Andrew and Tristan Tate 'will return to UK' to face rape charges, lawyers confirm
Andrew and Tristan Tate will return to the UK to defend themselves against charges of rape and other offences, a lawyer representing the brothers has said. In a statement, Holborn Adams, the firm representing the two brothers, confirmed that once legal proceedings they are facing in Romania are concluded: "The Tates will return to face UK allegations".
The firm also claimed that its clients are at a disadvantage, because British prosecutors have not shared any information with them about the charges."These are historic allegations and our clients are not even being told who the supposed victims are," the statement said. "This ... demonstrates a different approach on the basis of the profile of our clients."
Prosecutors confirmed on Wednesday that Andrew and Tristan Tate are facing a string of criminal charges in the UK.
Andrew Tate is accused of 10 charges including rape, actual bodily harm, human trafficking and controlling prostitution for gain relating to three alleged victims.
Tristan Tate faces 11 charges including rape, actual bodily harm and human trafficking against one alleged victim.An international arrest warrant was issued by Bedfordshire Police for the siblings over allegations dating back to between 2012 and 2015, which they deny.
They are already facing prosecution in Romania over allegations of trafficking minors, sexual intercourse with a minor and money laundering.
A separate case against them, in which they are accused of human trafficking and forming a criminal gang to sexually exploit women, has been sent back to prosecutors.
On Wednesday, a CPS spokesperson said: 'We can confirm that we have authorised charges against Andrew and Tristan Tate for offences including rape, human trafficking, controlling prostitution and actual bodily harm against three women.
'These charging decisions followed receipt of a file of evidence from Bedfordshire Police.
'A European Arrest Warrant was issued in England in 2024, and as a result the Romanian courts ordered the extradition to the UK of Andrew and Tristan Tate.
'The Crown Prosecution Service reminds everyone that criminal proceedings are active, and the defendants have the right to a fair trial.
'It is extremely important that there be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings".
Bedfordshire Police said in a statement on Wednesday: "As part of an ongoing investigation into allegations of rape and human trafficking, Bedfordshire Police has obtained an arrest warrant, formerly known as a European Arrest Warrant, for Andrew Tate, 38, and Tristan Tate, 36.
"We understand this is a distressing subject, and people may be impacted by what they are seeing in the news. Bedfordshire Police takes all reports of sexual offences seriously, and further support is available via or by calling 101. Anyone with information about this specific investigation should call 101, and quote Operation Moonwalk."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Herald Scotland
an hour ago
- The Herald Scotland
A hate crime on Arran? No, just a sign of where we are now
My second thought about the flags was more complicated however. For a start, flags have never been my favourite form of expression, an aversion made worse by the referendums of 2014 and 2016. And by 2023, I was also struggling – still am – with how I feel about LGBTQ+, trans, gender, and self-ID, and Pride flags in particular. There was a time, in the 90s, when I would've felt overwhelmingly positive about the flag, but in 2023, it was starting to change. The fact that my views have changed was underlined at the weekend when I heard that the police on Arran are investigating an incident with this year's Pride flags. The flags were on the main street in Brodick, as they were in 2023, but they were taken down some time overnight before the main Pride event on Saturday. There were reports on social media that some of the flags were later found dumped on the beach. The Pride event itself was not affected and went ahead as planned, but Police Scotland announced they were investigating what happened. 'Between 2am and 7am on Saturday, 31 May, flags and banners for the island's LGBTQ parade were pulled down,' they said. 'This is being investigated as a hate crime.' There are a few things that should worry us about that statement. First of all, the police should have said they were investigating a possible hate crime as they can't be sure who took the flags down and why. Secondly, it looks like the police still haven't realised that the idea of a hate crime defined and enforced by government is highly contested, thanks in part to the debacle of the SNP's law on the subject. And thirdly, even though we cannot know for sure what the motivation was, there's an implication in the statement that anyone who'd remove an LGBTQ Pride flag must be motivated by hate rather than just opposition to what the flag represents. All of this need to be challenged. Read more The best building in Glasgow, and what we can learn from its tragedy I walked Glasgow streets with a 'heritage detective' and found clues to city's future The Argyle Street Gap – what does it say about Glasgow? One man who has challenged the concepts behind Pride and hate crime is the writer and broadcaster Andrew Doyle, who has a rather good new book out, The End of Woke. Andrew admits there will be some who object to the word 'woke' and/or deny it exists, but his working definition – a cultural revolution that seeks equity according to group identity by authoritarian means – is supported by 550 pages of evidence on the beliefs that form the core of 'woke' and the individuals whose careers have been damaged or ended because they do not subscribe to them. He also outlines his evidence that the end is coming, including the Supreme Court ruling on the word woman, the ban on puberty blockers, and leftist politicians, including the beloved AOC, quietly removing pronouns from their social media profiles. I hope he's right. The critique Andrew offers of modern LGBTQ Pride and the concept of hate crime in the book is particularly applicable to the Arran situation. As Andrew points out, many conservatives have always opposed same-sex relations on moral or religious grounds, and it may be that the person or persons who took the flags down in Brodick were just old-school conservatives who don't much like the gays. Such people haven't gone away just because the Pride flag is ubiquitous. However, it's equally possible that the flags on Arran were removed by someone who supports gay equality but objects to the particular beliefs with which the modern flag has become associated: gender-affirming care for example, or trans self-ID; as Andrew says in his book, this group of people includes many gay people. Andrew also points out that by flying the Progress Pride flag as it's known, corporations and government bodies are taking a side in a highly contentious cultural debate that alienates as many gay people as it attracts. A Pride flag in Brodick (Image: Newsquest) The point about Arran is that the response of the police – the portentous announcement that the removal of the flags is being investigated as a hate crime – indicates they do not understand, or are even aware of, the case Andrew is making. The Pride flag is contentious and someone disliking it, or even removing it as they did on Arran, may be driven not by hate but by opposition to what the flag represents. The police are perfectly free to pursue the person for theft or damage, but by using the term hate crime, they are suggesting that objecting to, or removing, or damaging the flag is more than that: it's hateful. They have taken a side. Andrew Doyle's case is that the wider points in the debate are also poorly understood. In a free society, he says, we are entitled to think and feel as we see fit and so long as that does not interfere with the liberties of others, it includes the right to hate. He also points out that the European Court of Human Rights has admitted there's no universally accepted definition of the expression hate speech and as we saw with the SNP's attempt at a hate law, the lack of clarity renders the law useless or dangerous or both. We do not know the motivation of the person or persons who removed the flags on Arran. But no evidence of hatred is required for it to be seen or recorded as such, and a legal system that requires no evidence is a legal system we should be worried about. I suspect the police investigation on Arran will come to nothing in the end, as so much of the furore around hate crime does. But I also fear we'll take the wrong messages from the fact that someone took the flags down. Some people, including the police it would seem, will believe it's evidence of hatred for LGBTQ people, but it's much more likely to be evidence of how divisive and contentious the debate over the T in LGBTQ has become, including for many gay people. So the question in the end is: was it a hate crime we saw on Arran at the weekend? No: just a sign of where we are now.
Scotsman
2 hours ago
- Scotsman
Families of Chinook crash victims to launch legal action against MoD
Relatives want High Court judge to be able to review information not included in previous investigations Sign up to our daily newsletter – Regular news stories and round-ups from around Scotland direct to your inbox Sign up Thank you for signing up! Did you know with a Digital Subscription to The Scotsman, you can get unlimited access to the website including our premium content, as well as benefiting from fewer ads, loyalty rewards and much more. Learn More Sorry, there seem to be some issues. Please try again later. Submitting... The families of those killed in a Chinook helicopter crash on the Mull of Kintyre in 1994 have said they are beginning legal action against the Ministry of Defence (MoD) for not ordering a public inquiry. They want a High Court judge to be able to review information which they say was not included in previous investigations, and which they believe will shed new light on the airworthiness of the helicopter. Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad RAF Chinook ZD576 was carrying 25 British intelligence personnel from RAF Aldergrove in Northern Ireland to a conference at Fort George near Inverness when it crashed in foggy weather on June 2, 1994. The wreckage of the RAF Chinook helicopter, which crashed on the Mull of Kintyre on June 2, 1994, killing all 29 on board, including 25 top Northern Ireland security experts | PA All 25 passengers – made up of personnel from MI5, the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the British Army – were killed, along with the helicopter's four crew members. The families of the victims, who have coalesced into the Chinook Justice Campaign, said failing to order a public inquiry is a breach of the UK Government's human rights obligations. In a letter to the Government 31 years after the crash, the group said: 'The investigations conducted to date, whether considered individually or in combination, have failed to discharge the investigative duty.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Documents sealed for 100 years They have also called for the release of documents that were sealed at the time of the crash for 100 years, something revealed in a BBC documentary last year. Solicitor Mark Stephens, who is representing the families, said: 'In this case, the families of those who were killed have seen more than enough evidence to convince them, and us, that there was a failure by the MoD to apply appropriate safeguards in order to protect the passengers and crew. 'In fact, they were put on board an aircraft that was known to be positively dangerous and should never have taken off. 'That is why we are seeking a judicial review into the Government's failure to hold a public inquiry – which the families have sought for more than a year.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad Following the crash, the Chinook's pilots, Flight Lieutenants Richard Cook and Jonathan Tapper, were accused of gross negligence, but this verdict was overturned by the UK Government 17 years later, following a campaign by the families. A subsequent review by Lord Philip set out 'numerous concerns' raised by those who worked on the Chinooks, with the MoD's testing centre at Boscombe Down in Wiltshire declaring the Chinook Mk2 helicopters 'unairworthy' prior to the crash. Esme Sparks, who was seven years old when her father Major Gary Sparks was killed in the crash, said: 'We don't want to have to take legal action against the Government and MoD but we do want and need answers surrounding the circumstance of this crash. 'We want to know who or what is being protected? Who made the decision to let this helicopter take off? What is being hidden? In our view a public inquiry is key.' Advertisement Hide Ad Advertisement Hide Ad The MoD said that records held in The National Archives contain personal information and early release of those documents would breach their data protection rights.
Rhyl Journal
6 hours ago
- Rhyl Journal
Families of Chinook crash victims to launch legal action against MoD
They want a High Court judge to be able to review information which they say was not included in previous investigations, and which they believe will shed new light on the airworthiness of the helicopter. RAF Chinook ZD576 was carrying 25 British intelligence personnel from RAF Aldergrove in Northern Ireland to a conference at Fort George near Inverness when it crashed in foggy weather on June 2, 1994. All 25 passengers – made up of personnel from MI5, the Royal Ulster Constabulary and the British Army – were killed, along with the helicopter's four crew members. The families of the victims, who have coalesced into the Chinook Justice Campaign, said failing to order a public inquiry is a breach of the UK Government's human rights obligations. In a letter to the Government 31 years after the crash, the group said: 'The investigations conducted to date, whether considered individually or in combination, have failed to discharge the investigative duty.' They have also called for the release of documents that were sealed at the time of the crash for 100 years, something revealed in a BBC documentary last year. Solicitor Mark Stephens, who is representing the families, said: 'In this case, the families of those who were killed have seen more than enough evidence to convince them, and us, that there was a failure by the MoD to apply appropriate safeguards in order to protect the passengers and crew. 'In fact, they were put on board an aircraft that was known to be positively dangerous and should never have taken off. 'That is why we are seeking a judicial review into the Government's failure to hold a public inquiry – which the families have sought for more than a year.' Following the crash, the Chinook's pilots, Flight Lieutenants Richard Cook and Jonathan Tapper, were accused of gross negligence, but this verdict was overturned by the UK Government 17 years later, following a campaign by the families. A subsequent review by Lord Philip set out 'numerous concerns' raised by those who worked on the Chinooks, with the MoD's testing centre at Boscombe Down in Wiltshire declaring the Chinook Mk2 helicopters 'unairworthy' prior to the crash. Esme Sparks, who was seven years old when her father Major Gary Sparks was killed in the crash, said: 'We don't want to have to take legal action against the Government and MoD but we do want and need answers surrounding the circumstance of this crash. 'We want to know who or what is being protected? Who made the decision to let this helicopter take off? What is being hidden? In our view, a public inquiry is key.' Andy Tobias, who was eight when his father, Lt Col John Tobias, 41, was killed, said: 'It's clear to me that a complete lack of duty of care was given to those passengers because they got on a Chinook that wasn't fit for flight. 'And really, the government need to show their duty of candour and really be open and transparent about what's in those documents and give us the opportunity to really understand anything that's in them that could give us more answers about what happened.' The MoD said that records held in The National Archives contain personal information and early release of those documents would breach their data protection rights. An MoD spokesperson said: 'The Mull of Kintyre crash was a tragic accident and our thoughts and sympathies remain with the families, friends and colleagues of all those who died.'
