Starmer warns of ‘risk of escalation' following US strikes against Iran
The Prime Minister urged all sides to return to negotiations but said he had taken 'all necessary measures' to protect British interests in the region if the conflict escalates.
There was no British involvement in the action but the Government was informed before the US strikes.
Tehran has threatened to retaliate and Mr Trump has warned of further US action if necessary, saying: 'There will either be peace or there will be tragedy for Iran.'
Speaking at his Chequers country retreat, the Prime Minister said there was a 'risk of escalation' adding: 'That's a risk to the region. It's a risk beyond the region, and that's why all our focus has been on de-escalating, getting people back around to negotiate what is a very real threat in relation to the nuclear programme.
'In relation to the UK, we were not involved in the attack. We were given due notice, as we would expect, as close allies to the US, and we have been moving assets to the region to make sure we're in a position to protect our own interests, our personnel and our assets, and, of course, those of our allies.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
NBC News
19 minutes ago
- NBC News
How Middle Eastern leaders may react to U.S. strike against Iran
President Trump is claiming success from the U.S.'s military strike to cripple Iran's nuclear capabilities, yet there is uncertainty on how the Middle East region will respond. NBC News' Matt Bradley reports from Tel Aviv on how Iran has been perceived by other nations in the region in recent decades and how that may indicate Middle Eastern leaders' reaction to the current 22, 2025
Scottish Sun
21 minutes ago
- Scottish Sun
Nigel Farage casts doubts over Lucy Letby's murder convictions as he becomes latest MP to wade into debate
Click to share on X/Twitter (Opens in new window) Click to share on Facebook (Opens in new window) NIGEL Farage has revealed he has "doubts" over the Lucy Letby case as he becomes the latest MP to join the debate. Letby, 35, from Hereford, is serving 15 whole-life orders after she was convicted across two trials at Manchester Crown Court of murdering seven babies and attempting to murder seven others. Sign up for Scottish Sun newsletter Sign up 6 Reform UK leader Nigel Farage said he was beginning to have 'doubts' about the case Credit: Peter Powell 6 Killer nurse Lucy Letby was convicted of ruthlessly murdering seven babies in her care Credit: SWNS 6 Some insist Letby has been made a scapegoat for hospital failings Credit: Getty Letby lost two attempts to challenge her convictions at the Court of Appeal last year. The Reform UK leader spoke about the case off the back of Jeremy Hunt's comment piece in the Mail last week. The former health secretary called for an "urgent re-examination" of Letby after "serious and credible" questions were raised by experts. The MP urged Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC), which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, to "speed up their normally painfully slow process". Speaking on GB News, Mr Farage agreed that he was also beginning to have 'doubts' about the case. He said: 'I have a feeling, actually, Jeremy Hunt might be right about the Lucy Letby case. "I'm just beginning to get more and more doubts about that issue." Cheshire Constabulary is still conducting a review of deaths and non-fatal collapses of babies at the neonatal units of the Countess of Chester and Liverpool Women's Hospital during Letby's time as a nurse from 2012 to 2016. The force have also launched another probe into allegations of corporate manslaughter and gross negligence manslaughter at the Countess of Chester Hospital. Meanwhile Lady Justice Thirlwall is due to publish in November the findings from the public inquiry into how the former nurse was able to commit her crimes. Argentina's Lucy Letby' in court after murdering 5 newborns & trying to kill 8 more in chillingly similar case to UK's baby killer The Sun revealed earlier this year what Letby's own parents, Jonathan, 79, and Susan Letby, 65, said about the case. In one correspondence, seen by The Sun, Letby's parents reveal they "firmly believe" their daughter's convictions will be "the biggest miscarriage of justice in British history". They also said they're pleased "public opinion is beginning to sway" in her favour "at last". 'FRESH' EVIDENCE This all comes after Letby's lawyers say they have a bombshell report that reveals "fresh" evidence she didn't kill any babies. Mark McDonald told reporters the convicted child serial killer has "a new hope" as he visited the Birmingham offices of the Criminal Cases Review Commission (CCRC). He said the new evidence "blows the case out the water". He was there to deliver the full findings of a 14-strong international panel of neonatologists and paediatric specialists who say poor medical care and natural causes were the reasons for babies collapsing at the Countess of Chester Hospital neonatal unit. Also passed to the CCRC, which investigates potential miscarriages of justice, was a separate report from seven medics which claims the results of insulin tests on two infants, which a jury concluded Letby poisoned, were unreliable. Mr McDonald said in April: "Today I've put in 23 expert reports from 24 experts from across the realm covering eight separate countries," he said. "Those expert reports completely demolish the prosecution's case that was put before the jury. "It is now hoped that the CCRC will not take long to look at this evidence and refer it back to the Court of Appeal. "These reports show that no crime was committed... This blows the case out the water. The charges Letby was convicted on in full Child A, allegation of murder. The Crown said Letby injected air intravenously into the bloodstream of the baby boy. COUNT 1 GUILTY. Child B, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby attempted to murder the baby girl, the twin sister of Child A, by injecting air into her bloodstream. COUNT 2 GUILTY. Child C, allegation of murder. Prosecutors said Letby forced air down a feeding tube and into the stomach of the baby boy. COUNT 3 GUILTY. Child D, allegation of murder. The Crown said air was injected intravenously into the baby girl. COUNT 4 GUILTY. Child E, allegation of murder. The Crown said Letby murdered the twin baby boy with an injection of air into the bloodstream and also deliberately caused bleeding to the infant. COUNT 5 GUILTY. Child F, allegation of attempted murder. Letby was said by prosecutors to have poisoned the twin brother of Child E with insulin. COUNT 6 GUILTY. Child G, three allegations of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby targeted the baby girl by overfeeding her with milk and pushing air down her feeding tube. COUNT 7 GUILTY, COUNT 8 GUILTY, COUNT 9 NOT GUILTY. Child H, two allegations of attempted murder. Prosecutors said Letby sabotaged the care of the baby girl in some way which led to two profound oxygen desaturations. COUNT 10 NOT GUILTY, COUNT 11 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT. Child I, allegation of murder. The prosecution said Letby killed the baby girl at the fourth attempt and had given her air and overfed her with milk. COUNT 12 GUILTY. Child J, allegation of attempted murder. No specific form of harm was identified by the prosecution but they said Letby did something to cause the collapse of the baby girl. COUNT 13 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT. Child K, allegation of attempted murder. The prosecution said Letby compromised the baby girl as she deliberately dislodged a breathing tube. COUNT 14 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT. Child L, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said the nurse poisoned the twin baby boy with insulin. COUNT 15 GUILTY. Child M, allegation of attempted murder. Prosecutors said Letby injected air into the bloodstream of Child L's twin brother. COUNT 16 GUILTY. Child N, three allegations of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby inflicted trauma in the baby boy's throat and also injected him with air in the bloodstream. COUNT 17 GUILTY, COUNT 18 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT, COUNT 19 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT. Child O, allegation of murder. Prosecutors say Letby attacked the triplet boy by injecting him with air, overfeeding him with milk and inflicting trauma to his liver with "severe force". COUNT 20 GUILTY. Child P, allegation of murder. Prosecutors said the nurse targeted the triplet brother of Child O by overfeeding him with milk, injecting air and dislodging his breathing tube. COUNT 21 GUILTY. Child Q, allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby injected the baby boy with liquid, and possibly air, down his feeding tube. COUNT 22 JURY COULD NOT REACH VERDICT. "I'm absolutely confident that the expert evidence that has appeared post-conviction totally undermines the safety of the conviction. "I'm very confident that we're going to get back to the Court of Appeal." Asked how Letby "is doing", he said: "I don't talk about Lucy herself as a person but to say this: She's read all the reports, she's seen the reports, we have a new hope now. "A new hope that, in fact, the truth will come out. So yes, she has a new hope." Last month, lawyers for the families of Letby's victims rubbished the international panel's findings as "full of analytical holes" and "a rehash" of the defence case heard at trial. Mr McDonald also gave the CCRC a separate report on the insulin cases of Child F and Child L from seven experts including two consultant neonatalogists, a retired professor in forensic toxicology and a paediatric endocrinologist. Their report summary concluded the jury was misled in a number of "important areas" including medical and evidential facts, and that key information on the insulin testing procedure was not submitted. It added that the biomechanical test used in both cases "can give rise to falsely high insulin results" due to the presence of antibodies which can interfere with the outcome. On Thursday, Mr McDonald released the independent panel's case summaries of all 17 babies that were said by trial prosecutors to have been deliberately harmed on the Countess of Chester Hospital's neonatal unit. The 14-strong panel concluded that no criminal offences had been committed at the Countess of Chester Hospital in 2015 and 2016 and instead provided alternative causes of deterioration. Among the findings of the panel, working pro bono for Letby's defence team, was that baby boy Child C died following ineffective resuscitation from a collapse after an "acute small bowel obstruction" that went unrecognised, rather than from a deliberate administration of air. Child P, a triplet boy, was also found by the jury to have been fatally injected with air but the panel ruled he died from a collapsed lung that was "suboptimally managed". Letby's experts said there was no evidence of air embolism - in which bubbles form and block the blood supply - in Child E, a twin boy, and that bleeding was not caused by inflicted trauma but from either a lack of oxygen pre-birth or a congenital blood vessel condition. The panel said insulin-related levels for Child E's brother, Child F, insulin were within the norm for preterm infants and it did not prove that synthetic insulin was administered. The same conclusion was reached for Child L, another twin boy that Letby was convicted of attempting to murder by insulin poisoning, and both cases were said to have involved sub-standard medical management of hypoglycaemia. BOMBSHELL EMAIL Meanwhile, an explosive email has also been found which appears to cast more doubt on the prosecution claims that Letby was caught "red-handed". A new email - sent on May 4 2017 to colleagues at the Countess of Chester Hospital - suggests there could be discrepancies over the chronology of events. The memo, revealed in April, is a significant boost to Letby's legal fight to overturn her convictions. Dr Ravi Jayaram is the only hospital staff member to have claimed to see Letby act suspiciously and link her behaviour directly to babies' deaths. Medical experts provided case summaries on all 17 babies from the Letby trial An international panel of medical experts has provided case summaries on all 17 babies who featured in the 10-month trial of Lucy Letby. The 14-strong panel concluded that no criminal offences had been committed at the Countess of Chester Hospital in 2015 and 2016 and instead provided alternative causes of deterioration: - Baby 1 (known as Child A in the trial): The prosecution said the boy was murdered by an injection of air into the bloodstream which caused an air embolism where bubbles form and block the blood supply. The panel found no evidence of air embolism and said the child had died from thrombosis, where a blood clot forms in a vessel. - Baby 2 (Child B): The prosecution said Letby attempted to murder Child A's twin sister by also injecting air into her bloodstream. The panel found no evidence of air embolism and said the child had collapsed from thrombosis. - Baby 3 (Child C): The prosecution said the boy was murdered with air forced down his feeding tube and into his stomach. The panel said the child died following ineffective resuscitation from a collapse after an "acute small bowel obstruction" that went unrecognised. - Baby 4 (Child D): The prosecution said the girl was murdered by an injection of air into the bloodstream. The panel found no evidence of air embolism and ruled the child died of systemic sepsis, pneumonia and disseminated intravascular coagulation (blood clotting). Issues with failures to give relevant antibiotics were also identified. - Baby 5 (Child E): The Crown said Letby murdered the twin boy with an injection of air into the bloodstream and she also deliberately caused bleeding to the infant. The panel said there was no evidence of air embolism and bleeding was caused either by a lack of oxygen pre-birth or a congenital blood vessel condition. - Baby 6 (Child F): The prosecution said Letby attempted to murder Child E's twin brother by administering insulin. The panel ruled that the child's insulin levels and insulin/C-peptide ratio did not prove that exogenous insulin was used and were within the norm for pre-term infants. It added that there was poor medical management of the child's prolonged hypoglycaemia. - Baby 7 (Child G): The prosecution said Letby attempted to murder the girl by overfeeding her with milk and forcing air down her feeding tube. The panel said there was no evidence to support air injection into the stomach or overfeeding. The infant's vomiting and clinical deterioration was due to infection, it found. - Baby 8 (Child H): Jurors cleared Letby of one count of attempted murder and failed to reach a verdict on a second count. Prosecutors said the nurse sabotaged the girl's care in some way which led to two profound oxygen desaturations. The panel said the deteriorations were due to medical mismanagement of a tension pneumothorax where air is trapped between the lung and chest wall. - Baby 9 (Child I): The prosecution said Letby murdered the infant by injecting air into her bloodstream and stomach. The panel said it found no evidence of air injections and that the baby died of breathing complications caused by respiratory distress syndrome and chronic lung disease. - Baby 10 (Child J): Jurors could not reach a verdict on an allegation of attempted murder. No specific form of harm was identified by the prosecution but they said Letby did something to cause the collapse of the girl. The panel said the deterioration was caused by sepsis and there was no evidence to support malicious airway obstruction. - Baby 11 (Child K): The prosecution said Letby attempted to murder the girl by deliberately dislodging her breathing tube. Among its findings the panel said there was no evidence to support a dislodged endotracheal tube (ETT) and the clinical deterioration was caused by use of an undersized ETT. - Baby 12 (Child L): The Crown said the nurse poisoned the boy with insulin. The panel said the infant's insulin-related levels were within the norm for pre-term infants and there was no evidence of deliberate administration. - Baby 13 (Child M): Prosecutors said Letby attempted to murder Child L's twin brother by injecting air into his bloodstream. The panel said there was no evidence of air embolism and his collapse was caused by sepsis or a heart problem. - Baby 14 (Child N): The Crown said the boy was the victim of attempted murder by inflicted trauma in his throat and an air injection into his bloodstream. The panel said there was no air embolism and it was likely his blood oxygen levels dropped due to his haemophilia condition or routine cares, which was "exacerbated" by repeated attempts to insert a breathing tube. - Baby 15 (Child O): The prosecution said Letby murdered the triplet boy by injecting air into his bloodstream and inflicting trauma to his liver. The panel said he died from liver damage caused by traumatic delivery, resulting in bleeding in the abdomen and profound shock. - Baby 16 (Child P): Prosecutors said Letby murdered Child O's brother by injecting him with air. The panel said there was no evidence to support that mechanism and that he died from a collapsed lung that was "suboptimally managed". - Baby 17 (Child Q): Jurors could not reach a verdict on an allegation of attempted murder. The Crown said Letby attempted to murder the boy by injecting liquid, and possibly air, down his feeding tube. The panel said there was no evidence to support air injection into the stomach and the child deteriorated because he had early symptoms of a serious gastrointestinal problem, or sepsis. He testified that the nurse was seen standing over Baby K's cot as the infant's condition deteriorated. Taking the stand, the doctor said Letby failed to call for help as the newborn's condition declined, insisting the nurse had virtually been caught "red handed". But prior to the start of the police investigation, Dr Jayaram wrote in an email to colleagues: "At time of deterioration ... Staff nurse Letby at incubator and called Dr Jayaram to inform of low saturations." The revelatory memo appears to contradict previous testimony, with the evidence not making it into documents handed to cops before the start of the investigation. In the newly released email, Dr Jayaram also suggested Baby K's fragile premature condition was instead the cause of death, saying: "Baby subsequently deteriorated and eventually died, but events around this would fit with explainable events associated with extreme prematurity." The note sees him suggest that the baby's death was explained by issues associated with extreme prematurity. Appearing at the 2024 trial, the doctor framed her behaviour as suspicious, telling the court: "Lucy Letby was stood next to the incubator. "She wasn't looking at me. She didn't have her hands in the incubator." Asked by prosecutor Nick Johnson KC whether he had "any call for help from Lucy Letby?", he replied: "No, not at all. "I was surprised that the alarm was not going off, although my priority was (Baby K) and I didn't question it at the time.'In retrospect, I was surprised that help was not called, given (Baby K) was a 25-week gestation baby and her saturations were dropping." However, at the recent Thirlwall Inquiry, the doctor expressed regret at not raising the alarm over the nurse's behaviour sooner He explained: "I lie awake thinking about this ... I should have been braver." 6 Human rights barrister Mark McDonald Credit: PA 6 Dr Ravi Jayaram was the only medical witness at Letby's two trials who was able to point to behaviour directly linking her to babies' deaths Credit: Rex
Metro
22 minutes ago
- Metro
Is Donald Trump gambling his popularity and presidency with strikes on Iran?
The US bombed three nuclear sites in Iran overnight, which might be a surprise if you heard his campaign rhetoric against foreign intervention. Boasting to be 'the only president in generations who didn't start a war' on the campaign trail, he said his presidency would 'turn the page forever on those foolish, stupid days of never-ending wars'. So what led to him sending B-2 Spirit stealth bombers to drop 'bunker buster' bombs on Iran last night, as as well as firing Tomahawk cruise missiles from US Navy submarines? Angelia Wilson, Professor of Politics at the University of Manchester, told Metro that his motivations are most likely to be political rather than borne from ideological conviction. 'Two weeks ago he had a big military parade that no one showed up to, and he had millions of Americans protesting against him over 2,000 cities. You've got to get those headlines shifted somehow,' she said. Her work looks particularly at the Christian Right in the US, and she said that key figures have been calling for the US to support Israel in their war against Iran. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video 'I monitor the emails from political organisations to their constituents, and they've spent the last two weeks softening the ground for this,' she said. Many had been sharing Bible verses such as Numbers 23:24, which describes Israel rising 'like a lion' to destroy and devour its enemies until all the blood of its prey is drained. Military action supporting Israel is therefore likely to play well with this key section of his base, which also includes those with the biggest pockets to fund Republican politicians. 'MAGA' supporters, who tend to be more secular, working class, anti-establishment and supportive of the 'America First' slogan against involvement overseas, are unlikely to be cheerleaders for the bombing campaign. The in-fighting between these two factions of Republican supporters could be seen most clearly when Senator Ted Cruz debated Tucker Carlson over Iran. The former Fox News heavyweight savaged the politician, claiming he knew little about the country he intended to bomb, and could not say its population of ethnic mix. But Professor Wilson, who wrote The Politics of Hate: How the Christian Right Darkened America's Political Soul , said that although Maga supporters may not like the idea, they are unlikely to turn against Trump over it, so long as strikes remain limited, and troops are not sent to fight. Trump has 'weighed up which of the constituents he needs to keep happy at this stage, and it's very much the Christian right,' she claimed. Asked whether he was gambling his presidency over the issue, she said she doubted he was too concerned with his personal political legacy as he doesn't have to be elected again (constitutionally, he can only serve two terms). To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video She claimed he was more likely to be concerned with keeping rich backers happy to secure income for the future – and the Christian Right have deeper pockets. 'I think he's taken a calculated decision that he's not going to get that much push back for it,' she said. 'Whatever he does in the next three years, it's going to be to suit him and his needs. 'I suspect he's thinking that by standing by Netanyahu on this particular account, that he will benefit from it financially in the long-term, post-presidency.' She said that what he is really gambling with is 'the reputation of the Republican Party'. So even though few are falling out of line just yet, he might face more pushback when it comes to the next election campaign. 'Americans get two weeks holiday a year in the summer, she said. 'And if gas prices are through the roof, I don't care who's president: they get very angry at the president. 'So having a war in the Middle East is not going to be good for the popularity of the president or the Republicans.' Trump himself has claimed that war in Iran does not contradict his 'America First' strategy. He told the Atlantic: 'Considering that the term wasn't used until I came along, I think I'm the one that decides that. 'For those people who say they want peace — you can't have peace if Iran has a nuclear weapon. So for all of those wonderful people who don't want to do anything about Iran having a nuclear weapon — that's not peace.' More Trending Professor Wilson pointed out that the slogan was not developed by Trump, having emerged during World War One when it was used by isolationists and later the KKK, and again being used to oppose the US joining World War Two. The decision to bomb Iran without approval from Congress was also not popular with Democrats, unsurprisingly. US Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez called for him to be impeached over it, saying the strikes could be unconstitutional if they amount to a declaration of war. Professor Wilson said this was unlikely to phase him, however, as 'while both houses of Congress are in the hands of the Republicans, then he's not going to get prosecuted for anything.' Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: London to Dubai BA flight turns back 90 minutes from landing after Iran strikes MORE: Has World War Three started and how close has Iran come to having a nuclear bomb? MORE: Moment officer tells Christian street preacher 'it's all wrong' outside station
