Man Accused of Starmer Arson Attacks Claimed No Knowledge of Prime Minister, Court Hears

Man accused of Starmer arson attacks – In a recent court hearing, a 22-year-old Ukrainian national was questioned about his alleged role in a series of arson incidents targeting properties linked to Sir Keir Starmer. The Old Bailey heard during the proceedings that the accused, Roman Lavrynovych, had no prior awareness of Starmer’s position as the UK’s prime minister. The case involves three individuals: Lavrynovych, 22, and Petro Pochynok, 35, as well as Stanislav Carpiuc, a 27-year-old Ukrainian-born Romanian resident. All three are charged with conspiring to damage property by fire, though they have denied the accusations.

Accused Individuals and Their Alleged Involvement

The defendants, who reside in London, are accused of coordinating attacks on two properties and a vehicle connected to the Labour Party leader. Lavrynovych, from Lewisham in south-east London, is specifically charged with setting fires that endangered lives at two addresses in north London. His legal team has argued that he acted under pressure, citing his financial desperation and a sense of being threatened by the orchestrator of the plot. Meanwhile, Pochynok, based in Islington, and Carpiuc, from Romford, have yet to provide comments during their police interviews.

Police Interview Details

During a police interrogation on 13 May 2025, Lavrynovych was repeatedly asked whether he recognized Sir Keir Starmer as the UK’s prime minister. His responses were unequivocal: he claimed to have no knowledge of Starmer’s identity or his political role. The detective questioned him about the significance of the attacks, noting that Starmer’s residence was in Kentish Town. Lavrynovych’s answers were firm, and he admitted to not harboring any grudges against the prime minister or the Labour Party. When asked if he had an interest in British politics, he replied with hesitation, stating he was “not really” involved.

“I just want to ask you about our prime minister. Do you know who that is?” the detective inquired. “No,” Lavrynovych responded. “You don’t know who the UK prime minister is? Alright, have you heard of Keir Starmer?” “No,” he repeated. “Okay so Keir Starmer’s our current prime minister, he lives in London. Do you have any thoughts about Keir Starmer and the Labour Party and the government in general?” “No, not at all,” he said. “Not really,” he added when asked if he had any interest in British politics.

Despite his denials, Lavrynovych’s statements were corroborated by digital evidence. A transcript of his interview, presented to jurors, revealed his confusion about the targets of the attacks. He also mentioned being offered payment by a Russian-speaking Telegram user known as “El Money” for setting fires at the specified locations. According to his account, the contact had instructed him to check for CCTV cameras and provide updates on the progress of the arson. Lavrynovych stated he trusted the individual, who had promised financial compensation, but the payment had not yet been received.

Timeline of the Arson Attacks

The first incident occurred on 8 May 2025, when a Toyota car previously owned by Starmer was found ablaze on a street in Kentish Town, where the prime minister had once lived. Three days later, a fire broke out at flats in Islington, a neighboring area, where Starmer had resided before. On 12 May 2025, the final attack targeted the front entrance of Starmer’s current home in the same Kentish Town neighborhood, which was rented out to his sister-in-law. The timing of these events, all falling within the period from 1 April to 13 May 2025, has raised questions about the perpetrators’ familiarity with the prime minister’s movements and residences.

Threats and Motives

Lavrynovych described feeling intimidated after the last fire. He told investigators that “El Money” had threatened him, claiming to know his address and insisting he complete the task. The defendant emphasized that he had been coerced into the actions, with his grandmother living at the same location as his home. This raised concerns that the attacker might have endangered his family. He also noted that his involvement was limited to the arson plan, asserting he did not personally set any fires at the addresses. However, the prosecution argues that the evidence, including his phone data, links him directly to the incidents.

Defense and Evidence

Lavrynovych’s defense hinged on his lack of knowledge about the political figures he targeted. He claimed to have been misled by “El Money,” who had promised money in exchange for carrying out the attacks. The defendant detailed how he was instructed to monitor the properties and report back, but he insisted he had no personal motive. He maintained his story even after being shown data from his mobile device that connected him to the locations of the fires. The prosecution, however, highlighted that the evidence suggested he was more than just a passive participant.

Coordinated Attacks and Additional Charges

According to the trial’s timeline, the three accused were working in tandem, with Lavrynovych being recruited by a Russian-speaking user on Telegram. The accused also faced charges of conspiring with others to damage property by fire, a broader accusation that includes potential unknown accomplices. Lavrynovych’s account of being paid to check for CCTV and follow instructions was presented as part of his defense, but the prosecution has challenged the claim, suggesting it was a cover for his involvement in the actual acts of arson.

After the final fire, “El Money” reportedly sent Lavrynovych a message expressing satisfaction with the attack, stating that he had targeted “a very high-ranking person in Britain” and offering to send money to help him leave the city. Lavrynovych was arrested shortly after this message, during which he denied any role in the incidents. His claim that he was at home on the dates of the first two attacks and visiting his friend Petro Pochynok in Camden on the third day was central to his defense. However, the evidence contradicted this, as it showed his presence at the locations in question.

Continuation of the Trial

The trial, which has been ongoing, continues to explore the motivations and connections behind the arson attacks. While Lavrynovych’s statements paint a picture of confusion and coercion, the prosecution maintains that the defendants’ actions were deliberate. Jurors are now tasked with evaluating the credibility of Lavrynovych’s testimony, the digital evidence linking him to the attacks, and the potential involvement of other parties. The case remains a focal point in the broader investigation into politically motivated arson in London, with the courtroom expected to hear further testimonies in the coming weeks.