Salisbury Novichok inquiry latest: Putin told to ‘look Dawn Sturgess family in the eye’ over poisoning death

Vladimir Putin should not “cower behind the walls of the Kremlin” and should look the family of Dawn Sturgess “in the eyes” over her death, their lawyer has told the inquiry into the Novichok poisonings in Salisbury.

Ms Sturgess, 44, was killed after coming into contact with the Russian-engineered nerve agent in Amesbury in July 2018.

Her contact with Novichok followed the attempted murder of former spy Sergei Skripal and his daughter, who were poisoned in nearby Salisbury in March that year. Police officer Nick Bailey also fell ill after becoming exposed to the chemical.

They were poisoned when members of a Russian military intelligence squad are believed to have smeared the nerve agent on Mr Skripal’s door handle. All three survived, as did Ms Sturgess’s boyfriend Charlie Rowley, who had unwittingly given her the bottle containing the killer chemical weapon.

In a new witness statement issued by Mr Skripal, the inquiry heard on Monday that the former Russian militay intelligence operative believes Vladimir Putin personally ordered the attack on his life.

The inquiry will sit all week in Salisbury.

Key Points

• Vladimir Putin told to ‘look Dawn Sturgess family in the eye’ over poisoning death

• Sergei Skripal accuses Putin of ordering attack on his life in new statement

• Perfume bottle ‘contained enough Novichok to kill thousands of people'

• Sturgess may have been ‘caught in crossfire of outrageous assassination attempt’

• Theresa May says ‘justice is unlikely’ for family of Novichok victim

16:39 , Andy Gregory

Today’s hearing has now come to a close. You can keep scrolling to catch up on the day’s events as we reported them, ahead of our full upcoming report on the proceedings.

Skripals express ‘deepest sympathies’ to family of Dawn Sturgess

16:35 , Andy Gregory

Sergei and Yulia Skripal would “like to express their sorrow at the death of Dawn Sturgess and to offer their deepest sympathies to her family and loved ones”, their lawyer Andrew Deakin told the inquiry.

And they further express their sympathy to those injured in the incident, he said, which includes Sturgess’s partner Charlie Rowley and police officer Nick Bailey.

‘Hard to imagine’ what sitting through inquiry must feel like for Dawn Sturgess family, barrister says

16:31 , Andy Gregory

Barrister Bridget Dolan KC, representing the South West Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust, told the inquiry: “It is hard to imagine what it must feel like for Dawn’s family to sit in this room with all of these lawyers, faced by all these purple signs with their mother and their daughter’s name [emblazoned] across them.

“No family would want to be in a position to have to experience their loved one’s death as the heart of a public inquiry and we do sincerely hope that you get all the answers that you want from this processs.”

UK government holds ‘considered view’ that Putin ordered attack, barrister says

16:25 , Andy Gregory

Jonathan Allan, a director-general in the Foreign Office will later testify that the ongoing investigation since 2018 has only strengthened the government’s confidence in attributing this attack to Russia, barrister Cathy McGahey KC told the inquiry.

“It is now the government’s considered view that President Putin authorised this operation,” added Ms McGahey, acting on behalf of the home secretary.

She continued: “Hindsight should not unduly colour the inquiry’s assessments of what could or should have been done by those who had to make the decisions before the attack on the Skripals took place and before the tragic death of Ms Sturgess.”

Local police had to rely on Wikipedia in Novichok response, inquiry told

16:16 , Andy Gregory

Local police had to rely on Wikipedia for information on how to respond to the Salisbury poisonings, the inquiry was told.

Disclosed documents show public health bodies were concerned that “secrecy, withholding of relevant information and an over-centralisation of decision-making in central government hampered the response” to the attacks and in the early stages it was “very difficult” to access credible information, said barrister Michael Mansfield KC.

He added: “Documents paint a picture of some concern - they describe organisational disputes and disagreements over tactical and strategic decision-making, and a lack of clarity on how to secure essential scientific advice; there are references to public health officials being risk averse and too slow to offer advice and make decisions.”

Advice on dry cleaning potentially-contaminated clothing “took up considerable time” even at a national level, said Mr Mansfield, who is representing Dawn Sturgess’s family.

“[One] report records that the most comprehensive source of information to local police was Wikipedia”, he added.

Chris Whitty discussed need to identify ‘where the chemical might be’ in March 2018, inquiry told

16:11 , Andy Gregory

The government’s then chief scientific adviser Professor Sir Chris Whitty discussed the need to identify “where the chemical might be” after the attempted murder of former spy Sergei Skripal, his daughter Yulia and then police officer Nick Bailey, in Salisbury in March 2018, the inquiry heard.

Michael Mansfield KC, counsel on behalf of the family of Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley, raised whether adequate steps were taken to locate the Novichok.

He said: “In emails within the Department for Health and Social Care on 15 March, it was recognised that there was an outstanding risk of a secondary incident, including through the accidental discovery of discarded agent by humans”.

Mr Mansfield added that, in emails on 19 March, Professor Whitty identified the need to identify “where the chemical might be” as an investigation question.

Scale of probe into Salisbury poisonings ‘difficult to overstate'

16:06 , Andy Gregory

The scale of the investigation into the Salisbury and Amesbury poisonings “is difficult to overstate”, Lisa Giovanetti KC, a lawyer acting on behalf of the Metropolitan Police.

It has involved cooperation between police and partners across government, and extensive inquiries both domestically and internationally, Ms McGahey said.

The inquiry has disclosed nearly 800 documents from the operation – named Operation Verbasco – to all core participants in the inquiry, in accordance with the inquiry’s established protocols to protect national security, the barrister added.

Openness needed to counter ‘huge amount of Russian disinformation’ about Salisbury incidents, barrister says

16:00 , Andy Gregory

Lawyers for the family of Dawn Sturgess have questioned why the UK authorities appeared to have failed to identify the risk faced by Sergei Skripal and why “innocent citizens [were] placed in harm’s way”.

As well as with the aim of helping the family “grieve the loss of their loved one, and come to terms with her death”, barrister Michael Mansfield KC warned that openness in the inquiry will be “of great importance” in countering the “huge amount” of Russian disinformation about Salisbury.

Mr Mansfield said: “A huge amount of disinformation has been produced by the Russian state in the international media about this incident. Countering that disinformation is of great importance, to put public pressure on those responsible, and even to support international democracy at a time when the threat from Russian interference remains very real.”

He added: “Clear and persuasive evidence heard in public may also affect the support Putin and his regime has in Russia. There is currently a feeling in Russia that unfair allegations are made against them by the West, including the UK.”

“Countering the disinformation can only be done by publicising clear and persuasive evidence and conclusions,” he continued, warning that “national security should not be a convenient smokescreen” to avoid thorough questioning over the conduct of UK government agencies.

Putin told to ‘look Dawn Sturgess’s family in the eye’ over poisoning death

15:31 , Andy Gregory

Lawyers acting for the family of Dawn Sturgess have called for Russian president Vladimir Putin not to “cower behind the walls of the Kremlin, and to look her relatives “in the eyes and answer the evidence against him”.

Speaking after the inquiry disclosed a witness statement by Jonathan Allen, now director general of defence and intelligence at the Foreign Office asserting that “it is [His Majesty’s government’s view that President Putin authorised the operation”, Adam Straw KC pointed to his reasoning that the structure of the Russian government means an operation using Novichok must have been approved at the highest level.

Mr Straw continued: “In light of that new evidence, the family invite the chair to call Mr Putin as a witness, to give oral evidence to the inquiry.

“As an individual who has now been identified, through persuasive evidence, as being responsible for the attempted murder of Mr Skripal – and ultimately responsible for Dawn’s death – he is clearly a relevant and important witness.

“He should not cower behind the walls of the Kremlin. He should look Dawn’s family in the eyes and answer the evidence against him.”

Mr Straw then conceded that the chances of such an appearance by Mr Putin – who is subject to an International Criminal Court arrest warrant relating to Russia’s war in Ukraine – “may be very very small.”

Questions over potential failure to prevent chemical attack are ‘of the greatest gravamen’, inquiry told

15:14 , Andy Gregory

Questions of whether there was a failure to prevent a chemical weapons attack on UK soil which may have put “countless” members of the public at risk are “of the greatest gravamen”, the lead barrister for Dawn Sturgess’s family has said.

Michael Mansfield KC told the inquiry: “Given that Sergei Skripal was a manifestly obvious target” what was done to prevent the attack? That is a question of profound importance – to Dawn’s family, to her partner, to the emergency services, and to the wider public.

“The Novichok attack against Mr Skripal caused Dawn’s death, nearly killed her partner, and placed first responders and the wider public – in Salisbury, Amesbury, London and more widely – at very great risk.

“If the attack could and should have been prevented by the UK authorities, Dawn’s family and partner are entitled to know. So are the wider public.

“Was there a failure to prevent a chemical weapons attack on UK soil? Were countless members of the public put at risk, with the potential for hundreds or even thousands of deaths? These are questions of the greatest gravamen, to which the public deserve answers. Public confidence requires it.”

‘Credible reporting’ suggests Skripal was supplying evidence to UK shortly before attack, barrister says

15:09 , Andy Gregory

Barrister Michael Mansfield KC, acting on behalf of Dawn Sturgess’s family, told the inquiry that “credible reporting indicates that [Sergei] Skripal was supplying evidence to UK intelligence services in the period shortly before he was attacked.

Mr Mansfield said: “Mr Skripal himself stated in the aftermath of the attack that the Russian authorities believed he was still actively working for the West and that ‘this [was the] number one reason ... [for the attack]’.”

Deadly Novichok incident in Salisbury ‘felt like James Bond meets The Archers’, barrister says

15:04 , Andy Gregory

Dawn Sturgess’s death was a tragedy that “stunned” her family, to whom being the “collateral damage of global spy wars” felt “like James Bond meets The Archers”, her family’s barrister has told the inquiry.

Adam Straw KC said: “Dawn’s death is a tragedy for her family, her partner and her friends. Living a quiet life in rural Salisbury they were stunned to be the collateral damage of global spy wars. It felt like James Bond meets The Archers. But the consequences could have been even more disastrous.

“For example, children could have found the bottle and innocently poisoned each other. What would have happened if the Nina Ricci bottle had been taken into and used in a crowded local venue? It was capable of causing a massacre.”

Leaving fatal Novichok in Salisbury amounts to unlawful killing, barrister alleges

15:01 , Andy Gregory

Adam Straw KC, a barrister for Dawn Sturgess’s family has alleged to the inquiry that, “depositing the Novichok in the centre of Salisbury, when that same Novichok later caused Dawn’s death, was unlawful killing – either unlawful act or gross negligence manslaughter.

Russia accused of training personnel to apply Novichok to door handles, inquiry told

14:58 , Andy Gregory

Barrister Adam Straw KC has cited the UK’s then national security advisor Sir Mark Sedwill as claiming that the only way the quantity and purity of the Novichok in the perfume bottle “could have been made and deployed is by a state actor”.

He told the inquiry that Sir Mark had accused Russia of covertly producing and stockpiling Novichoks, and of training personnel from special units to deliver Novichok for assassination, including by applying it to door handles.

No evidence Russian suspects knew Skripal personally, inquiry told

14:53 , Andy Gregory

There is no evidence that the Russian men going by the names of Alexander Petrov, Ruslan Boshirov and Sergey Fedotov knew Sergei Skripal personally, or that they had some personal animus against him, barrister Adam Straw KC told the inquiry.

“They must have been acting for someone else. The Russian state and Mr Putin evidently did have a motive to attack Mr Skripal,” Mr Straw said.

He added: “Mr Putin described Mr Skripal as ‘A traitor to his motherland’. That was an ominous description, given that the Russian state under Mr Putin has a track record of assassination, or of botched assassination, of those it considers traitors.”

Sturgess family’s barrister lays out assertions over Skripal poisoning

14:49 , Andy Gregory

In the poisoning of the Skripals, lawyers for Dawn Sturgess’s family have proposed to the inquiry that the facts can be assumed as follows:

• The scientific trace evidence proves that the same specific Novichok that poisoned the Skripals and was left on their front door handle, was also in Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov’s hotel room.

• The Novichok was deposited on that front door handle on Sunday morning.

• Petrov and Boshirov went past the Skripal address on Sunday morning, and they did not return to their hotel room thereafter.

Barrister Adam Straw KC added: “If so, there is no credible explanation of those facts, other than that Petrov and Boshirov put the Novichok on the Skripal front door handle.”

Inquiry told of symptoms suffered by Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley

14:41 , Andy Gregory

Dawn Sturgess found found lying in the bath fully clothed, with “pinpoint pupils”, convulsing and drooling at the mouth shortly after spraying herself with the perfume bottle, her family’s barrister Adam Straw KC said.

Dawn’s partner Charlie Rowley called an ambulance and she was taken to hospital, the inquiy was told.

Because of the Novichok found to be in her system, Sturgess’s family were not allowed to bury her as they wished.

After Mr Rowley called the ambulance for Sturgess, he then suffered “very similar” symptoms to hers, and was “drooling profusely, fitting” and also had pinpoint pupils. He has suffered long-term physical and mental injuries as a result of the poisoning, including problems wih his vision, legs, balance and memory, the inquiry heard.

‘Necessary and proportionate’ to hear some evidence anonymously, inquiry told

14:36 , Andy Gregory

Today’s hearing is now back under way.

The inquiry has been told that the chair has permitted some witnesses to give evidence anonymously, and “exceptionally” for some to give evidence without their faces to be sen or their voices heard by the public.

“These are limited measures. They will not impact greatly, either on the transparency or the essentially public nature of these proceedings,” said lead counsel Andrew O’Connor KC, adding that the chair is satisfied that these measures are both “necessary and proportionate”.

Skripal denies fearing for his life prior to Novichok attack

13:24 , Andy Gregory

Sergei Skripal has denied that he feared his life was in danger prior to the Novichok attack in 2018, but said he believed there were “some precautions” in place to protect him.

In his written statement, he said: “My life was normal and I had no information or warning to support such a comment. I was aware of nothing special or different around that time.”

“I do not know specifically which organisations were responsible for my security in Great Britain. I believe the authorities had put some precautions in place but I am not aware of all the details.”

He added: “I do not remember concretely what was covered in discussions about my personal security arrangements, but I believe I was offered protection, including changing my name. It was never suggested that this was a necessary option and I decide against it.”

He added that CCTV was recommended to him, but he declined this “because I did not want to make my house conspicuous or live under surveillance”, and “did not keep my address secret and when I visited London and stayed overnight I registered at a hotel under my own name”.

But he continued: “I may not be aware of all the security measures that were in place and I am not a security expert. When I received advice about my security I generally followed it ... I do not believe it was suggested to me that I posed a risk to the UK community, either generally or in relation to poison or other toxic substances.”

Barristers ‘not optimistic’ over determining circumstances around discovery of perfume bottle

13:18 , Andy Gregory

The inquiry will examine the circumstances around Dawn Sturgess’s boyfriend Charlie Rowley’s discovery of the perfume bottle, lead counsel Andrew O’Connor KC said, but barristers are “not optimistic that we will arrive at a single convincing explanation”.

He told the inquiry: “The idea that [Mr Rowley] may have found the perfume bottle in a bin is plausible in itself. As we shall hear, Mr Rowley accepts that he was in the practice of searching for valuable items in certain bins, and the charity shop bin in the Brown Street car park was one of those that he visited.

“But there is evidence that these bins were emptied regularly – a bottle left in the bin in early Mrach would certainly not have still been there in June, when Mr Rowley says he found the bottle.

“Perhaps Mr Rowley is wrong and he removed the bottle from the bin within a day or so of the Skripal poisoning – perhaps even the same day – but that would mean that he had it in his possession for months longer than he remembered, including a time when he moved house.”

He added that “there are other factual scenarios to consider”, which will be heard over the course of the inquiry’s hearings.

Perfume bottle contained enough Novichok to kill thousands of people, inquiry told

13:13 , Andy Gregory

The perfume bottle carrying the Russian nerve agent that fatally poisoned Dawn Sturgess contained “enough poison to kill thousands of people”, the inquiry into her death was told.

Andrew O’Connor KC, counsel to the Dawn Sturgess inquiry, said: “A particularly shocking feature of Dawn’s death is that she unwittingly applied the poison to her own skin.

“She was entirely unaware of the mortal danger she faced, because the highly toxic liquid had been concealed – carefully and deliberately concealed – inside a perfume bottle.

“Moreover, the evidence will suggest that this bottle - which we shall hear contained enough poison to kill thousands of people – must earlier have been left somewhere in public place creating the obvious risk that someone would find it and take it home.

“You may conclude, sir, that those who discarded the bottle in this way acted with a grotesque disregard for human life.”

Russia ‘will find a way to kill anywhere’, Skripals say

13:05 , Andy Gregory

Yulia Skripal has warned that, if Russia wants to kill you, “they will find a way anywhere”, her father Sergei has told the inquiry.

In his witness statement, he said: “I think Yulia was right in principle when she said, ‘If [the Russian government] want to kill you they will find a way anywhere’.

“Nobody can be protected 100 per cent from an assassin, especially one who plans carefully or is prepared to die.”

Skripal claims to have accessed secret information about illegal activity involving Putin

13:01 , Andy Gregory

Sergei Skripal has claimed to have become aware while working for the GRU of allegations about illegal activity involving Vladimir Putin, whom he said he believes must have personally ordered the Salisbury Novichok attack.

In a witness statement issued last week, he said: “When I was still working in GRU special services in Russia I had access to secret information. I was aware of allegations that Putin had been involved in illegal activity to do with the disposal of rare metals.”

Putin ‘very interested in poisons’, Skripal claims

12:59 , Andy Gregory

In a new written witness statement, Sergei Skripal claimed to have read somewhere that Vladimir Putin is “very interested” in poisons.

He said: “I have always thought poison is a KGB technique because it is not honourable. GRU relations with the KGB and later the FSB were generally bad while I was working in the GRU and we did not cooperate so I have not myself seen evidence of the KGB using poison.

“I have read that Putin is personal very interested in poison and likes reading books about it. I believe I read this somewhere online although I cannot now remember where. I am aware of the poisoning of Litvinenko in 2006.”

Sergei Skripal says he believes Putin ordered Salisbury attack

12:56 , Andy Gregory

In a statement given to the inquiry just last week, Sergei Skripal has said he believes Vladimir Putin personally ordered the Novichok attack on his and his daughter Yulia.

Insisting that he “never thought the Russian regime would try to murder me in Great Britain” given that he had been exchanged in a prisoner swap and personally pardoned by then president Dmitry Medvedev in 2010, Mr Skripal said: “I believe Putin makes all important decisions himself.

“I therefore think he must have at least given permission for the attack on Yulia and me. Any GRU commander taking a decision like this without Putin’s permission would have been severely punished.

“That is what I meant when I said ‘special services in Russia will do nothing again without permission Putin’. That he ordered the attack is my private opinion, based on my years of experience and my analysis of the continuous degradation of Russia. I do not have concrete evidence to support this.”

Inquiry ‘sought to contact Russian suspects three times'

12:43 , Andy Gregory

Attempts were previously made to contact Alexander Petrov, Ruslan Boshirov, the inquiry has heard.

Lead consel Andrew O’Connor said: “They were each written to three times care of the Russian Embassy in London between 2019 and 2021, but no responses were ever received.

“The existence of this Inquiry has been well-publicised in recent years – there are contact details on the inquiry website – any of these three men could have made contact with the Inquiry at any time. But they have chosen not to do so.”

The inquiry was then played a clip from the two men’s infamous 2018 interview with Russian state broadcaster RT, which was published eight days after the Crown Prosecution Service announced it was bringing charges against them, and CCTV photographs were released showing them in Salisbury.

Inquiry to probe whether Russian men’s Salisbury visit was ‘innocent day trip or something more sinister'

12:29 , Andy Gregory

Summarising the details of the men referred to as Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov’s first trip to Salisbury on the day that Sergei Skripal collected his daughter from the airport, the inquiry’s lead counsel Andrew O’Connor KC said: “Was it an entirely innocent day trip, or was it something more sinister?”

Outlining the route taken by the two men in considerable detail, he added: “Why did the two men – purposefully, apparently, avoid the centre of Salisbury? Might it have been a deliberate reconnaissance of Sergei Skripal’s house and access routes between the house and the station?

“Was it a coincidence that [their] visit to Salisbury coincided with a time when Sergei Skripal was away from his house?”

The two men then returned to Salisbury the following day, on 4 March 2018 – the day that the Skripals drove into Salisbury and collapsed on a bench in the Maltings shopping centre.

Russia’s potential responsibility is ‘matter of utmost public concern’, inquiry told

12:19 , Andy Gregory

Questions around Russia’s potential responsibility for the Skripal poisonings, and its possible indirect responsibility for Dawn Sturgess’s death, are “plainly matters of the utmost public concern,” lead counsel Andrew O’Connor KC has said.

“It is one of the core functions of this Inquiry to reach authoritative and conclusive answers to those questions,” he added.

The inquiry will hear evidence in the coming weeks, gathered by police, suggesting that the three Russian men – whose names were given as the alleged aliases of Alexander Petrov, Ruslan Boshirov, Sergey Fedotov – “at the heart” of in the inquiry’s examinations were Russian military intelligence officers, or at least were in 2018, Mr O’Connor said.

The inquiry will hear that all three men are associated with GRU unit 29155, and that they had travelled extensively in Europe, often together, prior to 2018, Mr O’Connor said.

Family seeking answers over medical treatment received by Dawn Sturgess

12:12 , Andy Gregory

The inquiry will hear evidence from paramedics who provided pre-hospital care to those poisoned with Novichok and from medics who treated them at hospital, lead counsel Andrew O’Connor KC said.

He told the inquiry that the Sturgess family are seeking answers as to why their loved one died when the four others poisoned with Novichok survived.

Her family “have asked whether this could have been the result of the somewhat different treatment that DS received – different, in particular to the emergency treatment given to Charlie Rowley only a few hours after Dawn had been taken to hospital”, he said.

“They wish to understand why doctors, apparently acting on information from the police, initially theorised that Dawn’s symptoms may have been caused by a drug overdose, and whether this theory was dismissed as quickly as it should have been.

“They ask whether Dawn Sturgess’s medical treatment was properly informed by lessons that had been learnt – or at least, that should have been learnt – months earlier in treating the Skripals.

“And ultimately, of course, they wish to know whether any of things that may have gone wrong in Dawn’s treatment could have made a difference to her chances of survival. To use a legal term – if there were failings, were they causative?”

Government to give private evidence over whether Skripal spied for Britain, inquiry hears

11:55 , Andy Gregory

The inquiry will hear in private evidence relating to the question of whether Sergei Skripal was a British agent prior to his arrest in Russia and, if so, continued to do so following his release and move to Britain, its lead counsel said.

Andrew O’Connor KC told the inquiry that “these two factual questions are of obvious importance” to the investigation, “not least because they may go towards indicating the presence, or, equally, an absence, of a possible motive on the part of the Russian state for attempting to kill” Skripal.

The inquiry’s chair ruled on 3 November 2023 that the government would not be required to provide this evidence in open sessions, as he accepted that to depart from the “neither confirm nor deny” principle “would cause unjustifiable damage to national security”, Mr O’Connor said.

He added: “The reason for that general principle is not only to protect individuals whose activity is questioned, but also and more importantly to ensure that anyone who may give information to the British authorities, now or in the future, can be confident that whatever their relationship with them may be, the authorities will never be required to discuss it publicly.”

Inquiry counsel rejects Russian criticism of chair

11:50 , Andy Gregory

The inquiry’s lead counsel has rejected criticism by Russia of the inquiry chair Lord Hughes of Ombersley’s decision that neither of the Skripals should give live spoken evidence to the inquiry.

While the Russian embassy had claimed that the ruling three weeks ago “demonstrates the British authorities’ obstinacy in concealing our citizens”, Andrew O’Connor KC said: “First, you are not ‘the British authorities’ – rather, you are the chair of a public inquiry that is entirely independent of the British government.

“Second, the core reason for your decision not to call the Skripals to give oral evidence ... was in fact the risk of physical attack (by whomever it might be) on one or both of them – a risk which, you concluded, clearly outweighed the advantage to the Inquiry of them attending to give oral evidence.”

Sergei Skripal worked for GRU before being convicted on spying charges

11:46 , Andy Gregory

Poisoning victim Sergei Skripal was born in Russia and that he served first as a paratrooper in the Russian Army, and latterly as a member of the GRU Russian military intelligence agency, the inquiry was told.

In 2004, he was convicted in Russia on espionage charges, and was reportedly alleged to have spied for Britain, lead counsel Andrew O’Connor KC said.

He was subsequently sentenced to 13 years in prison, but in 2010 was given a presidential pardon and was brought to the UK in a prisoner exchange.

Mr Skripal had lived in Salisbury since 2010, mostly on Christie Miller Road. After his arrival in the UK, his wife, son and daughter left Russia to live with him, but his wife and son had subsequently died and his daughter had returned to Russia, Mr O’Connor said.

But his daughter Yulia visited her father regularly and arrived to visit him the day before the poisoning.

Inquiry hears results of post-mortem

11:43 , Andy Gregory

The inquiry has heard that the professor who conducted the post-mortem examination on Dawn Sturgess, who will be giving evidence to the inquiry, recorded her cause of death as post cardiac arrest hypoxic brain injury and intra cerebral haemorrhage, and Novichok toxicity.

According to lead counsel Andrew O’Connor KC, the poison caused Sturgess’s nervous system to become overstimulated, which led to heart failure. That in turn caused DS’s brain to be starved of oxygen.

When paramedics arrived at the scene they performed CPR and managed to restart her heart, after which she was taken to hospital and treated for several days, Mr O’Connor said.

But the damage that had been done to her brain from the lack of oxygen during that initial period gradually developed and worsened over the days she was in hospital, and this brain injury was ultimately her immediate cause of death, the barrister said.

Inquiry to hear from Dawn Sturgess’ partner Charlie Rowley

11:39 , Andy Gregory

The inquiry will hear evidence from Dawn Sturgess’s partner Charlie Rowley, about their life living together in the 16 months or so before her death.

Lead counsel Andrew O’Connor KC said: “In an interview that he gave after her death, Charlie Rowley described Dawn as ‘a lovely lady, she had a big heart, she’d help anyone if she could’.

Charlie has previously described their relationship as being “very happy, supportive and loving”, having said of his loss: “It’s my girlfriend I lost, my partner, my soulmate.”

Mr Rowley was also poisoned by the Novichok, received hospital treatment and suffered serious symptoms.

What issues will the inquiry examine?

11:35 , Andy Gregory

The seven key issues that the inquiry will look at, according to its lead counsel, are:

• Dawn Sturgess’s life and the immediate circumstances of her death

• The broader factual circumstances of the poisoning of the Skripals and that of Dawn Sturgess

• Medical treatment, including the adequacy of the medical treatment provided to Dawn Sturgess.

• Responsibility for Skripal poisoning

• The Novichok and the bottle that it was found in.

• How did the bottle come to be in Dawn Sturgess’s possession?

• Was the poisoning of Dawn Sturgess preventable?

Inquiry’s chair is performing role of a coroner with enhanced powers, barrister says

11:32 , Andy Gregory

Chair Lord Hughes of Ombersley is performing the role of a coroner with the added powers of the chair of a public inquiry, lead counsel Andrew O’Connor KC has noted.

He added: “Let me address the question head on” that is often asked about this case – why is it taking so long? Six years is a long time to wait for answers, especially for her family.

Legal process does take time, and this has been a complex example, including the decision to order and inquiry instead of an inquest, Mr O’Connor said, adding that the thoroughness of the work prior to this week’s hearings have also meant a longer wait.

“In this case, we will of necessity hear some highly sensitive evidence in closed session,” he added.

In order to minimise the number of hearings held behind closed doors, the chair has had to go through submissions line by line to guage what can be help in public, Mr O’Connor said.

Lead counsel asks whether mistakes were made in run-up to Dawn Sturgess’s death

11:22 , Andy Gregory

Lead counsel Andrew O’Connor KC has begun by setting out the circumstances of Dawn Sturgess’s death.

Whether or not she was caught up in the attempt to poison the Skripals four months earlier will be for the inquiry to decide, he said.

He asks: can it be said that the nerve agent in both cases was identical and part of a single batch? Is it possible to say that the bottle is that one used in the attack on the Skripals? If so how did it come to be in her possession in Amesbury four months later, and should the bottle have been discovered in the meantime?

And if the UK government had taken sufficient steps to protect the Skripals, is it possible that mistakes might have been made which led to Sturgess’s death, he asks.

Dawn Sturgess may have been ‘caught in crossfire of outrageous assassination attempt’

11:16 , Andy Gregory

The purpose of the inquiry is to investigate the circumstances of Dawn Sturgess’ death, lead counsel Andrew O’Connor KC has said.

It is no exaggeration to say the circumstances were extraordinary, he said.

Sturgess’s life was wholly removed from the world of politics and international relations, he said, adding that the circumstances of her life stand in stark contrast to the circumstances of her death, poisoned by a military grade poison.

The inquiry will look at whether an “innocent” British woman died after she was caught in the “crossfire of an illegal and outrageous international assassination attempt”, Mr O’Connor said

“Whether or not that is in fact what happened will, of course, be for you to determine,” he added.

Inquiry will ‘begin with a clean sheet’, chair says

11:14 , Andy Gregory

Opening Monday’s hearing, chair Lord Hughes of Ombersley has said that the object of this inquiry is to begin with a clean sheet without making any judgement as to what has gone before.

“The object is to examine the evidence” and say what conclusions the evidence either does or doesn’t justify, Lord Hughes said.

The inquest into Dawn Sturgess’s death was replaced with an inquiry so as to be able to examine otherwise classified evidence, he added.

Inquiry hearings set to commence in Salisbury

11:03 , Andy Gregory

The inquiry’s first open hearings are set to commence shortly at the Guildhall in Salisbury.

Scheduled to appear on Monday morning is counsel Andrew O’Connor KC, one of three barristers who are asking questions on behalf of the inquiry.

Watch: A timeline of the Salisbury attacks

10:48 , Andy Gregory

Who is appearing at the inquiry this week?

10:36 , Andy Gregory

The inquiry will sit all week in Salisbury before moving to London on 28 October.

Monday’s hearing will feature counsel to the inquiry, Andrew O’Connor KC, a barrister who has previously worked on 7/7 inquests, Hillsborough inquests, the Litvinenko Inquiry, the Manchester Arena Inquiry and the UK Covid-19 Inquiry.

In the afternoon, the inquiry will also hear from core participants.

On Tuesday, the inquiry will hear evidence from Dawn’s mother Caroline Sturgess, Wiltshire Police Deputy Chief Constable Paul Mills, and the Metropolitan Police’s counter-terrorism lead, Commander Dom Murphy.

Why has Theresa May said it is ‘highly unlikely’ suspects will face justice?

10:20 , Andy Gregory

An international arrest warrant was issued for three Russian men thought to be involved in the Novichok attacks.

But as the Russian constitution does not allow the extradition of its citizens it is unlikely they will ever stand trial, as noted by former prime minister Theresa May last week.

Two suspects gave an interview with Russian state media in which they said they were only in the UK, briefly, to visit Salisbury Cathedral, which was widely ridiculed after airing in 2018 and dubbed an “insult to the public’s intelligence” by Downing Street.

Here is The Independent’s report on the reaction to that interview:

Theresa May lashes out at 'blatant' lies in interview with Russian novichok suspects

Skripals excused from giving evidence due to ‘overwhelming risk’

10:04 , Andy Gregory

It was previously revealed that the Skripals will not give evidence at the inquiry over fears for their safety.

In June, a preliminary hearing at the Royal Courts of Justice heard that the Sturgess family wanted the Skripals to give oral evidence to address “unanswered questions”.

They were, however, excused from doing so in a subsequent ruling, with the relevant judgment citing an “overwhelming risk” of another physical attack on their lives.

‘No intelligence to suggest wider risk to public’ during inquiry, police say

09:49 , Andy Gregory

Wiltshire Police said people in Salisbury city centre can expect to see an increased police presence for the duration of the hearing.

They added that there is “no current intelligence to suggest there is any risk to the wider public”.

Police officers could be seen walking the beat in the area close to where the inquiry will be held on Monday morning.

Local business owners recall aftermath of Novichok attack

09:35 , Andy Gregory

Nearby business owners have recalled the aftermath of the Novichok attacks in Salisbury.

Speaking to the Salisbury Journal ahead of the public inquiry opening on Monday, makeup stall owner Brian Askew said: “The footfall of people probably went down by about 15 or 20 per cent.

“They didn’t know what it was – no one knew how bad it was. They said if we touched it, we would be dead.

“The council helped us with rent – they halved it to help us. We needed money to help us get through the hard times. Business now is as strong as it’s ever been. We went from that, to Covid, to up-doing the [paving] blocks – now hopefully we’re free.”

Mr Askew, who also sells perfume, added: “We did have people joking ‘have you got any Novichok for sale there?’”

Richard Wheeler, whose shop B&R Textiles is located just metres away from where the Skripals were found after they had been poisoned, said he did not know until he saw the news why he was unable to access his shop on the day of the incident.

“I got to work and parked where we always park and noticed I couldn’t come around the front. No one had got to work yet so I said we would meet for a coffee at Costa,” he told the paper. “We went and came back – the police couldn’t tell me what was going on but said we wouldn’t get in the shop today.”

“The local news came on and my wife said – isn’t that your shop? That’s the first I knew it was a poisoning.

“It did affect us, but after the first few days we did manage to negotiate with police to let people in the back, so we crawled along.”

Watch: Detective Sergeant Nick Bailey describes being poisoned with Novichok

09:00 , Tara Cobham

Safety fears mean Skripals will not give evidence at Salisbury Novichok poisonings inquiry

08:30 , Tara Cobham

A former spy and his daughter, who were poisoned by the deadly nerve agent Novichok, will not give evidence at the Russian-state Salisbury poisonings inquiry over fears for their safety.

The judge leading the inquiry said if Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia are identified and their current whereabouts are discovered, the risk of an attack on them “is not properly controllable”.

Dawn Sturgess, 44, died after being exposed to the chemical weapon which was left in a discarded perfume bottle in Amesbury, Wiltshire, in July 2018.

Ted Hennessey reports:

Safety fears mean Skripals will not give evidence at Salisbury poisonings inquiry

In pictures: Victims of Novichok nerve agent attacks in Salisbury in 2018

08:00 , Tara Cobham

Theresa May says ‘justice is unlikely’ for family of Novichok victim

07:30 , Tara Cobham

Theresa May has said “justice is unlikely” for the victims of the Novichok nerve agent attacks, days before an independent inquiry begins into the Russian-state Salisbury poisonings of 2018.

The former prime minister told the BBC she hopes friends and family of Wiltshire woman Dawn Sturgess, who was killed after coming into contact with the Russian-engineered nerve agent, “will take some comfort” from the probe into her death, set to start on October 14.

Ms Sturgess, 44, died after coming into contact with a discarded perfume bottle which had housed the chemical weapon in Amesbury in July 2018.

Rachel Vickers-Price reports:

Theresa May says ‘justice is unlikely’ for family of Novichok victim

Inquiry opens into poisoning of Dawn Sturgess via Novichok in Salisbury

Sunday 13 October 2024 16:47 , Tara Cobham

The public inquiry into the death of Dawn Sturgess who was poisoned by Novichok in Salisbury is set to open.

The independent probe into the Russian-state Salisbury poisonings of 2018, which is chaired by retired Supreme Court justice Lord Hughes of Ombersley, is to begin evidence hearings at the Guildhall in Salisbury on Monday.

Ms Sturgess, 44, was killed after coming into contact with the Russian-engineered nerve agent, which was present on a discarded perfume bottle, in Amesbury in July 2018.

The 44-year-old’s contact with Novichok followed the attempted murder of former spy Sergei Skripal, his daughter and ex-police officer Nick Bailey, who were poisoned in nearby Salisbury in March that year.

All three survived, as did Ms Sturgess’s boyfriend Charlie Rowley, who had unwittingly given her the bottle containing the killer chemical weapon.

The inquiry will sit all week in Salisbury, before adjourning for a week and resuming the week commencing 28 October in London.