation would be practical as well as diplomatic. Regional governor Anton Alikhanov said that as well as reprisals, Kaliningrad would organise shipments by sea.
One option would be to disconnect Lithuania from the electricity network it shares with Russia, Belarus and the other Baltic states, although officials in Vilnius have said for months they are ready to connect through Poland to the West European grid.
The Lithuanian prime minister told the BBC that it was important not to overreact, as this was the latest in a series of threats used by Russia or Belarus to threaten their neighbours, such as attempted cyber-attacks on public institutions and utilities.
Estonia called on Russia to stop issuing threats and suggested Moscow was flexing its muscles ahead of next week's Nato summit in Madrid, where Sweden and Finland hope to get backing to join the Western defence alliance.
As Lithuania is a member of the Nato as well as the EU, the prime minister said lessons needed to be learned and security had to be in place, given that Russia's neighbour Belarus had acted as an accomplice, allowing its soil to be used as a staging post for invasion of Ukraine.
"We need a significantly higher presence in the region," she told the BBC's Katya Adler, citing a 100-km (62-mile) corridor of territory that connects Lithuania and the other two Baltic states to Poland.
"The Suwalki Gap is a place which is crucially important, not only for my country or Poland, but also for Nato, because this is a short corridor and there is a need to take its defence and security seriously."
She was speaking on the eve of an EU summit, where diplomats said the Russian threats were bound to come up.
One diplomat told the BBC that when sanctions had been imposed, it was unlikely that they were designed to stop Russia moving goods internally. The European Commission might seek to de-escalate the situation, the source added.
However, another senior European diplomat said the legal argument was clear, that there would be no derogation for allowing banned Russian goods from crossing EU territory.
Further sanctions are due to come into force in August and December, covering luxury goods and crude oil, so the aim is for the Commission to make a public statement on what is seen as legal and what is not.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61901764
|
news_world-europe-61901764
|
|
Nicola Sturgeon to launch fresh Scottish independence campaign - BBC News
|
2022-06-14
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Scotland's first minister says she still plans to hold a referendum by the end of next year.
|
Scotland politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. "Yes" - Nicola Sturgeon asked if she is firing the indyref2 starting gun
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon is to launch a fresh campaign for Scottish independence.
Asked whether she was now formally beginning the campaign for indyref2, the first minister replied: "Yes".
She also insisted she still planned to hold another vote before the end of next year.
Ms Sturgeon said she would unveil the first in a series of new papers setting out the case for independence on Tuesday.
She added: "Had we known in 2014 everything we know now about the path the UK would have taken then, I've got no doubt Scotland would have voted yes back then."
The first referendum on Scottish independence took place on 18 September 2014 when 55% of voters said "No" to the change while 45% said "Yes".
Supporters of the Union have accused the Scottish government of being obsessed with independence.
The first paper on the new independence push - entitled 'Wealthier, Happier, Fairer: Why Not Scotland?' - will be a "scene setter" which will compare Scotland and the UK to other European countries and set out why the government believes the country would be better off if it were independent.
Ms Sturgeon added that subsequent papers would look at a number of areas including;
The first minister told the BBC: "The conclusion very clearly is that Scotland could be doing much better as an independent country... Nobody right now can look at the UK - the mess it's in currently and its prospects for the UK outside of the European Union surely and conclude anything other than that Scotland can do better as an independent country."
She said that a bill to bring about the referendum, or a timescale for putting forward a bill, would also be set out shortly.
Ms Sturgeon acknowledged that whether Holyrood had the power to legislate for a referendum was contested, and had not yet been tested in the courts.
She said: "That is the issue we are currently navigating so that we can deliver a lawful process," - adding that more details on those plans would come soon too.
Ms Sturgeon has always said that she wants any referendum to be officially recognised, which therefore means the power to hold a fresh vote must be passed from Westminster to Holyrood (as it was to allow for the 2014 referendum - in which voters backed remaining in the UK by 55% to 45% - to take place).
However, the UK government has shown no sign it would be willing to give the formal consent that ensured the legality of the 2014 referendum again.
Ms Sturgeon insisted her government had a mandate to hold a further ballot, and accused the UK government of respecting neither democracy nor the rule of law.
Before the 2014 vote the UK government passed powers to Holyrood to hold the referendum
In a wide-ranging interview with BBC Scotland, the first minister also defended plans to make public sector cuts.
Last week, her government set out plans to cut tens of thousands of public sector jobs.
It followed a warning from a think tank that the Scottish government will face a £3.5bn gap opening up between spending and income.
Asked whether now was the right time to hold another vote, the first minister said the case for independence was not "abstract" or "separate" to the challenges the country faced.
"It's exactly about how we best equip ourselves to navigate those challenges so we don't have our budget set by Westminster, but we are in charge of these decisions ourselves," she said.
"So many of these challenges if not caused by then are absolutely exacerbated by the fact we are not independent. So yes this is the time."
In response to the new campaign for a referendum, the Scottish Conservatives' Donald Cameron said the vast majority did not want the "distraction" of another referendum next year.
He said the public wanted 100% of the government's focus to be on Covid recovery, the cost-of-living crisis, and supporting the health service.
Sarah Boyack, of Scottish Labour, said the government's attention was "still on their constitutional obsession".
She said it was an "appalling waste of time, energy and money" and that independence would "make Brexit look like a walk in the park".
Alex Cole-Hamilton, the Scottish Lib Dem leader, said the Scottish government cared "more about their independence obsession than everyone stuck on the longest NHS waiting lists in history, the cost of living crisis or the climate emergency.
"Nobody believes education is Nicola Sturgeon's top priority any more.
Nicola Sturgeon has a Holyrood majority for indyref2 when all the SNP and Green votes are added together.
What she does not have is the undisputed power to hold a referendum on Scotland's constitutional future.
That was secured in 2014 through an agreement with the UK government which lent Holyrood the power to put a referendum beyond legal challenge.
This time that will almost certainly not be forthcoming and if Holyrood legislates anyway, the bill is likely to be challenged in the UK Supreme Court.
I don't expect the bill or even a timetable for it to emerge this week.
The paper being published on Tuesday is likely to set out big picture arguments for independence rather than a process designed to break the deadlock over holding a referendum.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61785553
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61785553
|
|
Happy the elephant is not a person, New York court rules - BBC News
|
2022-06-14
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
An animal rights group was seeking legal means to have the elephant moved from a zoo to a sanctuary.
|
US & Canada
|
Happy the elephant must remain in the Bronx Zoo, a judge has ruled
Happy the elephant, a long-time resident of the Bronx Zoo, must remain there after a New York court ruled she is not legally a person under US law.
On Tuesday, the state's highest court voted 5-2 to reject an animal rights group's argument that Happy was being illegally confined at the zoo.
While elephants are "impressive", the court said, they are not entitled to the same liberty rights as humans.
The animal rights group sought to have Happy moved to an elephant sanctuary.
The court dispute centred on whether the legal principle of habeas corpus - which guards against illegal detention - should be extended to emotionally complex and intelligent animals.
"While no one disputes the impressive capabilities of elephants, we reject petitioner's arguments that it is entitled to seek the remedy of habeas corpus on Happy's behalf," wrote Chief Judge Janet DiFiore on behalf of the majority.
"Habeas corpus is a procedural vehicle intended to secure the liberty rights of human beings who are unlawfully restrained, not nonhuman animals."
The decision follows that of lower courts which had repeatedly taken the side of the Bronx Zoo in the case brought by the Nonhuman Rights Project, a New York-based legal non-profit.
The group had pushed to remove the 51-year-old elephant from the Bronx Zoo, saying she was imprisoned in her one-acre enclosure.
But the Wildlife Conservation Society, which operates the zoo, rejected this description, saying Happy and her fellow elephant at the zoo are well cared for. It did not respond immediately to a request for comment following the ruling.
In a statement on Tuesday, the Nonhuman Rights Project celebrated the decision's dissenting opinions, calling them "powerful" and adding that it planned to use them in another elephant rights case underway in California.
In her dissent, Judge Jenny Rivera wrote: "[Happy's] captivity is inherently unjust and inhumane. It is an affront to a civilized society, and every day she remains a captive—a spectacle for humans—we, too, are diminished."
Happy was born in the wild in Thailand in the 1970s, captured and brought to the US when she was about one. She has lived at the Bronx Zoo since 1977.
She is one of two remaining elephants at the zoo, which has said it will eventually end its captive elephant programme.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61803958
|
news_world-us-canada-61803958
|
|
Why is Scottish independence back in the spotlight? - BBC News
|
2022-06-14
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
BBC Scotland's Glenn Campbell looks at the Scottish government's promise to hold another referendum.
|
Scotland politics
|
Independence is never far from the surface in Scottish politics. It is the principle fault line. The great divide.
The question will persist unless and until a) independence actually happens or b) the public tire of the political parties that promote it.
Neither of those possibilities seem very likely anytime soon and so the debate continues.
It was largely put on hold during the pandemic but when the SNP won the Holyrood election in 2021, they did so having promised another referendum.
Together with the Scottish Greens who share power with them in the Scottish government, they have a majority in parliament for indyref2.
What they do not have is the explicit power to hold a vote.
That was overcome in 2014 through an agreement with the UK government, which transferred authority on a temporary basis to Holyrood.
It did so through what's known as a section 30 order.
The first minister has not yet formally asked for one of those this time, although UK ministers including Boris Johnson have made clear it would not be forthcoming.
Nicola Sturgeon's predecessor Alex Salmond seems to think she should make the request and use the rejection as a basis for her campaign.
She seems more cautious about giving the prime minister a formal opportunity to spurn indyref2.
The alternative, as set out in the SNP's previously published plan, is to test Holyrood's powers by introducing a referendum bill without UK agreement.
In 2014, Alex Salmond and David Cameron struck an agreement for power to hold a referendum to be transferred from Westminster to Holyrood
This approach anticipates that the bill would face challenge in the UK Supreme Court and that the Scottish government would argue its case there.
It would then be for judges to decide if Holyrood can hold a referendum or not.
On one side, the argument that there is no legal barrier to Holyrood consulting the public on any given issue and that a vote on independence would not be binding.
On the other, the argument that a "yes" vote would create the expectation that Scotland would become independent, fundamentally altering the UK constitution over which decision-making is specifically reserved to Westminster.
If the judges said no, the referendum would not go ahead because Nicola Sturgeon has specifically ruled out an illegal vote in the Catalan-style.
If the judges said yes, things could still get messy with the "no" side potentially boycotting a referendum on the basis that the process had not been agreed.
In reality, the only way to have a successful referendum is by agreement and at this stage there is not even consensus on the circumstances in which that should happen.
So, however certain Nicola Sturgeon says she is about indyref2 happening before the end of 2023, the basis for her confidence is not clear.
If she has some new initiative to break the deadlock, it remains well hidden.
The first minister has said she will make a statement to MSPs, probably this month, on how she plans to secure a referendum.
This week, for her, is less about the process and more about the principles behind her argument for independence. The whys rather than the hows.
It is a signal to her supporters that she means business and an effort to persuade others and build public pressure for another referendum.
There is no doubt that Brexit has fundamentally changed the circumstances in which Scotland voted back in 2014.
However, the upheaval leaving the EU has caused is - for some - an argument not to consider the bigger constitutional change that independence would bring.
To pro-UK parties like the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberal Democrats, independence is a massive distraction from challenges like Covid recovery and the cost of living crisis.
To independence supporting parties, like the SNP and the Greens it is an opportunity for Scotland to decide how best to tackle these and other problems.
This is the beginning of a new phase of campaigning for and against independence and another referendum, rather than the start of a 2014-style referendum campaign.
Calling for a referendum does not mean it is actually going to happen but it does ensure the independence debate endures.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61796876
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61796876
|
|
Scotland can navigate a legal independence vote - Sturgeon - BBC News
|
2022-06-14
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
First Minister Nicola Sturgeon launches a fresh referendum campaign and says she "stands ready" to negotiate with PM Boris Johnson for the powers to hold one.
|
Scotland
|
Why is this renewed push for independence happening? The answer is simple. The people of Scotland voted for it.
Of course there is plenty of opposition to, and concern about, a second independence referendum but it remains an inescapable fact that in last year's elections to the Scottish Parliament voters returned a majority of MSPs, both SNP and Green, who had pledged to hold one.
When this happened in 2011, there was a referendum. If that was the accepted trigger then, why is it not the trigger now? That is primarily a question for Prime Minister Boris Johnson. The SNP’s argument is that if his Conservative party previously regarded a majority at Holyrood as a mandate for a poll, why is he thwarting the will of Scotland’s voters now?
Having said that, First Minister Nicola Sturgeon must operate in the world as she finds it not as she wants it to be and at today’s news conference the SNP leader simply did not or could not detail the alternative path she intends to follow if Mr Johnson persists in his refusal.
There are also difficult questions for both Ms Sturgeon and Mr Johnson about the "why" as well as the "how" of independence.
Among those for supporters of independence, is it sensible to ditch nuclear weapons with a belligerent Russia at large? Can green energy really replace oil as the engine of the Scottish economy? If leaving the European Union has damaged the UK, why wouldn’t leaving an even older and more entrenched union be much worse for Scotland?
For supporters of the union, aren’t the comparisons with other small European nations set out in today‘s paper an indictment of British failure? Why has the UK, and Scotland within it, performed so poorly on GDP, income inequality, poverty, productivity and other indicators set out in the 71-page document?
In 2014 the prospectus for an independent Scotland was subject to rigorous and detailed scrutiny. Ms Sturgeon’s aim with these papers is to ensure the same scrutiny is applied to the UK.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-scotland-61795633
|
news_live_uk-scotland-61795633
|
|
Rwanda asylum plan: Court allows first flight to go ahead - BBC News
|
2022-06-14
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The UK government's first flight taking asylum seekers to Rwanda will now go ahead tomorrow evening.
|
UK
|
The government's first flight taking asylum seekers to Rwanda can go ahead on Tuesday, appeal court judges say.
It supports a previous decision by the High Court that it was in the "public interest" for the government to carry out its policies.
Under the scheme, some of those entering the UK illegally will be flown to Rwanda to apply for asylum there.
Campaigners were trying to stop the flight before a full hearing on whether the policy is lawful next month.
The charity Detention Action and the PCS union that represents some Border Force staff, who were among the groups who brought the case, said they were "disappointed" by the decision.
Eight people are expected to fly to the landlocked east African country on Tuesday evening, a Home Office source told the BBC.
The numbers drastically reduced after legal challenges relating to modern slavery and human rights claims, according to a government source.
The government says the scheme will discourage dangerous journeys across the English Channel and therefore undermine smuggling gangs, but charities, religious leaders and opposition parties have criticised it.
People sent to Rwanda will be given accommodation and support while their asylum application is considered by the Rwandan government.
If they are successful, they can stay there with up to five years' access to education and support.
If they are not, they will be offered the chance to apply for other immigration routes, but could still face deportation.
At the urgent hearing on Monday, three senior judges ruled there was no error in the High Court judge's decision last week to allow the flight to go ahead.
They also refused permission for an appeal to the Supreme Court against their decision.
Just before the ruling, SNP home affairs spokesman Stuart McDonald told MPs in the Commons it was a "cash-for-deportations" policy "akin to state-sponsored trafficking and transportation".
But Home Office minister Tom Pursglove replied that the comparison was "plain wrong" and "very offensive not just to this government but also, I'd argue, hugely offensive to the Rwandans too".
Mr Pursglove said the policy offers "new opportunities for those relocated to Rwanda" and "people will no longer be able to pay evil people smugglers to go to a destination of their choice while passing through safe, sometimes several safe, countries."
Meanwhile, the head of the UN Refugee Agency, Filippo Grandi, said the plans were "all wrong" and could set a "catastrophic" precedent.
And leaders of the Church of England - including the archbishops of Canterbury and York - wrote in the Times that it was an "immoral policy that shames Britain".
Later on Monday a High Court judge dismissed a separate, similar challenge brought by charity Asylum Aid.
A lawyer for the charity argued asylum seekers were "effectively guinea pigs" for a process that hadn't been properly tested, but the judge concluded some of their arguments were "thin".
More than 10,000 people have made the dangerous journey across the Channel so far this year. Another 37 people were brought into Dover by Border Force earlier on Monday.
This is a major legal victory for Home Secretary Priti Patel.
The Court of Appeal's decision underlines one of the principles of how the law works: if a judge decides there's no pressing need for an injunction, then unless there is a major legal fault with their reasoning, more senior judges should not overturn their decision.
General concerns about the human rights of would-be passengers, in the broadest sense of the phrase, have been repeatedly raised over the last couple of days.
Yet the courts have shown, contrary to the views of some commentators, that those safeguards are not a bar to the government pursuing its policy objectives if the law appears to be correct.
Lord Justice Singh noted that the outcome of next month's full challenge to the policy could hypothetically see asylum seekers returned to the UK, were they to win the day.
But the more immediate question is this: how many asylum seekers will actually be on the flight?
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61789982
|
news_uk-61789982
|
|
Nicola Sturgeon unveils case for Scottish independence - BBC News
|
2022-06-14
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Scotland's first minister says her government has an "indisputable mandate" for another referendum.
|
Scotland politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Scotland must "forge a way forward" to a referendum, without section 30 order "if necessary", Nicola Sturgeon said
Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has unveiled what she called a "refreshed" case for independence.
She told a press conference in Edinburgh that her government had an "indisputable mandate" for a second independence referendum.
Ms Sturgeon was launching the first of a series of papers setting out the case to break away from the UK.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the 2014 referendum result should be respected.
And opposition parties accused the Scottish government of being obsessed with independence.
The first minister said it was now time to set out "a different and better vision" for Scotland.
She said it was time to talk abut independence and then to make that choice.
Ms Sturgeon insisted she won last May's election with a "clear commitment to give the people of Scotland the choice of becoming an independent country", and that Holyrood had a "decisive majority" of MSPs in favour of independence.
"The Scottish Parliament therefore has an indisputable democratic mandate," she added.
Nicola Sturgeon and Patrick Harvie at the launch of the new paper
However, she conceded that a future referendum faced challenges, including what she described as an issue of process. She said Holyrood's power to hold a vote was "contested".
If a referendum bill was introduced without Westminster agreement it could be challenged in the courts.
Before the 2014 referendum, the Scottish government struck an agreement with the UK government which transferred authority on a temporary basis to Holyrood. This was called a section 30 order.
The UK government has so far shown no indication that it would be willing to do so again.
Ms Sturgeon said any referendum "must be lawful", and that only parties opposed to independence would benefit from doubt about the process.
"If this UK government had any respect at all for democracy, the issue of legality would be put beyond doubt, as in 2014," she added.
An agreement was reached between the Scottish and UK governments ahead of the 2014 referendum,
She said she had made clear to Boris Johnson that she was "ready to discuss the terms of such an order at any time".
The first minister said her government had a mandate for another referendum, adding: "If we are to uphold democracy here in Scotland, we must forge a way forward if necessary without a section 30 order."
An update on the Scottish government's plans for holding a referendum would follow soon, she added.
Ms Sturgeon said the independence papers would set the scene for the debate about Scotland's future in the UK.
She said they would cover how Scotland can benefit from the "massive opportunities" independence would present, but also address the challenges and not shy away from tough questions.
She said independence would put "the levers that determine success into our own hands", and away from Westminster - which was taking Scotland "in the wrong direction".
The first paper - called Independence in the Modern World. Wealthier, Happier, Fairer: Why Not Scotland? - makes comparisons between Scotland and other European countries - all of which Ms Sturgeon said were independent, wealthier and fairer than the UK.
Subsequent papers will look at a areas including currency, tax and spend, defence, social security and pensions, and EU membership and trade.
Ms Sturgeon was joined at the press conference by Patrick Harvie, the co-leader of the Scottish Green Party and a member of the Scottish cabinet.
The SNP and the Greens are both pro-independence and struck a power sharing arrangement at Holyrood after last year's election.
Mr Harvie said Scotland "could chart a different future" with independence and set out a vision for a greener, fairer and more prosperous Scotland.
Boris Johnson said the 2014 result should be respected. He said the UK government should focus on the economy and Covid recovery, adding: "That's the focus of the government. We're working with our friends in the Scottish government, in the Scottish administration, on those issues."
At Holyrood, the presiding officer stopped a minister from making a statement to MSPs on Tuesday afternoon because the details had already been released to the media.
Alison Johnstone said the "benefits of independence" announcement should have been made in the chamber first "as a matter of courtesy and respect to the parliament".
She skipped instead to response from Scottish Conservative leader Douglas Ross, who said energy was being wasted on the wrong priorities.
He said: "Pushing for another divisive referendum... is the wrong priority, at the worst possible time."
Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said Ms Sturgeon's speech was "a disappointing return to the politics of the past", adding that the majority were opposed to independence.
He said the first minister should not "turn her back" on important issues in order to "focus on her own obsession" with independence.
Alex Cole-Hamilton, the Scottish Lib Dem leader, said the first minister "must be wired to the moon if she thinks that breaking up the UK is the priority for people".
Why is this renewed push for independence happening? The answer is simple. The people of Scotland voted for it. Of course there is plenty of opposition to, and concern about, a second independence referendum but it remains an inescapable fact that in last year's elections to the Scottish Parliament voters returned a majority of MSPs, both SNP and Green, who had pledged to hold one.
When this happened in 2011, there was a referendum. If that was the accepted trigger then, why is it not the trigger now?
That is primarily a question for Prime Minister Boris Johnson. The SNP's argument is that if his Conservative Party previously regarded a majority at Holyrood as a mandate for a poll, why is he thwarting the will of Scotland's voters now?
Today the SNP leader did not or could not detail the alternative path she intends to follow if Mr Johnson persists in his refusal.
There are also difficult questions for both Ms Sturgeon and Mr Johnson about the "why" as well as the "how" of independence.
Independence is never far from the surface in Scottish politics. It is the principle fault line. The great divide.
The question will persist unless and until a) independence actually happens or b) the public tire of the political parties that promote it.
Neither of those possibilities seem very likely anytime soon and so the debate continues.
It was largely put on hold during the pandemic but when the SNP won the Holyrood election in 2021, they did so having promised another referendum.
Together with the Scottish Greens who share power with them in the Scottish government, they have a majority in parliament for indyref2.
What they do not have is the explicit power to hold a vote.
• None Independence in the Modern World. Wealthier, Happier, Fairer- Why Not Scotland- - gov.scot The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61796883
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61796883
|
|
Ukraine war: Five ways Russia's invasion may play out - BBC News
|
2022-06-10
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
As the offensive intensifies in the country's east, what will happen next? Here are some potential scenarios.
|
Europe
|
Residents look for belongings in the rubble of their home after a Russian strike in the eastern Ukrainian region of Donbas
Wars ebb and flow. Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine is no exception.
Early fears of a swift conquest were succeeded by Russian retreat and Ukrainian resistance. That has now been met by a more focused Russian offensive in the east.
But 100 days on, where might this war go next?
Here are five potential scenarios - they are not mutually exclusive, but all are within the bounds of plausibility.
The war might continue for months - if not years - as Russian and Ukrainian forces grind each other down.
Momentum shifts to and fro as both sides make gains and losses. Neither side is willing to give up. Russia's President Putin judges he can gain by demonstrating strategic patience, gambling that Western countries will suffer from "Ukraine fatigue" and focus more on their economic crises and the threat from China.
The West, however, shows resolve and continues to supply Ukraine with weapons. Semi-permanent front lines are established. Steadily the war becomes a frozen conflict, a "forever war".
Mick Ryan, a retired Australian general and military scholar, says: "There is little prospect of a crushing operational or strategic victory by either side in the short term. Neither belligerent has demonstrated the capacity to land a strategically decisive blow."
What if President Putin were to surprise the world with a unilateral ceasefire? He could pocket his territorial gains and declare "victory".
He could claim his "military operation" was complete: Russian-backed separatists in Donbas protected; a land corridor to Crimea established. He could then seek the moral high ground, putting pressure on Ukraine to stop fighting.
"This is a ploy which could be used by Russia at any time, if it wants to capitalise on European pressure on Ukraine to surrender and give up territory in exchange for notional peace," says Keir Giles, Russia expert at the Chatham House think tank.
Russia's President Putin may gamble on Western countries suffering from "Ukraine fatigue" and switching focus to their economies
The arguments are heard already in Paris, Berlin and Rome: no need to prolong the war, time to end the global economic pain, let's push for a ceasefire.
This, though, would be opposed by the US, the UK and much of eastern Europe, where policymakers believe Russia's invasion must fail, for the sake of Ukraine and the international order.
So a unilateral Russian ceasefire might change the narrative but not end the fighting.
What if both Ukraine and Russia conclude they cannot achieve more militarily and enter talks for a political settlement?
Their armies are exhausted, running short of manpower and munitions. The price in blood and treasure no longer justifies further fighting. Russia's military and economic losses are not sustainable. The Ukrainian people tire of war, unwilling to risk more lives for an eternally elusive victory.
What if the leadership in Kyiv - no longer trusting continued Western support - decide the time has come to talk? US President Joe Biden openly admits America's aim is for Ukraine to be "in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table".
But there may not be a battlefield stalemate for many months and any political settlement would be hard, not least because of Ukraine's lack of trust in Russia. A peace deal might not endure and could be followed by more fighting.
Could Ukraine - against the odds - achieve something close to a victory? Could Ukraine force Russian troops to withdraw to where they were before the invasion?
"Ukraine will definitely win this war," the country's President Volodymyr Zelensky told Dutch TV this week.
What if Russia fails to seize all Donbas and suffers more losses? Western sanctions hit Russia's war machine. Ukraine makes counter attacks, using its new long-range rockets, seizing back territory where Russian supply lines are stretched. Ukraine transforms its army from a defensive to an offensive force.
The US said it would supply Ukraine with weapons including medium-range High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS)
This scenario is plausible enough for policymakers to worry already about its consequences. If Mr Putin were facing defeat, might he escalate, potentially using either chemical or nuclear weapons?
The historian Niall Ferguson told a seminar at Kings College, London recently: "It seems unlikely to me that Putin is going to accept conventional military defeat when he has a nuclear option."
And what of a possible Russian "victory"?
Western officials emphasise that Russia, despite early setbacks, still plans to seize the capital Kyiv and subjugate much of Ukraine. "Those maximalist objectives remain in place," one official said.
Russia could capitalise on its gains in Donbas, freeing up forces for use elsewhere, perhaps even targeting Kyiv once again. The sheer weight of Russian numbers come to bear. Ukrainian forces continue to suffer.
Ukraine's President Zelensky met servicemen in the eastern Kharkiv region, where fighting has intensified
President Zelensky already admits up to 100 Ukrainian soldiers are dying and another 500 are wounded every day.
The people of Ukraine could divide, some wanting to fight on, others wanting to sue for peace. Some Western countries might tire of supporting Ukraine. But equally, if they thought Russia was winning, others might want to escalate.
One Western diplomat told me privately the West should test a nuclear weapon in the Pacific as a warning to Russia.
The future of this war is not yet written.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61674469
|
news_world-europe-61674469
|
|
Rwanda asylum plan: UK court allows removal flight planned for Tuesday - BBC News
|
2022-06-10
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Campaigners fail in their legal bid to halt the removals set for Tuesday but will appeal.
|
UK
|
A group of people, thought to be asylum seekers, arriving at Dover (file image)
A flight to take asylum seekers from the UK to Rwanda next Tuesday has been allowed to go ahead by the High Court.
Campaigners failed in an initial legal bid to halt the removals to the east African country, but have confirmed they will take the case to the Court of Appeal on Monday.
Under the policy, some of those entering the UK illegally will be flown to Rwanda to apply for asylum there.
About 31 people have been told they may be on the first flight.
There will be a full judicial review, where the High Court will hear a challenge to the policy as a whole, before the end of July, it heard.
In his decision, the judge Mr Justice Swift accepted there was a "material public interest" in Home Secretary Priti Patel being able to carry out her policies.
Ms Patel praised his judgement and said the government would go ahead with its plans, while Prime Minister Boris Johnson described the ruling as "welcome news".
However, campaigners who brought the case expressed concern for the welfare of people set to be "forcibly deported".
One asylum seeker - an Iranian ex-police commander - who was told he will be deported on Tuesday has said he fears being killed by Iranian agents in Rwanda.
He has been held at a detention centre since arriving in the UK from Turkey in May.
It comes as the Daily Mail and the Times reports the Prince of Wales has been privately critical of the government's policy - quoting a source saying he thinks the approach is "appalling".
Prince Charles is to represent the Queen in Kigali, the Rwandan capital, at a Commonwealth summit later this month. His office reiterated he remains "politically neutral".
The government hopes the scheme will discourage asylum seekers from crossing the English Channel, by making it clear many cases will now be dealt with by Rwanda.
More than 10,000 people have made the dangerous sea journey so far this year.
While their application is considered by Rwanda those affected will be given accommodation and support and, if successful, will be able to remain there with up to five years' access to education and support.
Those who fail in their asylum bids in Rwanda will be offered the chance to apply for visas under other immigration routes if they wish to remain in the country, but could still face deportation.
Campaigners had sought to block the flight from leaving, as well as individual people being placed on it.
An excerpt of the document given to some asylum seekers by the Home Office
The case was brought by lawyers representing asylum seekers set to be deported, alongside the Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) - which represents more than 80% of UK Border Force staff - and migration charities Care4Calais and Detention Action.
Their lawyers raised concerns about shortcomings in the Rwanda asylum system and the possibility that people could be sent on to countries where they would be persecuted - a process known as refoulement.
Home Office lawyers had told the court the plan must not be stopped by legal challenges because it was in the public interest, and also urged the judge to reject challenges on behalf of individual asylum seekers.
At the hearing, the UN's refugee body, the UNHCR, also intervened to distance itself from the policy amid claims the Home Office has misrepresented its position on the scheme.
Lawyers for the UNHCR also said it had warned the Home Office twice that its arrangement with Rwanda was unlawful.
In his judgement, Mr Justice Swift ruled against a temporary block on the deportation flights before the full hearing on the policy in July.
He said he did not consider there was any evidence there would be "ill-treatment, refoulement" or anything that violated their rights under article three of the UK's Human Rights Act.
Article three protects people from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and deportation or extradition to a country where there is a real risk they will face torture or inhuman or degrading treatment.
Mr Justice Swift said part of the case to block the initial flights focused on the argument that Ms Patel's "decision to treat Rwanda as a safe country is either irrational or based on insufficient investigation".
He said this argument, along with other parts of the case, would be heard with evidence at the full judicial review, to be held across two days before the end of July.
A judicial review sees a judge looking at how a decision, or action, has been made by a public body. It does not consider whether the decision itself is correct or not.
But Mr Justice Swift noted that, while the campaigners had enough evidence for a review, their claim was "not conspicuously strong".
He also denied interim relief to two people who face removal on Tuesday, one from Syria and another from Iraq, who are still set to be on the plane to Rwanda.
"I accept that the fact of removal to Rwanda will be onerous," he added.
However, the judge granted the campaigners and migrants the right to appeal against his decision and said the Court of Appeal would be able to hear their case on Monday.
Following the judgement, Ms Patel said the government would "continue to deliver on progressing" the plan.
She said: "People will continue to try and prevent their relocation through legal challenges and last-minute claims, but we will not be deterred in breaking the deadly people smuggling trade and ultimately saving lives.
"Rwanda is a safe country and has previously been recognised for providing a safe haven for refugees - we will continue preparations for the first flight to Rwanda, alongside the range of other measures intended to reduce small boat crossings."
Mr Johnson tweeted: "We cannot allow people traffickers to put lives at risk and our world leading partnership will help break the business model of these ruthless criminals."
James Wilson, deputy director of campaign group Detention Action, said it was disappointed, but added there were "some positives" from the case - noting that six of the eight original claimants had their removal orders withdrawn by the Home Office in advance of the judgement.
Clare Moseley, founder of Care4Calais, said the charity was "deeply concerned for the welfare of people who may be forcibly deported to Rwanda, a fate that could profoundly harm their mental health and future".
The PCS union has called for urgent talks with Ms Patel to discuss the removal policy following the ruling.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61763818
|
news_uk-61763818
|
|
Ukraine war: Five ways Russia's invasion may play out - BBC News
|
2022-06-04
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
As the offensive intensifies in the country's east, what will happen next? Here are some potential scenarios.
|
Europe
|
Residents look for belongings in the rubble of their home after a Russian strike in the eastern Ukrainian region of Donbas
Wars ebb and flow. Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine is no exception.
Early fears of a swift conquest were succeeded by Russian retreat and Ukrainian resistance. That has now been met by a more focused Russian offensive in the east.
But 100 days on, where might this war go next?
Here are five potential scenarios - they are not mutually exclusive, but all are within the bounds of plausibility.
The war might continue for months - if not years - as Russian and Ukrainian forces grind each other down.
Momentum shifts to and fro as both sides make gains and losses. Neither side is willing to give up. Russia's President Putin judges he can gain by demonstrating strategic patience, gambling that Western countries will suffer from "Ukraine fatigue" and focus more on their economic crises and the threat from China.
The West, however, shows resolve and continues to supply Ukraine with weapons. Semi-permanent front lines are established. Steadily the war becomes a frozen conflict, a "forever war".
Mick Ryan, a retired Australian general and military scholar, says: "There is little prospect of a crushing operational or strategic victory by either side in the short term. Neither belligerent has demonstrated the capacity to land a strategically decisive blow."
What if President Putin were to surprise the world with a unilateral ceasefire? He could pocket his territorial gains and declare "victory".
He could claim his "military operation" was complete: Russian-backed separatists in Donbas protected; a land corridor to Crimea established. He could then seek the moral high ground, putting pressure on Ukraine to stop fighting.
"This is a ploy which could be used by Russia at any time, if it wants to capitalise on European pressure on Ukraine to surrender and give up territory in exchange for notional peace," says Keir Giles, Russia expert at the Chatham House think tank.
Russia's President Putin may gamble on Western countries suffering from "Ukraine fatigue" and switching focus to their economies
The arguments are heard already in Paris, Berlin and Rome: no need to prolong the war, time to end the global economic pain, let's push for a ceasefire.
This, though, would be opposed by the US, the UK and much of eastern Europe, where policymakers believe Russia's invasion must fail, for the sake of Ukraine and the international order.
So a unilateral Russian ceasefire might change the narrative but not end the fighting.
What if both Ukraine and Russia conclude they cannot achieve more militarily and enter talks for a political settlement?
Their armies are exhausted, running short of manpower and munitions. The price in blood and treasure no longer justifies further fighting. Russia's military and economic losses are not sustainable. The Ukrainian people tire of war, unwilling to risk more lives for an eternally elusive victory.
What if the leadership in Kyiv - no longer trusting continued Western support - decide the time has come to talk? US President Joe Biden openly admits America's aim is for Ukraine to be "in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table".
But there may not be a battlefield stalemate for many months and any political settlement would be hard, not least because of Ukraine's lack of trust in Russia. A peace deal might not endure and could be followed by more fighting.
Could Ukraine - against the odds - achieve something close to a victory? Could Ukraine force Russian troops to withdraw to where they were before the invasion?
"Ukraine will definitely win this war," the country's President Volodymyr Zelensky told Dutch TV this week.
What if Russia fails to seize all Donbas and suffers more losses? Western sanctions hit Russia's war machine. Ukraine makes counter attacks, using its new long-range rockets, seizing back territory where Russian supply lines are stretched. Ukraine transforms its army from a defensive to an offensive force.
The US said it would supply Ukraine with weapons including medium-range High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS)
This scenario is plausible enough for policymakers to worry already about its consequences. If Mr Putin were facing defeat, might he escalate, potentially using either chemical or nuclear weapons?
The historian Niall Ferguson told a seminar at Kings College, London recently: "It seems unlikely to me that Putin is going to accept conventional military defeat when he has a nuclear option."
And what of a possible Russian "victory"?
Western officials emphasise that Russia, despite early setbacks, still plans to seize the capital Kyiv and subjugate much of Ukraine. "Those maximalist objectives remain in place," one official said.
Russia could capitalise on its gains in Donbas, freeing up forces for use elsewhere, perhaps even targeting Kyiv once again. The sheer weight of Russian numbers come to bear. Ukrainian forces continue to suffer.
Ukraine's President Zelensky met servicemen in the eastern Kharkiv region, where fighting has intensified
President Zelensky already admits up to 100 Ukrainian soldiers are dying and another 500 are wounded every day.
The people of Ukraine could divide, some wanting to fight on, others wanting to sue for peace. Some Western countries might tire of supporting Ukraine. But equally, if they thought Russia was winning, others might want to escalate.
One Western diplomat told me privately the West should test a nuclear weapon in the Pacific as a warning to Russia.
The future of this war is not yet written.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61674469
|
news_world-europe-61674469
|
|
G7 face battle for unity as cost of Ukraine war mounts - BBC News
|
2022-06-26
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Russian war against Ukraine will inevitably dominate the summit of G7 nations in Bavaria.
|
Europe
|
An unexploded Russian bomb is removed from a block in Kharkiv
The Russian war against Ukraine will inevitably dominate the summit of G7 nations in Bavaria.
And the leaders of the US, UK, Germany, France, Italy, Canada and Japan face a difficult challenge.
They are aiming to put on a show of unity and resolve over the war. In recent months, the Western alliance has shown signs of strain and fatigue.
Some voices - particularly in France, Germany and Italy - have asked if it might not be better for the war to end, even if it came at the cost of Ukraine having to cede territory. A recent cross-Europe opinion poll suggested some voters put solving the cost-of-living crisis ahead of punishing Russia.
Others argue about the need to salvage some kind of relationship with Russia in the future.
Countries like the UK, Poland and the three Baltic States have been resisting these arguments, saying that any peace deal with Moscow that is not on Ukraine's terms would lead to further Russian aggression in the future. President Zelensky is likely to reinforce this argument when he addresses the summit virtually on Monday.
So the G7 leaders are expected to try to use the summit to clear these muddy waters, promising more weapons to Ukraine and more sanctions against Russia. The idea will be to send a signal to Russian President Vladimir Putin that the West has the strategic patience to maintain its support for Ukraine, even if it faces domestic political pressure at home from voters concerned about rising prices.
The problem for G7 leaders is they also face growing pressure to show they are tackling the global economic crisis. The soaring price of fuel and food is causing hunger and unrest across the world. And some countries are pointing the finger at the West.
Many countries in the global south do not share Western concerns about Russian aggression. They see the conflict as a European war and seem unmoved by Western arguments that Vladimir Putin is acting as a colonial aggressor. And they blame Western sanctions - as much as Russia's invasion - for the rising costs of gas and oil, and the massive shortage of wheat and fertiliser.
To try to resist this narrative, G7 countries are expected to use the summit to show they are acting to help countries round the world - with development aid, debt restructuring, climate finance, help finding alternative sources of energy and, of course, fresh efforts to get grain out of Ukraine's ports. That is why Germany has invited the leaders of India, Indonesia, Senegal, Argentina and South Africa to the summit, to hear their perspective and show the rest of the world the G7 is listening.
So on the one hand, these Western leaders must show resolve to keep backing Ukraine, and on the other, they must show a readiness to fix the global economic shocks that some blame, in part, on the war.
One senior US official described the dilemma thus: "How do we maximise pain on Putin's regime? How do we minimise spillbacks back to the rest of the world?"
That is quite a circle to square.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61940007
|
news_world-europe-61940007
|
|
Transgender women are women, says Mark Drakeford - BBC News
|
2022-06-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
First Minister Mark Drakeford was pushed to define what a woman is during a Welsh Parliament session.
|
Wales
|
Mark Drakeford was asked for his view in the Senedd
The first minister of Wales has said he believes "transgender women are women".
Mark Drakeford was asked to define what a woman is during a session at the Senedd.
Mr Drakeford was answering a question about the inclusion of trans athletes in sport, acknowledging it was an "argument that divides people".
Prime Minister Boris Johnson does not believe transgender women should compete in female sports - a view he conceded may be "controversial".
There has been criticism of the UK Labour party's policies on trans and women's rights and the refusal of some politicians to publicly define what a woman is.
In the Senedd on Tuesday, Conservative MS Laura Anne Jones said: "I think it's important that I make it clear that protecting women's rights does not for one moment mean that you're anti-trans rights. Female competitors deserve the same rights as male competitors.
"We all know the huge benefits that sports can offer, and we all, I'm sure, want to ensure trans athletes can participate in sport.
"But what we don't want is a situation where we're trying to be so inclusive that it is to the detriment of a particular group.
"We have a situation where women athletes are so disheartened that they are pulling out of their own female categories because they say that trans women taking part in a female category have a male puberty advantage."
The issue of transgender athletes - centred around the balance of inclusion, sporting fairness and safety in women's sport - has recently focused on the case of transgender cyclist Emily Bridges.
Bridges was recently ruled ineligible to compete in her first elite women's race by cycling's world governing body.
South Wales East Ms Jones asked Mr Drakeford: "First minister, do you believe that trans athletes should compete in female sports?
"Can you do something that many other Labour politicians have failed to do so far, which is define a woman?"
Mr Drakeford said: "My starting point is the same as Penny Mordaunt's - the UK minister responsible at the time - who said that the UK government's starting point was that transgender women are women. That's my starting point in this debate.
"It is a difficult area where people feel very strongly on different sides of an argument, and an argument that divides people who agree on most other things.
"What I say to the member is that in such a potentially divisive issue, the responsibility of elected representatives is not to stand on the certainties of their own convictions, but instead to work hard to look for opportunities for dialogue, to find ways of promoting understanding rather than conflict, and to demonstrate respect rather than to look for exclusion.
"I do not understand the point that the member makes that you can be too inclusive. To me, inclusivity is absolutely what we should be aiming for here."
Lia Thomas swam for the Pennsylvanian men's team before beginning hormone replacement therapy in 2019
In March, Lia Thomas became the first known transgender swimmer to win the highest US national college title with victory in the women's 500-yard freestyle.
She said athletes did not transition to gain a competitive advantage.
Mr Johnson said recently: "I don't think biological males should be competing in female sporting events. Maybe that's a controversial thing to say, but it just seems to me to be sensible.
"I also happen to think that women should have spaces - whether it's in hospitals, prison or changing rooms - which are dedicated to women. That's as far as my thinking has developed on this issue.
"If that puts me in conflict with some others, then we have got to work it all out. It doesn't mean I'm not immensely sympathetic to people who want to change gender, to transition and it's vital we give people the maximum love and support in making those decisions.
"These are complex issues and they can't be solved with one swift, easy piece of legislation. It takes a lot of thought to get this right."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-61733995
|
news_uk-wales-61733995
|
|
Ukraine war: Five ways Russia's invasion may play out - BBC News
|
2022-06-08
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
As the offensive intensifies in the country's east, what will happen next? Here are some potential scenarios.
|
Europe
|
Residents look for belongings in the rubble of their home after a Russian strike in the eastern Ukrainian region of Donbas
Wars ebb and flow. Vladimir Putin's invasion of Ukraine is no exception.
Early fears of a swift conquest were succeeded by Russian retreat and Ukrainian resistance. That has now been met by a more focused Russian offensive in the east.
But 100 days on, where might this war go next?
Here are five potential scenarios - they are not mutually exclusive, but all are within the bounds of plausibility.
The war might continue for months - if not years - as Russian and Ukrainian forces grind each other down.
Momentum shifts to and fro as both sides make gains and losses. Neither side is willing to give up. Russia's President Putin judges he can gain by demonstrating strategic patience, gambling that Western countries will suffer from "Ukraine fatigue" and focus more on their economic crises and the threat from China.
The West, however, shows resolve and continues to supply Ukraine with weapons. Semi-permanent front lines are established. Steadily the war becomes a frozen conflict, a "forever war".
Mick Ryan, a retired Australian general and military scholar, says: "There is little prospect of a crushing operational or strategic victory by either side in the short term. Neither belligerent has demonstrated the capacity to land a strategically decisive blow."
What if President Putin were to surprise the world with a unilateral ceasefire? He could pocket his territorial gains and declare "victory".
He could claim his "military operation" was complete: Russian-backed separatists in Donbas protected; a land corridor to Crimea established. He could then seek the moral high ground, putting pressure on Ukraine to stop fighting.
"This is a ploy which could be used by Russia at any time, if it wants to capitalise on European pressure on Ukraine to surrender and give up territory in exchange for notional peace," says Keir Giles, Russia expert at the Chatham House think tank.
Russia's President Putin may gamble on Western countries suffering from "Ukraine fatigue" and switching focus to their economies
The arguments are heard already in Paris, Berlin and Rome: no need to prolong the war, time to end the global economic pain, let's push for a ceasefire.
This, though, would be opposed by the US, the UK and much of eastern Europe, where policymakers believe Russia's invasion must fail, for the sake of Ukraine and the international order.
So a unilateral Russian ceasefire might change the narrative but not end the fighting.
What if both Ukraine and Russia conclude they cannot achieve more militarily and enter talks for a political settlement?
Their armies are exhausted, running short of manpower and munitions. The price in blood and treasure no longer justifies further fighting. Russia's military and economic losses are not sustainable. The Ukrainian people tire of war, unwilling to risk more lives for an eternally elusive victory.
What if the leadership in Kyiv - no longer trusting continued Western support - decide the time has come to talk? US President Joe Biden openly admits America's aim is for Ukraine to be "in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table".
But there may not be a battlefield stalemate for many months and any political settlement would be hard, not least because of Ukraine's lack of trust in Russia. A peace deal might not endure and could be followed by more fighting.
Could Ukraine - against the odds - achieve something close to a victory? Could Ukraine force Russian troops to withdraw to where they were before the invasion?
"Ukraine will definitely win this war," the country's President Volodymyr Zelensky told Dutch TV this week.
What if Russia fails to seize all Donbas and suffers more losses? Western sanctions hit Russia's war machine. Ukraine makes counter attacks, using its new long-range rockets, seizing back territory where Russian supply lines are stretched. Ukraine transforms its army from a defensive to an offensive force.
The US said it would supply Ukraine with weapons including medium-range High Mobility Artillery Rocket System (HIMARS)
This scenario is plausible enough for policymakers to worry already about its consequences. If Mr Putin were facing defeat, might he escalate, potentially using either chemical or nuclear weapons?
The historian Niall Ferguson told a seminar at Kings College, London recently: "It seems unlikely to me that Putin is going to accept conventional military defeat when he has a nuclear option."
And what of a possible Russian "victory"?
Western officials emphasise that Russia, despite early setbacks, still plans to seize the capital Kyiv and subjugate much of Ukraine. "Those maximalist objectives remain in place," one official said.
Russia could capitalise on its gains in Donbas, freeing up forces for use elsewhere, perhaps even targeting Kyiv once again. The sheer weight of Russian numbers come to bear. Ukrainian forces continue to suffer.
Ukraine's President Zelensky met servicemen in the eastern Kharkiv region, where fighting has intensified
President Zelensky already admits up to 100 Ukrainian soldiers are dying and another 500 are wounded every day.
The people of Ukraine could divide, some wanting to fight on, others wanting to sue for peace. Some Western countries might tire of supporting Ukraine. But equally, if they thought Russia was winning, others might want to escalate.
One Western diplomat told me privately the West should test a nuclear weapon in the Pacific as a warning to Russia.
The future of this war is not yet written.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61674469
|
news_world-europe-61674469
|
|
G7 face battle for unity as cost of Ukraine war mounts - BBC News
|
2022-06-27
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The Russian war against Ukraine will inevitably dominate the summit of G7 nations in Bavaria.
|
Europe
|
An unexploded Russian bomb is removed from a block in Kharkiv
The Russian war against Ukraine will inevitably dominate the summit of G7 nations in Bavaria.
And the leaders of the US, UK, Germany, France, Italy, Canada and Japan face a difficult challenge.
They are aiming to put on a show of unity and resolve over the war. In recent months, the Western alliance has shown signs of strain and fatigue.
Some voices - particularly in France, Germany and Italy - have asked if it might not be better for the war to end, even if it came at the cost of Ukraine having to cede territory. A recent cross-Europe opinion poll suggested some voters put solving the cost-of-living crisis ahead of punishing Russia.
Others argue about the need to salvage some kind of relationship with Russia in the future.
Countries like the UK, Poland and the three Baltic States have been resisting these arguments, saying that any peace deal with Moscow that is not on Ukraine's terms would lead to further Russian aggression in the future. President Zelensky is likely to reinforce this argument when he addresses the summit virtually on Monday.
So the G7 leaders are expected to try to use the summit to clear these muddy waters, promising more weapons to Ukraine and more sanctions against Russia. The idea will be to send a signal to Russian President Vladimir Putin that the West has the strategic patience to maintain its support for Ukraine, even if it faces domestic political pressure at home from voters concerned about rising prices.
The problem for G7 leaders is they also face growing pressure to show they are tackling the global economic crisis. The soaring price of fuel and food is causing hunger and unrest across the world. And some countries are pointing the finger at the West.
Many countries in the global south do not share Western concerns about Russian aggression. They see the conflict as a European war and seem unmoved by Western arguments that Vladimir Putin is acting as a colonial aggressor. And they blame Western sanctions - as much as Russia's invasion - for the rising costs of gas and oil, and the massive shortage of wheat and fertiliser.
To try to resist this narrative, G7 countries are expected to use the summit to show they are acting to help countries round the world - with development aid, debt restructuring, climate finance, help finding alternative sources of energy and, of course, fresh efforts to get grain out of Ukraine's ports. That is why Germany has invited the leaders of India, Indonesia, Senegal, Argentina and South Africa to the summit, to hear their perspective and show the rest of the world the G7 is listening.
So on the one hand, these Western leaders must show resolve to keep backing Ukraine, and on the other, they must show a readiness to fix the global economic shocks that some blame, in part, on the war.
One senior US official described the dilemma thus: "How do we maximise pain on Putin's regime? How do we minimise spillbacks back to the rest of the world?"
That is quite a circle to square.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61940007
|
news_world-europe-61940007
|
|
Ukraine war: The price of freedom is worth paying, says Boris Johnson - BBC News
|
2022-06-27
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Boris Johnson argues letting Russia "get away with" invading Ukraine would have "chilling" consequences.
|
UK Politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. The UK PM compares standing up to Nazi Germany with today's war after Russia invaded Ukraine
"The price of freedom is worth paying," Boris Johnson has said when asked about the cost of helping defend Ukraine.
Speaking from a G7 summit, he argued that letting Russia "get away with" invading Ukraine would have "chilling" consequences and lead to instability.
Likening the conflict to defeating Nazi Germany in World War Two, the PM said that war had been "very expensive" but delivered "long term stability".
It comes as the Ukrainian president calls for more military support.
Over a video link, Volodymyr Zelensky told the leaders of the world's advanced democracies at the summit that his country needed more anti-aircraft defence systems to help repel Russia's invasion.
He also said they needed to impose more sanctions to keep the pressure on Russian leader Vladimir Putin.
G7 leaders, meeting in Germany, are expected to offer more military support as well as further sanctions against Russia, with some planning to ban Russian gold imports.
Speaking to the BBC's political editor Chris Mason from the summit, Mr Johnson said there was "no alternative" to supporting Ukraine regain its sovereignty.
He argued that the consequences of letting Mr Putin "get away with the violent acquisition of huge chunks of another country" would be "absolutely chilling".
"In terms of the economic effects, that would mean long-term instability and anxiety across the world," he said.
Asked if there was any limit on the amount of money or support the UK would offer Ukraine, Mr Johnson replied: "The price of freedom is worth paying."
He said defeating dictators in World War Two "took a long time" and was "very expensive" but brought "decades and decades of stability" and delivered "long-term prosperity".
The UK government has said it is spending £1.3bn ($1.6bn) on military support for Ukraine.
And at the summit, the UK pledged £10m to repair damaged Ukrainian rail infrastructure, to create an overland route to get grain out of the country.
The ongoing conflict in Ukraine has pushed up oil and gas prices leading to higher energy bills, while a squeeze on Ukrainian global grain production has pushed up the cost of food.
Addressing the repercussions on the UK at a time of rising costs of living, Mr Johnson said: "Just to reassure people at home, I think the economic impacts on the UK will start to abate. Cost pressures will start to come down."
In an interview over the weekend, Mr Johnson was asked on Radio 4's Today programme if there was any matter of principle he would consider resigning over, and he said if he had to abandon Ukraine because it became too difficult or the costs were too great, he would quit.
"If it was put to me that we had to abandon the Ukrainian cause, because it was simply getting too difficult and that the cost of supporting that people in their heroic fight for freedom was too great in terms of inflation, in terms of economic damage," he said.
"I think I would, accept that I'd lost a very important argument."
Mr Johnson is currently facing pressure from some of his own MPs after his party lost two by-elections last week - including the previously safe seat of Tiverton and Honiton in Devon.
Following the defeats, the Conservative Party chair, Oliver Dowden resigned telling the prime minister it could "not be business as usual".
Earlier this month, Mr Johnson survived a confidence vote among his own MPs - although 148 voted against him.
Under party rules, Mr Johnson cannot face another leadership challenge for another year. However some Conservative rebels have suggested the party rules could be changed to enable another contest.
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Mr Johnson could also be pressured into stepping down if several senior ministers resigned.
But speaking from the G7 summit, he insisted he had the authority to continue governing and had a mandate from the public as well as his own MPs to stay in office.
He said he was focused on his job adding: "It is a huge, huge privilege to do it and nobody abandons a privilege like that."
Conservative MP - and critic of the prime minister - David Davis has said he opposed forcing another confidence vote in the prime minister.
"He's got to use the year he has to prove to us that actually, he can deliver on the promises we gave at the 2019 election - which was low tax," he said.
"I have people, working class voters in council estates, saying you're not behaving like a Conservative government... that's a terrible thing to have to face down."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61949714
|
news_uk-politics-61949714
|
|
Cardiff memorial for anti-apartheid campaigner Hanef Bhamjee - BBC News
|
2022-06-11
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Hanef Bhamjee was born in apartheid-era South Africa and was later awarded an OBE.
|
Wales
|
Hanef Bhamjee was awarded an OBE for his fight against apartheid
A memorial event has been held in tribute to a lifelong anti-apartheid campaigner who died in January.
Hanef Bhamjee, of Cardiff, was born in apartheid-era South Africa and campaigned against its whites-only rule from the age of 10.
He fled South Africa in the 1960s because of involvement in the student wing of the African National Congress.
Mr Bhamjee was awarded an OBE for race relations in recognition of his fight against apartheid.
Speaking to the crowd of more than 100 people at the Senedd in Cardiff Bay, his younger brother Yusuf said "H" had begun to "exile himself from me" even before he went into exile from his home country.
He added: "It was only in years later that I realised... he was trying to shield us."
He met Nelson Mandela on his visit to Cardiff
More than 100 people attended the memorial service
For decades Mr Bhamjee, who was originally from Marikana and knew Nelson Mandela from the age of 15, ran the Wales Anti-Apartheid Movement from his home, with the help of volunteers.
That organisation, succeeded by Action for Southern Africa Wales, campaigned vigorously for an end to racism, colonialism and apartheid in South Africa.
Campaigners signed an anti-apartheid poster which will be displayed in the museum in St Fagans
Mr Bhamjee, who was one of the guests when Mandela visited Wales, said at the time the then-South African president had a "special place in the hearts of Welsh people".
"The anti-apartheid campaign was always very strong here, possibly stronger than in any other part of Britain," Mr Bhamjee added.
He said his brother had carved himself into the history of Wales and of South Africa and dubbed him a "true internationalist".
"He has inspired so many young people to campaign for the cause of justice and that, I think, is his legacy."
He said while his brother was no saint, he had "touched our lives uniquely".
Wales' First Minister, Mark Drakeford, said Hanef Bhamjee had left an "enormously important legacy".
"All those things that motivated Hanef and made him the astonishing force that he was, we have to capture that and go on putting that to work," Mr Drakeford said.
"I'll be remembering him with huge fondness. But as so many people said here today, he was a man for whom, and I mean this in the best possible sense, nothing was ever good enough.
"No matter how hard you worked, no matter how many times you turned up, no matter how many articles you wrote, there was always more that he wanted.
"And every movement needs people like that."
Mark Drakeford said every movement needed people like Hanef Bhamjee
Anti-apartheid campaigner and former Secretary of State for Wales, Peter Hain, remembered the anti-apartheid struggle as "long, hard and bitter".
He said: "Everybody takes for granted now that it was ultimately victorious, but were it not for Hanef here in Wales, driving the Wales Anti-Apartheid Movement, who knows, apartheid may still be with us.
"Because it was not defeated just on its own. It took a lot of hard and bitter struggle, and he was a legend in that struggle."
Stepdaughter Robyn Griffiths said the memorial was "really special"
"We are really grateful for everyone who's travelled so far to come and celebrate Hanef's life and his achievements and just remember everything today," she said.
Anti-apartheid campaigner and lifelong friend of Hanef Bhamjee, Gulam Mayet, lived in Cardiff from 1968 to 79 but returned to South Africa to work in the education department.
Friends Gulam Mayet and Gaynor Legall both said Hanef Bhamjee's life was to be celebrated
He said: "I'm very sad that he's gone. It was too early.
"He had a lot to contribute still, I'm sad he never went back to South Africa.
"He's made such a big contribution here. We sort of value his life, we celebrate his life but we don't mourn."
Anti-racism campaigner Gaynor Legall, from Butetown, Cardiff, added: "I've lost a good friend and I'll miss the talks and the debates and the arguments, but we celebrate his life."
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-61769156
|
news_uk-wales-61769156
|
|
Rwanda asylum plan: Campaigners' challenge to be heard on Monday - BBC News
|
2022-06-11
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
They are taking the case to the Court of Appeal after a judge ruled the first flight could go ahead.
|
UK
|
A group of people, thought to be asylum seekers, arriving at Dover (file image)
Campaigners against the government's policy to send migrants to Rwanda say they will now take their fight to the Court of Appeal on Monday.
It comes after the High Court said the first flight to take asylum seekers from the UK to Rwanda could go ahead.
About 31 people have been told they could be on that flight on Tuesday, with more planes to go later this year.
The Prince of Wales has been caught up in the row after two papers reported he had called the policy "appalling".
The prince is travelling to the east African country later this month to represent the Queen at the Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting being held in the capital, Kigali.
Clarence House, which represents the prince, reiterated that he remains "politically neutral" and said that it would not comment on "supposed anonymous private conversations".
Under the government policy, some of those entering the UK illegally will be flown to Rwanda to apply for asylum there.
The government hopes the scheme will discourage asylum seekers from crossing the English Channel, with more than 10,000 people making the dangerous sea journey so far this year.
But campaigners who brought the High Court case said they were deeply concerned for the welfare of people set to be "forcibly deported". They had wanted to block the first flight from leaving, as well as individual people being placed on it.
Speaking at the High Court on Friday, Mr Justice Swift said there was a "material public interest" in Home Secretary Priti Patel being able to carry out her policies. He said he did not consider there was any evidence asylum seekers would be ill treated.
But he said there would be a full judicial review, where the High Court will hear a challenge to the policy as a whole, before the end of July.
The first claim had been brought by lawyers on behalf of some asylum seekers, alongside the Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) which represents more than 80% of Border Force staff, as well as groups Care4Calais and Detention Action.
Ms Patel has praised the judgement, with Prime Minister Boris Johnson calling it "welcome news".
One asylum seeker - an Iranian ex-police commander who has been held at a detention centre since arriving in the UK in May - has said he fears being killed by Iranian agents in Rwanda.
The former commander, who is not being named in order to protect his identity, was sentenced by an Iranian military court to almost five years in jail in Iran and a demotion for refusing to shoot protesters during anti-government demonstrations in 2019.
When he was out on bail pending his appeal, the former commander escaped to Turkey, where in November 2021 he gave testimony via Skype to a UK-based rights groups' tribunal investigating alleged Iranian atrocities during the protests
He says he lived in hiding in Turkey before arriving in the UK in May. Although his face was covered when he gave evidence, he says Iran's security forces managed to identify him and persecuted his family.
"Why Rwanda? I'd rather be sent to Iran," he said. "At least, I know the consequences. I can't live with uncertainty and in fear any more."
He has been told he will be deported on Tuesday.
Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the PCS union - which has called for urgent fresh talks with Ms Patel - said those being removed to Rwanda faced the risk of being sent back to the countries they had been fleeing, and where they faced persecution.
James Wilson, deputy director of campaign group Detention Action, said it was disappointed, but added there were "some positives" from the case - noting that six of the eight original claimants had their removal orders withdrawn by the Home Office in advance of the judgement.
Clare Moseley, founder of Care4Calais, said the charity was "deeply concerned for the welfare of people who may be forcibly deported to Rwanda, a fate that could profoundly harm their mental health and future".
But Conservative MP Kevin Hollinrake said while the policy is not ideal, it is the only viable solution.
He told BBC Radio 4: "I don't think anybody is particularly comfortable with the situation where we are shipping asylum seekers off to a far distant land - but, nevertheless, we have got to do something that acts as a disincentive for people to make money out of other people's perilous journeys.
"In the absence of any other workable policy I don't see any other option other than to support this one.
The government's policy will see people given accommodation and support in Rwanda while their asylum application is being considered by the country. If they are successful, they can stay there with up to five years' access to education and support.
Those who fail in their asylum bids in Rwanda will be offered the chance to apply for visas under other immigration routes if they wish to remain in the country, but could still face deportation.
Mr Justice Swift said part of the case to block the initial flights focused on the argument that Ms Patel's "decision to treat Rwanda as a safe country is either irrational or based on insufficient investigation".
He said this argument, along with other parts of the case, would be heard with evidence at the full judicial review, to be held across two days before the end of July.
A judicial review sees a judge looking at how a decision, or action, has been made by a public body. It does not consider whether the decision itself is correct or not.
Up to 130 people so far have been notified they could be flown to Rwanda at some point in the future. It emerged during the High Court hearing on Friday that removal directions for three people set to be on the first flight had been dropped by the Home Office, with two more having them cancelled.
Mr Justice Swift denied an injunction to the remaining two claimants trying to avoid being removed.
Conservative MP Peter Bone, former chairman of the all-party group against human trafficking, said he believes the scheme will work.
"These people smugglers - they're just out to make money. They don't want to get caught and they don't want to do anything difficult," he told BBC Radio 4.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61769300
|
news_uk-61769300
|
|
Rwanda asylum plan: UK court allows removal flight planned for Tuesday - BBC News
|
2022-06-11
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Campaigners fail in their legal bid to halt the removals set for Tuesday but will appeal.
|
UK
|
A group of people, thought to be asylum seekers, arriving at Dover (file image)
A flight to take asylum seekers from the UK to Rwanda next Tuesday has been allowed to go ahead by the High Court.
Campaigners failed in an initial legal bid to halt the removals to the east African country, but have confirmed they will take the case to the Court of Appeal on Monday.
Under the policy, some of those entering the UK illegally will be flown to Rwanda to apply for asylum there.
About 31 people have been told they may be on the first flight.
There will be a full judicial review, where the High Court will hear a challenge to the policy as a whole, before the end of July, it heard.
In his decision, the judge Mr Justice Swift accepted there was a "material public interest" in Home Secretary Priti Patel being able to carry out her policies.
Ms Patel praised his judgement and said the government would go ahead with its plans, while Prime Minister Boris Johnson described the ruling as "welcome news".
However, campaigners who brought the case expressed concern for the welfare of people set to be "forcibly deported".
One asylum seeker - an Iranian ex-police commander - who was told he will be deported on Tuesday has said he fears being killed by Iranian agents in Rwanda.
He has been held at a detention centre since arriving in the UK from Turkey in May.
It comes as the Daily Mail and the Times reports the Prince of Wales has been privately critical of the government's policy - quoting a source saying he thinks the approach is "appalling".
Prince Charles is to represent the Queen in Kigali, the Rwandan capital, at a Commonwealth summit later this month. His office reiterated he remains "politically neutral".
The government hopes the scheme will discourage asylum seekers from crossing the English Channel, by making it clear many cases will now be dealt with by Rwanda.
More than 10,000 people have made the dangerous sea journey so far this year.
While their application is considered by Rwanda those affected will be given accommodation and support and, if successful, will be able to remain there with up to five years' access to education and support.
Those who fail in their asylum bids in Rwanda will be offered the chance to apply for visas under other immigration routes if they wish to remain in the country, but could still face deportation.
Campaigners had sought to block the flight from leaving, as well as individual people being placed on it.
An excerpt of the document given to some asylum seekers by the Home Office
The case was brought by lawyers representing asylum seekers set to be deported, alongside the Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) - which represents more than 80% of UK Border Force staff - and migration charities Care4Calais and Detention Action.
Their lawyers raised concerns about shortcomings in the Rwanda asylum system and the possibility that people could be sent on to countries where they would be persecuted - a process known as refoulement.
Home Office lawyers had told the court the plan must not be stopped by legal challenges because it was in the public interest, and also urged the judge to reject challenges on behalf of individual asylum seekers.
At the hearing, the UN's refugee body, the UNHCR, also intervened to distance itself from the policy amid claims the Home Office has misrepresented its position on the scheme.
Lawyers for the UNHCR also said it had warned the Home Office twice that its arrangement with Rwanda was unlawful.
In his judgement, Mr Justice Swift ruled against a temporary block on the deportation flights before the full hearing on the policy in July.
He said he did not consider there was any evidence there would be "ill-treatment, refoulement" or anything that violated their rights under article three of the UK's Human Rights Act.
Article three protects people from torture, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment, and deportation or extradition to a country where there is a real risk they will face torture or inhuman or degrading treatment.
Mr Justice Swift said part of the case to block the initial flights focused on the argument that Ms Patel's "decision to treat Rwanda as a safe country is either irrational or based on insufficient investigation".
He said this argument, along with other parts of the case, would be heard with evidence at the full judicial review, to be held across two days before the end of July.
A judicial review sees a judge looking at how a decision, or action, has been made by a public body. It does not consider whether the decision itself is correct or not.
But Mr Justice Swift noted that, while the campaigners had enough evidence for a review, their claim was "not conspicuously strong".
He also denied interim relief to two people who face removal on Tuesday, one from Syria and another from Iraq, who are still set to be on the plane to Rwanda.
"I accept that the fact of removal to Rwanda will be onerous," he added.
However, the judge granted the campaigners and migrants the right to appeal against his decision and said the Court of Appeal would be able to hear their case on Monday.
Following the judgement, Ms Patel said the government would "continue to deliver on progressing" the plan.
She said: "People will continue to try and prevent their relocation through legal challenges and last-minute claims, but we will not be deterred in breaking the deadly people smuggling trade and ultimately saving lives.
"Rwanda is a safe country and has previously been recognised for providing a safe haven for refugees - we will continue preparations for the first flight to Rwanda, alongside the range of other measures intended to reduce small boat crossings."
Mr Johnson tweeted: "We cannot allow people traffickers to put lives at risk and our world leading partnership will help break the business model of these ruthless criminals."
James Wilson, deputy director of campaign group Detention Action, said it was disappointed, but added there were "some positives" from the case - noting that six of the eight original claimants had their removal orders withdrawn by the Home Office in advance of the judgement.
Clare Moseley, founder of Care4Calais, said the charity was "deeply concerned for the welfare of people who may be forcibly deported to Rwanda, a fate that could profoundly harm their mental health and future".
The PCS union has called for urgent talks with Ms Patel to discuss the removal policy following the ruling.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61763818
|
news_uk-61763818
|
|
Happy the elephant is not a person, New York court rules - BBC News
|
2022-06-15
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
An animal rights group was seeking legal means to have the elephant moved from a zoo to a sanctuary.
|
US & Canada
|
Happy the elephant must remain in the Bronx Zoo, a judge has ruled
Happy the elephant, a long-time resident of the Bronx Zoo, must remain there after a New York court ruled she is not legally a person under US law.
On Tuesday, the state's highest court voted 5-2 to reject an animal rights group's argument that Happy was being illegally confined at the zoo.
While elephants are "impressive", the court said, they are not entitled to the same liberty rights as humans.
The animal rights group sought to have Happy moved to an elephant sanctuary.
The court dispute centred on whether the legal principle of habeas corpus - which guards against illegal detention - should be extended to emotionally complex and intelligent animals.
"While no one disputes the impressive capabilities of elephants, we reject petitioner's arguments that it is entitled to seek the remedy of habeas corpus on Happy's behalf," wrote Chief Judge Janet DiFiore on behalf of the majority.
"Habeas corpus is a procedural vehicle intended to secure the liberty rights of human beings who are unlawfully restrained, not nonhuman animals."
The decision follows that of lower courts which had repeatedly taken the side of the Bronx Zoo in the case brought by the Nonhuman Rights Project, a New York-based legal non-profit.
The group had pushed to remove the 51-year-old elephant from the Bronx Zoo, saying she was imprisoned in her one-acre enclosure.
But the Wildlife Conservation Society, which operates the zoo, rejected this description, saying Happy and her fellow elephant at the zoo are well cared for. It did not respond immediately to a request for comment following the ruling.
In a statement on Tuesday, the Nonhuman Rights Project celebrated the decision's dissenting opinions, calling them "powerful" and adding that it planned to use them in another elephant rights case underway in California.
In her dissent, Judge Jenny Rivera wrote: "[Happy's] captivity is inherently unjust and inhumane. It is an affront to a civilized society, and every day she remains a captive—a spectacle for humans—we, too, are diminished."
Happy was born in the wild in Thailand in the 1970s, captured and brought to the US when she was about one. She has lived at the Bronx Zoo since 1977.
She is one of two remaining elephants at the zoo, which has said it will eventually end its captive elephant programme.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61803958
|
news_world-us-canada-61803958
|
|
Nicola Sturgeon unveils case for Scottish independence - BBC News
|
2022-06-15
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Scotland's first minister says her government has an "indisputable mandate" for another referendum.
|
Scotland politics
|
This video can not be played To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser. Scotland must "forge a way forward" to a referendum, without section 30 order "if necessary", Nicola Sturgeon said
Scotland's First Minister Nicola Sturgeon has unveiled what she called a "refreshed" case for independence.
She told a press conference in Edinburgh that her government had an "indisputable mandate" for a second independence referendum.
Ms Sturgeon was launching the first of a series of papers setting out the case to break away from the UK.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson said the 2014 referendum result should be respected.
And opposition parties accused the Scottish government of being obsessed with independence.
The first minister said it was now time to set out "a different and better vision" for Scotland.
She said it was time to talk abut independence and then to make that choice.
Ms Sturgeon insisted she won last May's election with a "clear commitment to give the people of Scotland the choice of becoming an independent country", and that Holyrood had a "decisive majority" of MSPs in favour of independence.
"The Scottish Parliament therefore has an indisputable democratic mandate," she added.
Nicola Sturgeon and Patrick Harvie at the launch of the new paper
However, she conceded that a future referendum faced challenges, including what she described as an issue of process. She said Holyrood's power to hold a vote was "contested".
If a referendum bill was introduced without Westminster agreement it could be challenged in the courts.
Before the 2014 referendum, the Scottish government struck an agreement with the UK government which transferred authority on a temporary basis to Holyrood. This was called a section 30 order.
The UK government has so far shown no indication that it would be willing to do so again.
Ms Sturgeon said any referendum "must be lawful", and that only parties opposed to independence would benefit from doubt about the process.
"If this UK government had any respect at all for democracy, the issue of legality would be put beyond doubt, as in 2014," she added.
An agreement was reached between the Scottish and UK governments ahead of the 2014 referendum,
She said she had made clear to Boris Johnson that she was "ready to discuss the terms of such an order at any time".
The first minister said her government had a mandate for another referendum, adding: "If we are to uphold democracy here in Scotland, we must forge a way forward if necessary without a section 30 order."
An update on the Scottish government's plans for holding a referendum would follow soon, she added.
Ms Sturgeon said the independence papers would set the scene for the debate about Scotland's future in the UK.
She said they would cover how Scotland can benefit from the "massive opportunities" independence would present, but also address the challenges and not shy away from tough questions.
She said independence would put "the levers that determine success into our own hands", and away from Westminster - which was taking Scotland "in the wrong direction".
The first paper - called Independence in the Modern World. Wealthier, Happier, Fairer: Why Not Scotland? - makes comparisons between Scotland and other European countries - all of which Ms Sturgeon said were independent, wealthier and fairer than the UK.
Subsequent papers will look at a areas including currency, tax and spend, defence, social security and pensions, and EU membership and trade.
Ms Sturgeon was joined at the press conference by Patrick Harvie, the co-leader of the Scottish Green Party and a member of the Scottish cabinet.
The SNP and the Greens are both pro-independence and struck a power sharing arrangement at Holyrood after last year's election.
Mr Harvie said Scotland "could chart a different future" with independence and set out a vision for a greener, fairer and more prosperous Scotland.
Boris Johnson said the 2014 result should be respected. He said the UK government should focus on the economy and Covid recovery, adding: "That's the focus of the government. We're working with our friends in the Scottish government, in the Scottish administration, on those issues."
At Holyrood, the presiding officer stopped a minister from making a statement to MSPs on Tuesday afternoon because the details had already been released to the media.
Alison Johnstone said the "benefits of independence" announcement should have been made in the chamber first "as a matter of courtesy and respect to the parliament".
She skipped instead to response from Scottish Conservative leader Douglas Ross, who said energy was being wasted on the wrong priorities.
He said: "Pushing for another divisive referendum... is the wrong priority, at the worst possible time."
Scottish Labour leader Anas Sarwar said Ms Sturgeon's speech was "a disappointing return to the politics of the past", adding that the majority were opposed to independence.
He said the first minister should not "turn her back" on important issues in order to "focus on her own obsession" with independence.
Alex Cole-Hamilton, the Scottish Lib Dem leader, said the first minister "must be wired to the moon if she thinks that breaking up the UK is the priority for people".
Why is this renewed push for independence happening? The answer is simple. The people of Scotland voted for it. Of course there is plenty of opposition to, and concern about, a second independence referendum but it remains an inescapable fact that in last year's elections to the Scottish Parliament voters returned a majority of MSPs, both SNP and Green, who had pledged to hold one.
When this happened in 2011, there was a referendum. If that was the accepted trigger then, why is it not the trigger now?
That is primarily a question for Prime Minister Boris Johnson. The SNP's argument is that if his Conservative Party previously regarded a majority at Holyrood as a mandate for a poll, why is he thwarting the will of Scotland's voters now?
Today the SNP leader did not or could not detail the alternative path she intends to follow if Mr Johnson persists in his refusal.
There are also difficult questions for both Ms Sturgeon and Mr Johnson about the "why" as well as the "how" of independence.
Independence is never far from the surface in Scottish politics. It is the principle fault line. The great divide.
The question will persist unless and until a) independence actually happens or b) the public tire of the political parties that promote it.
Neither of those possibilities seem very likely anytime soon and so the debate continues.
It was largely put on hold during the pandemic but when the SNP won the Holyrood election in 2021, they did so having promised another referendum.
Together with the Scottish Greens who share power with them in the Scottish government, they have a majority in parliament for indyref2.
What they do not have is the explicit power to hold a vote.
• None Independence in the Modern World. Wealthier, Happier, Fairer- Why Not Scotland- - gov.scot The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61796883
|
news_uk-scotland-scotland-politics-61796883
|
|
Johnson hints that new coal mine for Cumbria will get go-ahead - BBC News
|
2022-06-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The government faces a huge decision over what to do in Cumbria, amid employment and climate concerns.
|
UK Politics
|
Digging down to level up? Proposals for a new mine at Whitehaven are highly controversial
Governing is about choices - and it's about decisions.
And, every so often, a decision comes along that encapsulates the dilemmas ministers face.
Consider what the government might think of as its core, even defining priorities.
High up on the list would be what it calls "levelling up", the idea that geography shouldn't be destiny, that regional inequalities should be lessened.
Also up there would be the commitment to net-zero-carbon emissions by 2050 to restrict climate change.
And then, in light of the war in Ukraine, there is boosting energy security and reducing the UK's dependence on Russia.
Now think of the decision, being reached within government right now, on whether to allow a new coal mine to be opened near Whitehaven in Cumbria.
The black stuff in question, under the Irish Sea, is what is called metallurgical coal, which is used in making steel.
Around 40% of this type of coal the UK needs is imported from - yes, you guessed it - Russia.
Coal is widely seen as one of the dirtiest and most polluting energy sources.
But west Cumbria is crying out for skilled, long-term, well-paid private-sector jobs.
So what should ministers do?
You can imagine the criticism, whether they say yes or no.
Most of the UK's coalmining industry is gone
I've been following this for the last year or so, mesmerised by its awkwardness for those who have to decide.
It reminds me of a fundamental truth about reporting: it is a privilege to be an observer, asking sceptical questions.
But it's undeniably easier to ask questions than to answer them.
This is how the new coal mine could look
So tricky has been this, the prospect of the first new deep-coal mine in the UK in 30 years, that noisy disagreement and dither have dominated.
The government asked the Planning Inspectorate to examine the arguments. It has done that and handed its report to the government.
And a deadline of Thursday 7 July was set for a decision by the Communities Secretary Michael Gove.
That is a fortnight away.
West Cumbria is in need of high-skilled, long-term jobs
On Wednesday, tantalisingly, we got what looked like a glimpse of the government's instinct.
Deep into Prime Minister's Question Time, Conservative MP Chris Green asked about the importance of levelling up and the approach of other countries to the burning of different types of coal.
The prime minister knew the question was coming. Boris Johnson could have offered a generic answer. He could have ducked it entirely.
But instead he said this: "We can all be proud of the way in which we reduced CO2 emissions in this country, but plainly it makes no sense to be importing coal, particularly for metallurgical purposes, when we have our own domestic resources."
To supporters of the mine in and around Whitehaven, that sounded like a possible prime ministerial thumbs-up for it getting the go-ahead.
Those around Mr Gove remain tight-lipped and sources in No10 caution about reading too much into the PM's comment.
If Mr Johnson's outlook is soon reflected in the formal decision, we can expect to see opponents of the mine challenge it in court.
And the government will face questions on precisely how this will level up, as they describe it. These include:
And if they say no to the mine:
There are tough, legitimate, sceptical questions, whatever - difficult - decision is reached.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-61904622
|
news_uk-politics-61904622
|
|
Texas shooting: America's gun control debate that never goes away - BBC News
|
2022-06-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
Stricter gun control in the US is unlikely despite the grief and anger, the BBC's Sarah Smith writes.
|
US & Canada
|
American flags flew half mast in New Jersey this morning
This tragedy has reignited the debate over gun control in the US. But realistically, it is unlikely to result in significant reform. The argument over guns has simply become too politically divisive and culturally entrenched to allow for meaningful change.
It is important to remember that guns are normal in many parts of America. They are not seen as exceptional or frightening as they do to outsiders. They are a part of everyday life.
American gun owners - and there are an estimated 80 million of them - see their firearms as protection: a way to defend their own freedoms and property.
In a country where there is a real prospect of an armed criminal breaking into your home or assaulting you on the street, many consider carrying one to be a sensible precaution.
Guns are so ubiquitous in America that no one will be able to get them out of the hands of felons. And so the argument goes: the good guys should have them too.
We all know that the right to bear arms is protected by the Second Amendment of the US Constitution. What is less clear to those on the outside is why a document written nearly 250 years ago in response to a revolutionary war still has such resonance in 2022.
Freedom and the right to defend yourself is fundamental not just to America's origin story - but to how many in America think about their country and their values today.
Some of the most vociferous arguments in favour of guns are made by the rich and powerful National Rifle Association (NRA) who want to defend their supporters' profits. But many of the arguments come from ordinary citizens too.
A Texas ranger takes up a woman's offer of hugs in Uvalde yesterday
For many, your right to carry a gun is considered as fundamental as your right to free speech. Banning or restricting guns is viewed as a breach of your rights as an American.
Those rights have been up for debate before, especially in the wake of tragedies like the one in Texas.
Back in 2012 a lone gunman rampaged through Sandy Hook primary school - killing six adults and 20 children. Afterwards there was a groundswell of support for gun control similar to what we're seeing now.
President Barack Obama vowed to do everything in his power to act and his Democrats proposed US-wide laws banning specific models of firearms and enhancing background checks.
Some of those measures received Republican support - but it was never enough to make it through Congress and into law.
The families of the Sandy Hook dead were so frustrated by the failure of gun reform that they took matters into their own hands - choosing to directly sue the manufacturer of the AR-15 rifle used in the 2012 attack.
Earlier this year Remington Arms settled with nine of the families for $73m (£53.9m), which makes more of these lawsuits likely in the future.
Tears run down President Obama's face as he calls for gun reform in the wake of the 2012 Sandy Hook school shooting
Huge numbers of Americans are sickened by the high rates of gun violence in their country and calls today are louder to at least tighten restrictions on gun ownership.
Reform advocates talk about other types of freedom - like a child's right to go to school without fear of being shot. All in a country where guns are now the leading cause of death amongst children and teens.
The numbers are staggering. More than 4,300 under-18s died from firearm-related injuries in 2020. By comparison, some 50 American police officers died from gunfire injuries in the same year.
But do not expect the kind of political response provoked in 1996 by the Dunblane massacre in the UK - which MPs responded to by effectively outlawing all privately-owned handguns.
Arguments will rage across US cable shows and on social media in the coming days over who should be allowed to buy guns and what kinds of weapons they are permitted - but not over their right to bear arms.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-61585716
|
news_world-us-canada-61585716
|
|
Kaliningrad row: Lithuania accuses Russia of lying about rail 'blockade' - BBC News
|
2022-06-23
|
['https://www.facebook.com/bbcnews']
|
The prime minister says talk of a blockade is untrue and a tiny amount of goods are affected.
|
Europe
|
Ingrida Simonyte said a tiny proportion of Russian goods were affected by EU sanctions
Lithuanian Prime Minister Ingrida Simonyte has said Russian claims of a rail blockade of its territorial outpost in Kaliningrad are a lie.
Kaliningrad is on the Baltic Sea and uses a rail link to Russia via Lithuania for passengers and freight.
When Lithuania banned the transit of steel and other ferrous metals under EU sanctions last Saturday, Russia threatened to respond.
The Kremlin condemned the sanctions as illegal and unacceptable.
Ms Simonyte explained that passengers were still able to travel freely across Lithuanian territory from Russia to Kaliningrad and only about 1% of Russian freight was affected.
One senior diplomat in Brussels said that Russian talk of a blockade was disinformation and completely untrue.
"Lithuania is complying with the sanctions imposed by the European Union on Russia for its aggression and war against Ukraine," the prime minister said.
EU sanctions on steel were imposed in March, but a three-month transition period was allowed for existing contracts to wind down.
Russia annexed Kaliningrad after World War Two in 1945 and roughly one million people live there.
Diplomats say no goods trains have yet been barred from crossing Lithuania
It was not clear what Russian security council chief Nikolai Patrushev meant when he threatened a "serious negative impact on the population of Lithuania".
The foreign ministry in Moscow said merely that retaliation would be practical as well as diplomatic. Regional governor Anton Alikhanov said that as well as reprisals, Kaliningrad would organise shipments by sea.
One option would be to disconnect Lithuania from the electricity network it shares with Russia, Belarus and the other Baltic states, although officials in Vilnius have said for months they are ready to connect through Poland to the West European grid.
The Lithuanian prime minister told the BBC that it was important not to overreact, as this was the latest in a series of threats used by Russia or Belarus to threaten their neighbours, such as attempted cyber-attacks on public institutions and utilities.
Estonia called on Russia to stop issuing threats and suggested Moscow was flexing its muscles ahead of next week's Nato summit in Madrid, where Sweden and Finland hope to get backing to join the Western defence alliance.
As Lithuania is a member of the Nato as well as the EU, the prime minister said lessons needed to be learned and security had to be in place, given that Russia's neighbour Belarus had acted as an accomplice, allowing its soil to be used as a staging post for invasion of Ukraine.
"We need a significantly higher presence in the region," she told the BBC's Katya Adler, citing a 100-km (62-mile) corridor of territory that connects Lithuania and the other two Baltic states to Poland.
"The Suwalki Gap is a place which is crucially important, not only for my country or Poland, but also for Nato, because this is a short corridor and there is a need to take its defence and security seriously."
She was speaking on the eve of an EU summit, where diplomats said the Russian threats were bound to come up.
One diplomat told the BBC that when sanctions had been imposed, it was unlikely that they were designed to stop Russia moving goods internally. The European Commission might seek to de-escalate the situation, the source added.
However, another senior European diplomat said the legal argument was clear, that there would be no derogation for allowing banned Russian goods from crossing EU territory.
Further sanctions are due to come into force in August and December, covering luxury goods and crude oil, so the aim is for the Commission to make a public statement on what is seen as legal and what is not.
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-61901764
|
news_world-europe-61901764
|
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.