accidentally

A Delta Air Lines flight attendant “inadvertently deployed an emergency slide,” before departing Pittsburgh International Airport over the weekend, forcing passengers to rebook. The mistake could cost the airline hundreds-of-thousands of dollars. File Photo by John Dickerson/UPI | License Photo

Oct. 27 (UPI) — A Delta Air Lines flight attendant inadvertently deployed the plane’s emergency slide, before departing Pittsburgh International Airport over the weekend, forcing passengers to rebook and costing the airline “as much as $200,000.”

Passengers, bound for Salt Lake City on the Airbus A220-300, were rebooked onto other flights Saturday night and Sunday morning.

“While the aircraft door was being opened, crew inadvertently deployed an emergency slide at the gate in PIT,” a Delta Air Lines spokesperson said in a statement. “As a result, customers on the return flight from PIT to SLC were rebooked on other Delta flights to their destination later that evening or the following morning.”

The expensive error could cost the airline “as much as $200,000” for passengers’ hotel accommodations and repacking the slide, which can cost $12,000, according to aviation website simplifying.com. Other industry sources put the cost to repack an emergency slide on Airbus A220 models between $50,000 and $100,000.

The flight attendant told passengers he had 26 years of flying experience and admitted he accidentally raised the door handle while arming the plane for departure, which triggered the emergency slide to inflate.

“He did apologize and was quite flustered, cited over the 26 years of career, it never happened,” one passenger said.

Emergency slides are built to fully deploy in seconds in order to get passengers to safety as quickly as possible. In this case, the slide deployed against the jet bridge. That left passengers trapped inside the plane for more than an hour as engineers worked to disassemble it.

Good morning, and welcome to L.A. on the Record — our City Hall newsletter. It’s Rebecca Ellis, with an assist from Julia Wick, giving you the latest on city and county government.

L.A. County officials have been given a task: make sure the embarrassing blunder that led voters to accidentally wipe out a popular ballot measure never happens again.

The board is expected to soon review a policy to ensure “county charter is promptly updated” following the accidental repeal of Measure J — a 2020 ballot measure that promised hundreds of millions of dollars for services that keep people out of jail.

The mistake is complicated, but the root cause is simple: The county never added the measure to its charter, akin to the county constitution.

The county’s top lawyer, Dawyn Harrison, blames the failure squarely on the executive office, which supports the five politicians with the administrative parts of the job — including, apparently, keeping the county code fresh.

But Robert Bonner, the recently forced-out head of the sheriff’s oversight commission, said the county’s top lawyers learned long ago that parts of the code were outdated.

“I always thought it was weird that it would take so long for the county apparatus to get something in the code that the voters said was the law,” Bonner said.

Bonner said it took the county four years to incorporate a March 2020 ballot measure, known as Measure R, which gave his commission the power to investigate misconduct with subpoenas. For years, he said, the commission resorted to citing ballotpedia, an online encyclopedia with information about local measures, in its legal filings. The Times reviewed one such filing from November 2022 as the commission tried to force former Sheriff Alex Villanueva to obey deputy gang subpoenas.

County attorneys said they first discovered the issue in October 2023 and it was fixed by August 2024. It is not clear why it took ten months.

“This underscores the need to reform the system with clear safeguards and accountability,” county counsel said in a statement. “This breakdown made clear that our office must also be systematically included in the administrative process.”

“Fortunately, in our case, it didn’t lead to disaster,” Bonner said of the outdated code.

A few months later, it would.

In summer of 2024, county counsel got its marching orders: To create a ballot measure, known as Measure G, that would overhaul the county government, expand the five-person board of elected supervisors to nine and bring on a new elected executive who would act almost as a mayor of the county.

The office came up with a ballot measure that would repeal most of a section of the charter — called Article III — in 2028. That section details the powers of the board — and, most consequentially, includes the requirement from Measure J that the board funnel hundreds of millions toward anti-incarceration services.

County lawyers rewrote that chunk of the charter with the changes the board wanted in the county’s form of government — but left out the anti-incarceration funding. So when voters approved Measure G, they unwittingly repealed Measure J.

And it turns out, it’s not easy to get back a ballot measure after voters accidentally wipe it out.

The supervisors hoped they could just get a judge to tell them that, actually, Measure J was just fine. After all, voters had no idea they were repealing it — nobody did.

But the supervisors were recently told by their lawyers that getting relief from a judge — considered the easiest, cheapest option — would be legally tricky terrain. One month after the mistake came to light, they’ve yet to go to a judge.

Maybe the state could help by passing legislation that would make a correction to the county’s charter, officials hoped. Not so, according to a memo from Harrison and Chief Executive Fesia Davenport. For the state to help, it would need to pass legislation that mimicked the budget requirements of Measure J — potentially a bigger ask than a charter tweak.

“A court would likely strike down as unconstitutional any changes to the County Charter that were not approved by voters,” read the July 25 memo.

And then there’s the option of last resort: putting Measure J back on the ballot.

It’s high-stakes. It is, after all, no longer November 2020, when Measure J passed handily, buoyed by a wave of support for racial justice and disgust over police brutality after the killing of George Floyd. Voters have leaned in recently to tough-on-crime measures such as Proposition 36, which stiffened the penalties for some nonviolent crimes.

If the county needed proof the atmosphere has changed, the sheriff deputy union, which fought hard against Measure J, has plenty.

The union paid for a poll of 1,000 voters that suggests the measure wouldn’t pass if it were put up for a vote again. Only 43% of respondents said they would vote for the measure if it went back on the ballot, while 44% said they’d vote no. The measure passed in 2020 with 57% of the vote.

Voters weren’t big fans of the politicians in charge either. Almost half viewed the board unfavorably.

The union fought hard against Measure J, spending more than $3.5 million on advertising to fight it and following up with a court battle. It’s not not hankering for another go at it.

“Residents are clearly fed up with the shenanigans around Measure G and J,” said union President Richard Pippin. “The fix is to focus on investing in safe communities instead of half-baked ideas.”

The poll was conducted by David Binder Research, a San Francisco-based pollster frequently used by Democratic candidates, from Aug. 5 to Aug. 12, with a sampling error of plus or minus 3.5 percentage points. The Times was only sent a summary of the poll and did not view the original.

Some advocates argue that if anything goes on the ballot, it should be the measure that contained the poison pill.

“Why aren’t they considering [Measure] G?” asked Gabriela Vazquez, who campaigned for the anti-incarceration measure as a member of the nonprofit La Defensa. “Imagine all the fundraising folks would have to do to defend J if it was put back on the ballot.”

“The defect was in G not in J,” said former Duarte City Councilmember John Fasana, who voted against both measures and first noticed the county’s flub. “You’re overturning an election.”

But the overhaul of county government Take Two would also face an uphill battle, the poll suggests. The measure narrowly passed last November with 51% of the vote.

This time, only 45% of voters like the idea, while 40% said they’d vote no, according to the poll.

The Times asked all five supervisors what they wanted to do.

Supervisors Janice Hahn and Kathryn Barger did not respond. The other three appeared undecided.

Supervisor Holly Mitchell, a vocal supporter of Measure J and opponent of Measure G, said she wants to “explore all solutions” to keep the anti-incarceration measure in good standing. Supervisor Hilda Solis said she wanted to correct the error, but did not say how. Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, the force behind the government overhaul, said she’s not ruling out getting help from a judge and is moving forward with an ordinance that would mirror Measure J. Unlike a ballot measure, an ordinance could be undone by a future board.

She says going to the ballot is the last resort.

“My commitment to fixing this mess hasn’t changed. I’m open to every viable path, and we might need to pursue more than one,” Horvath said in a statement. “Before considering the ballot, we must exhaust every option before us.”

State of play

— A POLITICAL EARTHQUAKE: Come November, California voters will partake in a special election to potentially waive the state’s independent redistricting process and approve new partisan congressional maps that favor Democrats. Gov. Gavin Newsom’s high-stakes fight to counter President Trump’s scramble for GOP control is already sending shockwaves around the state.

—HILDA’S PLANS: The proposed maps would create a new congressional district in southeast L.A. County. Supervisor Hilda Solis has yet to publicly announce her candidacy, but she’s made her intention to run for the redrawn 38th District clear within the close-knit world of California politics.

—THE RICK OF IT ALL: Former L.A. mayoral candidate Rick Caruso was initially quiet about Newsom’s redistricting proposal. But after the Legislature sent the measure to the ballot Thursday, Caruso made his support clear, telling us that “California has to push back” against the Texas redistricting scheme. He plans to financially support the ballot measure, he said. One topic he remained vague on was whether he’ll run for mayor or governor in 2026, saying he was still seriously considering both options.

—AUTHOR, AUTHOR: Brentwood resident and former Vice President Kamala Harris announced a 15-city book tour for her upcoming election memoir “107 Days.” The lineup includes a September event at the Wiltern theater in partnership with Book Soup.

—FIRE JUSTICE: Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson was at the Stentorians office Friday morning to show his support for a package of state bills focused on incarcerated firefighters. He appeared alongside Assemblymembers Sade Elhawary, Celeste Rodriguez and Josh Lowenthal and Sen. Lola Smallwood-Cuevas.

— END IN SIGHT?: Councilmember Tim McOsker’s motion to “strategically and competently” work to wind down the mayor’s declaration of emergency on homelessness narrowly failed Wednesday. The motion called for the legislative body to come back in 60 days, with reports from city offices, to advise on an implementation plan to end the declaration of emergency. McOsker’s goal was to terminate the state of emergency, which has been in effect for more than two years, as soon as possible. His motion failed to pass in a 7-7 vote. The council instead continued to support the mayor’s declaration of emergency and will take up the issue again in 90 days.

—”SLUSH FUND” QUESTIONS: An election technology firm allegedly overbilled Los Angeles County for voting machines used during the 2020 election and funneled the extra cash into a “slush fund” for bribing government officials, federal prosecutors say in a criminal case against three company executives. Prosecutors do not indicate who benefited from the alleged pot of Los Angeles County taxpayer money.

QUICK HITS

• Where is Inside Safe? Staff from the mayor’s signature homelessness program visited the council district of Hugo Soto-Martínez, moving an estimated 23 people indoors, according to the mayor’s office. Her Shine LA initiative, which aims to clean up city streets and sidewalks, was postponed to September because of the extreme heat.
• On the docket for next week: The City Council will vote Wednesday on whether to approve the mayor’s appointment of Domenika Lynch to be the new general manager of El Pueblo de Los Angeles Historical Monument, which includes Olvera Street. She would be the first Latina head of the department.

Stay in touch

That’s it for this week! Send your questions, comments and gossip to [email protected]. Did a friend forward you this email? Sign up here to get it in your inbox every Saturday morning.

Michael, 64, and Kathryn, 72, Roper were enjoying a drink in the departure lounge at Leeds and Bradford Airport when they found the sharp knife in her bag, prompting alarm

A British couple inadvertently caused a security stir when they breezed through airport checks with a 10-inch steak knife in their luggage.

Michael, aged 64, and Kathryn Roper, 72, were left gobsmacked after sailing through Leeds Bradford Airport (LBA) security, only to discover the sizeable blade nestled in her bag while sipping pints in the departure lounge, eagerly anticipating their flight to their Spanish holiday home.

The sharp discovery, featuring a six-inch blade, was made as the couple from Oxenhope, near Bradford, Yorkshire, were about to embark on their sunny getaway. Kathryn recalled how the knife ended up in her possession after using it to slice some cake during a visit to her stepfather earlier that day, an innocent oversight that led to the alarming find.

READ MORE: Passengers ’cause huge delay with attempt to enter cockpit over aircon fury’

Upon realising the blunder, the Ropers promptly alerted the security team, who confiscated the blade.

Michael criticised the effectiveness of the security process: “It’s pretty rubbish, either the scanners were not working properly, or the bloke looking at the bag station has not been paying attention.

“My wife had been down to see her elderly step-dad, she took a knife and some cake for him. She put the knife in her bag, picked up our passports, bags, etc. and off we went. We went through security, sat having a beer and she pulled it out and she was like ‘oh my God’. Both of us fought it was shocking no one noticed – we couldn’t believe it.”

The pub-owning pair noted that upon their arrival at LBA, they passed through modern scanners designed to allow passengers to keep liquids inside their carry-ons.

After discovering what they’d brought through with them, the couple were initially uncertain about how to proceed, but ultimately Michael decided to pocket the knife, return through security, and alert the head of security.

Michael recounted: “We were stuck with an offensive weapon, a sharp steak knife, airside. You can’t put it into a bin, you’ve got a responsibility, it could get into the wrong hands, we all know what can happen. You can’t just give it to a member of the public there.

Leeds Bradford Airport (LBA), located in Yeadon, confirmed that an internal investigation is currently in progress. An airport spokesperson said: “As the incident is under investigation internally, we can’t comment any further.”

This summer hoolidaymakers have been urged to plan ahead and do their research before travelling abroad to avoid being caught out by hand luggage rules. The Transport Secretary has told air passengers to assume the 100ml limit on liquids in hand luggage remains in place, after two airports changed their policies.

To avoid confusion, make sure you check out guide of the UK’s major airports and their security policies.

Los Angeles County leaders are scrambling to restore a sweeping racial justice initiative that voters accidentally repealed, a mistake that could threaten hundreds of millions of dollars devoted to reducing the number of people in jail.

County supervisors unanimously voted Tuesday to ask their lawyers to find a way to bring back the ballot measure known as Measure J, which required the county to put a significant portion of its budget toward anti-incarceration services.

Voters learned last week that they had unwittingly repealed the landmark criminal justice reform, passed in 2020 in the heat of the Black Lives Matter movement, when they voted for a completely unrelated measure to overhaul the county government last November.

Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, who spearheaded the county overhaul — known as Measure G — along with Supervisor Janice Hahn, called it a “colossal fiasco.”

“This situation that has unfolded is enraging and unacceptable at every level. What has transpired is sloppy,” Horvath said Tuesday. “It’s a bureaucratic disaster with real consequences.”

The county says it’s looking at multiple options to try to get Measure J permanently back in the charter — which dictates how the county is governed — including a change in state law, a court judgment or a ballot measure for 2026.

“We cannot and we won’t let this mistake invalidate the will of the voters,” Hahn said.

County lawyers say the mistake stems from a recently discovered “administrative error.”

Last November, voters approved Measure G, which expands the five-person Board of Supervisors to nine members and brings on an elected chief executive, among other overhauls.

What no one seemed to realize — including the county lawyers who write the ballot measures — is that one measure would wipe out the other.

Measure G rewrote a chunk of the charter with no mention of anti-incarceration funding, effectively wiping out the county’s promise to put hundreds of millions toward services that keep people out of jail and support them when they leave.

The repeal will take effect in 2028, giving the county three years to fix it.

“I do agree that there’s all kinds of reasons to be outraged, but the sky is not falling. Even if you think the sky is falling, it won’t fall until December 2028,” said Rob Quan, who leads a transparency-focused good-government advocacy group. “We’ve got multiple opportunities to fix this.”

The mistake was first spotted last month by former Duarte City Councilmember John Fasana, who sits on a task force in charge of implementing the county government overhaul. The county confirmed the mistake to The Times last week, a day after Fasana publicly raised the issue to his unsuspecting fellow task force members.

The measure’s critics say the mistake adds credence to their arguments that the county overhaul was put together too hastily.

“It seems to be that if one has to go back on the ballot, it ought to be [Measure] G,” said Fasana, noting it passed by a narrower margin.

Otherwise, he says, the county has set an unnerving precedent.

“It’s almost like setting a blueprint to steal an election,” said Fasana, who opposed both the anti-incarceration funding and the government overhaul measures. “You’ve got this way to basically nullify something that was passed by voters.”

Some worry that putting either measure back on the ballot runs the risk of voters rejecting it this time around.

Measure G faced significant opposition — including from two sitting supervisors — who argued an elected chief executive would be too powerful and the measure left too much of this new government ill-defined. It narrowly passed with just over 51% of the vote.

The anti-incarceration measure also faced heavy opposition in 2020, particularly from the Assn. for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs, which spent more than $3.5 million on advertising on TV and social media. The measure passed with 57% of the vote.

A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge ruled it unconstitutional after a group of labor unions — including the sheriff’s deputies union — argued it hampered politicians’ ability to manage taxpayer money as they see fit. An appellate court later reversed the decision.

Measure J requires that 10% of locally generated, unrestricted L.A. County money be spent on social services such as housing, mental health treatment and other jail diversion programs. That’s equivalent to roughly $288 million this fiscal year. The county is prohibited from spending the money on the carceral system — prisons, jails or law enforcement agencies.

Derek Hsieh, the head of the sheriff’s deputies union and a member of the governance reform task force, said the union had consulted with lawyers and believed the county would be successful if it tried to resolve the issue through a court judgment.

“A change in state law or running another ballot measure — it’s kind of like swimming upstream,” he said. “Those are the most expensive difficult things.”

Megan Castillo, a coordinator with the Reimagine LA coalition, which pushed for the anti-incarceration measure, said if the group has to go back to the ballot, it will try to slash the language that it feels gives the county too much wiggle room on how funding is allocated. The coalition has clashed repeatedly with county leadership over just how much money is actually meant to be set aside under Measure J.

“If we do have to go to the ballot box, we’re going to be asking for more,” she said.

City Councilmember Eunisses Hernandez, who helped get the anti-incarceration measure on the ballot, said she felt suspicious of the error by county lawyers, some of whom she believed were never fully on board with the measure in the first place.

“I just feel like they’re too good at their jobs for this error to occur,” said Hernandez, who said the news landed like a “slap in the face.”

County leaders have emphasized that the error was purely accidental and brushed aside concerns that the repeal would have any tangible difference on what gets funded.

When Measure J was temporarily overturned by the court, the board promised to carry on with both the “spirit and letter” of the measure, reserving a chunk of the budget for services that keep people out of jail and support those returning. That will still apply, they say, even if Measure J is not reinstated.

The motion passed Tuesday directs the county to work on an ordinance to ensure “the continued implementation of measure J” beyond 2028.

Last November, voters approved a sprawling overhaul to L.A. County’s government.

They didn’t realize they were also repealing the county’s landmark criminal justice reform.

Eight months later, county officials are just now realizing they unwittingly committed an administrative screw-up for the ages.

Supervisors Lindsey Horvath and Janice Hahn co-authored Measure G, which changed the county charter to expand the five-person board and elect a new county executive, among other momentous shifts.

But nobody seemed to realize the new charter language would repeal Measure J, which voters approved in 2020 to dedicate hundreds of millions towards services that offer alternatives to incarceration.

“We can confirm that due to an inadvertent administrative error by a prior Executive Officer administration, Measure J was not placed in the County’s Charter after its passage in 2020,” said County Counsel in a statement. “As a result, when the voters passed Measure G, they repealed Measure J effective December 2028.”

The mistake appears to stem from a failure by the county’s executive office to update the county charter with Measure J after it passed in 2020. County lawyers then failed to include the Measure J language when they drafted the 2024 ballot measure.

So when voters approved Measure G, they accidentally repealed Measure J, according to the county.

The screw-up was first discovered by John Fasana, a former Duarte Councilmember who sits on the county’s governance reform task force, which is tasked with implementing the government overhaul. He said he first raised the issue with the county in early June.

“Someone goofed,” said Fasana, who was appointed to the taskforce by Supervisor Kathryn Barger. “I couldn’t believe it when I saw it.”

Megan Castillo, a coordinator with the Reimagine LA Coalition, which pushed Measure J to the ballot in 2020, said she was disturbed to learn last week that the fruit of years of advocacy would soon be wiped away accidentally.

“It shouldn’t be undermined just because folks rushed policy making,” said Castillo. “We know more voters were for Measure J than Measure G. It’s disrespectful to the will of the people to find this could unintentionally happen.”

Measure J requires that 10% of locally generated, unrestricted L.A. County money — estimated between $360 million and $900 million — be spent on social services, such as housing, mental health treatment and other jail diversion programs. The county is prohibited from spending the money on the carceral system — prisons, jails or law enforcement agencies.

Castillo said she was worried the repeal would result in a “deep economic fallout” for these programs with county money potentially diverted to costs required by Measure G, like the salaries of new politicians and their staff. Measure G bars the county from raising taxes meaning this money will have to come from elsewhere in the county budget.

Castillo said she first brought the issue to the attention to deputies for Hahn and Horvath last week.

“They are shocked as well,” said Castillo.

Supervisor Lindsey Horvath, who led the charge on Measure G, said in a statement a proposal was coming to correct the “County bureaucracy’s error related to Measure J.”

“This measure was the result of a hard-fought, community-led effort that I wholeheartedly supported—and remain deeply committed to upholding,” said Horvath. “This situation makes clear why Measure G is so urgently needed. … When five people are in charge, no one is in charge, and this is a quintessential example of what that means.”

Supervisor Kathryn Barger, who opposed the overhaul of the county charter, saw it a little differently.

“It also reinforces one of the key concerns I had about Measure G from the start. When major changes to the County Charter are pushed forward without sufficient time for analysis, public input, and transparency, mistakes become more likely. Oversights like this are exactly what can happen,” Barger said in a statement. “This error could–and should–have been caught before voters were asked to make a decision.”

Supervisor Hilda Solis said she was “surprised and concerned” to learn about the error but was confident the funding envisioned by Measure J would “continue unaffected.”

The Times reached out to the other two supervisors and has yet to receive their responses.

County attorneys said in a statement they were working with the executive office to “address this situation” and ensure the executive office “timely codified” charter amendments going forward. They emphasized that, despite the looming repeal of Measure J, the county will continue to align its budget with the goals of the measure.

Derek Hsieh, head of the Assn. for Los Angeles Deputy Sheriffs and a member of the governance reform taskforce member, called the mistake a “cluster—.”

“I think the voters and county employees would like to know when the Board of Supervisors knew about this mistake and what they plan on doing to fix it,” said Hsieh, who was an outspoken opponent of both Measure G and Measure J.

The union, which represents sheriff‘s deputies, had spent more than $3.5 million on advertising on TV and social media to fight Measure J. The union had also joined other county labor unions to challenge the measure in court.

“There’s absolutely no question both by the will of the voters and a decision by the California Supreme Court that Measure J is the law of the land,” said Hsieh.

The screw-up became public Wednesday night at the task force’s second-ever meeting. Fasana told his fellow members who had gatherered at Bob Hope Patriotic Hall downtown he had found “a major issue.”

The news created something of an uproar in meeting that was supposed to focus on more mundane bureaucratic matters. Some members said they wanted to wait to discuss it until everyone had been briefed on what exactly he was talking about.

Others said they didn’t understand how they could talk about anything else.

“To me all the work we’re trying to move forward with stops because there’s a problem —a significant, fundamental one,” said Derek Steele, who was appointed by Supervisor Holly Mitchell.

“We may actually need to take Measure G back to the people,” said Steele. “ We need to make sure we have a solve for this.”

Both Mitchell and Barger opposed Measure G, arguing it had been put together too hastily and gave too much power to an ill-defined county executive.

Sara Sadhwani, who was appointed to the task force by Horvath, said she found the accidental repeal of Measure J “incredibly concerning,” but found the way the news had been delivered to the task force “obstructive.”

“It raises so many questions for me and raises concerns about who is operating in good faith on this task forcem,” said Sadhwani. “If this was a good faith effort, wouldn’t we have agendized this issue, instead of dropping a bomb that people have no knowledge of.”

The taskforce has asked for a report from the county’s attorneys for their next meeting.

Jaclyn Cosgrove contributed to this story.

NewsFeed

US diplomat Dorothy Shea corrected herself after saying Israel’s government had “spread chaos, terror and suffering” across the Middle East during her statement at the UN Security Council. Shea went on to blame Iran for the conflict with Israel, saying they should have agreed to a deal.

CRISTIANO RONALDO’S attitude towards fans can’t be knocked – even when they accidentally knock him!

The Manchester United legend won new admirers for the way he dealt with a supporter catching him on the shin with his wheelchair.

3

3

Viewers loved the amusing exchange as Ronaldo ended up with a smile almost as big as his bank balance.

It began an eventful night for Ronaldo, who was outside Portugal’s team hotel at the time of the ‘collision’.

The Al-Nassr striker was later grabbed by a pitch invader as he warmed up at Bayern Munich’s Allianz Arena to face Germany in the Nations League semi-final.

And he then drilled Portugal’s clincher in a 2-1 comeback win – thanks to his 137th international goal midway through the second half.

Understandably the 40-year-old looked ecstatic.

But he was in high spirits too during his earlier hotel encounter.

Wearing shorts and training gear, Ronaldo walked over to sign an autograph.

And as he was preparing to scribble his name, the fan’s wheelchair nudged  forward and hit the five-time Ballon d’Or winner on the right leg.

3

BEST ONLINE CASINOS – TOP SITES IN THE UK

Ronaldo rubbed his shin as he smiled and shared a joke with the fan.

It’s just possible the ex-Real Madrid winger was mischievously pretending to have been fouled – as contact looked minimal.

And he then finished scribbling his signature before posing for a selfie with the man.

One fan responded to the clip on social media by saying: “Massive respect to CR7 who made the supporters day.”

Another viewer wrote: “Ronaldo down to earth.”

“I have to respect him for this,” posted a third.

Many fans still relentlessly argue online over Ronaldo’s GOAT claims compared to those of  Lionel Messi.

But Ron’s ‘bumpy’ exchange even earned grudging backing from supporters of his great rival!

One said: “As someone who prefers Messi’s play style this is why you gotta respect Ronaldo, class human being.”

EASTENDERS has accidentally leaked a major spoiler in a now-deleted post and it’s bad news for one Walford family.

Eagle eyed fans of the BBC soap are convinced that a huge change is coming on the soap as they notice major clue in a now-deleted post shared to the show’s TikTok account.

4

4

4

In a post uploaded to the account on Tuesday afternoon, fans noticed that a for sale/auction sign had been placed on the side of the Queen Vic – suggesting that current owners Linda Carter and the Knight family are set to lose the pub in a shock new storyline.

Taking to the EastEnders Reddit, many fans suggested their theories as to how Linda and the Knights could lose the pub – with some believing that George Knight (played by Colin Salmon) could have something to do with it. 

One wrote: “There was a rumour before that George was going to mess up the insurance on the pub and they were going to be forced to sell it, so I wonder if that’ll be what’s happening here.”

A second asked: “Interesting. I wonder if Linda and the Knights are selling the Vic in an auction.”

A third questioned: “The Knights were so happy to get it back, I wonder why they’ll lose it?”

“Perhaps they can’t afford the Vic, and I’m predicting if Phil and Linda do get closer, like a lot of people are saying that he’ll bid on it and own it while they run it,” this person speculated.

This viewer suggested: “Oh dear. Why do I have a sinking feeling it’ll go to the new Mitchells?”

The Sun have reached out to EastEnders reps for comment.

The iconic pub at the heart of Albert Square underwent a recent transformation following the devastating explosion that rocked Walford.

With a shiny new sign, fresh windows, and a sleek new front, the Queen Vic was ready to welcome punters once again.

EastEnders viewers know that the iconic Queen Vic pub went up in flames as part of the show’s 40th anniversary last month.

Fans were left horrified as the huge explosion ripped through the square, which resulted in Martin Fowler (James Bye) dying in the arms of his ex-wife Stacey Slater (Lacey Turner).

The Queen Vic pub was destroyed as the windows broke, ceiling structure beams fell down, walls collapsed and upstairs furniture crushed residents.

The Knight family were forced to move out until renovations were complete after they received the good news that the insurance would be paying out.

4