hello, it's thursday, it's 10 o'clock, i'm chloe tilley. lawyers for some of convicted paedophilejeffrey epstein's victims are urging prince andrew to put himself forward to give evidence to us investigators. will he submit evidence, like e—mails and calendars and travel logs, that all of us would like to see as part of our investigations? will he allow his staff to come and answer questions about his travels and where he was and what they saw? it comes after prince andrew announced he'd step back from public duties following scrutiny of his friendship with jeffrey epstein. we'll talk to a royal expert and a lawyer about what should happen next. this programme has exclusively seen a leaked letter which says that reforms to double jeopardy laws around child abuse cases, suggested by the victims‘

commissioner, will not happen. we'll hear from child abuse survivors. of the five of us, only three of us got some form of justice, and thatjust, it isn't fair. it isn't fair, because he abused all of us, and he should be in prison for what he did to all of us. and the family of an 18—year—old woman who's being held in a controversial secure mental health facility say they've been told experts "fear for her life". bethany‘s dad, jeremy says he's devastated to have to leave his daughter in a place where she's left locked in a room and "the system is broken". hello and welcome to the programme. we're live until 11 this morning. do get in touch on all the stories we're talking about — use the hashtag victoria live. if you're emailing and are happy for us to contact you, and maybe want to take

part in the programme, please include your phone number in your message. if you text, you'll be charged at the standard network rate. first, annita mcveigh has the news. prince andrew's offer to co—operate with an investigation intojeffrey epstein has been welcomed by lawyers for some of the disgraced american billionaire‘s victims. the duke of york announced he would be stepping back from public duties following scrutiny of his relationship with epstein, who took his own life in jail while awaiting trial for sex trafficking. entrepreneurs have come out in support of prince andrew's business scheme for start—up firms as fears grow it may not continue amid the current controversy. the scheme provides start—up firms with advice and contacts, but no funding. a source close to prince andrew said he would continue to be involved. labour is launching its general election manifesto in birmingham later today. the party's pledges include

a windfall tax on oil companies, expand free travel on public transport and build 100,000 council homes in england during each year of the next parliament. labour leaderjeremy corbyn says the plans would bring hope to the country. and we'll have full coverage of the launch on the bbc news channel from 11 oclock. a top us diplomat has told an impeachment inquiry that he followed president donald trump's orders to put pressure on ukraine to investigate his democratic rival, joe biden. gordon sondland, the us ambassador to the european union said the instruction came from mr trump's personal lawyer, rudy giuliani. the inquiry is assessing if mr trump withheld military aid to ukraine as a precondition. he denies any wrongdoing. a new report says that women can expect to take on caring responsibilities for an older, sicker or disabled relative more than a decade earlier than men. research by sheffield and birmingham universities shows half of women will care by the age of a6, compared with half of men,

where the age is 57. the research also suggests two—thirds of uk adults can expect to become an unpaid carer during their lifetimes. nearly half of uk adults are willing to fake an illness to get a day off work, according to a bbc survey. two in five said they would "pull a sickie", while others admitted to taking un—due credit for a colleagues‘ work. the office for national statistics says the average worker takes around four sick days a year, but official data doesn't include fake illnesses. a spanish court has called budget airline rya nair's policy of charging a fee for hand luggage "excessive" after a passenger was fined for taking a carry—on bag without a special ticket. the passenger was forced to pay a 20 euro fine to bring her 10kg luggage on board. ryanair allows only small bags as hand luggage if they can be stowed beneath the seat in front.

the airline said it would not change its bagging policy. a woman who rescued a seriously injured koala from a bushfire in australia has been reunited with him. toni doherty came to the aid of the creature in new south wales and took him to a koala hospital — the only one of its kind in the world. she's named him lewis after her grandson. that's it, back to chloe. the fallout from prince andrew's newsnight interview continues this morning after he said he was stepping down from all royal duties because of the controversy over his friendship with( convicted paedophile jeffrey epstein. lawyers for some of the victims have today called for prince andrew to put himself forward for questioning by us investigators. he has always denied any wrongdoing and says he regrets his association with the paedophile. with me here in the studio is royal biographer and commentator angela levin, and joining us via webcam is the lawyer mark stephens.

thank you for coming in. give us some context as how bad this is in terms of royal scandals, where we are now? it's unprecedented and if it was on accounting from one to ten and ten was the worst, it's probably about 15. i think it's really affecting the whole family. it snowballs down the hill and it gathers momentum. 0ne snowballs down the hill and it gathers momentum. one of the things that upset the queen was that she believed that before any general election the royal should take a step back and should be seen but not heard and the fact thatjeremy corbyn were talking about this in the debate the other day must have given her a real shock because it would slip the election off track. are so do you think that although the statements came from prince andrew, do you think the pressure

was probably exerted from the queen? absolutely. no doubt. afterwards he was delighted with the appalling interview and invited the team around to watch and he was overheard saying, mission accomplished and he thought it had gone down really well. so he wouldn't have changed his mind and said it didn't go down well. he had gone beyond what was tolerable and she spoke to prince charles in new zealand and one or the others of their must have been up the others of their must have been up in the night a lot and they decided itjust up in the night a lot and they decided it just could up in the night a lot and they decided itjust could not happen but they allowed him a certain amount of dignity. she is a mother he is rather and it was a very good announcement. what a pity he did not do this before. i want to bring in mark stephens, and thank you for joining us. if you look at the statement handle is referring to, the tone is very different, and the last line is telling. i am willing

to help any appropriate law enforcement agency with their investigations if required. do you think prince andrew should be heading to the us to speak to the fbi or the new york police?m appears the common narrative is that he should but the question is in two parts. firstly, should he have had this friendship with jeffrey epstein and the answer is a resounding no, but the second question is, does he have anything probative that would sit an enquiry assist an enquiry into the guilt or innocence of jeffrey epstein in terms of the suits against him and that i very much doubt. there are better witnesses, people who perhaps worked in his homes, people who were much more regular visitors than prince andrew who would give more probative evidence, but the problem with that

is they are not as high profile. they are not if you like, sexy witnesses, and what is happening is the traditional approach of lawyers who want a celebrity in their case to get a tension to it and hope it might magnify the damages, and i am not convinced that prince andrew has a huge amount to offer in terms of witness evidence. but could it be good pr for prince andrew after what has been a difficult week for him in pr terms. he has diplomatic immunity and he is entitled to stand on that if he wishes to but it's almost a practical impossibility to stand on that now and he said in his statement that he will go, but the question then falls into two parts. firstly, does he talk to the fbi about their investigation, and i

think you should do that. the question on the other hand is, should he give evidence in relation to the other matters, and i think beyond the claims of the woman he knew, that he finds it a much more limited scope of evidence that he should be giving. angela, where do you stand on this? clearly the tone of the press release put out yesterday was very different to the tone of the interview done on newsnight. do you think it would be good for the monarchy if prince andrew went to the united states or are you with mark? i am with mark on this one, really. also, he said he could not remember ever meeting virginia, not at all, not for one moment he could not remember putting his arm around her and could not remember seeing her or going to a nightclub, nothing at all, and then afterwards he said, i didn't do it,

so afterwards he said, i didn't do it, so you have to put the two together and say either he can't remember anything or he doesn't know if he did it or if he didn't, and this sort of blankness and forgetfulness sometimes convenient forgetfulness won't make things very helpful, because if he feels in any sort of difficulty he can say i can't remember or i don't know. and that is the reason i think he has to go and give evidence in the virginia roberts case because she has made very direct allegations and he is a witness in that he is not charged with anything because the sex trafficking charges are against the estate of epstein but i think it is important that he gives evidence in that case, particular given the case that case, particular given the case that there have been problems in terms of the media as has been pointed out by angela levin so accurately, i think. i want

pointed out by angela levin so accurately, ithink. iwant to pointed out by angela levin so accurately, i think. i want to ask you as well, one question that listeners to radio stations and bbc tv viewers have been asking since the news broke is if prince andrew is stepping back from public duties, does that mean he will get no public money, less public money? does it work like that? i'm afraid it does. he won't get the sovereign grant which is worth about quarter of a million. he gets that he sheer to pay for his offices and clothes and all sorts of things needed to help him function for charities and businesses. he also gets about the same amount from the queen, and this is from her own private person that will continue. she's made that quite clear. it's public money, still, of course. it is and it isn't. it's not money that has to be announced its money that has to be announced its money where things have worked out well, and i don't know. it doesn't come into the same category but

otherwise he'd just be on an x navy pension which is very small indeed, so pension which is very small indeed, soi pension which is very small indeed, so i don't think she wants him to live an uncomfortable life but it will certainly make a difference. it might makea will certainly make a difference. it might make a difference to paul beatrice whose wedding is coming up. how embarrassing is that and you cannot have an elaborate wedding like eugenie had because it would look so distasteful and his ex—wife has supported him but is a huge spender and an incredible debt and at the time epstein gave £25,000 to help her out of her depth. so it's quite complicated but he won't be starving. one final question and i don't think it is this is too much ofa leap, don't think it is this is too much of a leap, is prince charles in moloch and all but name —— a moniker and all but name. it must be very

stressful. within 20 minutes she came out last night and went to give an award so duty comes above anything. but i think she would be very upset and i'm pleased if prince charles gets his chance to say what he really thinks because they did have a very bad relationship when he was younger. thank you angela and mark, thank you for your time. let me bring you some breaking news. alex salmond has appeared in court charged with attempted rape and 13 other sexual offences against ten different women. they are all alleged to have happened between june 2008 and november 2014 while he was first minister. the attempted rape is said to have happened in june 2014 at his official residence in edinburgh. he is alleged to have pushed a woman against a wall and removed her clothes and his own before pushing her onto a bed and lying naked on top of her. mr salman

is said to have been tempted to have raped another woman in the previous year at the same location. 0ther alleged sexual assaults are said to have happened at a restaurant, in a carand at have happened at a restaurant, in a car and at the scottish parliament. the hearing is at the high court in edinburgh and is expected to last no more than an hour and no date has been set for his trial and he has denied all of the charges against him. we are expecting a statement from the former first minister of scotla nd from the former first minister of scotland before the end of the programme. if that happens, we will bring it to you here. there has been a 20% increase in the number of times police in england and wales have detain someone under the mental health act. the latest government figures show 28,537 detentions by police under section 136 of the legislation in the year 2018/19. there's also been an increase in the number of people who are sectioned by police and transported in a police vehicle.

the police federation for england and wales say it's "a crisis". megan has been detained by police under the mental health act numerous times. i have been sectioned by the police and a few different situations. whether it's been on a motorway bridge or a train station. i've also been brought back to hospital by the police, not section but brought back because i was already under a section in hospital and before i was sectioned i didn't know what it meant. i thought it was just for people who were really dangerous and criminally insane. i did not realise it could happen to somebody like me.

so when you are being put chased by the police, how many police are we talking about and how do they stop you and restrain you? what is that like for you at that time? again, it varies, but one incident springs to mind, when you first said about being chased, i was being chased down on the slip road of the motorway having three big policemen running andi motorway having three big policemen running and i was running for my life and my shoes came half and having this policeman run and tackle me to the ground, they had to pin me down and restrain, handcuff me i understand why now but at the time it's extremely traumatic and you are doing everything within your power to get away, to make it stop and we understand they are trying to help you, andi understand they are trying to help you, and i understand it was for my own safety but i do feel really

guilty but the question is, am i that dangerous that i need the police to intervene to help, if that makes sense? as you are speaking i can see thatjohnny is nodding away and listening intently and i want to bring him into the conversation. john, how much have you experienced this story that megan is telling us, it's happened several times to her. asa it's happened several times to her. as a front line police officer how many times have you experienced it? many times. i've been a police officer for almost 27 years and when operational the number of people that we are dealing within mental health crisis has certainly increased over the years since i have been police officer and the story from megan is sadly very typical. there are people who are in such a state of despair that they wa nt such a state of despair that they want to end their own lives and in some cases want to hurt other people. clearly not in the case of megan, but in some cases they do and the police have to act and its devastating for us because these are

not people doing bad things, they need help but we also have to prevent them where possible from harming themselves or potentially harming themselves or potentially harming other people. the mental health crisis that this country is in the grip of, the police are at the forefront of my colleagues are at the forefront of trying to protect and support as many people as we can, often in isolation. megan, do you think the police officers who had to chase you and restrain you have had the right training know how to deal with you and have had the right training?|j wouldn't say that police officers are mental health experts, so they are mental health experts, so they are doing the best they can with what they have got but in my experience i've only had positive experiences in the way that the police have treated me. there's not been any stigma against me and they've been extremely kind and patient and often in a lot of

scenarios there haven't been the mental health professionals available, for example when i've been taken to hospital it has been the police that have stayed with me and looked after me and supported me, not the mental health team which has been hard to get my head around. so despite not having the same level of expertise that they have, they have done an incredible job for me, in my experience. i thinkjust mainly in their compassion and willingness to understand and be open—minded that it's not somebody trying to be difficult it is somebody genuinely struggling and needing support. it is interesting that megan says clearly a police officer is not a mental health expert, but what she is describing is human kindness and compassion. but it must be very difficult, as a police officer, when you are used to dealing with criminals and people who are breaking the law or you

think might have broken the law to then have to switch that mindset to somebody who is clearly in a crisis. my colleagues are professional, dedicated individuals and an awful lot of people think that police office rs lot of people think that police officers time is dealing with crime, but it's not, it's about 20% of time is dealing with crime. 80% of the police officers crime is dealing with things like mental health crises, and certainly in the early years of training for mental health within policing it was not very good. and it's much better now and megan is right. police officers are there to protect members of the public and they will not turn their back on someone in a mental health crisis. where it is frustrating is that despite promises made by government after government, there is still not enough investment in the mental health system, support to give for those who need it and police officers are the service of

la st police officers are the service of last resort and they will never turn their back on summary in crisis, but they are sometimes, very often, not they are sometimes, very often, not the right people to be dealing with people such as megan and we will always do the best we can and i'm glad that megan said that that the office rs glad that megan said that that the officers showed compassion and care and that is what i've experienced, but sometimes in a high stress situation with somebody suffering a crisis and could be violent, we have to restrain them and that is not good, because these are not prisoners, they are patients. good, because these are not prisoners, they are patientslj good, because these are not prisoners, they are patients. i want to ask megan about that. in an ideal world, in those moments of crisis where people are concerned you could hurt yourself or others what would be the best way for you to be dealt with and were not talking about resources and money but who do you wa nt to resources and money but who do you want to help you at that moment?

ideally i've got the gift of hindsight right now but in those moments where i am out of control and self—destructing i am very much determined to harm myself and someone determined to harm myself and someone like the police could keep me safe and keep me physically safe but at the same time i need, in an ideal world, some therapeutic support, some kind of mental health professional to help dissipate the situation and soothe me and if necessary help administer sedatives or medication. and i'm not sure exactly, because again, each situation can vary but ultimately something less traumatic than the police having to restrain you and hold you until mental health professional is available to give you something to calm down and then

pretend that nothing has happened, it would be really good to have somebody help keep me safe and a tea m somebody help keep me safe and a team of people that can manage the crisis and then following the crisis get the support in place to prevent it from happening again. 0therwise we just it from happening again. 0therwise wejust go it from happening again. 0therwise we just go round it from happening again. 0therwise wejust go round in it from happening again. 0therwise we just go round in circles and with my crises, they have got worse and worse each time because nothing has been put in place to help prevent them from happening again, which i think is being forgotten about. them from happening again, which i think is being forgotten aboutm you've got any mental health issues there is a range of organisations and websites that can offer you advice and support. you can find them listed on the bbc‘s actionline website at bbc.co.uk/actionline. still to come. we'll talk to the father of a young woman who is being held in a controversial security facility , he says experts have told him they "fear for her life". and the mother of harry dunn tells us they are no further on in securing a prosecution for the driver who is suspected of killing their son. that's despite the foreign secretary

saying a month ago there were "no longer any obstacles" in getting justice. lorna gordon is at the high court in edinburgh. lorna. tell us what's gone on in there. alec salman, the former first minister of scotland and leader of the snp --, minister of scotland and leader of the snp ——, the man who secured a referendum on scottish independence, he has appeared at the high court here in edinburgh for a free trial hearing in relation to charges he is facing to do with serious sexual assaults. he is facing 14 charges, one of attempted rape, one of intent to rape, ten counts of sexual assault and two of indecent assault against ten different women. it's

alleged that the assaults took place ina alleged that the assaults took place in a variety of locations, those locations including bute house, the scottish parliament, bute house being the official residence of the first minister in scotland, so it's also a nightclub, restaurant and in also a nightclub, restaurant and in a car. it was a short hearing in edinburgh and it lasted just a few minutes dealing with procedural matters and we learnt of the date that the trial will go ahead and the trial is expected to last four weeks. after the hearing here, alex salmond and made a statement to the waiting media. he said he was not permitted to say too much but he was not guilty of all the charges. he said that this was for him entering the second year of court actions, the second year of court actions, the first being civil actions that

he took against the scottish government and an enquiry they held into sexual harassment claims which was found to be flawed and they ended up paying alex salmond £500,000 in legal costs and now following the civil action this criminal action, which will take place next march. he said he is innocent and he will defend his position vigorously. thank you, lorna, speaking to us from edinburgh. victims of sexual abuse have told this programme they feel "desperately let down" after ministers refused to add child abuse to a list of serious crimes that can be retried in court. the victims commissioner and a group of mps had both recommended changing the law. but in a leaked letter seen by this programme, thejustice secretary robert buckland has it ruled out. 0ur reporterjim reed is here. so this is all about a legal

principle called double jeopardy and this has been the case for hundreds and hundreds of years in this country and essentially means that if you go on trial charged with an offence and found not guilty, you cannot be charged with that offence again. you cannot go back to court. it was a case for hundreds of years until 2005 when the then labour government relaxed the law and changed and added exemptions for 29 so—called serious offences. you can see examples of them here. they include things like murder, manslaughter, attempted arson, rape and so on. so for these offences, and so on. so for these offences, and these offences only, if there is new evidence in this case it is possible to take somebody back to court and retry them. but it doesn't include child abuse. not all forms of child abuse and that is where the controversy is today, so campaigners have been pushing very hard to add some form of child abuse, particularly sexual assault of children, to the list. the victims

commissioner, in august, wrote to the justice secretary saying he thought that should be the case, that it should be added. it came after the trial of this man, bob higgins, who was a former coach at southampton football club and convicted back in june southampton football club and convicted back injune of the sexual assault of 24 young boys but he was involved in an earlier trial way backin involved in an earlier trial way back in 1992 where he was found not guilty. the six young boys involved in the first trial were told that the offence was not serious enough for it to be reconsidered for a second time, which is why the victims commissioner was pushing for the change in the law. so what has the change in the law. so what has the government said now? we've seen this letter dated at the end of 0ctoberfrom robert this letter dated at the end of october from robert buckland, this letter dated at the end of 0ctoberfrom robert buckland, the justice minister, to the victims commissioner. in it he says he has relu cta ntly commissioner. in it he says he has reluctantly concluded, as he puts it, that it would not be right to change the law. he said by changing it it would inevitably lead to the demand for inclusion of more offences and in particular crimes of violence. so the argument is that if you add child sex offences to that

list, there would be pressure to add salt, gbh and other charges as well. so what are other survivors of abuse saying? it's really hard to say how many cases could be affected by this because it's not something that's routinely recorded by the court, but idid speak routinely recorded by the court, but i did speak to one woman who said she would have been affected and we are calling her sarah, it's not her real name and we will use her real voice but we have disguised identity asa voice but we have disguised identity as a victim of sexual offences and this is what happened in her case. in her case. my dad met him through work, my parents thought that he was really fun and exciting, he would always command with presents. michael murphy was part of the london music scene, in the 1980s. he claimed he was the tour manager for the band soft cell. as a family friend, he took sarah to covent garden and the theatre.

for a long time i would say, when i told people, i would say, "0h, he took advantage of me". i couldn't bring myself to use the word "abused". that he'd abused me. how old would you have been at the time? well, he was charged of abusing me from the ages of seven to 12, but what i've realised is, actually, it was happening before i could read. when she was 17, sarah told her parents. at that stage, she didn't want to go to the police. but in 2015, after thejimmy savile scandal, she decided to report it. the investigation was complex. by that stage, michael murphy, a common name, had vanished. the whole process has been the hardest thing i've ever done. i remember being really anxious, and i got this phone call out of the blue, completely out of the blue, saying, you know, we've found him and we've made an arrest. it felt incredible, but then i felt terrified. around this time, another

of murphy's victims, completely unconnected to sarah, had also gone to the police. injuly 2018, he went on trial in woolwich on 15 counts of historic abuse against five young girls. but for sarah, that first court case didn't go as planned. i don't know, i don't know. maybe it was too hard for them to hear, but they really let us down, the first jury. they really, really let us down. they had found him not guilty on three counts, and one of which was in relation to me, and it was the most serious charge that he was charged with, in relation to me. and i wasjust absolutely devastated. i was absolutely devastated. murphy was found not guilty on three of those 15 counts and the jury could not come to a decision on the other 12 charges. there would have to be a retrial. but because of the double jeopardy rule, those three not guilty verdicts would stand. two of the complainants were told they would have to drop out

of the second trial completely. and the most serious of the charges against sarah could also no longer be considered. i felt like, you know, i wasn't believed, and ifelt like he has literally gotten away with that, and i felt devastated. six months later, there was a second trial. michael murphy was found guilty on all of the 12 remaining counts against three victims, including sarah. but even if new evidence emerges, he could never be retried on those first three charges. of the five of us, only three of us got some form of justice, and thatjust, it isn't fair. it isn't fair, because he abused all of us, and he should be in prison for what he did to all of us. child sexual abuse is a very serious crime. at the moment, the current law, it kind of diminishes what people have been through, and that's just not good enough.

the abuse in that case, michael murphy, was given 16 years, he will be eligible for parole in 2027. he may have got a longer sentence if he had been found guilty if the jury could consider those other charges and the people involved may have got the justice they deserve. thank you, we are nowjoined by dean radford, former footballer at southampton, one of six men involved in the first trialjim was referring to, involving the football coach, bob higgins. he has been campaigning for a change in the law. thank you for speaking to us. the trial in 1992, bob higgins was found not guilty, now he is in prison after a second trial. you were a witness but your allegations could not be tried for a second time, as has been explained.

for you, what was that like, what did it do to you? it was devastating, i was fully behind all the other lads, i wanted it for them, but sitting there, knowing he was going to get away with what he did to me, that was devastating. at the time, i thought, on the positive side of it, justice would be there for the other lads, but for me, for the other five, it is just wrong. response to the government line on this whichjim was talking about a moment ago, saying, if a case like yours is allowed to go to court for a second time, it adds pressure for other crimes to be included, whether thatis other crimes to be included, whether that is assault, gbh, do you understand that thinking? no, i have tried, and i cannot... i have read the letter several times, i have tried to understand what he is trying to say, it is impersonal,

like a robot has written it. he mentions in their something quoted in 2003 by some guy who said it could lead to a slippery slope. child sex abuse is a specific crime, there is no grey area there. in life, you sometimes get right and wrong, sometimes things are down the middle. but this is 100% wrong. people know that. it baffles me, when i read something like that. it has basically been swept under the carpet. and i am guessing, as an outsider, clearly not understanding what you have been through, anyone who has been through what you have been through who is a survivor of sexual abuse as a child, it must ta ke sexual abuse as a child, it must take courage to speak up about your experiences, so for you then not to see justice followed the whole way through, does that hinder your ability to move on? definitely, yeah, and... i know as well as

anybody what it is like not to be believed, the case back in 1992, lots of things to be discussed about that. he was found not guilty, not bya that. he was found not guilty, not by a jury, that. he was found not guilty, not byajury, a that. he was found not guilty, not by a jury, a judge decided. and, it isjust, by a jury, a judge decided. and, it is just, you know... by a jury, a judge decided. and, it isjust, you know... ijust cannot find any part of me that can draw a line under this now. i knew what he was. he is now convicted, he is a known child sex abuser. for this not to go back to court, to be tried, and forajury to to go back to court, to be tried, and for a jury to listen to all the evidence... it isjust, from the letter i have read, again, i have got to say it again, it is sweeping it under the carpet, there is no ca re it under the carpet, there is no care and consideration for survivors out there. i am one of them, there is another five that i know of,

hundreds of other people out there that cannot get justice hundreds of other people out there that cannot getjustice and move on with their lives. you appeared on the programme back injune, back then you asked for borisjohnson the prime minister to apologise after he said police funding was being wasted, he used the expression "spaffed up the wall" on historical child abuse investigations. he has apologised in private to some survivors, it has been reported, are you one of those? no, i'm not, he has never responded or acknowledged what i have asked for. explanation, apology, again, he hasjust pushed me aside, as well as the others, and he has... it is inexplicable, it is unforgivable what he has done, it shows what kind of person this guy is. if i ever did something wrong, i would be mortified if i said something like that and i would want to put the record straight, i would wa nt to to put the record straight, i would want to explain what i meant, i

would want to apologise. but not a single word. it is reported that he has apologised privately to some survivors for his use of language, clearly not to you. thank you so much for your time. the mother of harry dunn has told this programme the foreign secretary dominic raab misled both parliament and her family when he claimed he had cleared the path to justice for harry. a month on from that statement and charlotte charles says they are no further in on in securing a prosecution for the driver who is suspected of killing their son ann sacoolas. you'll remember mrs sacoolas, who was married to a us diplomat, fled the uk claiming diplomatic immunity shortly after the incident. we can talk now to charlotte charles harry's mum and the family's spokesperson radd seiger. i could see you flinch, when i even

said the name of anne sacoolas, it must be incredibly difficult for you, living and breathing this and trying to grieve but at the same time, you clearly feel very let down by the foreign secretary dominic raab, just explain, you think he has made contradictory statements. absolutely, one month ago today, in parliament, he said there was no obstacles parliament, he said there was no o bsta cles in parliament, he said there was no obstacles in the way to secure justice, and yesterday morning, on a news channel, he stated that he was still working to clear the obstacles forjustice. still working to clear the obstacles for justice. those words still working to clear the obstacles forjustice. those words about... i am really angry with that, one month ago we were led to believe that there was nothing stopping now the cps from looking at the case. dominic raab has blown that open again once again. clumsy language?

have you managed to ask, do you think it is a case of, the cps is not looking at this closely and... we do not know. there is something out there, the victims code, that states that we should be kept fully informed of everything that is going on, they should have contacted us at the beginning, when they receive the case, we have had no contact whatsoever, if they are working really ha rd, to whatsoever, if they are working really hard, to get this charge, whatever decision they may put in place, talk to us, we do not expect them to go public. we are getting angrier by the minute, we are not. dominic raab said yesterday, the government is going to seek legal costs from you, if you go with a legal case against him. that is what

he told us in a letter, completely disgusting. why are you taking legal action against dominic raab. very simple, this family have two objectives, anne sacoolas must come back to the country, that is what we are working very hard to do. beyond that, there has clearly been a major problem, in london, in the government. anne sacoolas was spirited away under the watch of the foreign office and dominic raab, these people want to know why that happened, why it was allowed to happen, a judicial review of that... of that event. that is what they are after. they are not some frolic of theirown, after. they are not some frolic of their own, some vexatious litigation, these are british citizens and entitled to be represented by dominic raab and the foreign office. let me read you a

statement which has come from the foreign & commonwealth office, "we have sympathy for the family, we will continue to do everything we can to ensure justice is done, as the foreign secretary has set out, the foreign secretary has set out, the individual involved has immunity while under the country under the bma convention on diplomatic relations." irrespective of whether dominic raab used clumsy language or whether there is a difference between the two statements he made, the cps, it takes a long time, justice in this country can take a long time, there is an argument that it takes better and that the cps looks at this as a very high—profile case, and make sure everything is watertight, before they then decide if anything can go ahead. —— vienna convention on diplomatic relations. yes, absolutely, but, keep us informed! there is none at the moment, it is all about

communication, i have never seen a family so badly let down by the authorities in my long career, i have said that publicly. as a lawyer. it is all about communication, when you are not being communicated with, you feel suspicious. we are rushing to get this done, because we are concerned the two governments may be colluding or conspiring, a few phone calls and meetings, it could all be done but it is not happening. a statement from the cps, "we fully understand how difficult this must be for the family, cps is doing everything possible to make a charging decision as soon as we can. unfortunately we honour able to tell the family how long this will take, each case is different, and the cps must consider all available information in order to make an objective decision" why do you think you are not being kept informed, is it because of the general election, because they are busy? are you suspicious? straightforward simple road traffic collision, driving on the wrong side of the road, caught on cctv. if it

we re of the road, caught on cctv. if it were a complex fraud case that would ta ke were a complex fraud case that would take weeks and weeks in court, we would understand that. it is as simple as that. she is driving on the wrong side of the road and unfortunately collides with harry.|j ee, unfortunately collides with harry.|j agree, everything we are aware of, that has gone into the cps, it is extremely straightforward. anybody could rock up to the scene of the accident and look at the road markings, just to see how simple it was. there are no break marks, there are no skid marks, the cctv shows she was driving on the wrong side of the road for quite a distance. u nfortu nately, the road for quite a distance. unfortunately, where the accident happened, neither of them had any time to react, or respond. we totally understand that we need to

cross the tees and dot the eyes, the evidence is there, but it should be a very simple case, and there are no other factors to it. a very simple case, and there are no otherfactors to it. it a very simple case, and there are no other factors to it. it is a road traffic accident, and we do not understand why it is taking so long to come to a charging decision. we know the amount of evidence that has gone into show that it is straightforward. thank you very much for coming in today. thank you for having us. the former scotland first minister alex salmond has appeared in court charged with 14 sexual offences against ten different women. he denies all charges against him. this is what he said outside the court in edinburgh a few moments ago. i'm not permitted to say too much today say that we have launched a defence statement with the court, it pleads not guilty to all charges, and explains some of the circumstances in which they have

come about. i'm also conscious we are in the middle ofa come about. i'm also conscious we are in the middle of a general election campaign and i'm not going to say anything which would influence that democratic process. we are now into a second year of court actions, first civil, and now criminal. it is over ten months since we won the civil action. i am innocent. i will defend since we won the civil action. i am innocent. iwill defend my since we won the civil action. i am innocent. i will defend my position vigorously. but the only place, the only proper place, to answer criminal charges is in this court. and that is exactly what we intend to do next spring. i would love to ta ke to do next spring. i would love to take your questions, but you will understand, i will have to wait for another day. so, if you forgive me, lam going another day. so, if you forgive me, i am going to go with my legal team over to parliament hall, for a consultation.

the family of a young woman who is being held in a controversial security facility say they have been told experts "fear for her life". assessment and treatment units — or atus — are meant to be short term placements for people with mental health problems or challenging behaviours but 18—year—old bethany has been held in them for three years. this week a review of bethany‘s care took place. and bethany‘s dad says serious concerns were raised in every area of her care. nhs england says, "the immensely complex care needs of beth, and the repeated challenges faced in the multiple alternative care settings that have been tried, are a priority for the expert doctors, nurses, therapists and other staff seeking to look after her. "patient confidentiality rightly means that important context about her circumstances are not and cannot be in the public domain." let's now speak to bethany‘s dad, jeremy. we are not using his last name for legal reasons.

we invited matt hancock to come onto the programme to meet you, we sent all sorts of things, we asked him to send a statement reacting to the review, we have heard nothing back, clearly, if matt hancock is watching now, we would love for him to get in touch with us, it may happen in the next six or seven minutes we are talking. tell us first of all, bethany was in an adolescent unit, working quite well. yes, she was, and... then she turned 18 and is in and... then she turned 18 and is in an adult situation. she was being properly supported by staff that understood autism and her needs, in the adolescent unit, she was going out in the community, we would go and visit, we would take her for a walk, she was making progress, nhs england recognise that, they were praising bethany but because she turned 18 she had to move and they placed her in a unit in wales that has no autism speciality whatsoever. because they cannot meet her needs,

her anxiety has escalated, her behaviour becomes challenging at that point, and they have locked her away in a cell because of that. what is an average day for her? she sits ina room, is an average day for her? she sits in a room, ten feet wide, 12 feet long, she has nothing in the room other than a mattress and a beanbag. there is a perspex window, she can talk to staff through that window, thatis talk to staff through that window, that is it, that is it. two weeks ago, nhs england, realising how poor this situation is, put in place a tea m this situation is, put in place a team of specialist to reduce restrictions on her, that was working brilliantly, really well. that team withdrew because they have other commitments, it was left to the staff that work for the hospital, they do not have the skills to follow that through, so there was a blip and instead of working, continuing with that work, they locked her a way and they have banned that restraint production tea m banned that restraint production team from coming back on site. ——

away. as a parent i cannot begin to imagine what you go through seeing your daughter in this environment and you clearly want to do anything you can to get it changed. do you have any rights, any role, are you included in the discussions about how her care should happen?|j included in the discussions about how her care should happen? i am included in discussions, i listened to? no. the things i say, they acted on? the opening response to the nhs stated about expert clinicians being brought in at every stage, it is only this week that we have managed to bring in people who are autistic to bring in people who are autistic to represent the autistic voice, to tell her what her experiences are. this was at the review, what difference did it make having somebody who has autism, being there to talk about it? it made a massive difference, the sad point with it is, the commissioning team that run

her care, they did not know that that pool of autism experts was available to them. this is how poor the knowledge is around supporting my daughter. her case is not complex, she needs people who understand autism, she needs an environment which supports her autism, something like here, bright lights, ina autism, something like here, bright lights, in a room where she is now, where she can hear screaming and crying and shouting of other patients, distressed patients, that create sensory overload, she needs a proper environment. that is not complex. the review that happened this week, three red flags, explain what that means. there were far more than three red flags, there were three ratings, red, amber and green. red, massive concerns, green, everything going well. every element of the report was flagged as read. the independent panel that reviewed

beth's care, including the autism experts, stated at the end of the review, we are deeply concerned for bethany‘s life. review, we are deeply concerned for betha ny‘s life. her well—being review, we are deeply concerned for bethany‘s life. her well—being is so poorly treated in that unit... i'll give you an example, bethany, when she becomes anxious, will, as if you we re she becomes anxious, will, as if you were ina she becomes anxious, will, as if you were in a swarm of bees, you would wa nt to were in a swarm of bees, you would want to run away or you would start swatting those bees. beth cannot run away, she is locked in a room, so she will become challenging, she will also self—harm. the other day, they went in her room, they removed everything they thought could be potentially dangerous to beth, i left her in this stripped outsell. they left her with a bunch of clothing which she had tied into ligatu res. . . clothing which she had tied into ligatures. .. let's clothing which she had tied into ligatures... let's not clothing which she had tied into ligatures. .. let's not go into the details of that, hugely distressing, i cannot imagine what that is like for you. lets talk about the review,

everything is a red flag. everything. they are worried about her life, presumably it has changed straightaway? we have meetings, nobody has yet identified a placement where bethany will be moved to. do they think there is nowhere they can provide the appropriate care for bethany, is there not a space, what is the reason? a lot of it is spaces, there is nowhere in the community for people who are sitting in bed is ready for discharge, nowhere for them to move to. so, bed blocking is preventing proper care being given. i know the health secretary matt hancock spoke about your family's situation a couple of weeks ago, i will read some of what he said. i apologise to jeremy and to will read some of what he said. i apologise tojeremy and to bethany for the things that have gone wrong in her care. the current plan is to get bethany moved to a more appropriate setting before christmas, i very much hope that will happen. do you think that will

happen? that has to happen now, when matt hancock made the statement two weeks ago, that was before the report that said she must move out. the planning in place at that point did not include a move before christmas. that was a lie, by matt hancock. that move did not exist. matt hancock is not here to defend himself, and say otherwise. we do know that he is saying he cannot say anything more on this because of the election period we are in. how are you coping, how is yourfamily coping, we have heard bethany is struggling, but foryou...? coping, we have heard bethany is struggling, but for you. . . ? to drive away from the meeting after being told that my daughter's life was at risk, that was hell, to be sitting here wondering if my phone has gone off to say something that has happened, i can't describe it. i cannot describe it, how fearful i am

at the moment. and frustration with the lack of movement. i can't imagine how bethany is coping with this. i really can't. thank you ever so much for coming in, iam this. i really can't. thank you ever so much for coming in, i am sorry you got upset, we did not want that to happen. thank you very much for coming in. victoria will be with you tomorrow, in norwich for a special debate ahead of the general election, mps will have a chance to talk about issues important to you. you can send it in in all of the usual ways. labour will shortly be unveiling its election manifesto. it is a documentjeremy corbyn has described as the "most radical

and ambitious plan to transform the country in decades". it's expected to include proposals for a windfall tax on oil companies, free high—speed broadband for every home and business, and a pledge to expand social and affordable housing. let's get more from our political guru norman smith. what is labour promising in housing? massive expansion for council housing the likes of which we have not seen since the post—war labour government of clement attlee, which it seemsjeremy government of clement attlee, which it seems jeremy corbyn is government of clement attlee, which it seemsjeremy corbyn is trying to mimic in terms of radical nets, there is the manifesto, here is how they would pay for it. i have had a look, ntn it, iam barred from telling you exactly what, but some of the headlines we already know about. top, huge extension of the power and role of the state in our society, and economies. nationalisation of the big energy companies, the railway networks, broadband, all that in future would be run by the state, and we would also see a reversal of lots of the sort of benefit changes that have been introduced, all designed to give power back to ordinary people.

norman smith, thank you very much. comments coming in about prince andrew, is he still being paid by the taxpayer now he is standing down? in no way should be he be benefiting from taxpayer money, if he has stepped down. just to clarify, prince andrew's allowa nce to clarify, prince andrew's allowance is paid from the sovereign grant, publicly funded, it pays for official travel cost, that is the queen's private income. thank you for your company today. good morning, rather cloudy for many of us this morning, one or two clear skies, one or two pockets of frost first thing across eastern areas of england, but you can see from the satellite imagery, the cloud we have here, especially so towards western

areas, you can make out the band of cloud. bringing outbreaks of rain, the south—west of wales, the south—west of england, that could move east and into the west country, the isle of wight, hampshire. elsewhere, dry, sunny spells across northern england and in scotland today, maximum temperature is six to 10 degrees, rather brisk south—easterly wind making it feel a tad chilly. through tonight, we will see the rain moving north, shell was pushing into northern areas of income, further showers coming into the south, temperatures for most of us staying above freezing. —— showers. rain at times, through many parts of the uk, particularly to the south—west of england, through wales, west midlands, some heavy rain throughout the day.

you're watching bbc newsroom live — it's11am and these are the main stories this morning: in the next few minutes labour will launch their election manifesto — promising the biggest council house building programme in decades. this is the scene at the launch in birmingham, we'll bring it to you live shortly. the former first minister of scotland alex salmond appears in court charged with sexual offences against ten women. he denies all the charges. lawyers representing the victims of the sex offenderjeffrey epstein say prince andrew should put himself forward to be interviewed by us authorities, after his statement saying he would step down from royal duties. he should volunteer to cooperate

with law enforcement without any