Featured

Labour’s case on China spying is ‘falling apart’, says ex-Downing Street chief

The Government’s account of its handling of the alleged China spying case is “falling apart,” according to opposition whip and former Downing Street chief of staff Nick Timothy MP.

Speaking to GB News, he said: “The Government’s case is falling apart. Every single day we get new news reports. Last week, we had the security minister come to Parliament.


“He denied that one of the most sensitive meetings in this whole story took place in September.

“By Wednesday, the Prime Minister came to Parliament and confirmed that that meeting did take place. And then on Thursday, they sent a junior minister who gave, I’m afraid, the worst performance I’ve seen in the House of Commons in my time there to date.

“He wasn’t able to answer any question. He wasn’t able to justify what the Prime Minister had said.

“He contradicted what the Government had previously said in several key ways. And we need to get to the bottom of this. We need the truth.

“We need total transparency, because at the heart of this is something really, really important, which is our national security.

“This was a trial of two people who we believe were spying on Parliament for China, and the Government, it is alleged, did not give the Crown Prosecution Service the information they needed to successfully prosecute these two men.”

Nick Timothy MP

Nick Timothy MP said ‘we need the truth’ about the situation

|

GB NEWS

Mr Timothy’s comments come as questions continue over what officials knew and when, raising concerns about the handling of sensitive intelligence and the implications for UK security.

This comes after reports that one of the suspects in the alleged Chinese spying case was reportedly carrying a “suitcase full of cash” when he was stopped by police under terrorism laws at Heathrow Airport.

Christopher Berry, 33, an academic from Witney, Oxfordshire, was intercepted with £4,000 in February 2023 nearly six weeks before his formal arrest on suspicion of spying for China.

Sources familiar with the case say the money was believed to have been given to Berry by his Chinese intelligence handler, known only as “Alex”.

It remains unclear whether the cash was retained by police or what currency it was in.

Last week, Sir Keir Starmer finally published 18 pages of evidence connected with the case.

Mr Cash and Mr Berry, who both deny any wrongdoing, had been accused of passing secrets to Beijing and were charged under the Official Secrets Act in April 2024.

However, the Crown Prosecution Service unexpectedly dropped the charges against the two men last month.

The Director of Public Prosecutions claimed the case collapsed because evidence which referred to China as a national security threat could not be obtained.

In the now-released witness statements, Mr Collins said that Chinese intelligence services were “highly capable and conduct large-scale espionage operations” against the UK.

Keir Starmer

Sir Keir Starmer has come under fire for the China spy scandal

| X / KEIR STARMER

Mr Collins went on to admit that the UK was “committed to pursuing a positive relationship” with Beijing.

Mr Collins submitted one witness statement in 2023, with another two statements being filed earlier this year.

Concluding one witness statement, the deputy national security adviser wrote: “For the reasons given above, it is my assessment that the suspects’ alleged activities were prejudicial to the safety or interests of the UK, and the information and material passed would be directly or indirectly useful to the Chinese state.”

Source link

Related Posts

On April 12, 2021, a Knoxville police officer shot and killed an African American male student in a bathroom at Austin-East High School. The incident caused social unrest, and community members began demanding transparency about the shooting, including the release of the officer’s body camera video. On the evening of April 19, 2021, the Defendant and a group of protestors entered the Knoxville City-County Building during a Knox County Commission meeting. The Defendant activated the siren on a bullhorn and spoke through the bullhorn to demand release of the video. Uniformed police officers quickly escorted her and six other individuals out of the building and arrested them for disrupting the meeting. The court upheld defendants’ conviction for “disrupting a lawful meeting,” defined as “with the intent to prevent [a] gathering, … substantially obstruct[ing] or interfere[ing] with the meeting, procession, or gathering by physical action or verbal utterance.” Taken in the light most favorable to the State, the evidence shows that the Defendant posted on Facebook the day before the meeting and the day of the meeting that the protestors were going to “shut down” the meeting. During the meeting, the Defendant used a bullhorn to activate a siren for approximately twenty seconds. Witnesses at trial described the siren as “loud,” “high-pitched,” and “alarming.” Commissioner Jay called for “Officers,” and the Defendant stated through the bullhorn, “Knox County Commission, your meeting is over.” Commissioner Jay tried to bring the meeting back into order by banging his gavel, but the Defendant continued speaking through the bullhorn. Even when officers grabbed her and began escorting her out of the Large Assembly Room, she continued to disrupt the meeting by yelling for the officers to take their hands off her and by repeatedly calling them “murderers.” Commissioner Jay called a ten-minute recess during the incident, telling the jury that it was “virtually impossible” to continue the meeting during the Defendant’s disruption. The Defendant herself testified that the purpose of attending the meeting was to disrupt the Commission’s agenda and to force the Commission to prioritize its discussion on the school shooting. Although the duration of the disruption was about ninety seconds, the jury was able to view multiple videos of the incident and concluded that the Defendant substantially obstructed or interfered with the meeting. The evidence is sufficient to support the Defendant’s conviction. Defendant also claimed the statute was “unconstitutionally vague as applied to her because the statute does not state that it includes government meetings,” but the appellate court concluded that she had waived the argument by not raising it adequately below. Sean F. McDermott, Molly T. Martin, and Franklin Ammons, Assistant District Attorneys General, represent the state.

From State v. Every, decided by the Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals…

1 of 95