British Nationals Murdered Abroad: Support for Families

Josh Newbury Excerpts

Monday 12th May 2025 Commons Chamber

[Mr Reynolds]

I completely agree with the hon. Gentleman. I have spoken to a number of families across the country who say that they found out via social media or via the press that their son or parent had been murdered. That is not good enough—it is not acceptable.

I want to start with language barriers, which are among the first and most distressing problems that families face. The Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office offers families a list of translators, but those lists often come without crucial context, such as information about whether the translators are legally certified, whether they are experienced with criminal or judicial terminology, whether they are available on short notice, and how much they cost. In a moment of extreme vulnerability, families are forced into a commercial marketplace with no quality control and no guidance. Many simply cannot afford translation fees, which can run into thousands of pounds, yet they are handed copies of important documents—autopsy reports, court transcripts, police records, judgments—in a language they do not speak. That is an active barrier to justice. Let us consider for a moment what that means in practice: a grieving mother receiving her child’s post-mortem report, unable to understand a word of it, or a widower left alone to guess at the meaning of complex judgment findings, not even sure whether justice has been served or denied, because they cannot read the verdict.

Then we must confront the issue of distance. In many cases, trials take place thousands of miles away. Families may be notified of court proceedings at short notice and are often given no logistical or financial support to attend. The cost of flights, accommodation, meals and unpaid leave from work quickly adds up. For many, it becomes an impossible choice: deplete their savings to try to attend, or stay at home and risk missing their one chance to see justice carried out, to hear what happened or to look the accused in the eye. The Government do not provide any funding for families to attend foreign trials, even when the court’s findings could have a direct impact on a coroner’s inquest here in the UK. This is not about luxury; it is about basic fairness. No bereaved family should be priced out of justice because a killing happened beyond our borders.

Add to that the challenges of cultural and legal complexities, and it is easy to see why families feel so lost. Legal systems vary from country to country. Some are adversarial like ours; others are not. Some permit victims’ families to play an active role; others do not. The length of proceedings, the level of evidence required and the appeal process all differ, yet families are given little to no explanation by the Government. They are often told to find a lawyer abroad, but the list provided comes with little guidance. There is no indication whether those lawyers speak English, specialise in murder, understand victim support or are familiar with working alongside British families. All the while, in the UK, the families are left with no legal advice from someone who specialises in overseas homicide cases.

Time and again, however, the most frustrating aspect is communication failures, which the hon. Member for Strangford (Jim Shannon) mentioned. Families describe being left in the dark about the most basic details of the case. Trial dates come and go without notice. Hearings are adjourned with no explanation. Key developments, such as the release of a suspect or even a final verdict, are learned of through the media, social media or word of mouth, rather than through official channels. That is unacceptable. Families are not asking for the world; they are asking for regular updates, clear communication and transparency, so that they are not blindsided by crucial developments in the pursuit of justice for their loved one.

[Josh Newbury (Cannock Chase) (Lab)]

Some aspects of the cases that the hon. Gentleman is eloquently describing are sadly very similar to those in the case of Rob Spray, from my Cannock Chase constituency, who died suddenly in Bulgaria in 2019. Rob’s case is about to be heard at inquest, so I will not comment on the legal aspects, but I can say that his family were left in the dark by the Bulgarian authorities and, sadly, by the Foreign Office. They had very little guidance, even on how to bring Rob’s body back to the UK, and they had to resort to a translation app to decipher Rob’s autopsy after they were told that they would have to wait six months for an official translation. That all deepened their grief and frustration at the worst possible time. The worst part of all is that Rob’s mom sadly passed away not knowing what happened to her son.

I will do everything I can to help Rob’s family get the answers that they have waited so long to get, and I know that the hon. Gentleman will continue to campaign on this. Does he agree that we need to make sure that bereaved families like the Sprays get the full support of the British Government, so that they can get the closure that they need and deserve?

[Mr Reynolds]

I thank the hon. Gentleman for his intervention, and for talking about Rob and his family. It is really important that the Government step up and support families, where they need it. Families need consistent advice, and to know that they have someone to turn to.

That brings me on nicely to my next point, which is about the consistency of support for families through consular services. Some describe consular services overseas as being provided by really positive, empathetic individuals who go out of their way to help, but far too many tell me about being passed from person to person, receiving contradictory advice, having emails ignored and being made to feel more like a burden than a bereaved family in need of care. The inconsistency is one of the crucial failings, because there is no statutory duty on the Government to provide a minimum standard of support to families in such circumstances. The level of help depends on the consulate involved, which official picks up the phone, and which country the incident occurs in. It is a passport lottery.

I want to mention some real people and highlight how they feel they have been failed. Eve Henderson’s husband Roderick was killed in France in 1997. She encountered immediate language barriers and a completely different judicial process that no one explained to her and no one helped her navigate.

Brian Chandler’s grandson Liam was killed in Greece in 2006. He was pushed from a fourth-floor balcony by his own father, a British national. The perpetrator admitted what he had done, yet the Greek court found him not guilty because of a psychiatric episode. For Liam’s family, the experience of sitting through the trial in a foreign language and trying to understand the complex legal arguments with no help was traumatic and bewildering. The fact that the case involved a British perpetrator makes it all the more difficult to understand why British authorities provided no support.

Brenda’s brother Howard was killed in Australia in 1999. She faced an enormous barrier of distance. Attending the trial meant significant cost, time off work and personal sacrifice. No financial assistance or practical help was offered. She had to choose between justice and affordability—an impossible choice that no grieving family should ever have to make.

Alyssa’s sister Vanessa was killed in Thailand in 2004. Alyssa faced a perfect storm of challenges: the language barrier, cultural differences, geographical distance and an unfamiliar legal system. She had no understanding of how Thai courts operated and no guidance on how to follow proceedings, and it quickly became a nightmare. Those are not isolated incidents; they are emblematic of a broken and inconsistent system.

--- Later in debate ---

[Alex Davies-Jones]

The hon. Gentleman makes a valid point. It should be the appropriate protocol for the police to be informed first of an incident in a country, with the families informed by the police in that country or by the police in our country via Interpol, as I said. But, in today’s modern age, sadly that is not always the case. It is not fair to the families that they find out second or third hand. An appropriate protocol should be in place. That should be how it happens. Sadly, we know that is not always the case.

The Osman family did not receive, and did not know that they could receive, a trained family liaison officer in Wales, and they were largely ignored by Spanish police. When they visited Spain shortly afterwards, they had to describe the situation on a mobile phone using Google Translate—we have heard that about similar cases—and there was extensive miscommunication throughout the ordeal between the family and external authorities, costing valuable investigation time and prolonging their agony.

There were many other issues with obtaining Nathan’s case file and coroner’s report, which the family believe contain a number of discrepancies. No one should have to endure what they went through. Losing a young family member in such horrific circumstances is a pain that few of us can truly understand, and they were retraumatised through various errors and miscommunications.

In the pictures and videos shared with my team by the family, it is easy to see what a dedicated father Nathan was to his young children and how much he is still loved and missed every day. I thank Alannah, Lee, Liz and Jonathan for sharing Nathan’s story with me, and I thank hon. Members for sharing their stories with me this evening. I am sure the whole House will join me in sharing all our condolences with everyone impacted.

[Josh Newbury]

I thank the Minister for the open and sensitive way in which she is responding to the debate and for sharing the experiences of the family of her constituent Nathan. I am familiar with that case. She heard me explain the contact that I am having with the family of Rob Spray in my constituency. Would she be willing to meet me and the family, when the time is right for them, to see what could be done to get them the answers they so desperately want?

[Alex Davies-Jones]

I am grateful to my hon. Friend for raising the Sprays’ experience. It is their lived experience and the experiences of other bereaved families that fuel me and give me that information to conduct my role as the victims Minister. I wholeheartedly welcome that correspondence and information.

In addition to the FCDO support that I have set out, the Homicide Service is commissioned by the Ministry of Justice to provide specialist practical, emotional, peer and advocacy support to families after a murder, whether it happened here or abroad. For homicides that occur overseas, that includes funding to contribute to the cost of repatriation to the UK, for the family to travel to the country in question, and for the interpretation and translation of documents, among other services. Crucially, this support is tailored to each family’s circumstances and is available for as long as it is needed, so that families are not left to navigate these challenges alone.