Crime

The president of Brazil, left-wing leader Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, has denounced a decision by the United States to designate two of the South American country’s criminal networks as “terrorists”, warning that the label could be a “setback” for local law enforcement efforts.

The condemnation came in a 435-word message posted to Lula’s social media platforms on Friday.

In it, Lula drew a line between criminal activities and international terrorism, which is often understood to use violence for political or social aims.

“The terror inflicted by these organisations upon communities seeks to generate profit through crime — specifically through drug and arms trafficking,” Lula wrote.

Those activities, however violent, “must not be conflated with the ideologically, politically, or religiously motivated actions characteristic of international terrorism”, he added.

Lula’s statements came in response to an announcement a day earlier from the administration of US President Donald Trump.

Pushback against ‘terrorist’ label

On Thursday, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio revealed that he had designated Brazil’s two largest criminal groups — the Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC) and the Comando Vermelho (CV) — “specially designated global terrorists”.

He also outlined plans to add the two groups to the list of “foreign terrorist organisations”, effective June 5.

Rumours had swirled for months that the Trump administration would apply the “terrorist” label to the two groups. But Lula and his ministers had pushed back, calling on Trump to hold off.

“Terrorist” designations freeze all US-based assets connected to the targeted groups, but they can also be used to penalise anyone who offers “material support or resources” to them.

Experts warn that such restrictions could potentially affect financial institutions and even the victims of such groups, including businesses and individuals who might be forced to pay extortion.

Lula has also expressed concern that the “terrorist” label could pave the way for US military intervention, a fear he reiterated in Friday’s statement, though he never named Trump outright.

“We remain fully prepared to develop joint solutions that yield mutual benefits for all nations involved,” Lula wrote.

“However, we will not tolerate the imposition of arbitrary measures from abroad, nor will we accept their use as a pretext to undermine our sovereignty or our economy. Unilateral, non-negotiated measures can undermine the fight against criminals and trigger actions that endanger the lives of people who have absolutely no connection to crime.”

A tight election in Brazil

A prominent left-wing leader in Latin America, Lula is in the midst of a heated election season, as he seeks a fourth nonconsecutive term as Brazil’s president.

Previously, he served as president from 2003 to 2011, before being re-elected to a third term in 2022.

In that race, he defeated the right-wing incumbent, Jair Bolsonaro, who would later be convicted of attempting to overturn the results of the race. Bolsonaro is currently serving a 27-year prison sentence.

His eldest son, Senator Flavio Bolsonaro, is thought to have been instrumental in Trump’s decision to issue the “terrorist” designations. The senator is currently running against Lula in the 2026 presidential election, and the two have been locked in a tight race.

This week, as he visited the White House, Senator Bolsonaro confirmed to reporters that he intended to seek “terrorist” designations for both the Primeiro Comando da Capital and the Comando Vermelho.

Trump has close ties to the Bolsonaro family, and he has previously intervened in elections around the world on behalf of right-wing candidates.

In Friday’s post, Lula accused Senator Bolsonaro of leveraging his family connections to “petition foreign authorities” for favour.

“It is deplorable that, once again, members of the Bolsonaro family have travelled to the United States to advocate for foreign intervention in Brazil,” Lula wrote.

He pointed to alleged efforts to stop the criminal prosecution of Jair Bolsonaro. Currently, one of the ex-president’s sons, Eduardo Bolsonaro, is facing obstruction charges related to efforts to lobby Trump to intervene in the case.

Trump ultimately did impose steep sanctions against Brazilian products in August 2025, citing the Bolsonaro trial as a reason.

Concerns about sovereignty

Under Trump, the US has taken an increasingly expansionist view towards the Western Hemisphere, reviving the 19th-century Monroe Doctrine, which described the Americas as Washington’s sphere of influence.

Trump himself has used crime as justification for taking unilateral military action in the region. Since September, his administration has conducted 59 strikes against alleged drug-trafficking boats in the Caribbean Sea and eastern Pacific Ocean, killing at least 196 people.

And on January 3, he launched an early-morning military operation against Venezuela, culminating in the abduction and imprisonment of then-President Nicolas Maduro on drug-trafficking charges.

While the Bolsonaro family has courted Trump in recent months, Lula has criticised those military-led actions as unjustified.

But security is expected to be a dominant issue in October’s presidential race. This week’s “terrorist” designations are likely to put Lula in an awkward position, forcing him to condemn the label without downplaying the extent of the violence.

Lula has attempted to brush off right-wing criticism that he has been lax on crime, pointing to his government’s recent $11bn investment in the “Brazil Against Organized Crime” programme.

That follows a separate $2bn programme in March to bolster the country’s prisons, improve homicide investigations and disrupt arms trafficking and other financial transactions carried out by criminal groups.

Still, Lula and Bolsonaro remain neck and neck in the lead-up to October’s election.

On May 16, the polling firm Datafolha found that both candidates would receive 45 percent of voter support in a one-on-one race, with 9 percent of voters indicating they would cast a null vote.

Another 1 percent identified as undecided.

IN just three days, Katie Price’s husband Lee Andrews is due to be released from Dubai’s hell-hole Al Awir prison.

But the news of his imminent return to freedom has emboldened the women who have been caught up in his web of lies and deceit – and now they’re determined to see him locked up for good.

Over the past five months, I have spoken to the women who have survived Andrews, and their extraordinary stories are chilling.

From financial fraud on a life-changing scale to even more shocking allegations, the women painted a terrifying picture of the man Katie chose to marry just weeks after meeting him earlier this year.

For months, the women have shared evidence with The Sun – and the relevant police authorities – in the hope that the law will catch up with Andrews.

Together they stood firm as he desperately tried to smear their reputations, telling me in a long and rambling voice note that one of the women was disturbed and had spent time inside a “mental institution”.

He claimed they were fantasists, liars and angrily declared: “I know you’re a lady and everything, but women can be very harsh.”

I didn’t believe a word he said to me then, and I still don’t now.

But the patience of the women involved is understandably wearing thin.

His arrest in Dubai on a civil matter has, they tell me, been for Andrews just a brief taste of what they hope is to come.

Justice for these women, however, will be a war that will not be easily won.

“Lee is a dangerous man, and the authorities need to act,” one of the women tells me from their home in the US.

“All of the women Lee has conned in the past have come together in a group, and we are determined to fight to get justice.

“It does feel incredibly hopeless at times. No one in power seems to be properly acting. But we’re standing together, and we will do everything we can to make the police act.”

Criminal complaints have been lodged against Andrews by one woman with Hertfordshire Police.

Another of his victims, businesswoman Crystal Janke, reported an alleged theft of £123,000 to cops in America.

The uphill battle they face is the fact that Andrews resides in Dubai and is unable to leave due to a travel ban.

Andrews, ultimately, is able to dodge culpability because of where he is.

Hertfordshire Police confirmed to me they had handed the complaints filed to them to cops in Dubai because the alleged incidents happened in the UAE.

These allegations, to add, are incredibly serious.

They need to see him hauled in for questioning.

But so far, the police there have seemingly failed to act in any way to investigate Andrews, let alone arrest him.

The financial fraud complaint made to cops against Andrews in the US by Crystal is also dangling in the ether.

The police confirmed they can only act against Andrews if he lands on US soil.

And let’s be honest, Andrews isn’t going to be leaving Dubai anytime soon.

From the number of phone calls I had in the days leading up to Andrews’ arrest, the women who have joined forces to try and bring the con-artist to justice are not alone in their plight.

Andrews is alleged to owe vast sums of money to several people in Dubai.

Each individual wants him taken to task, and no one more so than the women whose lives he has irrevocably damaged in one way or another.

“We see ourselves as survivors of Lee, not victims,” one woman tells me.

“But to say the slow progress by the police in Dubai is frustrating is an understatement.

“The complaints are racking up, and nothing is being done.

“Some of us have even gone to the lengths of contacting the police when we know where Lee is and pleading with them to arrest him.

“Repeatedly, we have said, he is at this location, he is wanted for this, please act. And nothing ever seems to happen.

“We have no idea what else to do, but once he is out, we are going to carry on alerting the police, and we won’t stop until they act.”

After he was arrested and sent to the Al Awir prison, authorities confirmed to The Sun he had been apprehended on a private civil matter.

It proved once again that Andrews is a devious liar – after he told Katie he had been arrested for espionage.

“Lee saying he was arrested for spying is nothing new,” one of the women explained to me.

“It’s a claim directly out of his conman playbook.

“He’s said to everyone in this group at some point that he worked for the secret services. He bragged about being in MI5 in the UK.

“Lee would just tell so many lies. He told Katie he was an international arms dealer, too.

“By this point, we don’t think Lee would know what the truth is – even if he slapped him around the face.”

Previously, Andrews denied every claim made against him by the women who spoke out against him.

In the face of the weight of evidence they provided me with, including their bank statements and correspondence with their relevant police forces, Andrews stood firm and tried to paint them as scorned fantasists.

These women are nothing of the sort.

And I, along with my colleagues, will keep banging this drum until Andrews is locked up.

With any luck, they will throw away the key.

Erin Patterson was found guilty of killing three family members as she served them a lunch laced with poisonous fungi.

An Australian court has confirmed that an appeal hearing for Erin Patterson, commonly referred to as the “mushroom murderer,” will be held in August.

The Supreme Court of Victoria announced on Friday that the hearing will take place on August 19 and 20. Patterson’s lawyers formally applied to appeal her life sentence in November, arguing that there had been a “substantial miscarriage of justice” during her trial.

Patterson was sentenced to life in prison in September after being found guilty of murdering three of her estranged husband’s relatives by serving them a lunch laced with poisonous fungi.

During the two-day hearing, the court will also consider an appeal from prosecutors, who argue that her sentence, which allows her to be considered for parole after 33 years, is “manifestly inadequate”.

Prosecutors unsuccessfully argued during the trial that her sentence should have been life imprisonment without parole.

In July, a jury found Patterson guilty of killing her estranged husband’s parents after serving them a lunch of beef Wellington laced with toxic mushrooms.

The case attracted worldwide attention, with more than 250 journalists registering for updates from the court, and the judge deciding to broadcast the sentencing live.

Both Gail Patterson and Donald Patterson died in August 2023. Patterson was also found guilty of murdering Gail’s sister, Heather Wilkinson, who died that same month, and of attempting to kill Wilkinson’s husband, Ian. He spent seven weeks in hospital following the poisoning and received a liver transplant.

Patterson is appealing her conviction on seven grounds, including what her lawyers described as a “fundamental irregularity” relating to the sequestration of the jury, who stayed in the same hotel as key figures in the case, including a police witness and two prosecutors.

Patterson’s lawyers also argue that several pieces of evidence presented during the trial were either irrelevant or unfairly prejudicial, and that the prosecution’s cross-examination of her was “unfair and oppressive”.

Patterson maintains her innocence, arguing that the poisoning was accidental.

MATTHEW Perry’s live-in assistant has been jailed for three years and five months after injecting the actor with ketamine and leaving him alone to die.

Kenneth Iwamasa, 60, learned his fate as he appeared in federal court in Los Angeles on Wednesday.

He was the fifth and final defendant to be sentenced for playing a role in the actor’s 2023 overdose death.

Iwamasa, who was previously out on bail, avoided photographs by turning up to court at 7am when the doors opened, two hours ahead of the hearing, a source told The U.S. Sun.

He was then granted a delayed surrender date of July 17.

Los Angeles Judge Sherilyn Peace Garnett also ordered him to pay fines of $10,000 and $100 and be on supervised released for two years.

JAIL TIME

Matthew Perry’s street dealer gets 2yrs after admitting he’s ‘haunted by mistake’

Iwamasa wore a grey suit and matching tie with a white shirt for the hearing.

“Kenny wishes he would have had the strength to push back and say no and for that he will forever be remorseful,” his lawyer, Alan Eisner, said as he stood beside him outside of the court.

“Kenny is not the only person here who partook in this tragic event.”

He said Perry had agency, and his family should have also been there for him during his relapse.

“Mr Perry’s family could have said no along the way,” he bizarrely stated.

His loved ones previously insisted they had no idea he had fallen back into addiction.

The attorney said the blame shouldn’t all fall on his client, a man who is at the “low end of the totem pole” and wasn’t benefiting financially like those who sold him the drugs.

Asked why he left him alone to die after injecting him with the drug, the lawyer called the comments “vindictive” and said it was an unfair narrative.

Perry’s stepfather, Keith Morrison, who arrived with the actor’s mother, Suzanne, gave an emotional impact statement, along with estate manager, according to the New York Post.

Iwamasa was reportedly on the verge of tears as Morrison addressed him in court but he did not speak to reporters outside.

Although he pleaded guilty, his counsel argued that he was trapped in a toxic employer-employee dynamic and felt unable to refuse Perry’s requests.

The actor’s publicist, Lisa Calio, who was close to him for 30 years and is now the CEO of The Matthew Perry Foundation, wrote a heartbreaking letter to the judge and slammed Iwamasa.

She claimed he hatched a delusional plan to get rid of those tasked with keeping Perry safe so he could run the show and live a lavish lifestyle, before sourcing drugs for him.

She wrote, “His narcissistic, outrageous, irresponsible behavior, his psychotic plan, caused him to heat up the jacuzzi, give Matthew the giant shot he requested and leave him alone to die.”

Referencing the day Perry was found dead, she recalled, “I received a text from Kenny at 4 a.m. as he was driving one of Matthew’s cars from the house in the Hollywood Hills to the house in the Palisades. And he was loving it.”

She claimed, “Kenny convinced Matthew that there were too many people around and that he didn’t need to spend the money on them anymore. And that battle, Kenny won. I was not aware.”

Calio claimed that it was “the beginning of the end.”

She added, “Whatever sentence he receives, it won’t be long enough.

“He will always be known as the man who killed Matthew Perry, I suppose there should be some comfort in that.”

Before he was Perry’s live-in assistant, the star had other staff members and a sober companion who saved his life.

Iwamasa had been working for Perry’s manager, Doug Chapin, since the 1990s and took a more hands-on role as the actor’s live-in assistant around 2022, according to reports.

Court documents showed he was paid around $150,000 a year to assist Perry around the clock and was tasked with helping to manage his sobriety.

They lived together at a Beverly Hills rental after Perry sold his “mansion in the sky” in Century City and was waiting for renovation work to be completed on his new home in the Pacific Palisades.

As Perry relapsed, Iwamasa obtained ketamine from suppliers and was taught how to administer it, according to court documents.

Iwamasa admitted to injecting Perry with the drug three times on the day he died, including twice in 40 minutes.

He then left him alone near his hot tub at the star’s home in the Pacific Palisades, and when he returned, he found the actor unresponsive in the water.

Iwamasa was accused of repeatedly lying to investigators, including allegedly hiding the fact that he injected Perry with several ketamine shots on the day of his death, court documents also show.

He later admitted he “cleaned up the scene” during a phone call with middleman Erik Fleming, officials claimed.

The assistant reportedly said he got rid of syringes and bottles, changed passwords on Perry’s devices and “deleted everything.”

The five responsible for Matthew Perry’s death

Here are the five individuals allegedly behind Perry’s ketamine overdose.

• “Ketamine Queen of Los Angeles” Jasveen Sangha – Sangha, 42, pleaded guilty in September 2025 to federal charges for supplying the ketamine that caused Matthew Perry’s fatal overdose. Prosecutors say that after Perry’s death, she reportedly searched online, “can ketamine be listed as a cause of death.” She has now been jailed for 15 years.
• “Dr. P” Dr. Salvador Plasencia – Plasencia, 44, was one of the physicians who illegally supplied ketamine to Perry before his death. He pleaded guilty in mid‑2025 to several federal counts of ketamine distribution. In December 2025, he was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison and fined; he was remanded immediately to begin serving his term.
• Dr. Mark Chavez – Chavez, 55, pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute ketamine in connection with Perry’s death. In December 2025, he was sentenced to eight months of home confinement, ordered to complete community service, and placed on supervised release.
• Kenneth Iwamasa – Iwamasa, 60, Perry’s live‑in assistant, admitted he obtained and administered ketamine to Perry as part of the scheme. He pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute ketamine causing death and is set to be sentenced in May.
• Erik Fleming – Fleming, 56, an intermediary dealer who helped coordinate the flow of ketamine from suppliers to Perry’s assistant, pleaded guilty to conspiracy and distribution charges. He was sentenced to two years in prison.

It was several months before it was revealed that Iwamasa played a part in Perry’s death, shocking not only his family and friends but thousands of fans worldwide.

He pleaded guilty in August 2024 to one count of conspiracy to distribute ketamine resulting in death and initially faced 15 years behind bars.

But prosecutors said in court documents that he provided significant cooperation in the government’s investigation, leading to a reduced sentencing recommendation of three years and four months.

Perry’s mum, Suzanne Morrison, also described Iwamasa in a victim impact statement ahead of sentencing as a “man without conscience” and said the family felt betrayed by him.

In the statement, Morrison said Iwamasa not only delivered the fatal dose but also painted himself as someone who was trying to help Perry, and even went as far as begging to speak at his funeral.

She said in court filings, “He clung to me and the family as if he was somehow the good guy who tried to save Matthew.”

She added: “We trusted a man without a conscience, and my son paid the price.”

Four others were convicted in recent months after being involved in Perry’s death.

Erik Fleming, a middleman and former drug counsellor, was sentenced to two years in prison, while Jasveen Sangha, also known as “The Ketamine Queen”, was handed 15 years.

Dr. Salvador Plasencia, who was involved in supplying and administering ketamine linked to Perry, received two and a half years.

He obtained the drug from a fellow doctor, Mark Chavez, who received eight months of home detention after pleading guilty.

Perry rose to fame as Chandler Bing on the hit 90s sitcom Friends.

This “gripping” missing child thriller is brought to life by Slow Horses and Murders At White House Farm creators.

Crime thriller fans shouldn’t miss out on this “addictive” drama with an all-star cast.

Apple TV has given fans a first-look at its upcoming six-part drama Last Seen, based on Ryan David Jahn’s best-selling 2011 novel The Dispatcher.

The series follows Detective Ian Ridley (played by Patrick Brammall) whose life is turned upside down when his young daughter Maggie disappears.

Fast forward to the present day and Detective Ridley answers a call from a distressed teenage girl and becomes convinced it’s his daughter.

The official synopsis goes on to add that “he will stop at nothing to find her and reunite his broken family, whatever the cost.”

The Last Seen cast will be headed up by Glitch and Devil Wears Prada 2 star Patrick Brammall as Detective Ridley.

He will be joined by Shameless, The Village and Three Girls star Maxine Peake, as well as Dune: Prophecy actor Brendan Cowell, Mickey 17 Daniel Henshall and Mr Inbetween Jessica Wren.

Thankfully, the wait isn’t too long before Last Seen premieres with the six-part series coming out on Wednesday, September 9.

Only the first two episodes are going to be released on this initial release date with the remaining episodes coming out weekly until Wednesday, October 7.

It isn’t just about the cast that fans should be excited about either as Last Seen was written by The Murders at White House Farm creator Kris Mrksa.

He’s also backed by executive producers from Slow Horses and Down Cemetery Road.

Given that Last Seen is based on Jahn’s best-selling book The Dispatcher, the drama already has a fanbase ahead of its release.

Describing the series on Good Reads, someone called the novel an “adrenalin rush” as another shared: “When I sat down to start reading this book which has closer to 400 pages than 300, it was early in the morning and little did I know I would be in the same spot that evening tapping to the final pages of this addictive read.”

Meanwhile, a third commented: “This book is right up my alley- gritty, violent, brutal, psychologically thrilling and fast paced.”

Last Seen premieres on Wednesday, September 9, on Apple TV

Michele Spagnuolo allegedly used insider information to profit from bets on people on Google’s most-searched list.

A Google software engineer has been charged with fraud by US authorities after allegedly using insider information to win more than $1.2m in bets on the prediction market platform Polymarket.

Michele Spagnuolo, an Italian citizen residing in Switzerland, is accused of using confidential information to wager on the results of Google’s annual most-searched list, according to a criminal complaint unsealed on Wednesday.

US prosecutors accuse Spagnuolo of using an account named “AlphaRaccoon” to make trades on various markets linked to the results of Google’s 2025 Year in Search.

The total sum of the bets was approximately $2.75m, according to the complaint, filed in federal court in New York.

Among the bets, Spagnuolo successfully predicted that indie pop musician d4vd would top the list for the most-searched for person last year, hours after accessing confidential data at Google, according to prosecutors.

Spagnuolo, 36, faces charges of commodities fraud, wire fraud and money laundering.

“Today’s charges reinforce a decades-old message: corporate insiders cannot use confidential business information to turn a profit in our markets,” US Attorney for the Southern District of New York Jay Clayton said in a statement.

“Insider trading compromises the integrity of our markets, and the American people want this greed-driven conduct investigated and prosecuted,” Clayton added.

Bets on Maduro’s capture

Google said in a statement that it is working with law enforcement and that using confidential information to place bets is a serious breach of company policy.

Spagnuolo has been placed on leave, according to a Google spokesperson.

A Polymarket spokesperson said the company had worked closely with the US Attorney’s Office on the investigation and that the firm “is the only prediction platform to date whose cooperation has led to insider trading charges in the United States”.

“We are committed to maintaining accurate, fair, and transparent markets as well as enforcing our rules and working with our regulators and law enforcement,” the spokesperson added.

Last month, a US soldier was charged with using classified military information to place bets on Polymarket regarding the abduction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro.

Prosecutors accuse Gannon Ken Van Dyke, 38, of cashing in on the US operation against Maduro, to the tune of more than $400,000.

SAVANNAH Guthrie has quietly dropped hundreds of thousands on private investigators in a desperate attempt to find her mother months after she was abducted from her home.

The U.S. Sun can report that the Today anchor, 54, has shelled out around $500,000 to keep the search going for Nancy, 84, after losing faith in the official investigation. 

Though many have lost hope that Nancy will ever be found, Savannah “has told everyone involved that the search will continue for as long as necessary,” an insider told The U.S. Sun.

“She is not prepared to stop looking for her mother. She feels that depending only on the official investigation is not enough anymore – that’s why she’s investing so heavily in private investigators and outside specialists.”

The source said that the heartbroken daughter has hired an “entire independent team” who are “working leads every day” to help bring her beloved mother home.

This top-notch team includes former agents, security experts, and investigators, the insider claimed.

Read More Savannah Guthrie

‘ISN’T SHE RICH ENOUGH?’

Inside Savannah Guthrie’s plan for ‘second act’ in entertainment

According to the insider, the veteran journalist became disillusioned with the official investigation.

“She became increasingly disappointed with how communication from authorities changed over time,” they added.

“What once felt urgent started to feel far more routine.”

“When Savannah learned there would no longer be direct contact with the sheriff, she took that very personally,” the insider continued.

“She felt the family was being pushed further away from the center of the investigation.”

Meanwhile, a second insider explained: “The financial cost has become enormous, but Savannah doesn’t care about the money.”

“Right now, every dollar is worth spending if it helps bring her mother home.

“By now, the costs have climbed well into the mid-six figures. 

“And remember,  Savannah was once willing to pay a ransom, so spending big on the search is nothing new for her.”

“She keeps telling friends the same thing: The family can’t stop searching.

“Hope is the only thing driving her right now.”

The second insider claimed Savannah is still “emotionally devastated,” despite her smiley demeanor on the morning show each day.

“But she still believes there’s a chance her mother can be found, and that belief is what keeps the private search going every single day.”

Rob Shuter’s Naughty But Nice Substack was the first to report on Savannah’s ongoing investigator efforts into Nancy‘s disappearance. 

More than 100 days have passed since Nancy Guthrie disappeared from her bed in the early morning hours of February 1.

As the Pima County Sheriff’s Office remains tight-lipped, a feud has erupted behind the scenes between local cops and the highest levels of federal law enforcement.

FBI Director Kash Patel went on national television to blast local authorities, claiming they completely botched the opening hours of the investigation. 

Speaking with Fox News host Sean Hannity, Patel emphasized that while missing persons cases technically fall under local jurisdiction, the first 48 hours are the absolute most critical window to find someone alive. 

According to the FBI chief, federal agents were left twiddling their thumbs for four straight days before locals finally let them in.

Once the Bureau secured access, they immediately bypassed local roadblocks to recover chilling Nest security camera footage from Guthrie’s front porch. 

The terrifying video shows a masked predator messing with potted plants to block the camera view before tearing the device off the wall. 

Patel took direct credit for the breakthrough, noting the Bureau had to coordinate directly with Google just to get those haunting images out to the public.

The finger-pointing did not stop there. Patel openly slammed Pima County Sheriff Chris Nanos for bypassing the FBI’s world-class crime lab in Quantico, Virginia. 

Instead, local police shipped crucial DNA evidence found inside Nancy’s home to a private laboratory down in Florida.

Timeline of Nancy Guthrie’s disappearance

Nancy Guthrie, the 84-year-old mother of Today show co-anchor Savannah Guthrie, disappeared from her home on February 1, 2026.

Timeline:

• January 31: Nancy is last seen by her family
  • 5:32pm: Nancy travels to her daughter’s home for dinner, about 11 minutes from her own house.
  • 9:48pm: Family members drop off Nancy Guthrie at her home in Tucson. Her garage door closes two minutes later.
• February 1: Nancy is reported missing and a search begins
  • 1:47am: Nancy’s doorbell camera disconnects
  • 2:12am: Camera software detects a person moving in range of the camera. There is no video, and Nancy does not have a storage description.
  • 2:28am: Nancy’s pacemaker app disconnects from her phone, which is later found still at her house.
  • Around 11am: A parishioner at Nancy’s church calls the mom’s children and says she failed to show up for service.
  • 11:56am: Family members arrive at Nancy’s house to check on her.
  • 12:03pm: The family calls 911 to report Nancy missing.
  • 8:55pm: The Pima County Sheriff’s Office gives its first press conference and reveals some clues found at Nancy’s home caused “grave concern.” Sheriff Chris Nanos says helicopters, drones, and infrared cameras are all being utilized in the search.
• February 2: Search crews pull back. Nancy’s home is considered a crime scene. Savannah releases a statement thanking supporters for their prayers, which her co-hosts read on Today.
• February 3: A trail of blood is pictured outside Nancy’s home, where there were reportedly signs of forced entry. Nanos admits they have no suspects, no leads, and no videos that could lead to Nancy’s recovery. He and the FBI beg for more tips and accounts.
• February 4, 8pm: Savannah and her siblings release a heartbreaking video directed at their mother’s abductors asking for proof she is alive and saying they’re willing to work with them to get her back.
• February 5: FBI offers $50,000 reward for information on the case.
  • 5pm: First ransom demand deadline for millions in Bitcoin passes. Guthrie family releases demand to speak “directly” to the kidnappers, saying, “We want to talk to you and we are waiting for contact.”
  • Blood is confirmed to be Nancy’s.
• February 7: Savannah and her siblings share a video stating they received a message from kidnappers and are willing to pay.
• February 9, 5pm: Second ransom demand deadline, reportedly with “much more serious” conditions.
  • Savannah posts a video asking the public to report anything strange to law enforcement.
• February 10: The FBI release surveillance footage of the armed masked suspect outside Guthrie’s house on the night she disappeared.
• February 11: A man is detained in Rio Rico, about 19 miles south of Tucson. The individual was released after being questioned by authorities.
• February 12: Suspect described as 5’9″-5’10” carrying a black Ozark Trail backpack (Walmart exclusive).
• February 13: A second man is detained by police after being pulled over by Pima County officers near a Culver’s in Tucson. The man, identified as Luke Daley, was questioned and has since been released.
• February 15: DNA is collected from a discarded glove found 2 miles away that matches surveillance.
• February 16: Sheriff Nanos clears the Guthrie family and their spouses of any involvement.
• February 24: The Guthrie family increased the family’s reward for information to $1million.
• March 4: DNA on the glove is traced to a restaurant worker, and the person is cleared of any involvement.
• March 16: ABC News reports that more images have been obtained from motion-activated cameras.
• March 26: Savannah’s first on-camera interview since her mother’s disappearance airs.

Patel claimed he had hundreds of federal agents and intelligence analysts deployed to Phoenix and Tucson on standby, ready to flood the neighborhood and process the DNA evidence within days. 

He expressed frustration that the Bureau was sidelined, arguing their premier lab could have cracked open better leads by now.

Sheriff Nanos is fiercely hitting back against the narrative. 

In an official statement, Nanos denied keeping the feds in the dark, insisting that members of the FBI Task Force were actually boots-on-the-ground at the scene alongside local detectives from the very beginning. 

Nanos fired back that both his department and Nancy’s own family notified federal authorities immediately.

True crime fans are urged to check out the Netflix documentary series described as “one of the best” ever made.

A “fascinating” Netflix series with a major twist is the perfect binge watch for fans of true crime documentaries.

The docu-series, which viewers have described as “heartbreaking” and “mindblowing”, first aired back in 2019.

It follows the stranger-than-fiction story of Henry Lee Lucas, who was known as “the most prolific serial killer in the US”.

However, the bizarre case takes an unexpected turn, and the series about his extraordinary life has left viewers stunned.

The synopsis on Netflix reads: “Henry Lee Lucas rose to infamy when he confessed to hundreds of unsolved murders. =

“This documentary series examines the truth – and horrific consequences.”

Titled The Confession Killer, the Netflix series was a hit when it first came out, earning a rare 100% fresh score on Rotten Tomatoes.

Audiences took to the review section to share their thoughts on the mini-series, with many praising its detail and calling it a “must watch”.

“Superb, my mind was blown as the story unfolded,” one person wrote, as another agreed: “This is amazing. One of the best, if not the best, true crime doc series of late.”

“Very well described in terms of details and information. Very little bias,” another praised, as a fourth person said: “Henry Lee Lucas is a tragic story where everyone involved was surprised in the end. It’s heartbreaking. You must watch it.”

Get Netflix free with Sky

This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more

£5.99

£0

Sky

Get the deal here

Sky is giving away a free Netflix subscription with its new Sky Stream TV bundles, including the £15 Essential TV plan.

This lets members watch live and on-demand TV content without a satellite dish or aerial and includes hit shows like Stranger Things and The Last of Us.

Another person reflected: “As someone as complicated as Henry Lee Lucas, this is probably the best and most well put together documentary about him that has ever been made.”

One more viewer observed: “This was fascinating and SO well done. The old footage was terrific as were the interviews with people who are still alive to tell their versions of the story. I was hooked.

“I thought I was just watching a good profile of a serial killer and then everything took a completely different turn. Anyone interested in true crime will find this a compelling documentary. Highly recommended.”

Critics also applauded the documentary, with Mashable noting: For true crime devotees, watching the five-part series will do more than hit the spot.”

The Confession Killer is available to stream now on Netflix.

Moscow condemned the action of the Czech police, calling the detainment a ‘provocation’.

Czech police have detained a Russian cleric after four containers of a suspicious white substance were discovered in his car.

Orthodox Bishop Hilarion was detained in the town of Karlovy Vary, according to a statement released on his Telegram channel by his defence team on Monday.

The arrest sparked claims of provocation from Moscow against Czechia’s government, despite Prague having reduced its support for Ukraine since it took office six months ago.

Bishop Hilarion, 60, whose secular name is Grigory Alfeyev, heads the Russian Orthodox Church’s congregation in the western town, which hosts a sizeable Russian diaspora.

The cleric denied any involvement in drug possession. “I have no connection and have never had any connection to the illegal trafficking of narcotic substances,” he said in the statement.

Czech police said only that a man was detained on Sunday evening on a highway between Karlovy Vary and Prague, adding that interrogations were under way and no one had been charged, without disclosing the detainee’s identity.

The Czech Drug Enforcement Centre said it had also acted on an anonymous tip-off reporting the transport of narcotic and psychotropic substances.

Hilarion’s defence said police offered no clear reason for stopping the vehicle and that two patrol cars appeared to be waiting for it on the road.

Hilarion was not permitted to observe the search, his lawyer said, adding that the defence was demanding independent forensic analysis of the substance along with fingerprint and DNA checks.

‘Provocation’

Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova called the incident an “orchestrated provocation” aimed at discrediting Hilarion, and demanded his immediate release.

“The head of the Czech diplomatic ⁠mission in Moscow will shortly be summoned to ⁠the Russian Foreign Ministry, where a strong protest will be lodged regarding the unacceptable high-handedness of the Czech authorities,” she said.

Russian media reported that the detention followed months of anonymous threats against Hilarion, including threats of physical violence demanding he leave his post in Karlovy Vary.

Hilarion was once considered the right-hand man of Patriarch Kirill – the head of the Russian Orthodox Church and a pillar of support for President Vladimir Putin and his war on Ukraine.

However, the priest reportedly fell out of favour with Moscow’s spiritual authorities and was sent abroad in 2022, shortly after Russia’s invasion.

His assignment to the Czech Republic came after a former aide brought sexual misconduct charges against him, allegations Hilarion denied, claiming the aide had attempted to extort €384,000 from him.

Unlike many senior Russian clergymen who have publicly backed the war in Ukraine, Hilarion has never publicly commented on the conflict.

Separately on Monday, the Czech government, a coalition of populist and far-right parties that took office in December, announced that it had approved a legal amendment ⁠that would ⁠tighten rules for Ukrainian refugees’ stays and financial support. It said it was responding to the abuse of ⁠aid, and the perception that refugees had some advantages over locals.

As technology becomes more and more advanced and accessible to people, cruise ships have to put rules in place to make sure passengers are safe, and their privacy is protected

People are being warned that they could be fined or kicked off a cruise ship they’re a passenger on for wearing 1 luxury item when onboard. Several cruise companies have introduced a number of new rules in 2026 to ensure the safety of passengers travelling on board.

As technology continues to advance and people snap up the latest gadgets, cruise operators are keeping their policies up to date to safeguard holidaymakers and protect their privacy while travelling at sea. Whether you’re sailing with Disney, Virgin, P&O or Fred. Olsen., each cruise liner has their own set of rules that could land passengers in trouble.

Don and Heidi, a couple who have clocked up 100 cruises between them, regularly share updates and handy tips on TikTok, and have been keeping a close watch on shifting cruise policies over recent months.

With the rise of people wearing smart glasses, such as the very popular Meta Glasses, cruise ships have been forced to take steps to protect their passenger’s privacy when they’re traveling on cruise liners.

Don said: “Cruise lines are instituting new policies and in 2026, these behaviours will get you fined, banned, or removed from the ship entirely.

“One, recording other passengers without their consent using technology like Meta Glasses is a serious violation of privacy policies and fellow cruisers are reporting it.”

One of the cruise companies who has banned the items is Royal Caribbean who quietly updated its prohibited items list to tighten onboard safety and cybersecurity.

Recently, Royal Caribbean updated the verbiage on its prohibited items list to read: “‘Smart’ glasses from any of several manufacturers that can record video and audio are not allowed to be used in certain areas onboard the ship, including, but not limited to, public restrooms, Youth Program areas, medical areas, as well as the casino.”

Royal Carrabian’s app confirmed that if a guest fails to abide by the policy, the chief security officer and captain are authorized to confiscate the smart glasses.

Don continued: “Two, flying a drone from the ship is banned on nearly every cruise line. Get caught launching one and you’ll be escorted off at the next port.

“Three, fights on cruise ships are all over the news and lines are done looking the other way. Passengers involved in physical altercations are now being banned from certain cruise lines for life.

“Four, getting caught with prohibited items in checked luggage and you get escorted to a security meeting. Try to bring something more serious on board and you could be handed over to authorities at the next port.

“Five, this isn’t optional. It’s international maritime law. Skip the muster drill and crew will track you down to complete it. Refuse entirely and you’ll be removed from the ship before a set sail.

“Six, lighting up on your balcony, in your cabin, or anywhere else outside the designated smoking areas can get you fined and repeat violations can get you escorted off the ship.

“This includes vaping. Don’t forget to share this one with your cruise mates for your next sailing.”

The right-wing president highlighted anti-crime operations and economic progress, while critics warned of abuses.

Ecuadorian President Daniel Noboa has used his State of the Union speech to tout his United States-backed crime-fighting strategies as well as improvements to the economy.

Addressing the National Assembly in the capital Quito on Sunday, Noboa cited the extradition of a dozen crime bosses to the US and the seizure of almost 300 tonnes of drugs as examples of what he described as his decisive and effective approach.

“We will seek them out, find them and extradite them,” Noboa said of wanted criminals. He also asserted that the South American country cannot develop “if families live in fear”.

Organised crime is the leading concern among Ecuadorians this decade, after a spike in homicides during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Since 2021, Ecuador has struggled to contain drug violence as rival cartels partner with local gangs to battle for control of routes and coastal ports used to smuggle cocaine. The country is wedged between Colombia and Peru, the world’s top cocaine producing countries.

Last year, Ecuador recorded its highest homicide rate in decades, with approximately 50 murders for every 100,000 residents, according to the Ministry of the Interior.

In response, Noboa, who was reelected last year to a four-year term, has used a state of exception to allow the military to implement a variety of crime-fighting strategies, including joint patrols with police officers and property searches without warrants.

Earlier this year, Ecuador’s military also carried out an operation with US forces against a training camp allegedly used by Colombian drug traffickers, attacking the site with drones, helicopters and boats.

Noboa’s approach, however, has come under criticism from civil society groups, who say his iron-fisted methods have failed to reduce crime while putting civilians in danger.

Glaedys Gonzalez, an analyst for the Andean region at the International Crisis Group, said on Sunday that Noboa may have been optimistic in his speech regarding the country’s security.

“Progress on violence is far from being achieved,” Gonzalez said. “It is evident that the situation in Ecuador has reached unprecedented levels.”

Sunday’s speech also promoted Ecuador’s economic progress, with Noboa telling lawmakers that poverty dropped from 26 percent to 21.4 percent in 2025. Extreme poverty, he added, went down from 10.4 percent to 8.4 percent.

Noboa was first elected in 2023 during a snap election triggered when then-President Guillermo Lasso dissolved the National Assembly and shortened his own term.

Convictions handed down amid an intensified crackdown by Bahraini authorities on individuals accused of having ties to Tehran.

Bahrain has sentenced nine people to life in prison for carrying out what authorities describe as “hostile and terrorist acts” in cooperation with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC).

Two other defendants were also jailed for three years each after being convicted of collaborating with the IRGC in what prosecutors described as “terrorist and espionage” activities, state media reported on Sunday.

The convictions were handed down during an intensified crackdown by Bahraini authorities on individuals accused of ties to Tehran. The crackdown followed a wave of Iranian strikes on Bahrain after the United States and Israel launched their war on Iran in late February. Iran began striking all of its Gulf neighbours in response, saying it was targeting American interests, including military bases.

Prosecutors said some of the defendants photographed vital and strategic sites in Bahrain on behalf of the IRGC. Others were accused of facilitating the transfer of funds from Iran to Bahrain, including through cryptocurrency transactions, to finance the operations. Authorities also alleged that individuals inside the country were recruited to support some of the plans.

Bahrain began arresting individuals allegedly linked to Iran in March, shortly after the conflict began.

Earlier this month, authorities detained a further 41 people.

Less than two weeks later, more than 60 people were stripped of their citizenship for allegedly supporting Iranian attacks on Bahrain and “colluding with foreign entities”.

The London-based Bahrain Institute for Rights and Democracy described the move as “dangerous” and said it constituted a clear violation of international law.

Other Gulf states have also arrested individuals accused of cooperating with Iran. Last month, the United Arab Emirates said it had dismantled a group allegedly planning to carry out what officials described as “terrorist acts”.

Bahrain is home to a large Shia population. Many of its members have long accused the authorities of political and economic marginalisation. The government denies discriminating against Shia citizens, accusing Iran of fuelling unrest in the country.

A Baloch separatist group has claimed responsibility for an attack on a train carrying soldiers in Quetta, Pakistan. The suicide car bombing killed at least 24 people and injured dozens more, including women and children.

Homicides in Los Angeles are down to levels not seen since the 1960s. Neighborhoods once awash in gang violence now sometimes go weeks, even months, without a shooting. And the follow-home robberies and street takeovers that captured the public’s attention in recent years have largely subsided.

By many measures, the city is safer than it has been in generations — and yet voters following L.A.’s hotly contested mayoral race might think the opposite.

The challengers to Mayor Karen Bass have zeroed in on homelessness and public drug use to argue she hasn’t delivered on public safety, while also criticizing how the Police Department has operated and been funded during her tenure.

Mike Bonin, a former L.A. City Council member, said the fact that Spencer Pratt — the former reality TV star who has been attacking Bass from the right — has gained so much traction in the race is proof of how Bass and other candidates to the left have failed to change “prevailing narratives that the city is unsafe.”

Mayoral candidate Spencer Pratt hosts a campaign block party on 10th Avenue in Los Angeles on May 20, 2026.

(Robert Gauthier / Los Angeles Times)

Pratt has been particularly active on social media, where he has shared artificial-intelligence videos created by fans depicting him as various superheroes coming to the rescue of a city that, under Democratic rule, has turned into a dystopian hellscape.

In a March 26 post on Substack, Pratt railed against the thousands of drug-related calls that emergency officials respond to every month. He has said that if elected mayor, he would order the police and fire chiefs and the county health director to “treat every encampment as a grave-disability zone.”

“No new laws needed,” he wrote. “No endless task forces.”

Flanking Bass on the left is Nithya Raman, a progressive City Council member who was once the mayor’s political ally.

Raman has argued that Bass has thrown too much money at the LAPD, with raises for police officers coming at the expense of other basic services such as park maintenance and street paving. Raman said the LAPD pay increases have “bankrupted” the city, depriving other services of much-needed funding. In campaign ads, Raman has cast herself as a more sensible alternative to Bass. Raman has said she would work to reduce traffic deaths and prioritize safety on the city’s buses and trains.

When she first ran for office in 2020, Raman called for defunding the police, saying the Los Angeles Police Department should be a “much smaller, specialized armed force.” Since then, however, she has voted for some budgets that increased spending on law enforcement.

In response to questions from The Times, Raman said she would work to find ways to overhaul public safety.

“I’ll propose budgets that expand unarmed response, work with LAPD to improve 911 response to more quickly answer calls for help that don’t require armed officers, and will appoint leadership at the Police Commission who will actively partner with the City Council to work on reform,” she said.

Representatives for Pratt and Bass didn’t respond to requests for interviews with the candidates.

Bonin said Bass — who supported various police reform measures while Congress — has shocked some of her supporters with how “aggressively pro-police she has been.”

When she ran for mayor in 2022, Bass vowed to retool the recruitment and hiring process in order to restore LAPD staffing to 9,500 officers. That hasn’t happened. The number of sworn officers recently fell below 8,600, despite Bass striking a deal with the police union to offer higher starting salaries and new retention bonuses.

Mayor Karen Bass takes part in a candidate forum on May 5, 2026, in Sherman Oaks.

(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)

On Thursday, the City Council approved a $15-billion budget for the upcoming fiscal year, which included funds to hire 510 new officers — just enough to offset turnover and maintain current staffing levels.

Raman has said the LAPD should not shrink any further because there aren’t enough officers to respond to 911 calls “in a timely fashion.”

Samantha Stevens, a Los Angeles political consultant and former legislative staffer, said people seem willing to back Pratt because he acknowledges that their sense of safety has been shaken — even if he has offered few concrete details about how to tackle crime beyond cracking down on homelessness.

Pratt’s critics say that his plan relies on funneling homeless people into a shelter system that doesn’t have the capacity to handle them all. Others have noted that the aggressive tactics he has proposed would probably face legal challenges.

L.A. City Councilmember Nithya Raman, who is running for mayor, makes a campaign stop at the site of a home burned in the Palisades fire.

(Eric Thayer / Los Angeles Times)

“He’s kind of a case study in somebody who has a lot of opinions but has no idea of how the city is run,” Stevens said.

Fernando Guerra, a political science professor at Loyola Marymount University, said Pratt seems to have tapped into a deep well of discontent among Angelenos who believe that crime and homeless have spiraled out of control. The challenge for Bass, he added, is that although the numbers suggest that crime has decreased, many people associate the sight of encampments spilling onto public sidewalks as “a breakdown” that indicates the city is becoming less safe.

“You want to go back to the days of Daryl Gates, you’ve got Pratt,” he said, referencing the former LAPD chief whose controversial police sweeps in the late 1980s yielded thousands of arrests while alienating large segments of South L.A.

“If you want more of the same from the past 20 years, you’ve got Bass,” Guerra added. “And if you want something new, then you’ve got Raman, but she has to explain what exactly she wants to do.”

Although Pratt and Raman appear to be the strongest challengers to Bass, several long-shot candidates have also made public safety a key issue in their campaigns. Some have gone after Bass for her support of LAPD Chief Jim McDonnell. Hired by Bass in 2024, McDonnell has touted the impressive drop in crime under his leadership, but also faced criticism over an uptick in shootings by police and aggressive crowd control tactics during protests against the Trump administration’s immigration policies.

Police Chief Jim McDonnell attends a news conference at LAPD headquarters on May 21, 2026.

(Genaro Molina / Los Angeles Times)

Rae Huang, a minister and housing rights advocate, said if elected mayor she would immediately replace McDonnell with someone who has the “ability to really reimagine what public safety really looks like.”

“I’m the only one with the guts to say that out loud,” Huang told The Times during a recent campaign stop at a bookstore in the West Adams neighborhood.

In social media posts and interviews, Huang has frequently referred to the LAPD as “one of the biggest legal gangs in the world,” and said she would work on diverting money from the police budget to scale up programs that have shown promise in sending unarmed specialists to deal with emergencies that involve people experiencing mental health crises.

The city is already running two such pilot programs, but under Bass they have remained underfunded, Huang said. Last week, the City Council signed off on expanding one of the programs.

Huang said she would also invest more heavily in addressing the city’s lack of affordable housing, which she said is an underlying cause of crime and homelessness.

The Los Angeles Police Protective League has poured hundreds of thousands of dollars into attack ads against Huang and Raman.

Adam Miller, a tech entrepreneur, has tried to strike a balance in his mayoral campaign, advocating for changes while acknowledging that many people still feel unsafe despite the historic drop in violent crime.

He criticized a recent vote by the L.A. City Council to limit so-called pretextual stops, in which officers pull people over for minor traffic infractions in order to investigate more serious offenses. The stops have been blamed for enabling racial discrimination.

Miller said that “constraining the Police Department is the opposite of what we should be doing.” He called for “leveraging” AI and modernizing the department’s archaic computer systems, which he said could allow the LAPD to catch up to other agencies that have embraced new technology.

Miller told The Times that he recently went on a ride-along with officers from the Rampart Division, which he said was eye-opening.

“At the highest level I think Angelenos don’t feel safe anymore,” he said. “They don’t feel safe in their neighborhoods, but more recently they don’t feel safe even in their own homes.”

Statistically speaking, the city might be safer than it’s been in decades, he said — but that doesn’t necessarily matter to voters.

“I don’t think it’s just perception,” he said. “I think it’s reality that crime has spread.”

A former MAFS UK bride has alleged she was left traumatised after her on-screen husband performed a lewd act and controlled her behaviour as she criticises welfare team

A former Married At First Sight UK bride says she was traumatised for years after appearing on the show and alleges her co-star restricted her movements, leaving her isolated.

Speaking to the Mirror following Panorama: The Dark Side of Married At First Sight, which aired on BBC One on Monday night, the bride alleged: “He performed a lewd act and then touched my face without consent. He banned me from drinking or speaking to production staff without him.”

She claims to have reported it to welfare staff and that production staff were aware of incidents but she was encouraged to continue with the show. She alleged: “They [production] would say, ‘It’s going to be OK’. Staff bought me a drink to help smooth things over after I complained.”

READ MORE: Two more Married At First Sight UK brides and a groom make fresh abuse claims

Describing the welfare team, she alleged: “They present as your best friend. I thought they were somebody you could talk to about anything. But if I look back on it now, I would say it’s more like grooming.”

The bride alleged she felt pressured into intimacy by her partner and does not believe enough safeguarding existed once couples returned to their apartments off camera.

She said: “I had sex with my partner and whilst I wasn’t forced, I felt pressured.” She added: “The couch ceremonies are supposed to be a safe space where you can speak honestly. But you go back to your apartment afterwards and there are no cameras there and nobody to protect you.”

She told how much of the alleged behaviour took place away from cameras and claimed she repeatedly raised concerns with welfare and production teams throughout filming.

She had months of psychological assessments, interviews and background checks, which she believed were designed to protect participants.

But she said: “I told them everything about myself – that I’d been in controlling relationships before, that I struggled speaking up for myself and that I fall in love very quickly. But now I feel like I gave them the blueprint on how to expose me and use me.

“They knew I had a history of abusive, controlling relationships and paired me with someone who controlled my every move.”

She believes the intense filming conditions heightened emotions. She said: “I’ve never cried more in my life. “You aren’t sleeping enough, you’re filming 14, 15, sometimes 20-hour days and when you’re not filming, you’re isolated in an apartment.

“At the dinner parties you’d be picked up at 8am in full hair and make-up then left sitting in a shipping container for six or seven hours before filming. The worse your situation was with your partner, the longer they seemed to leave you in the room.”

She questioned how much information relationship experts Paul C. Brunson, Charlene Douglas and the late Mel Schilling had received. The contestant said: “The experts had zero idea what was going on. They gave good advice based on the information they had.”

After watching the Panorama episode, the bride believes the worst is yet to come. She added: “They need to properly safeguard people instead of just creating drama. This Panorama story is only the beginning of hearing the nightmares people have had.”

The bombshell claims come as Channel 4 removed all ten series from its platforms and scrapped the series due to air in September following a BBC Panorama investigation that revealed two women claim they were raped by their on-screen “husbands” during filming, while another made allegations of sexual assault against her partner.

The Metropolitan Police has now urged potential victims to come forward, stating they will be “making approaches to the relevant production teams” to ensure anyone affected knows how to report criminal allegations.

The scandal has blown open the production practices used in dating reality shows which have been growing in popularity over recent years.

Monday’s documentary sparked a political row, with Channel 4 CEO Priya Dogra telling MPs the broadcaster was “not an adjudicator” on the serious allegations. But it is feared this is just the tip of the iceberg for dating reality shows and these new claims put pressure on producers and broadcasters to clean up their act.

Channel 4 has commissioned an external review while insisting their welfare protocols are “some of the most comprehensive and robust in the industry”. Industry sources say the show is unlikely to ever air in the UK again.

The Mirror put these allegations to CPL and to Channel 4 who directed us to their statement in full. Part of this includes: “MAFS UK is produced under some of the most comprehensive and robust welfare protocols in the industry. These include the most thorough background checks available, a Code of Conduct which clearly sets out behavioural standards, daily contributor check-ins with a specialist welfare team and access to additional support before, during and after filming. The physical and psychological wellbeing of all contributors is of paramount importance throughout the process. All duty of care processes are regularly reviewed and, where appropriate, strengthened.”

Another section of the statement reads: “Channel 4 believes that when concerns related to contributor welfare were raised through existing welfare and production protocols, prompt and appropriate action was taken, based on the information available at the time. Channel 4 strongly refutes any claim to the contrary.”

READ MORE: ‘Serious concerns’ raised with Channel 4 and Ofcom over Married At First Sight rape claims

The indictment of former Cuban President Raul Castro over a 1996 plane shootdown revives a decades-old case at a moment of heightened US pressure on Havana. Al Jazeera’s Kimberly Halkett explains why the timing matters.

Two gunmen have killed three people at the Islamic Center of San Diego in what police are treating as a hate crime. Police say the attackers, aged 17 and 19, died from self-inflicted gunshots. A security guard was among those killed.

The woman whose harrowing story is the basis for ITV’s John Worboys drama Believe Me has said the show should be shown to the police so that they will treat women better – but it shouldn’t take TV for change to happen

Anyone who wants to know what many women’s worst nightmare looks like should watch ITV’s latest true crime drama Believe Me. It follows the true story of three women who were raped by a London taxi driver and how many people, including the police, refused to believe them. Ahead of the show’s final episode, one of those women has said she thinks all police should be shown the TV show so that they can learn from it. It’s a brilliant idea that could lead to real change, but it poses a question – why can a TV show change everything, whilst the very real, very harrowing story behind it changes nothing?

There are certain things women are told to do to avoid being the victims of sexual assault and rape. Don’t go out late at night and if you are out late, get a cab home – it’s safer. Except in 2009, it very much wasn’t. John Worboys has been convicted of attacking 16 women who got into his taxi and is thought to have committed more than 100 rapes and sexual assault. They got into his cab thinking that they would be safe there and learnt in the worst way possible that ‘safe’ doesn’t really exist.

READ MORE: ITV confirms Believe Me replacement as Rivals legends’ new showREAD MORE: John Worboys ‘cowering in fear’ of prison attack after ITV’s Believe Me drama

And what do you do when you’re entire sense of safety has been ripped away from you? You turn to the police. Those whose job it is to make wrongs right, to investigate reports of crime and bring the perpetrator to justice. The three women at the heart of this story – ‘Sarah’, ‘Laila’ and Carrie Symonds (the only one whose real name was used) – do just that. Only they don’t get justice. They get belittled. They get interrogated. They learn that their red nail polish is enough to make those who are supposed to listen to them decide they are promiscuous and ‘asking for it’. Red nail polish. The same colour I painted my nails when I was 12 and Kate Middleton wears to church at Easter.

When I watched the show, I was caught, as I so often am, between rage and resignation. I was shaking with fury at how the police refused to listen and in the same moment, utterly exhausted. Exhausted by being angry, exhausted by being scared, exhausted by knowing that less than 3% of reported rape cases result in charges and the constant realisation that this hasn’t changed much before and isn’t likely to change in the future.

And yet, even before the final episode of Believe was released on 18 May, I was seeing a call for the police to do better all over social media. The woman who was in the inspiration behind Sarah went on Good Morning Britain to tell Susanna Reid about why the show should be shown to police officers. She argued that if they had the effects of police ineptitude laid before them – in this case, the many, many women Worboys raped in the months between Sarah’s report and his arrest – they might be better going forward.

We know from past TV shows that well told dramas that capture the public attention can lead to change. Just look at Mr Bates vs the Post Office. After that show, a petition to have Paula Vennells CBE stripped was signed by more than 1.2million people and the whole case became such a huge news story that the then Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, announced new legislation to exonerate the convicted subpostmasters. A TV show led to a change in the law.

Similarly, though it was not based on a true story, Adolescence was immediately met with calls from the now Prime Minister, Keir Starmer, for it to be screened in schools so that young boys can learn about the dangers of the manosphere.

There is a trend here where real life stories about traditionally marginalised groups – such as women and the working class – being treated badly by those more powerful than them are given little attention until TV shines a light on them. The systemic problems that are highlighted by these true stories are swept under the rug until television sweeps them back out again.

Here’s the message that sends: if you are from a marginalised group and something awful happens to you, don’t expect anything to change unless millions get to watch it happen to a fictional version of you on the country’s biggest TV networks. If you can’t get a BAFTA winning show out of your experiences, then, I’m sorry, but those with the power to change things aren’t listening.

It’s very Black Mirror, isn’t it? We’ve come to a place where people don’t matter unless there’s an element of entertainment thrown in. That being said, how many avenues for change do we really have?

Protests haven’t yet worked for ending violence against women. The protests after Sarah Everard was murdered sparked an inquiry, which in turn led to to James Cleverly announcing vaguely that police officers charged with “certain offences” would be automatically suspended from duty. Many women I know felt at the time that this was the equivalent to a pat on the shoulder and a ‘there, there, it’ll be alright’. Similarly, politicians are being hindered by internal party conflicts. Jess Philips, one of the biggest advocates for ending violence against women, resigned from her post in the cabinet amid calls for Keir Starmer to step down.

The people who are supposed to fight for us can’t. The routes we’re supposed to take to fight for ourselves don’t work. At least ITV dramas get our stories out there and into the spotlight. At least, when there are cameras, lights and someone calling action, somebody finally hears what we’ve been screaming all along.

Like this story? For more of the latest showbiz news and gossip, follow Mirror Celebs on TikTok, Snapchat, Instagram, Twitter, Facebook, YouTube and Threads.

Viewers have been left horrified by the chilling new documentary that is free to watch.

Channel 5 viewers have been left horrified by a new true crime documentary.

Murder In Shetland: Trial by Jury follows the killing of Claire Leveque, a woman who was found dead at a remote Shetland home.

Claire, from Canada, was 24 years old when she was killed on 11 February 2024.

She was found with a number of serious injuries in a hot tub at a property in the Sandness area, and though emergency services arrived at the scene, she was pronounced dead a short while later.

A new documentary is now revealing the murder trial that followed, as well as sharing the perspective of her grieving family.

The Channel 5 synopsis teases: “Inside the courtroom as a grieving family and an accused partner collide in a murder trial.”

Sharing a clip on social media, Channel 5 warned viewers: “Warning: Some viewers may find the following video distressing.”

They added: “Claire Leveque’s final months reveal a harrowing story of control and abuse. Now, her family cross continents in search of answers, and justice.”

The trailer heard clippings from the trial, with Claire’s family and friends in tears in court.

It also sees testimonies from experts brought in to prove the case, as a person warns: “This is a horror story from the beginning.”

“This was horrific,” one viewer commented to the clip.

Another said: “Horrendous case – can’t imagine how her family & friends coped with that trial.”

Someone else called it “very chilling”, and said “it wasn’t an easy watch”.

“A hard watch,” another agreed, while someone else said: “#MurderinShetland is remarkable television. Do watch it if you can, although it is quite harrowing.”

Ahead of the documentary airing, Gary Davies, consultant editor for commissioning at 5, said: “This thoughtful series gives a deeply human account of an unimaginable tragedy. It shines a light on the justice process and honours the courage of Claire’s family as they seek truth and remembrance.”

Mark Procter, executive producer for Big Little Fish, echoed the sentiment, saying: “We are profoundly grateful to the Judicial Office for Scotland and to everyone who enabled our access to the trial.

“Above all, we are honoured that the Leveque family have entrusted us to document what happened to Claire. We hope this series serves as a respectful tribute – giving her the voice that was so cruelly taken from her.”

Murder in Shetland: Trial by Jury is available to watch on Channel 5.

BBC One’s crime comedy Death Valley is back for a hotly anticipated second series, and a whole lot of new ‘whodunnits’ that need to be solved

Death Valley has made its eagerly awaited return for a second series.

BAFTA-winning performer Timothy Spall stars alongside Gwyneth Keyworth in the comedic murder-mystery programme, portraying the improbable pairing of actor John Chapel, formerly her hero as TV detective Caesar, and determined detective Janie Mallowan.

Filmed and set in Wales, Death Valley’s debut series launched in May 2025, smashing records with the largest overnight viewership for a new scripted programme in five years.

The series maintained a robust average of 4.6 million viewers over 28 days, and amongst Welsh audiences, Death Valley claimed the top comedy spot across all channels and platforms throughout 2025.

Given the programme’s triumph, it came as little shock when plans for a second series were swiftly revealed, with Death Valley series two now scheduled to debut on Sunday, 17 May at 8:15pm on BBC One. Audiences can also stream the complete box set on iPlayer from the same date, reports the Express.

The second series resumes several months following the conclusion of series one. Janie has secured promotion to Detective Inspector and finds herself more overwhelmed than ever, with administrative duties mounting faster than she can manage them.

Complicating matters further, she’s been avoiding John since discovering he’s been romantically involved with her mum, Yvonne (Melanie Walters), and the pair are compelled to make amends when DCI Barry Clarke (Steffan Rhodri) enlists John’s assistance to crack a murder investigation.

They must set aside their complicated personal relationships when tasked with examining a suspicious death within a community service group, following the fatal plunge of one of its members from atop a crumbling castle.

The latest series of Death Valley also sees John hesitantly return to the acting world, appearing on the set of a grand Welsh fantasy television production, though another killing soon demands attention.

Additional murders occur in a seaside fishing community, at an eco-friendly commune, and within a rugby club, as John and Janie persist in delivering justice throughout the mid-Wales area.

Throughout the series, there’s also an impressive roster of guest appearances, featuring Outlander’s Mark Lewis Jones, Game of Thrones legend Owen Teale, and Killing Eve’s Alexandra Roach.

Jane Horrocks (Here We Go, Chicken Run) also appears in the programme alongside Hammed Animashaun (Black Ops, SNL UK), Alexandra Roach (Killing Eve, Bodies), Roisin Conaty (After Life, Last one Laughing), Jim Howick (Ghosts, Here we Go), Asim Chaudhry (People Just Do Nothing), Lynn Hunter (Pushers & End of the Fxx World), Rhiannon Clements (Small Prophets, Pushers), Mike Bubbins (Mammoth) and Liz Carr (Silent Witness, Good Omens).

Death Valley series 2 launches on Sunday, 17 May at 8:15pm on BBC One and iPlayer.

Coronation Street boss Kate Brooks has revealed when viewers will find out the identity of Theo Silverton’s killer after the scaffolder was killed off in the soap’s latest whodunnit

Coronation Street boss Kate Brooks has revealed when viewers will find out the identity of Theo Silverton’s killer.

The scaffolder, who was played by former Tracy Beaker star James Cartwright, was killed off at the end of the soap’s much-hyped Murder Week after almost a year of abusing partner Todd Grimshaw, and along with Todd himself, George Shuttleworth, Gary Windass, Summer Spellman, Christina Boyd and Danielle Silverton were named as official suspects.

It all came about following a flashforward, which aired earlier this year, and five potential victims were named in the incredibly dramatic storyline. In the end, it was Theo who was revealed as the victim after viewers had to sit through the same day played out over and over again, all played out from various points of view.

Now Kate, who took over as producer of the ITV soap in November 2024 and previously held the top job on Emmerdale, has told viewers that they will have to wait just a bit longer to find out who was responsible for the murder.

READ MORE: Benidorm’s Crissy Rock says political correctness has ‘gone too far’ for rebootREAD MORE: Benidorm’s Crissy Rock says political correctness has ‘gone too far’ for reboot

She said: “It’s later in the summer. We reveal to the audience who it is during late June, July. There’s lots of people you definitely think it could be. It’s a massive story, there’s so many different twists, and there’s so many different offshoots to the story as well. You think you’re watching one thing, and then it diverts into a completely new kind of story territory. It’ll definitely keep people guessing. “

In the coming weeks the investigation shifts, and pulled in for questioning are Summer, Christina and Danielle. As lies are exposed, and arrests are made, it’s yet to be revealed if any of the six are actually the murderer.

They all have motives, and upcoming scenes will reveal why they are a suspect. Todd was being abused by Theo, and the night Theo died he was trying to hunt Todd down – so did he find him?

For Summer, the last time we saw Theo alive was when he trapped her in the flat alone. So did Summer kill Theo? Gary has also been seen acting weirdly – even though wife Maria Connor has givne him an alibi.

We know Gary had threatened him and the pair had clashed, and he’s also killed before. Did Gary take revenge? George also stood up to Theo, and on the night of the murder he was alone at home.

Finally there’s Theo’s ex-wife Danielle. She was also acting suspiciously on Monday and upcoming scenes tease her marriage faced it’s troubles. So might she have killed her violent ex?

Coronation Street airs weeknights at 8:30pm on ITV1 and ITV X.

* Follow Mirror Celebs and TV on TikTok , Snapchat , Instagram ,Twitter ,Facebook , YouTube and Threads .

South Africa’s President Cyril Ramaphosa has refused to resign over a “cash-in-sofa scandal” that continues to haunt his presidency.

Ramaphosa, who addressed the nation on Monday to declare his intention to remain in his post, is set to face a multi-party impeachment committee, which will investigate allegations that he covered up a 2020 break-in at his private ranch and the theft of more than $500,000, concealing the incident from police and tax authorities.

The committee’s findings could spell his impeachment; however, parliament has not provided a timeframe for the investigation, which has yet to commence.

Analysts say the scandal, which has been dubbed “Farmgate”, has been particularly damaging for a president who rode to power in 2018 on an anticorruption mandate, after the much-criticised presidency of Jacob Zuma. Now, eight years later, the case of the cash found stuffed in a sofa at his game ranch could be what takes Ramaphosa down.

Can the South African president survive? Here is what we know.

What’s the scandal all about?

In February 2020, burglars allegedly broke into Ramaphosa’s luxury private ranch, Phala Phala, in Limpopo province, South Africa, and stole $580,000. The cash was said to have been hidden inside furniture at the farm – hence the “Farmgate” label.

Ramaphosa has been accused of covering up the theft and keeping private efforts to trace the burglars a secret to avoid an investigation into where the money had come from – and why it was hidden in a sofa.

Corruption allegations surfaced when a former head of South Africa’s state security agency walked into a police station in 2022 and accused the president of money laundering in relation to the stolen cash.

Later that year, an independent parliamentary committee found that Ramaphosa “may have committed” serious violations and misconduct. In particular, the panel found he had failed to properly report a theft to police as required under anticorruption laws and “acted in a manner inconsistent with his office”.

At the time, the African National Congress (ANC) had a strong majority in parliament – with 230 seats out of 400. It was therefore able to reject the report and refused to open impeachment proceedings.

But the left-wing Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) challenged this at the Constitutional Court in Cape Town, which, last week, overturned the government’s rejection of the 2022 parliamentary report and referred it to a multi-party impeachment committee for a full investigation.

What has Ramaphosa said?

Ramaphosa has always denied allegations of corruption and maintains that the stolen cash came from selling buffalo.

Since the constitutional court’s ruling last week, Ramaphosa has been facing renewed calls for his resignation, mostly from opposition leaders. In a televised address on Monday, the president refused to step down.

“While there have been calls in some circles that I should resign, nothing in the Constitutional Court judgement compels me to resign my office,” he said.

“Since a criminal complaint was laid against me in June 2022, I have consistently maintained that I have not stolen public money, committed any crime, nor violated my oath of office,” Ramaphosa said in his address, adding that he has cooperated in all investigations.

The president rejected the 2022 report from the independent panel again, saying: “The complaints against me are based on hearsay allegations. No evidence, let alone sufficient evidence, has been presented to prove that I committed any violation, let alone a serious violation of the Constitution or law, or serious misconduct as set out in the Constitution.”

If the committee does find enough evidence against him, it could direct him to be impeached.

It is unclear how long this will take, however. Ramaphosa has pledged to seek a judicial review of the report’s contents, which, in turn, could delay the investigation of the impeachment committee.

What is the process for impeachment?

If a president is found to have violated the constitution or the law, or is unable to perform the duties of office, South Africa’s National Assembly has the constitutional authority to remove him or her.

Beyond the parliamentary investigation that will now begin into the Farmgate scandal, and which can trigger a vote on impeachment, as well, any member of parliament may introduce a motion seeking the president’s removal. The speaker of the National Assembly would then refer the motion to an independent panel of legal experts to determine whether sufficient evidence exists to proceed.

If this panel decides there is a case against the president, lawmakers must vote on whether to begin impeachment proceedings. After this, a specially constituted impeachment committee is established to carry out a detailed investigation into the allegations. This is separate from the investigation beginning now and could take several months.

Once that committee recommends the removal of the president, parliament holds a final vote to impeach the president. Under Section 89 of the constitution, a two-thirds majority is required – meaning at least 267 lawmakers must vote in favour of removal in the 400-seat National Assembly.

Are there other ways to remove Ramaphosa?

Yes, the South African president can be removed from his job via a no-confidence vote in parliament.

Any member of the assembly can propose the no-confidence motion, and it only requires a simple majority of more than 50 percent.

Ramaphosa would need support from coalition partners to survive a no-confidence vote, however. This has already been proposed by at least two opposition parties in parliament.

Another way could be if his ANC party turns against him, as it did with the last president, Zuma, who came in for years of corruption allegations and was finally forced to resign in 2018.

How strong is Ramaphosa’s position?

Ramaphosa is not only the president of South Africa, but also the leader of its most popular party, the ANC. Nelson Mandela was the ANC’s first Black president after apartheid ended in 1994.

In 2024, the ANC stunningly lost its majority in parliament for the first time following more than three decades in power. Today, the ANC holds 159 of 400 seats in the national assembly, or about 40 percent of seats – and Ramaphosa is governing in a coalition with the Democratic Alliance, which has 87 seats, along with other smaller parties.

But Chris Ogunmodede, an independent analyst of African politics, security, and international affairs, based in Lagos, Nigeria, said Ramaphosa would likely survive any impeachment attempts, “simply because of the arithmetic”.

“His numbers in the parliament virtually guarantee that impeachment will not happen,” Ogunmodede told Al Jazeera.

“It hasn’t been easy, but there is a government that seems to be functional and is showing some signs of reinvigoration,” Ogunmodede added. “There’s a lot of uncertainty on the part of the other coalition parties that suggests that they would much rather be on the side of caution and go with the devil they know, and preserve the government by keeping Ramaphosa in power.”

Despite this, the cash-in-sofa scandal has been damaging, he said.

And, under Ramaphosa, the ANC’s popularity has continued to slide. The party’s national vote share fell from 57.5 percent in the 2019 election to 40.2 percent in the 2024 election, marking its worst performance since the end of apartheid.

The South African economy has shown some signs of improvement, however, and given the Ramaphosa government “something to show for the time that it’s been in power”, said Ogunmodede.

Yet the South African government still faces long-term structural concerns about the economy, the country’s institutions, corruption, crime and other issues, the analyst added.

On the back of underlying anti-incumbency, Ogunmodede said the top court’s ruling on the cash-in-sofa scandal “has resurrected many concerns that South Africans have had about the president and his party, and the political institutions of the country more broadly”.