Skip to main content

WorldNews

RAF Fairford arrests: what police found in the vans and what remains unknown

Five men remain under investigation after their release on bail. Police have not established what the petrol was for or whether a foreign state was involved.

World Desk · The Wells Post

4 min readComments

Three vans sit behind a police cordon as bomb-disposal specialists examine them near RAF Fairford.

British counterterrorism police said Tuesday, Sept. 29, that they found no improvised explosive devices in three vans examined after five men were arrested near RAF Fairford, a U.S.-run air base in the United Kingdom. They did recover petrol. The men have been released on bail, and police have not said what the fuel was for.

The finding answers one urgent question raised by the operation, but not whether the men intended an attack. They remain under investigation after arrests on suspicion of explosives and terrorism offenses. No charges are reported in the available coverage.

The arrests followed reports of suspicious vehicles near the base in Gloucestershire, England, on Sunday, Sept. 27. As our earlier account of the response described, about 85 households were evacuated while Army bomb disposal specialists examined vehicles, a precaution police documented.

What police found in the vans

The latest police update says forensic and other examinations of the three vans found no improvised explosive devices. Officers recovered an unspecified quantity of petrol. Their public account does not say how much was found or why it was there.

The petrol is a physical finding; an alleged intended use is not. Police have offered no public account of what the five men planned to do, if anything. Nor have they said that finding fuel establishes an explosives offense or a plan to attack the base.

RAF Fairford is owned by the United Kingdom and used by U.S. forces, including bombers during the war with Iran, The Associated Press reported. The base’s role does not, by itself, establish why the men were nearby or whether another country was involved.

The examination had immediate consequences for residents. Police cordoned off the vehicles, and people in about 85 nearby households were told to leave while Army specialists assessed the scene. The later finding that the vans held no improvised explosive devices does not erase that disruption, but it changes what can be said about the physical evidence.

What is known about the five men

Police received an initial report about vehicles near the base at 12:45 a.m. on Sept. 27. The men were arrested in Whelford, near RAF Fairford. Police now say their response drew on several pieces of information, including a member of the public’s report of suspicious vehicles; they have not said that one call alone drove the operation.

Police cited the Explosives Act as one basis for the arrests. They also suspected the men of preparing an act of terrorism, an offense covered by Section 5 of the Terrorism Act. Those suspicions are not findings that an attack was planned. The five men were in their 20s.

Officers released all five on Monday, Sept. 28, after interviews and other inquiries. Laurence Taylor, the head of Counter Terrorism Policing, said they remained under investigation and were subject to strict bail conditions. Police have not specified those conditions publicly.

Free newsletter

Get the morning briefing

Start each day with the stories that matter and why — a short, free email from our newsroom.

Free. One email a day, one-click unsubscribe. See our privacy policy.

Taylor said releasing the men was an investigative decision made with public safety and police powers in mind. Bail does not mean the investigation has ended, just as arrest on suspicion does not prove an offense. No charges against the men are reported in the available coverage.

Police have not publicly set out what the men were doing near the base or the evidence behind the suspicion that they were preparing a terrorist act. Whether the petrol has any connection to an offense also remains unanswered in their public account.

U.S. President Donald Trump said he was surprised by the bail decision and suggested Iran might have been involved. Secretary of State Marco Rubio said the case “clearly involves the hands of a foreign actor,” The Associated Press reported. Rubio did not identify a country or provide supporting details in the reported interview.

British investigators have not publicly reached that conclusion. Counter Terrorism Policing says it is keeping an open mind about the circumstances, including whether any individuals worked knowingly or unknowingly on behalf of a foreign state. Investigating that possibility is not the same as finding that it happened.

The Iranian Embassy in London denied Iranian involvement, CBS News reported. Its denial does not settle the inquiry, any more than U.S. officials’ remarks establish a foreign role. Police have identified a line of investigation, not a country responsible for an offense.

British Defense Secretary Wes Streeting said it was too early to speculate about a motive and urged time for police and security services to investigate, TIME reported. For residents who were told to leave their homes, the unanswered questions include whether the vehicles posed any danger and what, if anything, the petrol was intended for.

Police have not disclosed the purpose of the petrol, the case-specific evidence behind the arrests or the precise bail terms. The five men remain under investigation, and police have not announced a finding of foreign-state involvement.

Comments

Comments are written by readers. They are not reporting or opinion from The Wells Post.

Share your view on this story. Criticise ideas and public records, not other readers.

Most comments appear right away; some wait for a moderator first.

Community guidelines
  • Be civil. Criticise ideas, arguments and public records, not other readers.
  • No harassment, threats, hate speech or dehumanising language, and nothing that targets private individuals.
  • Don't share personal information, such as email addresses or phone numbers, yours or anyone else's.
  • Stay on topic. No advertising, spam or repeated posts.
  • Comments with links may wait for a moderator.
  • We publish comments as written or not at all, and we may remove comments that break these guidelines.

More in our terms and privacy policy.

No comments yet. Start the conversation.

Related coverage

More from World

More World