A renewed attempt to legalise assisted dying has been blocked in the House of Commons, with MPs rejecting the controversial proposal at its first major parliamentary test.

The Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill was defeated at Second Reading by 286 votes to 270, a majority of 16.

The announcement prompted cheers in the chamber, including a shout of “good”, while several MPs embraced and raised their fists after the legislation was voted down.

The vote came after an impassioned four-and-a-half-hour Commons debate on Friday, pitting advocates of assisted dying against those warning of the potential consequences of changing the law.

Many MPs delivered emotional speeches, drawing on their own experiences and the deaths of relatives and loved ones.

Had it passed, the Bill would have enabled terminally ill adults in England and Wales, judged to have less than six months to live, to seek an assisted death.

Labour MP Lauren Edwards brought the measure back before Parliament after it failed in the previous session. Although the earlier version cleared two Commons votes, it ultimately stalled in the House of Lords.

Friday’s defeat came after several MPs who had previously backed the legislation switched sides and voted against it on this occasion.

They included Labour former minister Janet Daby, who revealed she had ‘nightmares about dying and death’ after she voted in favour of the Bill last year.

‘I had to wrestle with myself, knowing that I was not entirely comfortable with the decision I had made, and my conscience was not at peace, and I cannot again, in good conscience, vote for the Bill,’ she told the Commons on Friday afternoon.

Prime Minister Andy Burnham and Reform UK leader Nigel Farage did not vote on Friday, while Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch and Liberal Democrat leader Ed Davey both voted against the Bill.

Campaigners welcomed the fall of the Bill and claimed the Commons defeat meant the issue of assisted dying had been settled ‘for a generation’.

Ms Edwards had re-introduced the Bill to the Commons after taking over from its previous sponsor, Kim Leadbeater.

During Friday’s debate, she urged her fellow MPs to send the near-identical Bill back to the Lords ‘so that they can finish what they started’ in scrutinising the legislation.

But critics argued the ‘flawed’ Bill is ‘unsafe’ and told the Commons not to return it to the Lords unamended.

Mrs Badenoch warned against trying to ‘ram’ through the ‘badly drafted’ legislation.

‘It’s rushed, it’s badly drafted – and I say this as someone who is not, in principle, opposed to assisted suicide,’ the Tory leader said. ‘I think we need to be very careful about what we’re doing.

‘I don’t think our NHS is ready and I think this should be something that the Government does thoughtfully, not a private members’ Bill, let alone one which has failed before and which they’re trying to ram through with government numbers.

‘I think that’s wrong.’

Ms Edwards on Friday said MPs were being asked to consider ‘who ultimately decides the laws that govern our nations’ after the unelected Lords blocked the Bill last time round.

Opening the Second Reading debate, she said: ‘We can and we must improve both palliative care and support assisted dying.

‘We must grasp that opportunity in front of us to create a holistic end of life care system that will deliver choice and dignity for every single one of our constituents.’

She said that, because of the four-year implementation period in the Bill, assisted dying would not be available across the two nations until 2031 at the earliest.

‘We owe it to the people that we represent to find a resolution to this issue, one way or the other, within this Parliament,’ the Labour MP for Rochester and Strood added.

Dame Karen Bradley, a Conservative former minister, said previous supporters of the Bill should feel ‘no shame’ in opposing the draft new law.

‘You do not have to repudiate the vote you cast last time in order to vote differently today,’ she said.

‘You do not have to decide that assisted dying can never be right. You do not have to abandon the compassion that led you to support the principle.

‘You need only ask whether this Bill, in this form, on the evidence before us now today, is safe enough for Parliament to force into law.

‘That is today’s test and there is no shame whatsoever in concluding that the answer to a different question is different, indeed, there will be something profoundly wrong with a Parliament in which members felt bound by an earlier vote, regardless of everything they’d learned since.’

Dr Zubir Ahmed, a cancer surgeon and former health minister, told the Commons that the social and palliative care system ‘simply is not ready’ for assisted dying, adding that there can often be uncertainty in a doctor’s prognosis for terminally ill patients.

He told the chamber: ‘I have to be honest with you. When I am asked to prognosticate as to whether someone has six months to live or not, I am as often wrong as I am right.’

Ashley Dalton, another Labour former health minister, told the Commons that she herself has stage four metastatic breast cancer, which is incurable.

ALSO READ: Michael J. Fox Explains His Return to Acting While Living With Parkinson’s

She said her cancer ‘is stable’ but warned she was unsure for how long drugs would continue to work.

Ms Dalton said: ‘Palliative care professionals and oncologists tell me that, whilst they can more or less give me an indication of when I’ll die when I’m a few days or weeks off, anything beyond that is the flip of a coin.

‘The six-month prognosis in this Bill is something no one can ever be really sure of.’

Fellow Labour MP Claire Hazelgrove, a supporter of the Bill,  spoke publicly for the first time about her mother’s decision to bring her late-stage terminal illness to an end ‘on her terms’.

She said the ‘harmful status quo’ meant her mother died alone in October last year, after living with a rare blood cancer for half her life and argued ‘not all pain can be palliated’.

‘For Mum, it wasn’t a choice of life or death. It was a question of what kind of death she would have,’ she told the Commons. ‘She was clear that she didn’t want a painful or undignified death. She wanted peace.

‘For us, it will always be a tremendous personal sadness that the current law meant that she couldn’t tell us her plan, and we couldn’t say goodbye to her.

‘But more importantly than that, that she couldn’t say goodbye at the end of her life, or be surrounded by her loved ones, which is what she would have wanted for her death.

‘Instead, the harmful status quo meant that Mum died alone, with photos of us around her.’

Health minister Alison McGovern was visibly emotional as she concluded Friday’s debate on the Bill as she told MPs she had heard their concerns about social care.

‘Members mentioned the hospice sector, quite rightly,’ she said.

‘We provided a £125million boost… for adult and children and young people’s hospices. But I just want to say to members, I’ve heard the points that they’ve made, and I know we have more to do.

‘And many members and friends will know that in July, I lost my own mum. So I had a very practical education in this topic, and that experience will shape how I take this work forward.’

Mr Burnham had said he would not vote on the Bill on Friday afternoon so as not to ‘unduly influence the debate’.

The PM has previously argued there is a more immediate need to fix palliative care and social care than debate the legalisation of assisted dying.

In the last parliamentary session, the assisted dying Bill passed its Third Reading in the Commons in June 2025 by a majority of 23 votes.

Following Friday’s vote, Alisdair Hungerford-Morgan – chief executive of Right To Life UK, a charity that opposes the introduction of assisted dying – said: ‘This is a remarkable victory for the most vulnerable in our society.

‘They deserve protection and care, not a pathway to suicide.

‘After a two-year-long national debate, the country has decided to reject assisted suicide, settling the issue for a generation.

‘Evidence from overseas shows that, had this legislation become law, countless vulnerable people nearing the end of life would have been pressured or coerced into ending their lives.’

Toby Porter, CEO of Hospice UK said: ‘We recognise that today’s vote will be deeply disappointing for those who have supported a change in the law.

‘But there is so much that can be done to improve choice at the end of life by investing in end of life care, including funding to hospices.

‘This would dramatically improve the choices available to the 150,000 people in England and Wales who currently do not receive the palliative care they need.

‘Right now nearly 60 per cent of hospices in England have made, or are considering, cuts to frontline services at a time when demand is growing. This means more and more people are going without the care and support they need.

‘While the proposed legislation on assisted dying will not progress, as a society we must not lose focus on the urgent need to fix the hospice funding crisis.

‘Opponents and supporters of the Bill must now channel their energy and passion into fixing it, to ensure everyone can get the end of life care they need.

‘The Prime Minister has recently stated the need to fix palliative care funding. His support is welcome, but his words must now be accompanied by meaningful action.’

On September 11, 2001, Tania Head claimed she had staggered from the burning South Tower of the World Trade Center shortly before its collapse, badly burned and thrust into the enduring mythology of that horrific day.

Her account of tragedy, courage and survival became deeply embedded in the public consciousness, seeming more extraordinary than many of the other stories to emerge from 9/11.

Head later gave a strikingly detailed version of events, saying that she was a successful 26-year-old Merrill Lynch manager chairing a meeting on the 96th floor of the WTC’s South Tower when, at 8.46am, the building jolted as though struck by an earthquake.

She said the walls trembled, the lights flashed on and off, and screams rang out from the corridor beyond the conference room.

Through the vast reinforced-glass windows, she and her colleagues supposedly saw black smoke pouring from the North Tower opposite. Head described watching a terrifying fireball climb through the lower floors of the building.

According to her story, some workers fled for the exits in panic while others called friends and relatives to relay the devastating news and tell them to turn on their televisions. Head said her attention was then drawn to small objects falling from a North Tower window. She initially believed they were furniture, she claimed, until one appeared to flap its arms and she realized it was a person.

It was an account she repeated extensively in media interviews, to visitors at Ground Zero, where she served as a volunteer guide, and during her time as president of the WTC Survivors’ Network. For those who heard it, the story was difficult to forget.

But it would later become unforgettable for a far darker reason: Head was exposed as a brazen liar and fantasist who had been nearly 4,000 miles away when the Twin Towers were destroyed.

As she told it, the talented young Spanish banker had her own reasons to be particularly appalled by the discovery that people were so desperate they were throwing themselves to their deaths – her fiancé worked in the north tower.

Her fiancé, known to everyone as ‘Big Dave’ – was a consultant at the financial services company, Deloitte. He worked on the 100th floor.

Having met in February 1999, soon after she’d moved to New York from her native Barcelona, they lived together with a golden retriever puppy named Elvis and planned to marry the following month.

But first, she had to save herself just as scores of others had the same thought, ignoring the entreaties of bank security staff urging them to stay in their offices.

Her assistant Christine close behind, Tania used the stairs to reach the open ‘sky lobby’ on the 78th floor. There they waited in a huge throng of panicking, shoving people for the ‘express elevator’ to take them down to the 44th floor where they could switch to another elevator.

She tried to ring her fiancé on her Blackberry phone, her anxiety heightened by her knowledge that they parted that morning on a sour note after arguing over whether to give his mother a small birthday gift or take her out for dinner. She wanted to tell him it didn’t matter but at the back of her mind was the fear that might have been their last conversation.

As it transpired, of course, they would indeed never speak again – not because, as she explained, he died on 9/11 but because he never existed.

But that sickening discovery would only come years later for the thousands of people enthralled by her story.

She recalled trying to concentrate on controlling her breathing as they waited for the 78th floor elevator when a woman across the sky lobby shouted: ‘Another plane!’

Tania said she saw the wing of United Airlines Flight 175 crash into the building just above them. As flying glass and debris filled the air, her assistant Christine was decapitated by her side.

The shock of the impact hurled Tania into a marble slab as the tower was enveloped in flames – burning her badly on her right arm and convincing her she was going to die.

However, she regained consciousness to find a man with a red bandana tied over his face beating her with a jacket as he tried to put out the flames on her badly burned arm – now only connected to her torso by sinews. That man was Welles Crowther, a 24-year-old equities trader and volunteer firefighter. He died when the south tower collapsed.

As Head – singing Sting songs to keep up her spirits – and the heroic Crowther struggled together through the smoke-filled dust and debris, a dying man crawled towards her, holding out a hand towards her. It was a wedding ring. ‘Please give this to my wife,’ he implored her. She promised she would even though she didn’t know his name.

A stairwell was still intact and they struggled down, bandana man urging her onward when she lost courage.

She managed to get down more than 50 flights until, weakened by blood loss, she passed out. When she came to this time, a firefighter was standing over her.

He carried her down the final 20 floors, and they emerged on to the street just as the tower started to collapse.

Her rescuer passed her to another firefighter who threw her into a fire truck, shielding her body with his own as tons of steel and concrete came crashing down on her. As she gasped for air in the hot black dust that enveloped them, he put his oxygen mask to her face.

She could remember nothing more before waking up in a hospital five days later to learn from her parents, who’d rushed out from Spain, that Big Dave was dead.

For Head, though, the horror of 9/11 gave her a new lease on life as the big, bubbly lady with the brave smile and the tragic yet inspiring story.

For those looking for a symbol of optimism and strength to emerge phoenix-like from the ashes of September 11, Head seemed to provide it.

After her arm was surgically reattached, she said she spent months tracking down the widow of the man who gave her his wedding ring, a ring inscribed with the word ‘Forever.’ She never divulged his name at the time because, she said, she didn’t want to cause a media fuss.

Strangely, however, while she may have been coy about the man with the ring (because, of course, it was a detail that could easily be checked) she started to tell the rest of her story in 2003 when a man named Gerry Bogacz invited her to join his group, the WTC Survivors’ Network.

She first started telling her story on a survivors’ internet forum, then set up a writing workshop where she could draw inspiration and useful information from those who really had been in the WTC.

It turned out she was very special, one of the 20 or so people who had been on the highest floors that were above where the planes had hit the towers and still managed to survive.

She was later elected as the network’s president and she started to reform it, setting up, outrageously in the circumstances, a code of conduct to prevent hoaxers from tricking well-wishers into giving them money. Head, who spent much of her own money on the group’s work, became the public face of the survivors.

‘People cannot understand. We saw things,’ she told Time magazine in 2004, by now reportedly having plucked up the confidence to talk to a wide audience. ‘What I witnessed there I will never forget,’ she told a memorial event two years later. ‘It was a lot of death and destruction, but I also saw hope.’

In 2006, an interviewer in the New York Daily News rhapsodized: ‘To behold Head’s smile is to know the terrorists did not even come close to winning. To see that smile is also to be challenged to be as decent and positive as this true survivor.’

At a memorial service for Welles Crowther in 2006, Tania was too overcome with emotion to speak.

But a friend read her statement: ‘Even after five years, I still bear the burden of being alive when so many other lives were taken from us… In my family, we have a tradition at Christmas. Each year, we tell the children stories drawn from our lives.

‘The story they want to hear, year after year, is the story of the man in the red bandana, whose courage stood taller than the Twin Towers themselves.’

When documentary maker Angelo Guglielmo wanted to make a film about them, he naturally wanted her to feature prominently. Yet she proved to be strangely uncooperative at times. Privately, the filmmaker was puzzled by her scarred arm. It had clearly been injured but, to him, didn’t look as if it had been reattached to her body.

Fellow survivors also grew suspicious about details of her story, such as why she initially claimed that she and Dave were only engaged but later started saying they had already wed in Hawaii.

She never showed other people photos of him and didn’t reveal his last name. When she finally enlightened a friend, although there was indeed a Dave who died in the north tower, his obituary made no mention of Tania. As for their pet dog, oddly, he was always being walked by Tania’s maid when visitors came to her home.

RELATED: Ebola Outbreak in Eastern Congo Spreads to Seventh Province, Officials Say

Consciously or unconsciously, disaster victims will sometimes confuse some details but those who knew her wondered why so many things about Head didn’t quite add up.

In September 2007, citing her ’emotional turmoil,’ Head cancelled three scheduled interviews with the New York Times where two reporters had been puzzled about why her extraordinary story never emerged in 2001.

Her refusal to talk – she told other survivors not to talk to them, too, and declined to provide them with further proof of her story – didn’t save her.

The reporters’ basic fact checking revealed that her story was entirely fabricated. It was telling that a statement she gave included her emphasizing she hadn’t filed any claims for compensation and so had ‘done nothing illegal.’

It was true in that sense as she turned down every benefit offered to her even as she fought for others to get the money.

The board of the Survivors’ Network voted to remove her as president and director of the organization. The Tribute WTC Visitor Centre near the site of the towers said Head would no longer be a volunteer tour guide.

It soon became clear that no one had ever bothered to verify the key details of Head’s remarkable WTC story or asked her to elaborate on others, such as the identity of the man who gave her his ring, the hospital where she was treated or the names of those she met on the morning of the attack.

With hindsight, her story was so packed with ridiculously improbable details, worthy of several Hollywood movies not just one – that observers might wonder why nobody questioned much earlier whether it was all too good to be true.

Head, for instance, said she met Dave when they were fighting over a taxi. She tore up his proffered business card in fury but, a month later, they ran into each other again at a business meeting and started to date.

Alison Crowther, mother of Welles Crowther, probably spoke for many involved with Head when she admitted she had not wanted to ‘probe’ in her discussions with her. ‘I felt it was too private and painful for her,’ she said.

So, who was the woman claiming to be Tania Head? She was not, as she’d claimed, a diplomat’s daughter and senior vice-president for strategic alliances for an investment think tank. She had never worked in Britain, Argentina, France, Singapore and the Netherlands – as she’d also claimed. Nor did her claims to have degrees from Harvard and Stanford stand up.

Not only had she never worked for Merrill Lynch, the New York Times discovered, but she wasn’t in its WTC offices and wasn’t even in New York on 9/11.

She’d been in Barcelona, her hometown, studying at a business school.

Alicia Esteve Head – her real name – was the fifth child and only daughter of a wealthy Spanish family.

She’d been an attention-seeker since childhood who was always ready to embroider her life with false details. The scars on her arm came from a car accident in her teens – Head would lie to people in Barcelona that she’d been in a Ferrari driven by her fiancé.

As for her other fictitious fiancé, Dave’s family had never heard of her, and he had never even met her.

His identity was just one detail she gleaned from media reports about 9/11 and then woven into her story.

She’d been particularly inspired by the account of Ling Young, who worked in the New York tax department on the 86th floor of the south tower, and who was in the sky lobby when the second plane struck.

Given the weight of evidence against her, it’s surely no surprise that Head didn’t try to stick to her guns or try to defend the worst lies she’d ever told.

Instead, she simply disappeared without explanation. Head was never prosecuted because, having never taken money from the survivor group, she had committed no criminal fraud.

Rumors swirled about where she went although it was known that she was estranged from her parents.

Yet according to Spanish media reports, she returned to her home country and settled down quietly – and anonymously – with her mother in the Catalonian city of Terrassa. She reportedly opened a small business renovating houses.

In 2011, she reportedly took a job at Barcelona insurance firm, dealing with English-speaking clients. However, the following year and around the time that a documentary came out about her, she was fired after her bosses realized who she was.

Since then, there has been little sign of her – she could easily have changed her name and even her appearance – although company records reportedly showed an Alicia Esteve Head registering a Barcelona business, Zofrenia SL, in 2021.

It was also claimed she killed herself in 2008, unable to live with the shame of what she had done.

Some believe Head committed her monstrous fraud for emotional reasons – the desire for love, affection, belonging and recognition. The makers of a new Spanish documentary, La Superviviente (The Survivor) – which portrays her as a ‘strangely heroic figure’ – said last month that they are ‘absolutely convinced that even if Alicia had not been financially comfortable at the time, she still would not have taken money as the supposed victim of a terrorist attack.’

The documentary also highlights similarities between her case and that of a Spanish trade unionist named Enric Marco Batlle, who was found in 2005 to have fabricated claims that he’d survived Nazi concentration camps. Batlle, who also became a revered national celebrity and died in 2022, was exposed by a historian who noted inconsistencies in his various accounts of his experience.

Unlike Head, however, he admitted to being an imposter but never apologized, justifying his lies on the grounds he was helping to preserve the collective memory of the Holocaust.

In 1995, Binjamin Wilkomirski published a critically acclaimed memoir of his childhood in Auschwitz although it later emerged he wasn’t Jewish, as he’d claimed, and had spent World War II in neutral Switzerland.

Disgraced ex-Republican politician and serial liar George Santos falsely claimed links to both the 9/11 attacks and the Holocaust.

He said he was the grandson of Ukrainian Jews who fled the Holocaust, escaping first Ukraine and later Belgium.

Santos said his mother was in the South Tower of the WTC on 9/11. She survived but later died from cancer as a result of the carnage, he said. She was actually in Brazil that day.

Falsely claiming a connection to major tragedies appears to be far more widespread than many may imagine.

Manhattan psychiatrist Jean Kim revealed in a 2015 article for the Washington Post that she wasn’t surprised to hear the recent news that comedian and actor Steve Rannazzisi had admitted lying about escaping the Twin Towers on 9/11. ‘I also wasn’t shocked by the otherwise outrageous tale of Tania (Alicia Esteve) Head,’ she added.

She said psychiatrists divide so-called ‘pathological lying’ into conscious and unconscious motivations. The former is known as ‘conman’ behavior and is done for obvious gain, usually monetary. Rannazzisi fell into this category because his 9/11 claims drew attention that benefited his career.

But Head, who didn’t need the money, appeared to fall into the second category – ‘unconscious’ motivation – which ‘usually is related to strong unmet needs during childhood development, such as neglect or abuse, leading to an ongoing drive to seek forms of care and affection even in self-destructive or manipulative ways.’

Kim also noted that the 9/11 tragedy was particularly significant in the huge amount of sympathy it drew to survivors.

‘No other event has inspired so many false claims among my patients. And people of all stripes and socioeconomic classes seemed to sense the power lurking behind that type of attention, that kind of historic relevancy,’ said Kim.

Referring to Head and other 9/11 liars, she wrote: ‘We shouldn’t necessarily just feel enraged by these individuals (although it certainly is tempting.) These are usually ultimately sad, lonely, empty people who capitalize on this unprecedented capacity for charity.’

That’s certainly a charitable view of a woman for whom those who really did suffer terribly on 9/11 may find it difficult, even 25 years later, to extend much sympathy or understanding.

Russia warned Friday that Lithuania would become a target for its nuclear forces if the Baltic nation agreed to station nuclear weapons belonging to its Nato allies on its soil.

Lithuania is considering removing a constitutional prohibition on storing nuclear weapons in the country, a move intended to strengthen national security as Russia continues its war in Ukraine.

The proposal is making its way through parliament, where it requires a two-thirds majority. It is backed by the president and the country’s major political parties and could take effect this winter.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov described the potential change as “a very serious turn in terms of escalating tensions” during an interview with state television.

“If there are nuclear weapons on the territory that are aimed at us, accordingly, the territory of that country will fall into the crosshairs of our own nuclear weapons,” Peskov said.

Lithuanian President Gitanas Nauseda announced the initiative in July, saying the country wanted to become an “integral part of this nuclear deterrence.”

Still, Lithuanian officials have repeatedly stressed that there are currently no plans to host nuclear weapons in Lithuania.

The heightened tensions follow an incident in May, when Nato aircraft were scrambled after a drone flew over Vilnius, Lithuania’s capital, prompting the prime minister and president to be taken to a safe house.

The residents of the city were told to take shelter after drone activity from near Lithuania’s border with Russian ally Belarus.

An emergency announcement from the military told people in the Vilnius region to ‘immediately head to a shelter or a safe place’.

The alert, which lasted for about an hour, also led to the closure of the airspace over Vilnius Airport.

President Nauseda and Prime Minister Inga Ruginiene were taken to shelters, and there was also an evacuation order at Lithuania’s parliament.

‘Based on the parameters we saw, it’s most likely either a combat drone or a drone designed to deceive systems and lure targets,’ Vilmantas Vitkauskas, head of Lithuania’s National Crisis Management Centre, said.

‘The electronic countermeasures here can’t tell us whether an explosive device detonated or not. It’s very, very difficult.’

Based on the altitude and speed, it was probably a drone, he said, ‘though we can’t say at this stage exactly what kind of drone it was or where it was launched from.’

Some Western officials have argued that Moscow’s targeting of European states has increased in recent months as the front line in Ukraine has become largely static.

Countries close to Russia including Poland, Lithuania and Romania have confirmed various violations, but the Kremlin’s shadow war has also spread throughout the continent.

Tactics have included attempted assassinations and the use of nerve agents such as Novichok, as well as radiological weapons such as Polonium-210.

The use of drones has been prevalent, such as the explosive on a drone found at Leipzig Airport, alongside unexplained drone activity near Ireland, over US Air Force bases in the UK and above critical infrastructure and military sites across Germany, Denmark, Sweden and other European countries.

There have also been direct threats against the CEOs of arms companies in Scandinavia and Germany, as well as threats against British companies helping to supply Ukraine.

And cyber attacks and the sabotage of undersea communication cables have become another increasingly prominent tool in Russia’s arsenal.

Military experts recently warned that Russia ‘absolutely’ has the ability to launch drones deep into European nations.

While analysts widely believe that Putin wouldn’t dare stage a direct attack on Europe, the Kremlin has been steadily developing a series of secret bases – capable of firing high-powered suicide drones across the continent.

Some of the sites are already being used to obliterate Ukrainian infrastructure, though Moscow could also deploy its rapidly-developing technology to attack Europe in the event of war.

Russia has been busy building new launch pads for its most advanced long-range suicide drones at 10 bases, according to the Telegraph.

The Kremlin has also constructed at least 59 new launch rails – mechanical guide tracks used in the takeoff of fixed-wing drones in lieu of a traditional runway – along Russia’s border with Belarus and Ukraine.

The latest Russian drone models, named Geran-4 and Geran-5, can fly fast enough to evade air defence systems while carrying a 90kg payload, according to Ukrainian government documents leaked online.