An inquest has condemned the response of the Tunisian authorities during a 2015 terror attack in which 30 Britons died as "shambolic" and "cowardly".
Gunman Seifeddine Rezgui killed 38 people, 30 of them Britons, during an attack on a beach resort in Sousse, Tunisia, on 26 June 2015. He was later shot dead by police.
An inquest was launched in January to examine whether the British government and the travel firm TUI, which sold the holidays to the five-star Riu Imperial Marhaba hotel, had failed to protect British tourists.
"How can you imagine that police deliberately wanted people to die?" Nabil Ammar, the Tunisian ambassador to the UK, told the BBC Radio 4's Today ahead of the ruling on Tuesday morning.
Summing up the evidence before a short court break, Loraine-Smith ruled the Britons had been killed unlawfully but rejected calls to find TUI guilty of neglect.
He placed heavy blame on the Tunisian authorities, detailing how police officers – although already armed – had delayed entering the hotel on the pretense of collecting more weaponry.
Coroner: no police or security forces entered hotel until after gunman had killed 38 guests - even though they were armed #tunisia
Reading off a report from a Tunisian investigation into the attack, Loraine-Smith detailed the actions of the officers in the area. The report – a copy of which had been provided to victims' families ahead of the hearing – said the delayed response was "deliberate and unjustifiable".
According to an officer who was interviewed after the assault, the behaviour of the officers was "simple cowardice that could have prevented loss of life".
Although families of the victims had pushed for the coroner to consider TUI neglect, last week Coroner Judge Loraine-Smith said he would reject that decision.
The court, in London's Royal Courts of Justice, had heard that "part of the attack or most of it could have been prevented", suggesting that had there been more CCTV cameras and the hotel's guards had been armed, the gunman might have not killed as many people.
However, Loraine-Smith told the court: "Having reviewed the legal advice on gun law in Tunisia it's clear this was not a realistic option.
"The simple but tragic truth in this case is that a gunman armed with a gun and grenades went to that hotel intending to kill as many tourists as he could."
Lawyers defending TUI said "matters could have been worse" at the hotel. Representatives for the firm also said it was "wholly erroneous" to suggest neglect had played a part in the incident.
Despite ruling the company was not responsible for the deaths of the tourists, Loraine-Smith did strongly criticise TUI.
Coroner says Tui did not tell customers where to find FCO advice in wake of Bardo attacks #Tunisia
Coroner says: "A number of customers would not have gone to Tunisia if they had seen the [Foreign Office] travel advice."
In March of that year, three militants attacked the Bardo National Museum in the capital of Tunis, killing 22 people.
While the Foreign Office updated their travel advice for the country, Loranine-Smith noted that TUI did not on their website. They did provide a "crib sheet", ITV reported, on the Bardo attack and cancelled some trips to Tunisia.
Following the inquest, the families of 22 of the victims said they would initiate civil proceedings against TUI in a bid for compensation for personal injury and deaths.
"We are so very sorry for the pain and loss those affected have experienced," a TUI company spokesperson said, outside the court following the inquest. "We have played a full and active role throughout the process of the inquest. We, like others, wanted to understand the specific circumstances surrounding these tragic events."
Briefly discussing the judge's comments on FCO guidelines, the spokesperson said these were "complex matters" that the company had "already taken steps" to address. "We must now take some time to reflect on these areas," they continued.
This is a breaking news story. Follow @BuzzFeedNews for updates.