this is bbc news. the headlines at 11:00pm: sir cliff richard says he is relieved after winning his privacy case against the bbc. he has been awarded £210,000. there has to be something done that says you cannot do this again, you must not do it again, and i'm still not sure why they didn't have some kind of legal advice that would stop them. i was never even arrested, let alone charged. borisjohnson appeals to theresa may to reconsider her brexit strategy, warning the uk will exist in a state of miserable, permanent limbo unless she changes course. it is not too late to save brexit. we have changed tack once, and we can change again. president trump has said he is holding vladimir putin personally responsible for russian interference in the 2016 us presidential election. he was responding to a question in an interview with cbs news. well, i would,

well, iwould, because he is in charge of the country, just like i consider myself to be responsible for things that happen in this country. so certainly, as the leader of our country, you would have to hold him responsible, yes. also coming up: cancellations and disruption for ryanair passengers are on the horizon. —— a country. the 12 thai boys and their football coach who were trapped in a flooded cave make their first public appearance after being released from hospital. and, coming up in half an hour, we will take a look at tomorrow's front pages with the broadcaster david davies and political commentator daisy mcandrew. good evening.

four years after his home was searched by police in a raid broadcast by the bbc, sir cliff richard has won his privacy case against the corporation. thejudge said the bbc had infringed sir cliff's rights to privacy in a serious and sensationalist way. the raid was conducted in relation to an allegation of historical sexual abuse, an allegation sir cliff always denied and for which he was neither arrested nor charged. he has called for the bbc‘s senior managers to carry the can. but the bbc says it may appeal against thejudgment, as our special correspondent lucy manning reports. it was as good as it could have got for sir cliff richard, and as bad as it could be for the bbc. sir cliff, how are you feeling about thejudgement?

it's going to take a little while for me to get over the whole emotional factor. and so i hope you will forgive me. in tears, he had told the court his life was forever tainted. now, he was vindicated. sir cliff is of course very pleased with the court's judgement today. he never expected, after 60 years in the public eye, that his privacy and reputation would be tarnished in this way, and that he would need to fight such a battle. the singer was awarded £210,000, but is likely to get more. the bbc is also facing millions in legal costs. this is a massivejudgement for sir cliff richard, and pretty devastating for the bbc. and it raises questions for the entire media about how they cover police investigations. his friends saw the physical and mental toll over the last four years. he was determined to fight this case, and in a way,

even if he hadn't won the case, i think he's won it as far as the public is concerned. because personally, i've never heard so many people saying, i hope he wins this case and it was terrible, that invasion of privacy. and he's won it, in privacy law. the decisions made in the bbc newsroom to report the police investigation into sir cliff richard in 2014, and to use a helicopter to film it, significantly invaded his privacy, said thejudge. it was a scathing judgement. the judge said the reporting was breathless sensationalism, and using the helicopter created false drama. he rejected the bbc‘s case. he said the then uk news editor gary smith was not always a reliable witness, and he decided the bbc went in for an invasion of sir cliff's privacy rights in a big way. bbc editors fran unsworth and jonathan munro were grim—faced hearing the heavy criticism, but claim this is a dramatic move against press freedom. thejudge accepting it could have a significant impact on the media.

the bbc is very sorry for the distress caused to sir cliff. we understand the very serious impact this has had on him. she says the judgement will affect every media organisation. thejudge has made clear that, even if there'd been no footage of the search and the story had less prominence, the very naming of sir cliff would have been unlawful. this creates a significant shift against press freedom. ms unsworth, have you or mr munro offered your resignations over this matter, and should you? it's a very long judgement. we need to go away and absorb all the details. there are 200 pages there. we need to look at it and consider what lessons there are to learn out of it. what do you say to licence fee payers, that they are going to face this big damages fee? mrmunro, are you considering your position? the bbc says it is thinking about an appeal, and at its headquarters, there was a robust defence of its journalism. do you not think licence fee payers will find it astounding that you have lost this case, that it is going to cost potentially

millions of pounds, and nobody at the bbc is being held responsible? the question is not whether anybody‘s responsible. everyone is responsible. the question is whether that responsibility results in what you suggested might happen, which is that people should resign, and so on and so forth. that's not necessarily the right response to every mistake that every journalist makes in a news organisation. sir cliff had told the court everything he had worked for was torn apart by the bbc‘s reports. i was never even arrested, let alone charged, and i've had to suffer all of this. financially, and — but more importantly emotionally. for what? for absolutely doing zero. i never, never did what they said, they claimed. and, if heads roll, then maybe it's because it's deserved. # congratulations

and celebrations... 0utside court, there was, of course, only one song sir cliff's fans could sing. but his victory means the most difficult of days for the bbc, and potential challenges now for alljournalists. lucy manning, bbc news. earlier i spoke to david banks, a journalist and specialist in media law, who has also co—authored three editions of mcnae's essential law forjournalists. he says this ruling by the judge, that a criminal suspect should have a resonable expectation of privacy, radically changes the balance of reporting in the media. you only have to look at some of the cases that we have seen in recent yea rs cases that we have seen in recent years to see that introducing that isa years to see that introducing that is a blanket rule is a mistake. in many cases, and, you know, obviously sir cliff richard was completely innocent and has been exonerated, but in other cases of historic sexual offences, sometimes the identification of a person under investigation has been crucial in encouraging other victims to come forward , encouraging other victims to come forward, to give corroborating evidence. and without that core

operating evidence, the case could not have been built against people under suspicion —— corroborating evidence. so sickly saying it is a private matter and we can't name people in any circumstances, like this, is going to be very counter—productive to police investigations, and to the reporting of them bite the media —— basically saying. the bbc is considering whether to appeal against this judgement. do you think that it does have valid grounds to launch such an appeal? i think such a radical change in the balance of the privacy rights and rights of freedom of expression does need to be examined bya expression does need to be examined by a higher court. and so i certainly have, and i know a lot of newsrooms around the country, a lot of journalists around newsrooms around the country, a lot ofjournalists around the country, will be hoping that this judgement will be hoping that this judgement will be hoping that this judgement will be appealed, perhaps to the supreme court in due course. were you surprised that the judgement, for example, singled out specific editors at the bbc for a good deal

of criticism? well, i think what the case has seen has gone into some details of the decision—making process that went on. and so while it is surprising, i have not seen a judgement like it, where you have the witnesses gone through in such detail, and commentary made upon their reliability or otherwise, and so it was slightly unusual in that way, or surprising in some ways. i mean, judges often do comment on the reliability of witnesses, but it seemed to be very detailed. i think as well, for me as a journalist, there were certain sections of the judgement that showed that the judge was an expert in law or doesn't actually know what goes on in newsrooms. and, you know, that's a challenge we have to deal in newsrooms. but, you know, thejudges don't understand how news is made and gathered, and so there were certain sections of it i thought struck me as slightly naive on the pa rt struck me as slightly naive on the part of thejudge.

struck me as slightly naive on the part of the judge. but, you struck me as slightly naive on the part of thejudge. but, you know, this is a judgement that we will have two cope with and see if it gets appealed. -- have to cope with. boris johnson, the former foreign secretary, has accused the prime minister of crafting a brexit deal which would inflict a form of economic slavery on britain. mrjohnson, in his resignation statement to the house of commons, praised the vision set out by theresa may at lancaster house last year, but condemned the new deal agreed by the cabinet a few weeks ago at chequers as a miserable, permanent limbo. he said there was still time to save brexit, and urged the prime minister to change course, as our political editor laura kuenssberg reports. even the lightbulbs at the grandest of houses need changing. the resident here is changing soon, too. reporter: what's your brexit plan, mrjohnson? borisjohnson is on his way out. but today was the time to explain himself. why one of those who sold brexit so hard to the public thinks

the prime minister's plan sells us out. mrjohnson, ever—conscious of reputation, used an unusual resignation speech to say why. personal statement, mr borisjohnson. after decades in which uk ministers have gone to brussels and expostulated against costly eu regulation, we are now claiming that we must accept everyjot and tittle. we continue to make the fatal mistake of underestimating the intelligence of the public. 0uch! he says the government is telling you one thing and doing another. a convinced, small band of brexiteers surrounded him today, but some former remainers stayed away. it is not too late to save brexit. we have time, in these negotiations. we have changed tack once,

and we can change again. the problem is not that we've failed to make the case for a free trade agreement. we haven't even tried. not even two weeks ago, though, he signed up to the plan hatched here at chequers. were they arguing already? mrjohnson making the case on the terrace that the government would have to change course, and return to the prime minister's proposals she set out in a speech more than a year ago? let us again aim explicitly for that glorious vision of lancaster house. a strong, independent self—governing britain that is genuinely open to the world. not the miserable permanent limbo of chequers. we need to take one decision now, before all others, and that is to believe in this country and what it can do.

cheering. not a wholesale hero's reception — look at those crossed arms. but it matters. even though, almost too strangely to be true, he was speaking while she was speaking, sticking to her lines. if you looked at the white paper, and the agreement that we came to in chequers, you'll see the proposal we are putting forward is we're no longer a member of the customs union, we're no longer a member of the single market. many mps dismiss borisjohnson now, believing his credibility is shot. but he gives a bellowing voice to widespread concern that theresa may's "brexit with caveats" isn't really brexit at all. it was a serious warning, to the prime minister — change tack, or there could be more trouble. it was a very unusual encounter with boris johnson, one where he didn't make anyjokes. laura kuenssberg, bbc news, in the house of commons. president trump has again defended his meeting earlier this week in helsinki with

russian president vladimir putin, after a backlash over comments he made afterwards, in which he sided with president putin over his own intelligence services over claims of russian meddling in the us presidential election. yesterday he told reporters that he had got his words wrong, saying "why would russia interfere with the election" when he meant "why wouldn't they". today, he claimed no president had been as tough on russia as he has. you say you agree with us intelligence that russia meddled in the election in 2016. yes, and i said that before. i have said that numerous times before, and i would say that that is true, yes. but you haven't condemned putin specifically. do you hold him personally responsible? well, i

would, because he is in charge of the country, just like i would hold myself as possible for things that happen in this country. so certainly as the leader of the country, you would have to hold him responsible, yes. i would have to hold him responsible, yes. lam would have to hold him responsible, yes. i am very strong on the fact that we can't have meddling, we can't have any of that. look, we are also living in a grown—up world, with a strong statement. president 0bama supposedly made a strong statement, nobody heard it. what they did here is the statement he made to putin's very close friend, and that statement was not acceptable. didn't get very much play, relatively speaking, but that said, it was not acceptable. but i let him know we can't have this. we're not going to have it, and that's the way it's going to be. let's speak to our washington correspondent chris buckler. absolutely extraordinary from the us president. having during that summit with him, appearing to cosy up to

president putin is now insisting he will stand up to him. fundamentally different tone. he wants to be tough with president putin and that is because of the backlash particularly from some senior members from his republican party. specifically, those comments in which he said that he would not seek white it was russia involved in bad link. now you hit includes the word saying that it was russia. it took 2a hours for him to clarify his worth and that concerns many people. whether you believe president trump or not, that word not is very important, as we know, it gives the idea that whenever he speaks people are

watching very carefully and watching that relationship with russia. we so a new tack tick, at taking putin while trying to keep them close. —— tactic. given that, when we saw that statement, where he was clearly reading from a prepared script, claiming that he got his words wrong, do people there really believe that? people can go off script is well and when it comes to president trump, he is not beyond that at its only push is credibility. but it took so long to get clarification. we had to have another clarification today because, whenever there was a brief conference inside the white house, you had a conversation taking place about whether russia was still a

threat. he seemed to say no in response to that which would go against what intelligence chiefs are saying. they believe russia is still a threat to democracy and involved in an attempt to disrupt democracy in this country. subsequently we have had another clarification from the press secretary, saying that he was simply saying no to whether he was simply saying no to whether he was prepared to answer any more questions. but it does give you the idea that, in the last few days, we have had to have two serious clarifications, senior republican speaking against him. many thanks for the latest from the washington. the headlines on bbc news: sir cliff richard says he's relieved after winning his privacy case against the bbc. he's been awarded £210,000. borisjohnson appeals to theresa may

to reconsider her brexit strategy, warning the uk will exist in a state of "miserable, permanent limbo" unless she changes course. donald trump has defended his record in dealing with russia, saying no us president has ever been tougher. the 12 boys rescued from a flooded cave in thailand last week have left hospital and given their account of what happened. speaking of their ordeal, one of the boys described the moment they were found by a british diver as a "miracle". 0ur correspondentjonathan head was with the family of one of the boys as he came home. dom spent his 13th birthday in the cave, at the time unsure if he'd ever get out. but you'd hardly know it as he thanked the doctors and nurses on leaving hospital today, the very picture of health. this was him two weeks ago,

smiling for his rescuers when the 12 boys and their coach were discovered after nine days without food. he and his team—mates made their first public appearance since their astonishing rescue. treating journalists to some nifty footwork before taking the stage to recount their experiences in the cave. they had gone to explore, just for an hour, they said, but found themselves cut off by fast rising water. 14—year—old adul, who speaks the best english among them, then described the moment when, after nine days, they heard the two british divers close by. translation: we were digging and we heard somebody talking, but we didn't think that it was real, so we stopped and listened. but, as it turned out, it happened, it was real. i was shocked. i thought they were thai officers, but when they got out of the water, i found that they were english.

i did not know what to say to them, so ijust said hello. it was a miracle, it was a miracle. i was shocked. for all of them, the hardest thing in the cave was the hunger. this is the youngest, titan, who is 11 years old. translation: i tried not to think about food. but, because thinking about food... tried not to think about fried rice. they finished with a tribute to saman gunan, the thai diver who died while trying to save them. watching at home was dom's family. his stepfather had not been able to see him in hospital. with just a few hours before he came home, it was hard keeping his emotions back. "i am just waiting to welcome him as soon as he gets here," he said. "we'll all be there. ijust want to hug him." well, it's been a very long wait this evening for dom's family,

but we thinkjust a few more minutes to go before he comes home and for this very ordinary family, hopefully, an end to a very extraordinary story. and then he was there. the boy who had missed his 13th birthday, but with his miraculous escape had been given a second chance. it is not often you get an ending as happy as this. jonathan head, bbc news, northern thailand. more than 50,000 passengers booked on peak summer holiday flights with ryanair next week have been told their trips have been cancelled next wednesday and thursday. the airline has cancelled 600 flights in response to a coordinated strikes by cabin crews in belgium, portugal and spain over a 48 hour period. in addition, pilots employed by ryanair in ireland are planning to strike this friday, and probably next week as well.

welljoining me in the studio now, at this late hour, is simon calder, who is the travel editor at the independent. hundreds of passengers will be booked on these flights, what are the options? they will all have been sent a message according to ryanair telling them their flight has been cancelled, apologising and saying it was an unnecessary strike and giving them three options. 0ne, was an unnecessary strike and giving them three options. one, to get a full refund. which would be a foolish thing to do if you are thinking of getting an alternative flight thinking of getting an alternative flight because prices are sky high. 0r flight because prices are sky high. or you flight because prices are sky high. 0ryou can flight because prices are sky high. or you can fly on a different day and time. having spoken to a number of passengers, it is proving very difficult indeed because flights are very full and there may not be a

flight very full and there may not be a flight for a week. 0ption three is where they will reroute you to a nearby airport or crucially they will buy you a ticket on arrival at airline. if they cannot get you to your destination within a day they will buy you a flight. families wanting to get away at the start of the holidays will have a pretty miserable time. it is proving difficult. the huge surge in demand. trying to sort out their holidays. a lot of frustration. i think it will be very messy. if you remember, going back injust nine months, the pilot rostering debacle where tens of thousands of people or effect did then and there are echoes of that. this is a strike by cabin crew across europe on wednesday and

thursday. the pilot strike will cancel flights on friday. and another 2a if the tuesday flight goes ahead. it is a bit of a lottery ticket for ryanair passengers. and some bad news for ryanair reputation. ryanair has generally had a strong reputation for making its planes depart and arrive on time but it is having all kinds of problems with the unions, and so it could be a summer of considerable discontent. talking of disruption, we had problems at heathrow today. it has been pretty awful. a couple of things happen. a reported fire at the control tower which closed the airport and this is an important having about 80 flights and all going in and out and having about 80 flights and all

going in and outand if having about 80 flights and all going in and out and if it stops for ten minutes you get immediate disruption. lots of diverted flights. many delays and it could be noisy till quite late tonight. there are still aircraft coming in and lots of disruption in the morning. a lots of disruption in the morning. a lot of late flight from london, particularly on british airways, will not come back until tomorrow and that will affect domestic departures for scotland and the north of england. and passengers on qantas, tried to get to sydney, that has been delayed till tomorrow and british airways to dubai likewise. many thanks for the news. thejury

the jury has found naa'imur thejury has found naa'imur rahman guilty of preparing a terrorist action. two leaders of the neo—nazi group, national action, have been sentenced to a total of 1a years in prison for continuing to be members after it was banned as a terrorist organisation in 2016. the judge also noted that they had done nothing to discourage a plan by a fellow neo—nazi to kill an mp. our home affairs correspondent daniel sandford reports. when the time comes, they'll be in the chambers. jack renshaw, the neo—nazi who plotted to kill his mp, speaking in blackpool in 2016. you can call me a nazi, you can call me fascist, that is what i am. well done! so am i! he was a member of national action, which was banned last year as a terrorist organisation after celebrating the killing of the labour mpjo cox. but some of its members went underground, doing fight training at this improvised gym and meeting

most weeks at this pub in warrington, where lastjuly, jack renshaw made an announcement. sitting here at this table that night, jack renshaw told his fellow neo—nazis that he planned to kill his local mp, rosie cooper, and a female detective who had been investigating him for grooming boys for sex. he said he wanted to kill them in the name of what they called "white jihad". his plot was thwarted because one man inside the group that evening, robbie mullen, was leaking information to the antiracism charity hope not hate. renshaw‘s weapon, a sword, was later found by detectives. rosie cooper. in the commons today, the effect on his planned victim was clear. may i, on a personal note, thank the prime minister, thank the leader of the opposition and every single member of this house for the kindness they have shown me. the jury could not decide if renshaw

had remained a member of national action at the time of his plot, but the group's leader, chris lythgoe, and matthew hankinson, who both knew about renshaw‘s plan, were jailed today for belonging to a banned organisation. the two men who started national action and set out the violent nazi ideology that renshaw embraced, were alex davies and ben raymond. they were not on trial, but we tracked ben raymond down to a bedsit in swansea. ben raymond. daniel sandford from the bbc. bleep. you set off irresponsibly this neo—nazi organisation. bleep. you irresponsibly set up a neo—nazi organisation. do you deny all responsibility for that? bleep. daniel sandford, bbc news. the tech giant google has been fined a record £3.9 billion

by the european commission, in relation to its android mobile operating system. the european commission says google unlawfully favoured its own internet search service, denying rivals the chance to compete and consumers the right to choose. google says it will appeal, as our technology correspondent rory cellanjones explains. if you believe in innovation from everyone, then welcome to android. it sees itself as a benevolent giant that just wants to help us communicate. the eu has a different view. google has engaged in illegal practices to cement its dominant market position in internet search. google's android operating system runs on three quarters of europe's mobile phones. it is free for phone makers, but the eu says that google applies conditions which promote its own interests at the expense of rivals.