verdict

Coronation Street’s Sarah Platt received a verdict in her murder trial in Monday night’s episode and fans were certainly divided by the trial outcome.

Coronation Street’s Sarah Platt was found not guilty of murder in Monday night’s episode of the ITV soap.

The legendary character, who has been played by Tina O’Brien since 1999, had spent time in prison awaiting trial after hitting evil Theo Silverton (James Cartwright) over the head with a metal pole. She has claimed that it was all in self-defence.

Sarah was sent back to her cell to wait, and the jury reached a verdict remarkably quickly – something which did not fill the Platts with hope. To everyone’s great surprise, Sarah was found not guilty and her family cheered as she learned she was free to go.

Sarah rushed to hug her daughter Bethany (Lucy Fallon), and David was straight on the phone to mum Gail, who now lives in France, to tell her the good news. Soon enough, Bethany was back at home reunited with her young son Harry and ex-boyfriend DC Kit Green who had taken on caregiver duties whilst she was inside.

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.

She proclaimed: ” I feel like I’m the luckiest person in the world to be back with you all again,” unaware that daughter Bethany recently had a fling with the man who was almost her stepdad and is now pregnant. Later on, Bethany was seen preparing to call an abortion clinic.

Whilst on their own, Sarah decided to have a heart-to-heart with Kit, who has recently been diagnosed with breast cancer, and asked him for a chance to reunite. He said things were “different” now but insisted it wasn’t about his illness.

He told her: “Things are different now. We can’t. It’s about not being what I want. Just because you’re out, nothing’s changed. Stop it. Too much has happened,” and announced that he would be moving in with his long-lost mum Bernie Winter.

Taken aback by his sudden rejection, and unaware of what is really causing it, Sarah broke down in tears on the sofa.

During her time on the soap, Sarah was famously central to a teenage pregnancy storyline in 2000, was then kidnapped by an internet predator before her stepdad turned out to be a serial killer. She initially left the soap in 2007 but following her return in 2015, Sarah has helped cover up the death of her abusive ex-partner Callum Logan and then had to deal with her uncle Stephen Reid, who also turned out to be a serial killer.

Sarah’s not guilty verdict certainly caused divide amongst fans, with one fan writing on Reddit: “Anyone else disappointed by the verdict?

“Murder probably not but I don’t think Sarah deserves to get off scot free, end of the day Theo never actually touched her, we all know he probably would have, but it’s hard to defend a self defence claim when you haven’t been touched, especially when she tried to hide it, let someone else get charged etc. very least should be involuntary manslaughter and perverting the course of justice. Real world she’s never getting off with nothing.”

Another said: “I’m not disappointed Sarah got off. She’s one of my all time favorite characters,” and a third wrote: “Did anybody except anything else? She’s one of the main cast members. They weren’t going to find her guilty anyway. She has plot armour.”

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

Mary Berry has had her say on Nigella Lawson, who has taken over Prue Leith’s role as judge on The Great British Bake Off. Mary originally held the role alongside Paul Hollywood

TV cook and former Great British Bake Off judge Mary Berry has backed Nigella Lawson – saying she is a “glamorous” addition to the show who has brought “new life” to the format.

Mary, 91, had clearly been watching the current run of Bake Off and was full of praise for Nigella on the new series, whilst also urging her to take fellow judge Paul Hollywood to task.

Dame Mary said: “Bake Off is a wonderful format. We started it off not knowing what we were doing and then Prue has been doing it and it is a format and you fit into it.

‘I am delighted Nigella is there. She has got to keep control of a certain person. Paul needs handling and he has this handshake which keeps appearing.

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.

“Nigella has brought some glamour to it, and she really likes tasting doesn’t she? And I know how she feels, I always took a proper mouthful because if you just take a little bit, the person whose food you are tasting, their auntie will say ‘well she didn’t even taste it’. So I was aware of that.

“Nigella is a joy and I think she has brought new life and I think it will do really well. A touch of glamour.”

Speaking on stage at Cheltenham with comedian and former host of Bake Off Mel Giedroyc, the pair recalled how Mary would sometimes arrive for day two of filming in the tent with the same hair and make up, having slept without taking it off to minimise the amount of time she needed to be styled.

Laughing, Dame Mary said: “Why not? I used to put a towel over the pillow, I didn’t want them to think I was grotty. It does take such a long time for someone to do your make up.”

She also said she found the tent cold and would hide hot water bottles under her jackets.

Dame Mary was appearing at Cheltenham to promote her first gardening book, My Gardening Life and a new cook book All In One.

Arguably she was a gardener before she could cook, as she recalled how her father grew practical crops such as potatoes, sweet peas and celery during wartime to feed the family.

“My dad had to take to gardening because he had to dig for Britain and he gave me a little patch and I grew radishes,” she recalled.

Nowadays she has six raised beds in her garden raised to above knee height so she can easily reach them and even perch on the edge if she wants to take a rest.

She said one of her greatest pleasures now in life was ‘deadheading’ in the garden, the process by which you removed faded or spent flowers to tidy up plants.

She explained: “Deadheading is one of my favourite things, you don’t have to dress up for it. I can do it when I get in tonight if its not dark. I can deadhead the roses which are still flowering and it so encourages more things to come on.”

She added: “Gardening is similar to cooking, you follow a formula. But cooking you can follow a recipe and produce it by tonight. Gardening you have got to be much more patient.

“Which do I prefer, gardening or cooking? I think the two go together. We grow vegetables that we eat, things that I like, so there is no kale, lots of herbs and I think they go together.

“I am a fair weather gardener, I would walk a dog in any weather but I don’t garden in any weather. I wait until the sun comes out.”

Dame Mary is of course better known for her baking and cooking. Having studied in France and the UK, she worked for a number of food industry bodies and wrote recipe pages of Housewife magazine.

Her first cookbook, The Hamlyn All Colour Cookbook, was published in 1970 and since then she has gone on to write more than 50 others, which have sold millions of copies around the world.

Already a big name in food, Dame Mary became a household name to a new generation of cake lovers when she landed the role as a judge on The Great British Bake Off, alongside Paul Hollywood, Mel Giedroyc and Sue Perkins in 2010.

She quit the show in 2016, along with the hosts Mel and Sue, when it moved to Channel 4, staying loyal to the BBC and continuing to make shows there.

* My Gardening Life by Mary Berry is out now, published by DK.

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

Manchester City will claim as part of their appeal that key sponsorship deals were funded by the Abu Dhabi government, rather than the club’s owners.

Owners Abu Dhabi United Group (ADUG) – a private investment company belonging to United Arab Emirates vice-president and deputy prime minister Sheikh Mansour – are said to have topped up the value of commercial deals as part of a “disguised funding scheme” to the scale of £830.69m.

This, it was argued, enabled the club to appear to comply with Premier League and Uefa financial rules.

However, as first reported by the Daily Mail and Times, sources have told BBC Sport that City are expected to tell an appeal board that they have evidence showing the money directed to sponsors came from the Abu Dhabi government, rather than from ADUG.

Premier League rules allow state-owned bodies to sponsor clubs.

The independent commission detailed how City had “denied there had ever been any disguised funding scheme of the type alleged by the Premier League. Its case was that [it] had misunderstood how Abu Dhabi sponsorship agreements had been funded… The reality was [the club contested] that Abu Dhabi sponsors had always been liable for all recorded sponsorship fees and all had in fact been paid to the club by Abu Dhabi sponsors from their own funds/resources.

“No part of any recorded sponsorship fee had been paid by ADUG or from using ADUG funds. Abu Dhabi sponsors had from time to time applied for financial assistance from the Abu Dhabi government toward their liability to pay the recorded sponsorship fees – such applications had been granted…”

The independent commission rejected this submission as “untrue”, saying: “We concluded that it was an ‘explanation’ that the club had concocted well after the event in an attempt to obscure and conceal the realities of the disguised funding scheme.”

City’s argument is likely to lead to renewed debate over the extent to which City’s ownership is separate from the Abu Dhabi state, and over the ramifications of club ownership with state connections.

Mansour is a member of the ruling family of Abu Dhabi, and the brother of UAE President Sheikh Mohamed bin Zayed Al Nahyan.

Since the takeover in 2008, City have insisted the club is a completely private enterprise, and not state-owned. However, some critics have questioned the distinction, with human rights campaigners claiming the ownership of City has been used to “sportswash” the UAE.

On Saturday, City chairman Khaldoon Al Mubarak referred to “irrefutable evidence” that he claimed supports the club’s claims of innocence. City have claimed the commission’s decision contained “clear material errors, of law, principle and fact, and is unsafe”.

It has emerged that Al Mubarak, who was appointed chairman of City following the takeover in 2008, is named as an Emirati diplomat on the UK government’s current directory of all foreign representatives.

Representatives of foreign states and their diplomatic staff “enjoy privileges and immunities under the Diplomatic Privileges Act (1964)”, giving diplomats immunity from prosecution under criminal, civil and administrative laws.

City’s principal sponsor Etihad Airways has said it is considering legal action against the Premier League, claiming the release of the commission findings had “damaging implications… despite the airline not being named in the redacted published findings”.

The UAE’s state-owned national airline said it “categorically rejects any finding, conclusion or implication that suggests the airline has ever been involved in improper commercial arrangements”.

Etihad is owned by sovereign wealth fund L’Imad which is chaired by the Crown Prince of Abu Dhabi, the son of the UAE president.

The Premier League declined to comment when contacted by BBC Sport.

Additional reporting from James Landale, diplomatic correspondent for BBC News.

The Spanish coach won 20 trophies during a glittering 10 years as City manager before departing in May.

Former Manchester ‌City manager Pep Guardiola has spoken out ⁠in support ⁠of the Premier League club after they were found guilty of serious ⁠breaches of financial rules.

The Spaniard handed over to former assistant Enzo Maresca at the end ⁠of last season after a decade in charge.

“I want every single @ManCity fan to know I am here; more than ever. I am, always have ‌been, always will, be behind my club, my owner, my chairman, Ferran, the players, staff, Enzo and you, our unique supporters,” Guardiola said on Wednesday ⁠in a first reaction on his ⁠X account.

“Let me be clear: we will get through this together. I love you all.”

City’s Chief Executive Ferran Soriano addressed staff in a video on Tuesday in which he rejected the independent commission’s findings.

Guardiola ⁠took charge of City in 2016 and under his management, ⁠they won six Premier League titles – ⁠including four in a row – three FA Cups, five League Cups and the Champions League.

The Premier League charges, relating ‌to “sham” commercial contracts used as part of schemes to inflate revenue and understate costs by more ‌than 900 ‌million pounds ($1.2bn) over nearly a decade, cover the period from 2009-18.

In doing so, they concealed the true state of their finances and avoided breaching Premier League and UEFA spending limits during a period in which they won three league titles.

An independent commission found the club guilty on all charges related to breaches of financial rules over the nine-year period.

They have also been found guilty of most of the charges they faced in relation to a failure to cooperate with a Premier League investigation.

City, who continue to deny any wrongdoing, have said they will appeal and have until Friday to do so.

The ruling has sent shockwaves through English football and cast doubt over the future of a club that has become a European giant.

The likely punishment is uncertain but according to Premier League rules, City could face a substantial points deduction, a fine or even expulsion from the top division.

Everton and Nottingham Forest were handed points deductions in the 2023/24 season for single breaches of financial sustainability rules.

On that basis, City would likely face relegation given the sheer weight of the case against them.

There is speculation they could even be stripped of their titles.

“If the appeal fails, Manchester City cannot stay in the league, they have to suffer. And I say that as a supporter and a fan,” said the club’s former chairman, David Bernstein.

Another factor is a potential flood of compensation claims that could cost the club hundreds of millions.

Former Liverpool managing director Christian Purslow told the BBC that clubs would be “queueing up to seek compensation”.

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.

Arsenal, Manchester United, Liverpool and Tottenham Hotspur reportedly preserved their rights to claim compensation two years ago.

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.