A public inquiry began yesterdy in Salisbury to examine the 2018 poisoning of Dawn Sturgess
It has heard she was the innocent victim "in the crossfire of an illegal and outrageous assassination attempt"
Sturgess' death was blamed on two Russian agents after she came into contact with the nerve agent Novichok
Novichok victim and former Russian spy Sergei Skripal says Vladimir Putin is behind the poisonings
The family of Dawn Sturgess has called for Putin to give evidence at the inquiry and look the "family in the eyes"
The nerve agent had been hidden inside a designer perfume bottle that held enough Novichok to kill thousands
Russia denies any involvement and has described the inquiry as a "circus"
Find out more about the inquiry in our Crime Next Door: Salisbury Poisonings podcast on BBC Sounds
The inquiry has just begun its second day of hearings.
As a reminder, you can click the Watch Live button at the top of this page to watch proceedings. The feed is on a 10-minute delay, for security reasons.
Stay tuned - we will bring you the key lines and analysis.
Today we expect to hear from Dawn's mother, Caroline Sturgess, who will give evidence to the public inquiry.
She will give what's described as a family "pen portrait" to outline the life of her daughter, who went on to make international headlines for tragic reasons. Mrs Sturgess is expected to talk about Dawn's journey from childhood to the devastation that hit the family when she died.
The inquiry is then due to hear from deputy chief constable of Wiltshire Police Paul Mills, whose career took a dramatic turn at the time of the poisonings.
The attack on the Skripals took place on Sunday 4 March, 2018. He was appointed to his role the following day, and became the overall commander for the operation to trace who was behind the poisoning.
Image source, Getty ImagesAhead of the inquiry John Glen, the Conservative MP for Salisbury and South Wiltshire, said it's "difficult to understand what more information can be provided" from the hearing.
Speaking on BBC Radio 4's Today Programme, Mr Glen added there's "some questions about what happened between March and June" - between the Skripal and Sturgess poisonings.
"This is about trying to bring some closure, as far as one can, in these tragic circumstances... but we know in essence what happened and we've known that for a long time," he said.
It is a matter for lawyers whether or not the Russian's accused of the killings should be charged with murder in absentia, he added.
Here is the sequence of events that led to this public inquiry.
In March 2018, Sergei and Yulia Skripal were poisoned with Novichok in Salisbury, effectively shutting down the city and sparking international outcry.
Then, as things were finally getting back to normal, Dawn Sturgess and her partner Charlie Rowley were exposed to the same nerve agent on 30 June 2018.
While Rowley survived, Sturgess passed away on 8 July 2018.
Yesterday, the inquiry into the death of Dawn Sturgess began, as it seeks to establish responsibility and any lessons that can be learned from the poisoning.
Sturgess died in 2018, after using a perfume bottle that contained the nerve agent Novichok.
Here's what was established in Salisbury's Guildhall on Monday:
Read our full article into the first day's proceedings for a more in depth look at the case.
Image source, FacebookWelcome to our live coverage of the second day of the public inquiry into the death of Wiltshire woman Dawn Sturgess.
Sturgess was killed six years ago in a poisoning blamed on Russian agents.
The inquiry will examine the circumstances behind the Novichok attack in Salisbury in 2018, and try to establish where responsibility lies and highlight any lessons.
Tuesday’s session will begin at 10:00 BST. You can watch the inquiry by pressing the Watch Live button at the top of this page.
The first day of the Dawn Sturgess Inquiry is over.
We heard from various lawyers who outlined what the inquiry will cover for the next few months - including prevention, preparedness, and response.
Many of them expressed their condolences to the family of Dawn Sturgess, before beginning statements.
For more on this story, you can listen to the Crime Next Door: The Salisbury Poisonings podcast, which will follow the inquiry as it develops, or read more in our explainer of what happened to Dawn Sturgess.
This page was edited by Emma Hallett, Chris Kelly, James Harness and Jamie Whitehead.
Your writers were Imogen James, Dawn Limbu, Adam Goldsmith with analysis from Dan O'Brien at the inquiry.
Today we heard the opening statements of the Dawn Sturgess Inquiry - kicking off the next few months that will examine her death and how it was handled.
A large part of today focussed on the earlier poisoning of the Skripals, and the men accused of the incident, in order to understand the background behind the death of Dawn Sturgess.
Here's the key points:
Image source, Crown CopyrightToday’s final barrister is the lawyer representing Sergei and Yulia Skripal, Andrew Deakin KC.
Deakin begins by saying that the pair offer their condolences to Dawn Sturgess and her family.
The lawyer then thanks the emergency services on the Skripals’ behalf, before setting out some of the facts around how they came to be “attacked” by Novichok.
“They suffered serious injuries as a result”, he notes.
Deakin says: “Sergei and Yulia keenly await the outcome of this inquiry, they look forward to better understanding the circumstances of the Salisbury attack… And to being able to move on with their lives.”
The barrister finishes up his brief statement, and with that the inquiry adjourns until 10:00 BST tomorrow morning.
Image source, Crown CopyrightThe inquiry has adjourned for the day, as the last of the opening statements have concluded.
Proceedings will resume tomorrow at 10:00 BST. Caroline Sturgess, Dawn's mother, will give evidence on day two of the inquiry.
Stay with us as we continue to bring you more updates and expert analysis.
Image source, Crown CopyrightBridget Dolan KC is next to speak. She represents the South Western Ambulance Service NHS Foundation Trust (Swaft).
Swaft is there "to be fully committed to your inquiry and to your terms of reference," she adds.
Dolan says they will be "open, constructive and honest" in the inquiry.
"We are acutely aware of the importance of this inquiry to Dawn's family," Dolan adds. She has spoken privately to Ms Sturgess' parents and apologises, but does so again in public.
"It's hard to imagine Sir, what it must feel like" for Ms Sturgess' family in the room now, Dolan says. "No family would want to be in a position to have to experience their loved one's death as the heart of a public inquiry."
"We do sincerely hope that you get all the answers that you want from this process."
In Amesbury, she says Swaft people continued to offer aid to Charlie Rowley despite having recognised the "extremely serious risk to themselves if as they correctly suspected Charlie had been exposed to military grade chemical weapon," she adds.
Since then, Swaft has reflected and reviewed the events, Dolan adds.
"Swaft is not complacent."
Dawn Limbu
Live reporter
Image source, Crown CopyrightJohn Beggs KC, counsel for the Wiltshire Police chief, speaks now. He begins his statement by repeating his sincere condolences to Dawn's family.
He outlines how this public inquiry will hear about Wiltshire Police's response to the the two incidents in Salisbury and Amesbury and the lessons learned.
Mr Beggs says Wiltshire Police has engaged in a "full debrief", facilitated by the College of Policing, to ensure they are best prepared to respond to a similar event in the future. He added that the force is "committed to giving the inquiry full assistance".
Image source, Crown CopyrightWrapping up, McGahey tackles the issue of “hindsight”.
The barrister acknowledges that inquiries inevitably benefit from hindsight, but she stresses that this should not “unduly colour” the inquiry’s assessment of what steps could and should have been taken.
She finishes: “The government has done, and the government will continue to do everything it can to assist this inquiry and to help the family have as many answers as it can.”
Cathryn McGahey KC, counsel for the government, speaks now.
She says "the government believes that Ms Sturgess was the innocent and unintended victim of a cruel, deliberate and reckless attack on Sergei Skripal."
The government believes the attack was undertaken by the Russians, and President Putin authorised it, she re-iterates.
"Immediately after the attack, the government maintained an open mind as to who was responsible," McGahey says.
She says however, suspicions were derived as Skripal was a former Russian spy, and that Novichok is known to have been delivered by the Soviet Union.
"Within a week... the evidence led the then prime minister... to make the statement in parliament" - the statement blamed the Russian's for the poisoning.
She says in April 2018, the then national security adviser, Mark Sedwill, wrote to the NATO secretary general. In it, he identified three reasons why the UK thought Russia was responsible.
Sedwill outlines these as Novichok being something used and developed by the Russian federation, the country's record of state-sponsored assassination, and thirdly the target being a former Russian intelligence officer.
"There is no plausible alternative explanation," other than Russia being responsible, she cites Sedwill as writing.
Dawn Limbu
Live reporter
Ms Giovanetti continues to explain that the investigation into the poisonings in Salisbury and Amesbury in 2018 have resulted in charges against three suspects. They are all Russian nationals, linked to Russia's military intelligence agency known as the GRU.
The Russian suspects’ aliases are Alexander Petrov, Ruslan Boshirov and Sergey Fedotov. Their real identities are believed to be Anatoliy Chepiga, Alexander Mishkin and Denis Sergeev respectively.
Ms Giovanetti says the CTP considers that these three individuals are "responsible for death of Dawn and Charlie's poisoning".
On 19th July 2018, the CPS authorised charges against Alexander Petrov and Ruslan Boshirov for conspiracy to murder Sergei Skripal, three counts of attempted murder in respect of Sergei and Yulia Skripal and Nick Bailey, two counts of grievous bodily harm with intent, in respect of Yulia Skripal and Nick Bailey, and one count of use or possession of a chemical weapon.
Ms Giovanetti says: "CTP considers that these three individuals are responsible for the subsequent death of Dawn Sturgess and the poisoning of her partner, Charlie Rowley.
"CTP will continue to work closely with partners, including the CPS, to hold these individuals accountable for their actions."
Giovannetti moves on to discuss the oral evidence that Operation Verbasco received.
The lawyer explains how her team received evidence from three different operations; one each for the poisonings of Sergei Skripal and another that began as a covert operation, and looked more broadly into who was responsible for the poisonings in Salisbury in 2018.
Then lists some of the witnesses that are due to give evidence on these operations.
One of these is commander Dominic Murphy, who she says will address matters including the poisoning of the Skripals, as well as how the response to this event was handled.
He will also address how Charlie was able to get hold of the bottle contaminated with Novichok, and the subsequent movements he made with Dawn before she fell ill.
We will also hear from Det Ch Insp Philip Murphy, who “will explain the circumstances and events around the poisoning of Dawn Sturgess and Charlie Rowley".
Giovannetti says we will also hear from an expert on how the search for Novichok developed as news began to unfold of Dawn Sturgess’ poisoning.
We won’t be able to hear every single detail about these operations, though.
The barrister notes: “It is very likely that topics will arise in respect of which the witness might wish to give a fuller explanation or a more detailed explanation, but is unable to do so in open session because of the need to protect the public."
Image source, Crown CopyrightLisa Giovannetti KC is first to speak after the break. She represents the Commissioner of Police of the Metropolis.
They handle counter terrorism policing, who are closely involved into the investigations into the Novichok poisonings.
She begins by "reiterating the sincere condolences of both forces and all the officers involved" to the family of Dawn Sturgess.
She says they are "determined to bring to justice those responsible for her death".
Since the beginning of this inquiry on 18 November 2021, the operation has been expanded to "more than 40 officers" to get to this point.
The scale of the investigation into the poisonings is "difficult to overstate" she says, as it involves cooperation between police and partners "across government, and extensive enquiries both in the UK and internationally".
She says they have reviewed "documents with care" in preparation, but not all material has been put into open proceedings as it is too "sensitive".
Giovannetti says they have made as many documents open as possible.
The inquiry is back after a short break.
Keep following this page for more updates. You can continue to watch live at the top of this page.
Mansfield turns to the immediate medical response to Dawn Sturgess falling ill, and addresses some of the lessons to be learned from this.
He says “Important practice was not shared”, after doctors were reportedly prohibited from speaking about their response to Skripal’s poisoning.
Mansfield accepts that Dawn’s poisoning was “unsurvivable” and adds, “the responsibility for that lies with the Russian state and Mr Putin”, he says.
But, he says that this inquiry’s aim is to learn from the emergency response to the crisis in Salisbury.
“The family are eager to ensure that Dawn’s death was not in vain,” he continues.
The barrister says strong public interest in exposing any failings in emergency response.
“Hundreds if not thousands of people were exposed to a grave risk,” he says.
Thirdly, attacks such as this “are likely to happen again”, and says the fact that these incidents will be rare and unusual is exactly why emergency professionals should prepare and “take a precautionary approach”.
“Dawn and her family and the wider public are entitled to that.”
Mansfield continues to describe how Sturgess had no records suggesting that she was an illicit drug user, while Charlie Rowley confirmed at the time that she didn’t take drugs.
He says, therefore, that it is a concern that nerve agent poisoning was not suspected.
“The police decided that Dawn and Charlie’s condition was a quite straightforward overdose,” he observes.
He says this decision was made “on the basis that these were two well-known drug addicts”, but Mansfield dismisses this and points to Dawn’s clean record.
“Wiltshire Police have now accepted that Dawn should not have been characterised in this way,” he says.He says the police have apologised and the family accept this apology.
The inquiry has now paused for a short break - it will be back shortly.
As a reminder, the feed is on a ten minute delay for security reasons, so we - along with you - are watching it with a lag.