A man who stabbed his ex-girlfriend in a "brutal attack" has been jailed for 16 years for attempted murder.
Jack Darrion Sutton, 24, admitted stabbing his former partner multiple times in her face, arms and chest in Scarborough last December.
After attacking the 23-year-old, Sutton fled before eventually being found in a garden on Mount View Avenue.
Det Ch Insp Graeme Wright said Sutton's ex-partner was lucky she had "escaped with her life".
Leeds Crown Court was told the attack happened on Londesborough Road on the evening of 10 December 2021.
Officers were called and they managed to stem the woman's bleeding before she was taken to hospital for emergency treatment.
As well as pleading guilty to attempted murder, Sutton, of Mount View Avenue, Scarborough, admitted possession of an offensive weapon and was given an extended licence period of four years.
Det Ch Insp Wright said: "This was an extremely brutal and frightening attack in which the victim was very lucky to escape with her life.
"Sutton now accepts his actions that night were reprehensible and could have resulted in fatal injuries to the brave victim."
He called it "a mealy mouthed apology when the cameras roll, a vicious attack on those who tell the truth as soon as the cameras are off. Slander decent people in a private room, let the slander spread without the backbone to repeat it in public."
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:36
Tory MP on PM's 'pantomime' meeting
His comments centred on reports that Mr Johnson had criticised the archbishop, Justin Welby, at a closed-door meeting of Tory backbenchers hours after his Commons appearance.
Sir Keir also pointed out that the prime minister's spin doctor Allegra Stratton, COVID adviser Professor Neil Ferguson and health secretary Matt Hancock had all resigned over their actions during the pandemic.
He asked: "Why does the prime minister think everybody else's actions have consequences except his own?"
More on Boris Johnson
Related Topics:
Mr Johnson hit back by accusing Sir Keir of being "in some kind of Doctor Who time warp" and describing him as a "Corbynista in a smart Islington suit".
Sir Keir said the prime minister had attacked BBC coverage of the invasion of Ukraine - but Mr Johnson said this claim showed that the Labour leader was "out of his tiny mind".
It was the second day of pressure from MPs on Mr Johnson over partygate, after he apologised to the Commons on Tuesday following his fine last week for breaking lockdown rules.
Image:Boris Johnson said Sir Keir Starmer was a 'Corbynista in a smart Islington suit'
Sir Keir said: "Yesterday's apology lasted for as long as the prime minister thought necessary to be clipped for the news.
"But once the cameras were off the prime minister went to see his backbenchers and he was back to blaming everyone else.
"He even said that the Archbishop of Canterbury had not been critical enough of Putin.
"In fact, the archbishop called Putin's war an act of great evil."
Mr Johnson faced fresh calls to resign from other opposition MPs including the SNP's Richard Thomson, who was told to withdraw his description of Mr Johnson as a "Pinocchio prime minister" whom the public want to see "pack his bags and go".
Plaid Cymru's Westminster leader Liz Saville Roberts asked Mr Johnson whether he will support a law banning "lying in politics".
He replied: "It is well known that the rules of this House demand that we tell the truth in this House and that's what we try to do."
Sky's deputy political editor Sam Coates said the prime minister was trying to move on from partygate but that Sir Keir "clearly got under the prime minister's skin".
"Keir Starmer was on better form and Boris Johnson arguably slightly tetchier form than I can remember for some time," he said.
"Keir Starmer did what he doesn't always do which is to have quite specific questions which clearly got under the prime minister's skin."
On Thursday the prime minister will face a vote on a motion tabled by opposition parties calling for parliament's privileges committee to investigate whether he misled the House with his initial claims that no rules were broken during partygate - though Mr Johnson himself will be in India.
The wording of the motion - which will need to attract the support of some Tory MPs to succeed - orders that the investigation cannot begin until police inquiries into partygate have concluded.
What is the Privileges Committee and will it investigate Boris Johnson?
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer has tabled a motion, backed by other opposition parties, calling for the PM to be investigated for misleading Parliament.
A debate and vote will be held on Thursday, despite Boris Johnson due to be on an official visit to India at that time.
The motion calls for the prime minister to be investigated by the Committee of Privileges - a panel of seven MPs, which has a Conservative majority but is chaired by Labour's Chris Bryant.
The committee has responsibility for investigating issues relating to contempt of parliament.
It has the power to request reports and documents, meaning they could in theory ask Downing Street for the final report by senior civil servant Sue Gray, or any photos taken by the PM's official photographer.
However, because the Conservatives have a majority of 75 it would require a huge rebellion for the motion to be passed by MPs.
Currently, there are not thought to be enough Tory MPs ready to turn on Mr Johnson for this to be likely.
But Labour clearly believes there is sufficient political capital to be gained for them to push ahead with it anyway.
Sir Keir said: “The British public know that the rules were broken in Downing Street.
"Voting to say otherwise won’t persuade the public that everything was fine but will further damage the reputation of any Conservative MP who is happy to say it was one rule for the public and another for this government."
Boris Johnson will order his MPs tomorrow to block an investigation into claims that he misled parliament over lockdown-breaking parties in Downing Street.
The prime minister offered a “wholehearted apology” yesterday after being issued with a fixed-penalty notice for attending a gathering in the cabinet room to celebrate his 56th birthday.
Sponsored
Johnson insisted, however, that he had not misled the Commons when he said last December that Covid rules were followed at all times in Downing Street. “It did not occur to me, then or subsequently, that a gathering in the cabinet room just before a vital meeting on Covid strategy could amount to a breach of the rules,” he said.
Johnson apologises to Commons over partygate fines
At a meeting of Tory MPs last night, Johnson again expressed “genuine regret” but
Former prime minister Theresa May has criticised the government's plan to send some asylum seekers to Rwanda.
Mrs May told the Commons she did not support the policy due to her concerns over whether it met standards on "legality, practicality and efficacy".
Home Secretary Priti Patel said the scheme would be "a major blow to people smugglers" and would stop people dying on dangerous routes to the UK.
The policy has been criticised by charities and opposition parties.
Mrs May, who also served as home secretary overseeing the UK's immigration policy between 2010 and 2016, asked if the trial scheme would lead to an increase in trafficking of women and children - after reports that only single men making illegal crossings to the UK would be sent to Rwanda.
Under the scheme - announced last week - people deemed to have entered the UK unlawfully will be flown to the African country, where they would be processed, and if successful, would have long-term accommodation in the African country.
This video can not be played
To play this video you need to enable JavaScript in your browser.
Responding to a statement on migration by Ms Patel, Mrs May said: "From what I have heard and seen so far of this policy, I do not support the removal to Rwanda policy on the grounds of legality, practicality and efficacy.
"If it is the case that families will not be broken up, does she not believe and where is her evidence that this will not simply lead to an increase in the trafficking of women and children?"
But Ms Patel defended the policy saying: "Change is needed because people are dying attempting to come to the UK."
She told MPs: "This partnership is the type of international co-operation needed to make the global immigration system fairer, keep people safe, and give them opportunities to flourish.
"This will help break the people smugglers' business model and prevent the loss of life, while ensuring protection for those who are genuinely vulnerable."
How would the Rwanda trial scheme work?
According to a memorandum of understanding between the two governments, the UK would screen asylum seekers "without delay" after their arrival in the UK and then provide Rwanda with basic details of each person it wanted to transfer
Rwanda would have to approve all requests before they were transferred, and the arrangement would last for five years.
After arriving in Rwanda each asylum seeker would be given accommodation and support and would be free to come and go from their accommodation at all times, the memorandum says.
If successfully processed, the asylum seeker would be offered long-term accommodation in the African country
The UK would also resettle "a portion of Rwanda's most vulnerable refugees" in the UK.
Shadow home secretary Yvette Cooper condemned the policy as "unworkable, unethical and extortionate" and said it was designed to "distract from years of failure" to tackle illegal immigration.
Ms Cooper highlighted the lack of information from the home secretary on costs.
She said: "Will she admit the £120m she has announced doesn't pay for a single person to be transferred.
"She hasn't actually got an agreement on the price for each person. In fact, the £120m is the eyewatering price the Home Office is paying just for a press release."
The home secretary added that some of the tone used to describe the UK's partnership with Rwanda was "quite xenophobic".
Ms Patel personally pushed through the scheme with a rare "ministerial direction", meaning she has taken responsibility for it.
She had to personally approve the scheme after her officials voiced concern over the lack of evidence to demonstrate value for money.
It is only the second time in 30 years that the power has been used.
Boris Johnson will face a Commons vote on whether claims he misled MPs over partygate should be investigated.
Speaker Sir Lindsay Hoyle granted a request from opposition MPs for a vote which will be held on Thursday - and which Sky News understands will seek to refer Mr Johnson for investigation by the privileges committee.
The Speaker's ruling came as Mr Johnson prepared to face Parliament for the first time since he was fined last week for attending a gathering to mark his birthday in June 2020, in breach of his own government's social distancing rules.
Image:The Labour leader will table a motion for debate
The debate on Thursday will centre on the question of whether Mr Johnson misled MPs when he initially said, after claims about parties in Downing Street first surfaced, that no rules were broken.
Advertisement
It will take place at a time when the prime minister himself is scheduled to be away on a visit to India.
Sir Lindsay told MPs it was not for him "to determine whether or not the prime minister has committed a contempt" but rather whether there was "an arguable case to be examined".
More from Politics
The Speaker ruled, having considered the issue, that Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer could table a motion for debate.
Labour sources say the committee has wide-ranging powers which may mean it could ask for civil servant Sue Gray's yet-to-be-published report into the affair as well as photos, and that it has the power to recommend sanctions.
But for the investigation to take place, opposition parties will have to persuade Tories disquieted by the PM's behaviour to join them in voting for the probe.
Liberal Democrat leader Sir Ed Davey urged Conservatives to "do their patriotic duty" in Thursday's vote while Labour's shadow attorney general Emily Thornberry earlier told Sky News that Tory MPs should "look at their consciences".
However, one backbench critic of the PM, Tobias Ellwood, appeared to rebuff the notion of cooperating with opposition parties, telling Sky News the matter should be kept "in house".
Police have been investigating 12 events in Downing Street and Whitehall during 2020 and 2021 when lockdown rules were alleged to have been broken and so far more than 50 fines have been announced.
Downing Street is understood to be braced for more fines for the PM and reports over the weekend painted him as the instigator of leaving drinks for a staff member in November 2020 - another of the events being investigated.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
A woman has died following a fall from a block of flats in Bristol this morning (Tuesday, April 19), police have confirmed.
The emergency services were called by a member of the public at around 12.30am, and police found a woman lying at the bottom of Lansdowne Court in Easton. Police officers carried out first aid to no avail, and she was pronounced dead at the scene.
A spokesperson for Avon and Somerset police said a man has been arrested on suspicion of murder, and an investigation is underway. Police also said they will be carrying out extra patrols in the area, and pictures from the scene show a cordon is in place.
We will bring you the latest updates on this tragic incident, as and when we get them, in an updates below. This is a live blog - scroll down for the latest:
It comes as Police Scotland is currently assessing a complaint after footage showed her apparently breaching Scotland’s Covid face mask law on the council election campaign trail.
A video posted on social media appears to show Scotland’s First Minister not wearing a mask during a visit to a barber’s in East Kilbride, South Lanarkshire, on Saturday.
The event took place before the legal requirement to wear a face covering was scrapped from Easter Monday onwards.
The National Clinical Director Jason Leitch has been criticised for defending Nicola Sturgeon after she was pictured in a barber shop without a face mask.
Speaking on BBC Good Morning Scotland this morning, Professor Leitch said the First Minister’s actions were “actually what we’re asking people to do”, adding the First Minister realised within “a matter of seconds” she had to put a face covering on.
Defending Ms Sturgeon, Professor Leitch said: “’I’ve done that too, I’ve got up from the dinner table quite recently out for a meal, gone to the bathroom and halfway there you realise, ‘Oh, I need to put my face covering on’.
"Because it does still feel like a slightly odd thing to have to do. My understanding of that incident – I haven’t spoken to the First Minister today, I imagine I’ll speak to her later – my understanding is it was a matter of seconds, she realises the place is crowded, puts her face covering on, which is actually what we’re asking people to do.
"The guidance says if you are in a crowded area, inadvertently or deliberately, then put a face covering on and that will protect you and others.”
Criticising Professor Leitch, The Scottish Conservatives have said his remarks were “inappropriate” for him to make as a civil servant.
Scottish Conservative MSP, Craig Hoy said: "It is inappropriate for a civil servant to defend Nicola Sturgeon in this way. These kinds of questions should be left to politicians to answer. Instead, SNP ministers are in hiding and Jason Leith is blurring the lines between ministers and government officials.”
The Scottish Conservatives also accused Professor Leitch of “misrepresenting” the Covid laws that were in place at the time.
Mr Hoy added: "Face mask use was still in law until today but Mr Leitch backed up Nicola Sturgeon's excuse that she only had to put the mask on when in a crowded space.
"If the SNP had listened to us weeks ago and changed face mask rules from law to guidance, he and Nicola Sturgeon would have been correct.
"But they failed to do this and Mr Leitch should not be confusing the public, or doing the SNP's job for them, by trying to defend Nicola Sturgeon in this manner."
An SNP spokesman said: “The First Minister was invited into the barber’s during an outdoor visit on the street.
“Within a few seconds, she realised she hadn’t put her mask back on and immediately put it on.”
Those who breach the face covering rules can face a fine of up to £60.
A message from the Editor:
Thank you for reading this article. We're more reliant on your support than ever as the shift in consumer habits brought about by coronavirus impacts our advertisers.
If you haven't already, please consider supporting our trusted, fact-checked journalism by taking out a digital subscription.
