Barry Pring: Absolutely Betrayed by the British Legal System

As some of you know, I’ve extensively covered the case of Barry Pring, as all evidence shows, murdered by his Ukrainian wife Anna Ziuzina by Kiev, in 2008:

In January of this year, an inquest was held, which delivered a verdict of unlawful death, and more, the coroner, Dr Elizabeth Earland, stated that Barry had been ‘tricked’ into standing by the side of the road – clearly the only person who could have done this, his Ukrainian wife, Anna Ziuzina (pictured with Barry).

Things really started to move after that, with the case even being raised in Prime Minister’s Question Time, in late February, as MP Neil Parish asked the Prime Minister to ensure that justice was served against Anna Ziuzina. Pressure grew, and Foreign Minister Boris Johnson was due to discuss it with high-level Ukrainian officials in early April.

All of this was highly inconvenient for the UK, and their position of blanket support for Ukraine, whitewashing of any negatives in Ukraine. Boris Johnson was involved in the case, but never once publicly mentioned it – even when he was in Ukraine at that time. Actually, following the inquest verdict, there was considerable attention on it, all of which risked putting something in the public domain entirely, dangerously contradictory to the message the UK wants to project on Ukraine: corruption is just as bad, or worse, than it ever was there. (The UK message is that ‘everything in Ukraine is getting better after Euromaidan, reform‘ etc).

Actually, when I’d interviewed MP Neil Parish in February, he stated the problem with corruption in Ukraine:

As the case was going up, it was clearly going to have ramifications, and implications. The UK, only used to fawning over Ukraine (just have a look at Boris here, at the recent ‘UK / Ukraine reform conference’ in London. ), was going to have to ask some uncomfortable questions of Ukraine. The UK, used to only issuing glowing reports about Ukraine, was going to have to say some hard words.

OLYMPUS DIGITAL CAMERA

But just as things were about to get very inconvenient for the UK, something happened. After a letter by Ziuzina’s lawyer, long, rambling, full of factual errors, just two months after the inquest, the verdict was quashed. Just like that.

The coroner had had nine years to look over the facts of the case. Yet a claim based on easily disproved evidence by Ziuzina’s lawyer (and having earlier had his letter, I wrote to the coroner disproving it – he claimed a U-turn was 200 metres from the restaurant, it was actually over 600 metres – easily checkable on Google Maps), had the coroner suddenly ‘becoming aware of new evidence of this practice of hailing taxis’. This was one of 3 reasons cited in the quashing.

Meanwhile the coroner suddenly dismissed my evidence as being based on ‘commercial interest’ – despite the e-book I wrote on the subject not being on sale for over 4 years, that never having been for ‘commercial interest’, and my having done nothing of any ‘commercial interest’ on the theme. Plus, my evidence, praised so fulsomely in January by the coroner, was now ‘hearsay evidence’, despite everything in the 58-page document I’d submitted being fact-checked, and referenced.

The other reason given for the quashing was that Ziuzina herself was not present, despite her being given every notification, and opportunity to attend.

The quashing of the inquest verdict was a farce, an insult to the Pring family, a mockery of the reputation of the British legal system. Since then, Ziuzina has lauched a PR campaign to clear her name, with members of the UK press seemingly happy to take her lawyer’s word, perhaps more than that, and the UK government more than happy to allow the Ziuzina campaign, to avoid pressure for a second inquest from which may emerge more uncomfortable details of the UK’s new ‘best friend’, Ukraine, and its true nature.

The injustice for Barry Pring just goes on, as his murder in 2008 becomes an ‘inconvenience’ for the UK government in 2017.

More to come.

‘Gay Britannia’ – Onanistic Self-Absorption Britannia

I was just in the UK for a bit there, and have to say, I very quickly got sick of ‘Gay Britannia’ plastered everywhere, all over the tv, as part of the ‘Gay Britannia’ season.

Why can gay rights not include just living their lives as anyone else does, without constantly, literally, forcing it down people’s throats?

It’s not equal rights etc, it’s just undue fixation on people’s sexual orientation when there are things far more deserving of time, and attention.

And I don’t get how any one group has the right to add their own adjective to ‘Britannia’ either…. all just onanistic self absorption.

And that’s that.

A Graham Newsletter (#33) Pressure in the UK, Ukraine, and Leaving the UK

For the past couple of weeks, as you may know, I’ve been back in the UK, and have felt some pressure from the authorities in this time here. The conviction and imprisonment of Ben Stimson was framed around his being pictured ‘holding a weapon’ in Donbass, something the FCO have written to me about in the past. And further, they moved on from that by updating their travel guidance to add the threat that those who ‘assist those in the conflict’ in Donbass may be liable to prosecution in the UK.

I’ve written about all of that here – 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/22/exclusive-how-the-uk-are-trying-to-stop-my-work-full-story/

So, what to expect as I leave the UK in a few hours? Well, of course I hope to normally pass through the border, with no issues. Journalism isn’t a crime, after all, even if the government don’t like it. However, what also happened in my time back here is that the BBC came after me to try to blur the lines, insinuate that I’d crossed journalistic lines. Here’s my response to that:

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/24/bbc-hit-piece-my-response-to-it/

So what could the UK do against me? Jail me, like Ben? Unlikely they’d dare to go that far. Take my passport? They’d surely like to do that – either to stop me leaving the country, or force me into a position of applying for the passport of another country, i.e. Russia so they could discredit my work with ‘Russian propagandist’ etc. Not that that would or ever could be the case. I’m British, and actually consider myself a true patriot of the UK – in as much as I’d rather go against my country until it becomes the country I was brought up to believe in. For the moment, it’s hard to believe in anything the UK government do, and I’ve covered that on the Truth Speaker –

How the UK Got it So Wrong on Euromaidan, and Ukraine

Why is the UK supporting Ukraine so much? 3 Explanations…

I will keep challenging the narrative of the UK government as long as they continue acting in an entirely deceitful, immoral way. The next period of work is a hugely important one, and I’m ready for it. I’m pleased to have received my Russian visa, writing of that here:

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/25/new-russian-visa-leaving-the-uk-back-to-work-and-uk-fyi/

That, with your support, setting me up for the next year of work in Russia, of course not only. And, if the UK do try to prevent that in any way, they will have their own words to fall on, which they well indeed now wish to take back in light of their recent Ukraine escalation, from September 2016 that:

“Mr. Phillips did not commit an offense in Great Britain that could be a reason for the British government to make him forbidden to leave the country.”

Those by UK ambassador to Ukraine Judith Gough, by the way, and I’ve written of her here. And that came after my interview with Ukrainian POW (shortly before exchange), Vladimir Zhemchugov, and here’s my position on that:

My Interview with Ukrainian Terrorist Vladimir Zhemchugov: My Statement

Of course, the sensible thing for the UK to do would be to let me leave the country without any problems, warnings, questioning etc. Last time I left in March, it was 30 minutes of fairly standard questioning at Harwich. However even that shouldn’t be the case – I’m a working journalist, keen to get back to work, to do my job, to bring you reportage. I don’t like fuss, or scandal, just – reporting facts. That they don’t reconcile with the UK government’s version in no way impacts on my right to report them. 

If you’re sleeping now, and read this later, I hope this finds you well, and my having left for the next period of work, which will incidentally encompass the completion of my documentary from Belval, Luxembourg, (pictured) about which I’m very excited, and onto Russia, and more!

I hope to return, before too long, to a better Britain…

Why is the UK Supporting Ukraine so Much? 3 Explanations…


1. Supporting Ukraine was the EU position at the start, and the UK just went along with it…. 
true, but then why recently has the UK been ramping up its support for Ukraine, as the EU is generally paying less attention? The EU leaders recently ‘holding peace talks‘, while the UK ups its military support for Ukraine. Why? 

2. A reason would seem to be the UK’s desire to demonstrate to the world that post-Brexit, they are ‘still a force’, not diminished in any way etc etc. This would seem to be the case, with Boris Johnson frequently repeating versions on the theme:

UK’s Johnson reassures Ukraine of support after Brexit vote

The UK are locked in tough Brexit talks with the EU just now, are they afraid that if they are perceived as being weak on Ukraine, it’ll impact on the Brexit negotiations? It’s a real shame the UK have chosen absolutely the wrong situation in which to overcompensate. 

3. Is there a deal in it for the UK? Has Ukraine promised something? More specifically, one of the UK government’s most favourite deals…. an arms deal.

Did you know that Britain is now the 2nd biggest arms dealer in the world, and it’ll sell arms to almost anyone…

“Since 2010 Britain has also sold arms to 39 of the 51 countries ranked “not free” on the Freedom House “Freedom in the world” report, and 22 of the 30 countries on the UK Government’s own human rights watch list.” (source)

“UK Government approved Saudi arms deals worth £238m six months after deadly Yemen funeral air strike”. (source)

That recent large-scale, glitzy UK / Ukraine Reform conference in LondonPoroshenko’s visit to the UK. Just what was promised to the UK government to get them to up their support of Ukraine so significantly?

The UK’s been talking up war between Ukraine, and its former territories, talking up their own supplying of military aid to Ukraine. Are they anging for an arms deal? Has someone in Ukraine told them they’ve got the money for this?

How the UK Got it So Wrong on Euromaidan, and Ukraine

The UK, under then Prime Minister David Cameron, made their call from the start about whose side they were taking in the Ukraine situation. In March of 2014, then foreign secretary William Hague was lying to the UK parliament about Viktor Yanukovych having been ‘legimitately’ removed from power. He was actually removed by the violent coup which was Euromaidan.

Meanwhile David Cameron was telling parliament, in March of 2014: What has happened to Ukraine is completely indefensible. Its territorial integrity has been violated and the aspirations of its people to chart their own future are being frustrated.

This European Council sent a clear and united message to Russia that its actions are in flagrant breach of international law and will incur consequences. We agreed on a three-phase approach to stand up to this aggression and uphold international law: first, some immediate steps to respond to what Russia has done; secondly, urgent work on a set of measures that will follow if Russia refuses to enter dialogue with the Ukrainian Government; and thirdly, a set of further, far-reaching consequences should Russia take further steps to destabilise the situation in Ukraine.

It continues…

There was never an attempt to take into account the facts of Maidan:

A maximum of 500,000 (and that’s protesters figures, even) gathered on Euromaidan – that’s around 1% of the population of Ukraine.

But actually (and I was on Maidan), those who brought Maidan’s ‘victory’ (Yanukovych fleeing in fear of his life, government legitimately elected in 2012 just swept away) were not the mostly peaceful 500,000, it was the few thousand radicals, far-right, terrorists on Maidan.

So, take your pick: at best the UK supported the ‘right’ of 1% of the population of Ukraine on Maidan, over the 99% not on Maidan.

Or actually, the 0.01% who actually defined Maidan: the far-right, radicals, terrorists…

And Maidan ‘represented’ not the whole of Ukraine, in any way. Those there were almost exclusively from the west and centre of the country. Donbass didn’t take part, and was actually against Maidan, the South similarly.

So the UK chose to support a violent coup, dressed up as a revolution, in a country which had always had an east-west divide. And one which installed a government with an agenda dictated by ultra-nationals from the west, diametrically opposed to the life, history, culture of those in the east, who’d never voted for a Maidan government, and actually no one voted for a Maidan government. There were no elections, they just seized power. (Key figure in Maidan, and now chairman of Ukrainian parliament, founder of Ukrainian neo-Nazi Svoboda party, Andry Parubiy).

The UK chose to support a coup government, a junta, formed after a violent coup. Yet, all we were hearing about in the time in the UK was the BBC and co’s glowing coverage of the ‘revolution of dignity’ on Maidan, etc.

Most people in the UK know yet little about Euromaidan, the BBC, realising word was getting out, belatedly covered their proverbials with a documentary about the Maidan snipers.

Yet the general perception remains in the UK, is that if people know about Euromaidan, they generally subscribe to the narrative that it was a ‘revolution of dignity’, Ukrainians ‘fighting for their freedom’, etc – rather than a small proportion of the population in Kiev, peaceful maybe but supporting a minute proportion of ultra-nationals and radicals who overthrew a democratically-elected government before wanting to impose their own (unelected) agenda, on the east. And expecting that all to be ok.

If there’s an event about Euromaidan in the UK, be sure it will be universally pro-Maidan, that’s the only permitted position (this, the LSE from February of 2017):

Actually the unconditional support of the UK, US, Europe, was one of the fuelling factors in those on Maidan believing they could have it all their way.

And what happened after? Crimea, Donbass, war, mass loss of life due to war, ongoing misery due to war, which goes on to this day. And the UK? The position has remained set in stone = Maidan = Good. So everything against Maidan = bad.

This, despite the masses of evidence that a re-evaluation of Maidan is required. Because if Maidan wasn’t so good, then maybe all that went against it isn’t so bad…. that is a highly dangerous idea the UK is desperate to eliminate while still embryonic. The UK has remained entirely intransigent.

What have we had over the last few years?

Foreign Secretary William Hague taking a relentlessly pro-Ukraine, anti-Russia position.

Ukraine crisis: William Hague warns Russia

William Hague: Russia faces ‘isolation’ over Ukraine – BBC News

Russian actions over Ukraine may create new cold war – William Hague

Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond taking a relentlessly pro-Ukraine, anti-Russia position.

Philip Hammond: Britain not ruling out providing ‘lethal force’ in Ukraine

Philip Hammond: ‘No let-up’ in pressure on Russia over Ukraine

Foreign Secretary denounces Russia’s continued illegal annexation of Crimea

Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson taking a relentlessly pro-Ukraine, anti-Russia position.

UK’s Johnson reassures Ukraine of support after Brexit vote

Boris Johnson demands Russia end its ‘illegal’ annexation of Crimea during a visit to Ukraine

UK will not compromise on sovereignty of Ukraine: Johnson

Ukrinform: Boris Johnson says Britain will continue to provide Ukraine with non-lethal military aid

The position of Prime Minister Theresa May has hardly altered from Cameron’s. Lately, the UK has even been ramping up its support of Ukraine –

United Kingdom Steps Up Support of Ukrainian Army Still Shelling Civilians

A big question must be – why? That’s something I’ll be having a look at in the next Truth Speaker article.

A Graham Newsletter (#32) The UK Ups Support for Ukraine, BBC Come After Me

This is a factual newsletter, lots of info, lets get right to it.

Ben Stimson was recently jailed in the UK for his participation in Donbass. The UK effectively use Ben as the fall guy to send out a statement: they are upping their support for Ukraine:

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/18/rank-injustice-hypocrisy-in-the-uk-the-case-of-ben-stimson-and-chris-garrett/

Shortly after, the UK update their travel advice for Ukraine, stating: “If you travel to eastern Ukraine to fight, or to assist others engaged in the conflict, your activities may amount to offences against UK terrorism or other legislation and you could be prosecuted on your return to the UK”.

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/22/update-uk-updates-ukraine-travel-advice/

The UK also announces the other day, that it’s stepping up military support to Ukraine: 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/21/united-kingdom-steps-up-support-of-ukrainian-army-still-shelling-civilians/

And, in this time, the UK’s propagada agency, the BBC have come for me: 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/22/exclusive-how-the-uk-are-trying-to-stop-my-work-full-story/

What do the BBC want? They want to do an interview with me, where I either state, or they make out that I stated, that I’m ‘returning to Donbass’, having done a hit on me as a ‘Russian propagandist, banned from Ukraine as a threat to national security’, etc.

Public outcry at the repression of a journalist deflected, by the BBC, onto ‘UK authorities stop Russian propagandist’. 

The UK have resorted to this now, because actually last September, UK ambassador Judith Gough stated, despite her opporbrium of my work that I hadn’t committed any offences in the UK, so they couldn’t touch me (although if Ukraine get me, they can do what they like).

Yet, things have clearly changed.  Ben Stimson hadn’t committed any offences in the UK, actually he hadn’t committed any offences anywhere given that he’d never fired a shot in anger, but they still got him.

So, they sent in the BBC to find something new to frame me with, in the light of Ben’s conviction, and precedent set. Would they jail me? Almost certainly no. Would they try to stop me leaving the country? They’d love to. 

By the way, you can read my recent article about Judith Gough, here:

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/22/uk-ambassador-judith-gough-having-a-gay-time-in-ukraine-while-war-in-donbass-goes-on/

And my recent reportage, from Moscow here:

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/20/my-visit-to-the-ukrainian-cultural-centre-in-moscow-special-reportage/

And a look at recent Donbass reportage here: 

https://thetruthspeaker.co/2017/07/17/my-recent-donbass-period-25-key-moments/

There’s a lot of reportage to come, but no longer in the UK will I write, or can I write about ‘reportage to come from Donbass, Crimea’. However, I’ll always tell the truth. I’m leaving the UK soon, to finish my documentary from Luxembourg, about Belval. After that, there will be reportage from Russia.

As ever, all my work is 100% supported by individual donations on crowdfunding, and I’m hugely grateful to anyone who helps keep my independent, objective journalism alive:

https://www.paypal.me/grahamwphillips

Update: UK Updates Ukraine Travel Advice

After the recent imprisoning of Ben Stimson in the UK, on terrorism charges, the UK has now updated its travel advice on the official gov.uk website – 

Summary (Eastern Ukraine) – if you travel to eastern Ukraine to fight, or to assist others engaged in the conflict, your activities may amount to offences against UK terrorism or other legislation and you could be prosecuted on your return to the UK

An ‘interesting’ development…