There is now a six day wait to find out if Ross Kemp or Jerry Hall has been murdered – or if the Traitors failed.
21:03, 16 Oct 2026Updated 21:17, 16 Oct 2026
Maya was yawning like crazy in a bid to make a Faithful join in
Celebrity Traitors fans now have a tense wait to discover whether Ross Kemp or Jerry Hall will seal their own fate by yawning in the castle – or if the turret trio will fail their challenge to kill in plain sight.
In the UK game, the Traitors have never faltered at this before, but it has happened in international versions including in Denmark and Canada, when it was felt too many people were present to carry out the task – set by producers – without being caught.
If Maya Jama, James Acaster and Kenny Ojuederie do fail, their punishment would come in the form of a missed murder, meaning everyone arrives at breakfast the following morning and wonders what happened.
Jerry, 70, did say she was feeling tired during last night’s programme but did not respond to the many yawns made by Maya and James, which normally prompt a copycat response.
To see more of the stories you love from The Mirror and to find them easily in Google then make us your preferred source. Free and easy-to-do, just click on the link here to find more from The Mirror at the top of your feed.
If Ross succumbs, it could be seen as a fitting end to his time in the castle after he spent the whole of the first day convinced he’d been murdered in plain sight by first Bella Ramsey and then Leigh-Anne Pinnock.
Jerry – voted as the player whose head was most in the clouds during the latest mission – would be greatly missed for her eccentric ways, while Ross’s huge contribution to the missions would also be a sad loss for the whole team.
In last night’s show the ex-EastEnder, 62, said he felt angry with the Traitors for repeatedly setting him up and making the other Faithful feel suspicious of him.
But this time he and Jerry have been selected entirely at random, in the same way that Paloma Faith became Alan Carr’s first kill last year, even though she was one of his best pals.
The challenge, which left all three of the Traitors feeling the pressure, was to get any of the Faithful to yawn in a specific room after spraying some “deadly sleeping powder” from a perfume bottle, which would be breathed in.
Reading out the instructions in disbelief, comedian James said: “To seal the murder you must then say, ’Am I boring you?’ – followed by the victim’s name. I can’t believe this.” Viewers won’t discover the outcome until next Thursday’s episode at 8pm on BBC1.
“We’re all hiding a little bit of our personality inside,” says director Cristian Mungiu of the characters in “Fjord,” a searing drama inspired by real Norwegian child welfare cases. “The film speaks about a limit of intimacy, after which you will need to make a choice not knowing precisely what happens. This is why I wanted the film to start at the end of a conversation in which you don’t really know what kind of punishments exist in this family.” Lighting and shallow focus deepen the uncertainty of a mother (Renate Reinsve) comforting her daughter (Vanessa Ceban) and a father (Sebastian Stan) waiting to have his say: “You need to admit when you’re wrong.” “You see the role of a mother who tries to play this more empathic part, while the father is the one playing the role of the educator who imposes his rules,” Mungiu says. “This shot speaks about our way of storytelling and designing everything to be ambiguous enough about their relationship. At the same time, this also speaks about a theme in the film: this idea that there isn’t anything like right and wrong and the truth. And we all believe that the truth belongs to us. And this is the problem.”
In confirming his plans to live-stream Fort Hood mass shooter Nidal Malik Hasan’s military execution by firing squad on Dec. 3, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth called it a “no brainer” punishment for a “radical Islamist terror attack” on U.S. service members.
“We’ll make sure that people are able to watch it, that it’s public, because people need to understand [that] there are serious consequences for these types of things,” Hegseth said in an interview with the Real America’s Voice network.
Others across the country and around the world — Democrats and Republicans, human rights experts, legal scholars and military and religious leaders — condemned it as a barbaric throwback to an era when executions were cast as entertainment, and as the world’s leading democracy adopting a form of punishment carried out in modern times only by authoritarian regimes and terrorist organizations.
Nidal Malik Hasan is shown in a courtroom sketch in 2013.
(Brigitte Woosley / Associated Press)
“Hasan should face the death penalty, but making his execution public and streaming it? Beyond disgusting,” Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) wrote on X. “Public executions are what oppressive dictatorships like Iran and Afghanistan do. It should not be happening in America.”
“I absolutely support the sentence of death, but live-streaming executions is what jihadists do. America is better than that,” Rep. Austin Scott (R-Ga.) wrote.
The United Nations’ High Commissioner for Human Rights said that “the livestreaming of an execution is tantamount to a public execution and would breach the absolute prohibition of torture.” The head of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops said it would “further undermine the moral fabric of our nation and be a blight on the conscience of its people.”
Matthew Robinson, a criminal justice professor at Appalachian State University and author of a book on U.S. capital punishment titled “Death Nation,” said he was “appalled” by the plans. “It strikes me as meant to be entertaining.” He said the last military execution was in 1961, and the last by firing squad was in 1945.
Soldiers hold a candlelight vigil at Fort Hood, Texas, in 2009, one day after Nidal Malik Hasan shot and killed 13 people.
(LM Otero / Associated Press)
Hasan was an Army psychiatrist and major who in 2009 entered a medical building on the Texas military base with a laser-sighted handgun, shouted “Allahu akbar” — Arabic for “God is great!” — and opened fire, killing 13 people and injuring 32 others. He has since spoken of being a “martyr” if executed.
President Trump, an outspoken proponent of the death penalty for years but also a past critic of public executions in places like Iran, has signed off on Hasan’s execution but not addressed Hegseth’s plans. The White House did not respond to a request for comment.
Vice President JD Vance, who is Catholic, said Friday that people should remember that Hasan “brutally murdered a lot of innocent people.” But he also said he would not watch a live-stream of the execution, and expressed doubt that is “actually going to happen.”
On his first day in office this term, Trump issued an executive order requiring federal agencies to restore the death penalty to prominence. In April, the U.S. Department of Justice announced it had taken steps to do so, including by “expanding the protocol” to include firing squads.
Five states currently allow firing squads to carry out executions: Idaho, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Utah. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly turned down appeals contending such executions amount to “cruel and unusual punishment,” which is barred under U.S. law. South Carolina executed three men by firing squad last year.
When the Supreme Court last year rejected an Alabama inmate’s request to be killed by firing squad rather than with nitrogen hypoxia, liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor — joined by fellow liberal Justices Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson — dissented, writing, “Boyd asks for the barest form of mercy: to die by firing squad, which would kill him in seconds, rather than by a torturous suffocation lasting up to four minutes. The Constitution would grant him that grace.”
Kathleen Walter prays outside the Nashville, Tenn., prison where Christa Pike was set to be executed.
(George Walker IV / Associated Press)
Last week, a Tennessee inmate named Christa Pike survived what was meant to be a lethal injection of the barbiturate pentobarbital. Other states have also struggled with executions by lethal injection in recent years.
Much of the criticism of Hegseth’s plan for Hasan has centered not on the method of killing, but on the live-streaming of it.
Robin M. Maher, executive director of the Death Penalty Information Center, said the center has “no record of any execution being live streamed,” and is “not aware of any regulation or precedent for a military execution to be live streamed on the internet or otherwise made widely available to the public.”
Fox News commentator Howard Kurtz wrote: “I’m sensing revulsion on the left and right, not so much for killing a death row prisoner — although firing squad seems extreme in the modern age — but for the Pentagon to live-stream it, turning this into a horrifying TV show to entertain the masses. Is this America?”
Daniel LaChance, an associate history professor at Emory University and author of the book “Executing Freedom: The Cultural Life of Capital Punishment in the United States,” said the last public execution in the U.S. occurred in 1936, when a Black man convicted of rape was hanged in Kentucky — which still allowed public executions after most states had abandoned the practice.
That execution was “by all accounts a grotesque carnival” and “sort of like a gladiatorial contest brought to life in the 20th Century, where the crowd was surly, shouting,” LaChance said. “It was a debacle.”
That the Trump administration is seeking to turn capital punishment into a public spectacle once more, LaChance said, is out of line with decades of thinking on the issue, but in line with Trump’s own ethos about crime and punishment.
“His whole brand is this kind of populist, anti-elitism. And when executions moved into the bowels of prisons in the early 20th century, they were really becoming bureaucratic affairs, run by experts, carried out in front of a small group of professionals and clergy,” LaChance said. “It was a denial of the public’s right to see a punishment that was carried out in their name, in part because there were elites who thought that the public couldn’t handle this kind of spectacle, that they were misbehaving, that it would generate more disorder when an execution is designed to do the exact opposite: to generate order.”
President Trump points to fans to as he walks to the stage at a political rally Wednesday in San Antonio.
(San Antonio Express-News via Getty Images)
Trump clearly thinks he is pushing back against elitism and expertise and giving people what they want, LaChance said, though the question many scholars have is whether doing so will “increase people’s bloodthirst” or force them to recoil — and ultimate decrease support for such punishments.
Eugene Fidell, who teaches military justice at Yale Law School, said Trump has publicly mused about killing people by firing squad for years, so Hegseth’s plans to use a firing squad should not be surprising. However, the decision to live-stream the killing is clearly a source of “dismay” for many. “Even people who are resigned to the death penalty, who don’t have religious or other scruples about the death penalty, have real heartburn over this,” he said.
Fidell said “brutality” has become an “operating principle” for the Trump administration broadly, from its decision to host an Ultimate Fighting tournament at the White House to its immigration tactics across the country to, now, it’s plans to live-stream an execution — which Fidell said has “nothing to do” with deterring future crime.
“There’s a pathology going on here that is so out of keeping with the dignity that ought to characterize the taking of a life as a result of a legal process,” he said.
Robinson, of Appalachian State, said a student of his Friday morning asked what would happen when children tune in to watch the execution, which Robinson said he believes they will do, as if it’s a video game. He said the idea was appalling — and not just to him.
“I imagine the rest of the world, the civilized world, will see this and have the same response that I did,” he said. “They’ll respond with shock.”
Times staff writer David G. Savage contributed to this report.
Meanwhile, City club sponsor Etihad Airways said it is considering legal action against the Premier League.
In a statement issued on Wednesday, the United Arab Emirates-based airline said it “categorically rejects any finding, conclusion or implication that suggests the airline has ever been involved in improper commercial arrangements”.
It added: “The Premier League’s public communication of the commission’s findings, following a period of selective leaks and reporting, has further created damaging implications for Etihad despite the airline not being named in the redacted published findings.”
Etihad, City’s main sponsor since 2009, also said it was given no opportunity to engage in a process that now reflects “adversely on the airline”.
The statement added: “Etihad is deeply concerned by the way this matter has been communicated publicly.
“The lack of clarity and transparency, together with the selective disclosure of information, has created damaging implications for Etihad despite the airline not being named in the published decision.
“The Premier League must take responsibility for the consequences of the way in which these findings have been presented.
“Etihad will seek the relevant legal counsel on the options and recourse available to protect its interests.”
The Premier League declined to comment when contacted by BBC Sport.
Premier League clubs are seeking legal advice about compensation from Manchester City over the case.
One source, who held a senior executive position at two Premier League sides, said they expected clubs to submit individual compensation claims against Manchester City.
Another leading lawyer told the BBC that process could even be centralised by the league.
Premier League rules allow clubs to seek legal action against each other for compensation.
In June, Everton were told they must pay Burnley £35m after they broke PSR over a three-year period.
Burnley argued the breach impacted their chances of staying in the Premier League, and sought compensation for the losses associated with being relegated.
Everton are appealing, with sources previously saying they would “robustly and thoroughly” contest the ruling, but it provides an interesting backdrop to the Manchester City case.
There is uncertainty over a statute of limitations, which would set a cut-off point for claims.
This is not just about Manchester United (twice) and Liverpool, who finished as runners-up to City in their title-winning seasons.
It is about those clubs who just missed out on the Champions League, or failed to make Europe, or even those who were relegated.
And it could even result in claims over the prize money for each Premier League place, or the potential commercial earnings lost by rival clubs.
Kieran Maguire, professor of football finance at the University of Liverpool, told BBC Sport it would be considered a “denial of an opportunity” by complainants.
Maguire explained that the “statute of limitations is not referenced” in the Premier League’s traditional handbook, though that could be subject to a legal challenge from City.
But what of the compensation? Just looking at Champions League qualifying could bring huge financial claims.
“The Champions League in those days was worth a minimum of £30m,” Maguire said. “I think by the time we got to 2018, it was probably worth £60m or £70m, and that’s in prize money.
“On top of that, you could claim for loss of gate receipts, loss of sponsor bonuses. This is highly unlikely, but it’s certainly being discussed.
“Players get bonuses for qualifying for the Champions League. Those bonuses, if you talk to people connected to the elite clubs, are normally in the region of 25%.
“An average salary in those days would probably, if you go back to 2012, be in the region of £80,000 or £90,000 a week. Twenty-five percent of that is four or five million pounds a year. That’s how the issues stack up.”
Points deductions, fines, and compensation claims.
This is an extremely messy situation for the Premier League, and it does not look like being resolved anytime soon.
