Duty

The BBC has shared a teaser trailer ahead of the return of a police series called ‘the best thing on TV’

The BBC has shared a first look ahead of the return of a police series hailed as “a true gem”.

Blue Lights, which follows officers at the fictional Blackthorn police station in Belfast, has become a huge hit since it started in 2023, with some viewers saying it’s even better than Line of Duty. Its fourth series is set to air this autumn and the broadcaster shared a peek at what fans can expect in a new trailer.

In the exclusive clip, Constable Shane Bradley (played by Frank Blake) stops an elderly driver, David (Trevor Gill) and his passenger, Imelda (Rosamund Monteith), in a bid to improve Blackthorn’s crime statistics. He quizzes the man about whether he has been drinking, but he insists that he hasn’t touched a drop since 2003.

The forthcoming series stars Siân Brooke as Grace, Martin McCann as Stevie, Katherine Devlin as Annie and Nathan Braniff as Tommy.

Game of Thrones’ Richard Dormer, who played Gerry Cliff in series one, returns alongside Hannah McClean as solicitor Jen Robinson and Jonathan Harden as disgraced former Inspector, Jonty, in an episode “that will answer important questions from the past”. Blue Lights also stars Neil Keery from How To Get To Heaven From Belfast and Andrea Irvine from Call The Midwife.

So far three series of Blue Lights have aired, with fans posting messages on social media saying that it is “exceptional”, “stunning” and “the best thing on television”.

“Absolutely outstanding British drama,” one wrote on IMDb.com. “It’s poignant, emotional, engaging. The cast are brilliant. Best show I’ve watched in a long time.”

“It has everything a good police series should have,” said someone else. “It’s so tense and exciting with a great plot and cliffhangers and great criminals to catch.” “This is jewel of a police series!!” exclaimed another impressed viewer, as one said it keeps you “on the edge of your seat”.

“The storyline and acting are exceptional,” commented one fan, as another said: “The quality of Blue Lights took me completely by surprise – this is one of the highest quality shows I’ve seen in quite a while, driven by a superb storyline and excellent performances.”

“Blue Lights is a true gem,” said another. “Not your standard cop series. This one has HEART.”

“Easily the best police drama in the UK – I’d place it higher than Line of Duty,” remarked one person on Reddit. “I love Line of Duty, but I actually feel this recent series of Blue Lights was even better than the last couple from Line of Duty,” said another.

Blue Lights series four will be on BBC iPlayer and BBC One this autumn

AIRPORT terminals – love them or hate them, you’ll find yourself killing time in one before your next holiday.

According to a study by YouGov in 2023, the average Brit spends as much as £20 before a flight, with common items being perfumes, alcohol and food gifts.

Yet while some people enjoy a perusal of the aisles, others are more reluctant to.

While bargains can be found at Duty Free, you’ll find your cup of coffee or morning breakfast a lot more expensive than outside the airport – making your holiday more expensive before you even get on the plane.

The discussion of enjoying the airport terminal has divided even the Sun Travel team.

Here we share our biggest bugbears, best ways to spend a few hours at the airport, the freebies you can bag while there and the handful of duty-free items that are actually worth buying.

Lisa Minot, Head of Travel

As per usual, I am late. Airport security is a nightmare. Endless lines of stressed passengers are corralled into a hot, suffocating pen, awaiting the conveyor belts of doom.

I roll my eyes as my perfectly acceptable hand luggage is sent down the reject lane – and I stand fuming, knowing there’s nothing wrong with it.  After another ten minutes and a ‘random check’, I am finally free to enter departures.

I am hot, bothered and hating life. So what could possibly be worse?

The winding ‘hell-no brick road’ through the World of Duty Free with its cloying perfume sprays, overpriced make-up and endless rows of ‘designer’ sunglasses.

Travellers slow to a snail’s pace as the brightly-coloured displays tempt them. And as I try to accelerate through the dawdlers, I get a full-on spray of aftershave in the face as the sales staff accost yet another unlucky victim.

Round and round we go. Past overpriced beauty brands I’ve never heard of – and will never be able to justify the price. Past rows of Union Jack tat and extortionate Fortnum and Mason biscuits.

Rounding another corner, there’s yet more retail hell – overpriced sweets and costume jewellery you know will probably disintegrate before you’ve settled into your airplane seat.

Finally, after what feels like an eternity, I’m spat out into the departure lounge. Except more retail hell awaits.

No, I don’t want a pair of overpriced shoes. I don’t need a ‘just in case’ shawl or a tech gadget promising to ‘transform’ my flight. I just want to sit down.

It’s bad enough I’m stuck in this soulless cavern, but the endless assault on my wallet is exhausting.

If I have forgotten something, God forbid, I’d much rather buy it at my destination. At least there it might have some meaning.

Instead, there is only one place I am heading. The airport pub.

The lone sanctuary in the chaos. The one place where I can enjoy a cheeky albeit overpriced drink.

And as I finally sink into a chair to do a spot of people watching, the rage fades.

It might be twice the price of my local, but I’m jetting off… and this is my little slice of airport heaven.

Deputy Travel Editor, Kara Godfrey

‘We don’t need to be so early to the airport, Kara,’ my friends often moan at me when I turn up three hours early for a flight to Spain.

They, however, are wrong – the beauty of a holiday starts at the airport.

In fact, it’s one of the most exciting bits of my trip, especially when travelling through some of our London airports, which, dare I say it, are some of the finest in Europe.

There is something to be said for being stuck within the walls of a terminal where there is nothing else to do but explore the shops – you can’t go back through security, and you can’t go to your gate.

If it’s an early morning flight, I embrace my overpriced Pret coffee, often chased by a just as expensive cheese turnover to keep me going.

I’ll check the time for my gate to be revealed (often at least 1hr30, with how early I arrive), and that’s when the fun starts.

I peruse Waterstones, picking up a new book that I forgot to pack myself but will inevitably never read, opting to pass out as soon as I get on the plane.

There’s the swimsuit I also forgot to pack that I must pick up from Accesorize, before being tempted into some new earrings, where I shall return from the trip with just one of them.

And I’ve been burnt before by inedible economy meals, so my trip to Boots is a must, picking up the same Meal Deal as always – Elderflower and Mint CBD drink, Korean Fried Chicken Rice Bowl and a Big Bag of Hula Hoops.

All of that, and I still have time to perhaps try some of the designer beauty products I can only dream of affording, but will happily smear samples on my wrists and neck.

How people hate the airport experience is beyond me – I simply say you aren’t doing it right.

I will never be that person you see frantically running through the airport, face frazzled as they barely make their flight.

For I, with my coffee, book and earrings to join me, settle in with another hour to kill while calmly waiting to board.

Who needs spa treatments when you have an airport terminal to peruse?

NEW YORK — President Trump’s 10% global tariffs were declared unlawful by a federal trade court in a fresh blow to the administration’s economic agenda, several months after the U.S. Supreme Court vacated earlier levies he’d imposed.

A divided three-judge panel at the U.S. Court of International Trade in Manhattan on Thursday granted a request by a group of small businesses and two dozen mostly Democrat-led states to vacate the tariffs. Trump imposed the 10% duties in February under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974, which had never previously been invoked.

The court for now only immediately blocked the administration from enforcing the tariffs against the two companies that sued and Washington state, making clear that it was not issuing a so-called universal injunction. The panel found that the other states that sued lacked standing because they aren’t direct importers, instead arguing that they were harmed by having to pay higher prices for goods when businesses passed on tariff costs.

It wasn’t immediately clear what the ruling would mean for now for other importers that had been paying the contested levies.

The majority of the panel rejected the administration’s stance that “balance-of-payments deficits” — a key criterion for imposing the Section 122 tariffs — was “a malleable phrase.” They concluded that Trump’s proclamation imposing the levies failed to identify that such deficits existed within the meaning of the 1974 law, instead using “trade and current account deficits to stand in the place.”

The decision is the latest setback for the president’s effort to levy tariffs without input from Congress. Earlier duties — overturned by the Supreme Court on Feb. 20 — were issued under a different law, the International Emergency Economic Powers Act, or IEEPA. In that case, the justices ruled Trump had exceeded his authority, kicking off a legal scramble by importers for almost $170 billion in refunds.

The U.S. Justice Department could challenge the trade court’s latest ruling by taking the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, which ruled against the Trump administration during the last tariff fight.

Section 122 allows presidents to impose duties in situations where the U.S. faces what the law defines as “fundamental international payments problems.” Even before Trump issued the tariffs, economists and policy experts debated whether the president would be able to build a solid legal framework using the statute.

In a proclamation declaring the use of Section 122, Trump said that tariffs were justified because the U.S. runs a “large and serious” trade deficit. He also pointed to the negative net flows of income from investments Americans have overseas and other things that showed the U.S. balance-of-payments relationship with the rest of the world was deteriorating.

Under the law, presidents have the ability to impose tariffs on goods imported into the U.S. on a short-term basis to address concerns about how money is flowing in and out of the country. Those concerns include “large and serious United States balance-of-payments deficits” and an “imminent and significant depreciation of the dollar.”

Unlike other legal options Trump might pursue to impose tariffs, Section 122 can be invoked without waiting for a federal agency to conduct an investigation to determine whether the levies are justifiable. But they can still be challenged in court.

The small businesses and states that sued argued that Section 122 became outdated when the U.S. ditched the gold standard decades ago. They say Trump improperly conflated “balance-of-payments deficits” with U.S. trade deficits in order to justify using the law.

They also allege that Trump’s order announcing the Section 122 tariffs was “riddled with omissions and mischaracterizations” around the meaning of a balance-of-payments deficit. The trade deficit cited by Trump is just one part of calculating the country’s balance of payments position, the states say.

Under Section 122, the president can order import duties of as much as 15%. The executive action can last 150 days, at which point Congress would have to extend it. Trump has said he would aim to increase the rate to 15% from 10%.

The states argue that Trump’s new tariffs violate other requirements in Section 122, including that such duties not be discriminatory in their application. The states argue that Trump’s new tariffs improperly exempt some goods from Canada, Mexico, Costa Rica, the Dominican Republic, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua.

According to the complaint, the Trump administration conceded during the previous litigation over his IEEPA tariffs that trade deficits “are conceptually distinct from balance-of-payments deficits.”

The clash over Section 122 emerged just as the legal fight over refunds from Trump’s IEEPA tariffs began to heat up. A different judge in the Court of International Trade, U.S. Judge Richard Eaton, is overseeing the massive refund effort and ordered Customs and Border Protection to give him regular updates on a largely automated process the government will use to issue most refunds.

Larson and Tillman write for Bloomberg.

British crime drama fans won’t want to miss this gripping murder mystery series set in Scotland

Crime drama fans will be hooked on this “addictive” series packed with twists and turns.

Shetland is a cherished British programme adapted from Ann Cleeves’ novels by David Kane. The show centres on police detectives investigating murders across the remote, tight-knit Shetland islands.

Douglas Henshall portrayed DI Jimmy Perez throughout the first seven series, before Ashley Jensen assumed the lead role as DI Ruth Calder from series eight onwards.

The murder mysteries unfold primarily on the eponymous archipelago, though certain scenes are filmed on mainland Scotland. Last month, the BBC announced that production has commenced on Shetland’s 11th series, with Ashley reprising her role as DI Calder alongside Alison O’Donnell as DI Alison ‘Tosh’ McIntosh.

The upcoming instalment will shoot at various Scottish locations and across the Shetland Isles throughout the coming months, with fresh episodes scheduled to debut on BBC One and iPlayer later this year. This comes just months after series 10 wrapped up, reports the Express.

The new six-part series welcomes Christine Bottomley, Kevin Harvey, Stella Gonet, Gregor Fisher, Gavin Mitchell, John Wark, Jude Bain, Robin Weaver, Beth Marshall, Daniel Boyd, Charlene Boyd, and Helen Mackay to the cast.

Returning favourites include Steven Robertson, Lewis Howden, Samuel Anderson, Steven Miller, Anne Kidd, Angus Miller, Connor McCarry, and Eubha Akilade.

The forthcoming series will focus on a historical killing destined to “forever change the lives of all those connected in the present day”.

The official synopsis reveals: “When a car is pulled from the water, a grim discovery is made – crammed in the boot are the decomposed, skeletal remains of an unknown male. The team’s search to uncover the victim’s identity begins with a hunt for the vehicle’s owner – a respected, local GP who left the Isles under a cloud of troubled rumours nine years ago.

“As Calder and Tosh dig deeper into the enigmatic GP’s state-of-mind and the lives of the loved ones he left behind, the investigation takes them to dark and dangerous places in their quest for the truth.”

Before the fresh episodes arrive, viewers can delve into numerous Scottish murder cases as the first ten series of Shetland are currently available on BBC iPlayer.

Shetland has won over millions of devoted followers, ranking amongst the top five most-watched BBC drama programmes of 2025. Furthermore, it held its position as Scotland’s leading BBC drama, with numerous fans drawing comparisons to other BBC favourites including Line of Duty and Blue Lights.

When a Reddit user sought recommendations similar to Line of Duty, one fan responded: “Shetland is a fantastic show. Was a bit slow at first but really gets going quickly and is addictive.”

An IMDb reviewer commented: “Stunning, gripping, dynamic noir series. Beautiful scenery, laid back pace but still a gripping series with great characters.” Another viewer chimed in: “We just started this series and absolutely love it. It gets better as you go, we’re just now on Season 3 and can’t wait to see what’s next. Incredible actors, strong storyline. Worth the watch, just be patient as you start!”

A third enthusiast declared: “This is a superb series that never disappoints. The writing is great and well thought-out, something that is missing in most shows today. The pace is excellent. This series could go on for dozens of seasons and would still hold my interest. Add this to your must-have watch list,” while another echoed the sentiment: “Outstanding mystery series. Absolutely perfect. The characters are likeable, the stories are compelling, the cinematography is stunning.”

Shetland is available to stream on BBC iPlayer

Some of the reservists accused of sexually assaulting a detainee have already started combat roles, reports Israeli Army Radio.

Israeli military chief Eyal Zamir has authorised five soldiers accused of sexually assaulting a Palestinian inmate in the notorious Sde Teiman detention camp to return to reserve service after charges against them were dropped, according to Israeli media reports.

The soldiers, all from the Force 100 unit assigned to guard military prisons, are being reinstated despite an ongoing, internal military inquiry into their conduct.

Israeli Army Radio reported that some of the reservists have already returned to active duty, including deployment to combat roles.

An Israeli army statement, cited by Israel’s Haaretz newspaper, said: “The investigation does not prevent them from continuing to serve … the command-level investigation will be completed as soon as possible.”

The reinstatement comes after Israel’s top military lawyer dropped all charges against the soldiers last month, closing a case that had been among the most divisive in Israel’s recent history.

The soldiers had been charged with aggravated assault and causing severe injury, after footage broadcast by Israeli television showed them abusing a Palestinian man in Sde Teiman. The military’s own indictment described soldiers stabbing the detainee with a sharp object near his rectum, causing cracked ribs, a punctured lung and an internal tear.

A doctor at the facility, Yoel Donchin, told Haaretz he was so shocked by the Palestinian inmate’s condition that he initially assumed it was the work of a rival armed group.

Military Advocate General Itay Offir said the indictments were scrapped partly because of “complexities in the evidentiary structure” and “difficulties” arising from the detainee’s release to the Gaza Strip.

Rights groups condemned the decision as a legal injustice, with Amnesty International calling it “yet another unconscionable chapter in the Israeli legal system’s long-standing history of granting impunity to perpetrators of grave crimes against Palestinians”.

“Since the start of Israel’s genocide against Palestinians in the occupied Gaza Strip, and despite overwhelming evidence of widespread torture and abuse, including sexual violence, against Palestinians in Israeli detention centers, only one Israeli soldier has so far been sentenced over torturing a Palestinian detainee,” said the rights group in a statement.

Palestinians released from Israeli detention have reported suffering widespread abuse while in custody.

A February report by the Committee to Protect Journalists also cited dozens of formerly detained Palestinian journalists describing “routine beatings, starvation and sexual assault” in Israeli custody.