violence

A New York City man is facing charges after allegedly pulling out a knife near the set of the latest “Miami Vice” reboot.

On Friday around 11 p.m., the New York Police Department received a call about a man brandishing a knife near the intersection of Avenue N and McDonald Avenue in the borough of Brooklyn.

The caller, identified only as a 42-year-old man, told police that he had been in a verbal dispute with an “unidentified individual” when the man took out a knife, according to a police spokesperson.

The suspect was identified as Brooklyn resident Alex Perez, 23. The police spokesperson said Perez was taken into custody without incident and charged with menacing and criminal possession of a weapon. There were no reported injuries, she said.

In a video obtained by TMZ, a man the outlet identified as Perez is shown taking out a large butcher’s knife from his black sweatshirt pocket.

The Brooklyn district attorney’s office did not immediately respond to a request for comment Monday night. It was not immediately clear whether Perez has a lawyer.

NBC New York reported that “Miami Vice ‘85” had been filming nearby along Bay Parkway and McDonald Avenue, near Washington Cemetery.

Universal, the studio behind the film, did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Joseph Kosinski, the director behind “F1” and “Top Gun: Maverick,” is directing “Miami Vice ’85.” The movie, which according to Universal was in production as of Oct. 12, features Michael B. Jordan as Tubbs and Austin Butler as Crockett, according to the company’s social media posts.

The movie is based on Anthony Yerkovich’s iconic 1980s TV cop show. A movie adaptation directed by Michael Mann, also called “Miami Vice,” came out in 2006 but was a box-office flop, The Times reported at the time.

Jordan’s prime minister represents king at funeral for eight of the church attack victims as hunt for gunmen continues.

Thousands of mourners have gathered for the funerals of eight of the victims of a deadly attack on a church in southern Jordan, with Prime Minister Jafar Hassan also in attendance.

The burials on Sunday were beside St George’s Greek Orthodox Church in the village of Hamoud, southwest of the capital, Amman, two days after attackers opened fire during another funeral there.

Nine people were killed and dozens wounded in a rare attack on Jordan’s Christian minority, prompting three days of national mourning.

The ninth victim, Mohammed al-Qasous, is due to be buried on Monday, his family told the AFP news agency.

Coffins wrapped in Jordanian flags were carried through crowds gathered around the church in Karak province, as priests led prayers and security personnel stood guard.

Prime Minister Hassan attended the service alongside government ministers and senior military and civilian officials, according to Jordan’s state news agency, Petra.

Thousands of citizens also participated in the funeral procession, Petra said.

Among those caught in Friday’s shooting was Sahar al-Halsa, who told the Reuters news agency from her nearby home that she sheltered behind a pillar as gunfire erupted and people screamed.

When she rushed outside, she found her cousin Assem lying wounded.

“Assem, Assem, my darling, answer me,” she recalled calling to him. He briefly opened his eyes before dying, she said.

Father Yohanna Hamati told AFP that about 170 to 200 people were at the church for Friday’s funeral when firing began outside.

The mourners initially struggled to understand what was happening, he said, before people began rushing into the church to escape.

By Saturday, bullet holes remained in the walls and wooden pews, and windows had been shattered.

Church workers were cleaning away blood as villagers prepared to bury the dead. Jordanian authorities have described the attack as “extremist terrorism”.

King Abdullah, who visited some of the wounded in hospital on Friday, has promised a forceful response and the assailants are still being sought.

Officials say they have not established whether the attackers were connected to an armed group and no organisation has claimed responsibility.

The violence has also drawn expressions of solidarity across religious lines. Christians account for about 3 percent of Jordan’s largely Muslim population and AFP reported that Muslims were among those wounded.

Young volunteers visited a hospital in Karak with flowers and a message reading, “Our loss is one”.

The mourning reached Washington, DC, on Sunday, where members of the Jordanian community lit candles outside their country’s embassy.

Jordan’s ambassador to the US, Dina Kawar, told those gathered that efforts to stir religious division were “bound to fail”. Back in Hamoud, Father Hamati appealed for unity, stressing that Muslims had also suffered in the attack.

“We make no distinction between Muslim and Christian,” he told AFP.

PARIS — Some 70,000 law enforcement officers will be deployed across France on Saturday while the Louvre and several other major Paris museums will be closed as authorities seek to prevent renewed violence during planned protests.

Protests last week devolved into mayhem, with people setting fires, storming public buildings, smashing shop windows, looting and clashing with police. It was France’s most violent unrest in years.

Demonstrators plan to take to the streets again Saturday to denounce the high cost of living. Students, members of the CGT labor union and activists from the “yellow vest” movement, whose demonstrations against social injustice shook France in 2018 and 2019, are all set to join.

While some protests have been banned for security reasons in several cities, including Lyon, Nice and Montpellier, marches are expected in many other places including in Paris and Marseille.

French Interior Minister Laurent Nuñez said some 70,000 police officers and gendarmes would be deployed, along with helicopters, armored vehicles and water cannons. In addition, elite police units will help secure public buildings like city halls in a “highly mobile” security operation, he said.

“There have been numerous calls from radical far-left groups on social media to commit acts of violence and vandalism. There have also been renewed calls for looting, with those messages clearly being spread by rioters,” Nuñez said at a news conference.

“We will be absolutely uncompromising” with those involved in violence, he added, warning that police will have a “very firm approach to making arrests, and there will be legal consequences.”

Paris museums to be closed

In a statement to the Associated Press, the Culture Ministry said the Louvre, the Orsay and Picasso museums as well as the Grand Palais would be closed. The ministry called on all institutions under its authority to adopt any necessary measures to ensure “visitor safety, staff protection and the preservation of artworks,” according to the statement.

After two days when admission was by invitation only, Art Basel Paris opened to the public Friday — but only for the day, with the threat of unrest prompting organizers to cancel the weekend program. One of the world’s most prestigious contemporary art fairs, Art Basel includes exhibitions by 211 international galleries at Paris’ Grand Palais.

“This decision has not been taken lightly, and the safety of everyone involved in the fair remains our utmost priority,” organizers said in a statement Thursday.

Saloni Doshi, an art collector who traveled to Paris from India for the fair, grew worried Saturday as she saw the fires and panicked people, and she received phone calls from friends asking whether Paris was safe. She agreed with the organizers’ rationale to close.

Antoine Donzeaud and Elisa Rigoulet, the owners of the gallery exo exo, felt the same.

“We understand this decision, which we consider reasonable and consistent with the urgency of the social demands currently unfolding in France,” they said in a text message.

But some visitors were disappointed.

“It’s very sad, because we just came here to the fair, and we could not get in because they canceled it for the weekend,” said Fabián Hernández, 32, from Mexico City. “So it’s very busy today, and it’s disappointing to me because I love the art fair, you know? But it is what it is.”

An anti far-right protest is planned

A demonstration Saturday in the city of Orléans, about 70 miles south of Paris, will also be closely watched.

About 50 organizations have called for a protest against the far right on the sidelines of the two-day congress of Marine Le Pen’s nationalist, anti-immigration party ahead of next spring’s presidential election. Organizers include labor unions, left-wing political parties, student organizations and anti-racism groups.

Hugues Moutouh, the prefect of the Loiret region, said that 20,000 to 30,000 demonstrators from across the country were expected.

Le Pen, whom opinion polls place as the front-runner in next year’s election, accused left-wing organizations and political parties of trying to “disrupt a political party’s democratic congress” on news broadcaster Franceinfo.

Still, she said she had “no concerns” about security because the government had “recognized the need for measures allowing the congress to proceed safely.”

Gadeva and Corbet write for the Associated Press. AP writers David Biller and Samuel Petrequin in Paris contributed to this report.

The Trump administration has asked Israel to stop settler attacks in the occupied West Bank, according to Secretary of State Marco Rubio. This comes amid outrage over a savage settler attack on Washington Post photojournalist Heidi Levine on Friday.

In February 2014, Venezuela witnessed one of the most prolonged and violent periods in the past 17 years against the nationally elected government.

What began as violence at some of the country’s more elite universities quickly descended into the violent street barricades, known as the guarimbas. Forty-three people, mostly civilians and security personnel, were killed. Entire communities were walled in, their residents blocked from accessing food, transport, gas and even necessary medical services. Buildings were set alight with people inside, hundreds were injured.

The proponents, the so-called guarimberos, called themselves protesters: a claim echoed many times in the international press. But for the government and a vast number of ordinary citizens, they were terrorists.

The anniversary of these events comes at a critical moment in Venezuelan politics: over the past two weeks, the newly elected right-wing legislators in the country’s national assembly have begun pushing for an Amnesty Law. If passed, this legislation would grant a pardon to the most violent perpetrators of the barricades. 

With the perpetrators of these acts potentially about to be set free, many in Venezuela are asking: could more violence be on the cards? To answer this question we have to understand what the violent barricades were, who took part in them and why they eventually petered out. As usual, there is a whole other story that the mainstream media ignored.

Who Were the Violent Barricaders?

Although the international media portrayed the barricades as a spontaneous youth uprising, testimonies that have emerged in the wake of the barricades tell a very different story.

“There were organized groups from within the universities, which were divided into subgroups. People in charge of the distribution of information, photos, and publishing all that, people in charge of planning the routes, people in charge of security… there was organization amidst the chaos,” Gabriel* — an undercover participant at the protests who wished to remain anonymous — told me.

It’s also clear that the “youthful” barricaders didn’t operate alone — although they might have been the official face of the unrest.

In the barricaders’ stronghold of Altamira and Chacao in Caracas, collaborators from private homes to small businesses facilitated the protesters with a network of internet connections and passwords to aid their communications, as well as with food and drink, places to hold meetings or to hide from police. 

But it was perhaps at night when the most sinister and violent elements of the barricades emerged.

“There was a core violent group, but they weren’t students … They really did want to cause big shit, cause confrontations with police, they even intimidated the other guys (barricaders), they said ‘you’re a bunch of pussies, what are we gonna do with this shit?’,” Gabriel said.

“They knew how to act in these circumstances … (the police) launched gas bombs at them, and they all got out the way, grabbed the bombs and threw them back …There were people who really knew about this stuff,” related Gabriel.

The right-wing MUD coalition was a leader of the violence. In the words of one tight-lipped barricader, who also wished to remain anonymous, in response to why the protests had erupted in the first place, he simply replied, “I think it was more because of the calls from the political parties of the opposition.”

Gabriel also stated that the relationship between the MUD and the barricaders was clear.

“None of the protesters at the universities wore their university t-shirts, they all wore Popular Will or Justice First t-shirts … They might have been student groups, but the student councils are affiliated to the political opposition parties and they are accountable to them … There was a feeling among the universities that they wanted to take to the streets. There wasn’t exactly a violent idea there … but it was clear that some people wanted something transcendental to happen, the death of someone, a policeman getting burned…”

And despite the official narrative that the right wing wasn’t violent, “Men on motorbikes circled the camps — no one could get near, not even the police. But by night these … ultra violent radical groups turned up, and they (those students at the camps) let them in.”

But perhaps the most revealing comment in terms of how far the organized right-wing were involved in the 2014 barricades came when I asked what the majority of the barricaders were doing now. 

“Well if I am totally honest, those guys are legislators now,” Gabriel said.

The mayor of Hatillo, David Smolansky, and legislator Gabriela Arellano “were both up to their necks in it,” according to Gabriel. “Those who aren’t in the opposition rank and file, are in prison,” he concluded. 

Mystery Dollars 

Another question mark which also still hangs over the violent barricades is where the money came from to pay for tents, food and drink, transport, walky-talkies, weapons and a whole cohort of other not so cheap items in Venezuela.

While I was informed that many of the barricaders were paid approximately 600 bolivars a day to take part – especially to dissuade people from going on holiday during carnival – Gabriel also confirmed that he was approached and asked if he wanted to “make a bit of money.”

But the currency circulating among the violent barricaders gives even more pause for thought.

“I would actually go as far as to say that there were more dollars inside the camps than bolivars,” stated Gabriel, who added that the guarimbas coincided with a hike in the black market price of the dollar against the bolivar on website, Dolartoday.

What is clear from all this is that the guarimbas were not “student protests” or the youth in rebellion, as the mainstream media portrayed. While there were some middle class students among the ranks who didn’t intend to harm anyone, it’s also true that there were many others who came from Venezuela’s well seasoned and highly organized right-wing student movement and who were happy to flirt with violence, and even to let other other people do the dirty work on their behalf. Likewise, there were evidently highly violent groups within the protests who received funding and military training.

The Fish that Didn’t Want Water: ‘He Who Tires, Loses’

“They lost strength, people came out less and less, maybe we would have achieved something if people had stayed in the streets… Also, because of the places that (the barricades) were carried out, in Altamira, you can’t do anything in Altamira, you have to do this in the center of Caracas,” one barricader, who also preferred to be anonymous, said.

So why did the Guarimbas peter out? From a big protest in Caracas to barricades of main roads in other cities, the right-wing then also set up local barricades in their own communities. 

This was undoubtedly the straw which broke the camel’s back. In fact the barricade slogan, “he who tires, loses,” was meant to inspire people in their local communities to weather the formidable storm.

But the slogans didn’t stop people from getting tired of being barricaded in for months, without access to work, school, health, and food- no matter how disaffected these sectors were from the government.

In fact, the violent barricader I spoke to even admitted that his life in Altamira was “too affected” by the barricades.

Rather than capitalizing on local discontent, the guarimberos managed to alienate their upper and middle class support base by terrorizing them in their own homes. Even their fellow students became sick and tired of the university strike — which meant many were delayed in graduating.

With no desire to engage with the popular sectors in the country’s barrios – who the barricade leaders identified as home to the “Chavista collectives” that were “even more their enemy than the police” — the movement literally had nowhere to go inside of Venezuela. 

“They tried maybe once to bring (the barricades) up here… but the collectives, the organised community, we chased them out,” said community activist Laura from a community radio station in the eastern barrio of Petare, whose local community went head to head with a group of guarimberos, not far from where they had managed to decapitate a motorcyclist in a barbed wire trap. 

“People would do the same again,” she said

2016 = More Guarimbas? 

I was told by another former barricader that “if we have to take to the streets again then we will, but you know that’s not so easy, it involves organization”.

Despite the fact that barricades across main roads and targeted arson attacks continue to take place in Merida and Tachira, as Laura told me, it is unlikely that more barricades on a national scale will erupt this year because the rightwing is focusing its energies on its new found power in the National Assembly, as well as on organizing the recall referendum against president Nicolas Maduro for mid-2016. 

The problem for the right-wing is that the latter requires a much more consolidated level of organization than the violent barricades ever did, and it can’t be pulled off through riding the wave of media lies and discontent.

In order to organize a recall referendum, the opposition will have to collect the signatures of 20 percent of nationally registered voters – that means approximately just under 4 million signatures. And although the opposition won big at the National Assembly elections last December, they only managed to do so because of mass Chavista abstention – not because they substantially increased their vote or political presence. 

In spite of the discontent, says Laura, “the opposition know they still don’t have the people in the street … that’s why more guarimbas would be a last resort.”

And in the meantime, Chavismo is looking to regroup. In the streets, in community media, and in workplaces.

The violent barricades were the result of absolute frustration by the right-wing after having exhausted all options to oust Chavismo. But although the right-wing may have had a short term game plan to deal a series of blows to the government, they have never had an overall long-term political strategy.

While the right-wing National Assembly continues to attempt to weaken the Bolivarian revolution and its gains through legislating and the option of a recall referendum is open, it’s possible that further violence may be kept at bay. 

But if the Supreme Court blocks legislative decisions, or the recall is a failure for the right-wing, “In that scenario, I think it’s possible that all hell will break loose,” states Laura.

Whether it’s 2006 or 2016, violence is always on the opposition’s cards, especially when it has exhausted all other means. 

For months before carrying out Canada’s deadliest school shooting in almost four decades, Jesse Van Rootselaar was consulting an unlikely adviser on how to perpetrate mass murder.

“In a hallway, indoors, or a crowded classroom, the 870 [Remington shotgun] is brutal … Close quarters is its playground,” OpenAI’s ChatGPT guided the 18-year-old, according to reports.

On February 10, 2026, Van Rootselaar shot his mother and half-brother at home before going to a school in the small British Columbia town of Tumbler Ridge, where he killed another six people – including five students – before taking his own life.

Earlier this week, on October 14, US authorities charged a Washington State man with allegedly conspiring with Van Rootselaar to plan the attack. But the mass shooting incident has raised questions that go beyond the traditional legal understanding of culpability.

The British Columbia government in September filed a civil lawsuit against OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman, accusing them of failing to prevent the incident and claiming they were aware of the conversations that turned deadly. Families of the victims also filed separate lawsuits. OpenAI’s leadership issued a public apology for their failure to notify authorities.

The company has not responded to requests from Al Jazeera for its comments on the lawsuits.

But as the case against OpenAI progresses, it has spurred a familiar debate: Where should a line be drawn between reporting potentially dangerous behaviour and protecting an individual’s privacy?

“The question of whether companies should be required to turn such information over to law enforcement is extraordinarily difficult, particularly if they don’t already screen chats for indications of such types of threats,” United States-based civil liberties lawyer Jenin Younes told Al Jazeera.

“Forcing companies to implement a surveillance system implicates very serious civil liberties concerns, and that’s probably a bridge too far for me,” Younes added.

“On the other hand, AI gives individuals access to types and quantities of information they didn’t have previously that may facilitate the commission of mass casualty events, a concern it’s not easy to dismiss.”

AI’s ability to distinguish thoughts from threats

One of the biggest challenges facing AI companies is determining whether a user expressing violent thoughts actually intends to act on them.

In August, Anthropic, the company behind AI chatbot Claude, flagged a user to San Francisco police after discovering conversations allegedly threatening its CEO, Dario Amodei.

According to the San Francisco Standard, citing a police report, the user had claimed to possess an AR-15 gun and suggested he had Amodei “in his sights”.

However, when contacted by the newspaper, the man said he was joking and had no intention of carrying out any form of violence. The person was neither charged nor detained, the Standard said.

Fazl Barez, a senior researcher at the University of Oxford specialising in AI safety and governance, said current AI models cannot “reliably” determine whether an interaction with an AI chatbot “is purely hypothetical or is likely to lead to harmful behaviour”.

“Suppose you are a creative writer working on a fictional story and want to explore how a murder plot might unfold. From the context, it may be clear that this is simply a fictional narrative. If the threshold for flagging potentially harmful content is too low, such a writer could be wrongly flagged,” he told Al Jazeera.

“Similarly, consider a graduate student in biology or chemistry studying pathogens that, if misused, could have serious consequences. They might be trying to understand the risks associated with these pathogens and how to mitigate them. Such discussions may be necessary for legitimate research and education. Even when the subject matter is sensitive, they should not automatically be flagged without considering the broader context.”

The researcher said identifying a credible threat may require examining a user’s interactions across multiple conversations, rather than relying on isolated statements.

Barez said someone experiencing intrusive violent thoughts might turn to a chatbot for support, while another person planning an attack may reveal their intentions gradually across several conversations.

“Distinguishing between the two requires careful consideration of context, intent and patterns of behaviour, rather than relying on individual statements alone,” he added.

Chinmayi Sharma, a law professor at Fordham University, said the debate has parallels with the duty imposed on mental health professionals to warn identifiable third parties about credible threats.

However, she said there was a key difference – therapists have professional training, knowledge of their patients and enforceable standards governing their conduct. AI companies do not necessarily have comparable safeguards.

“My concern with AI companies is that right now there’s not a concerted effort to hire mental health professionals, sociologists, individuals that would have the unique expertise on what the indicators of threat are here,” Sharma told Al Jazeera.

“Secondly, licensed professionals are accountable to concrete, legally enforceable standards in their discipline. We don’t have something like that for AI companies.”

The privacy dilemma

The privacy implications extend beyond whether AI companies can accurately identify threats. Millions of people use chatbots to discuss relationships, emotional distress, mental health concerns and deeply personal experiences.

Civil liberties lawyer Younes said many users may not realise how vulnerable those conversations could be to disclosure.

“They often reflect a person’s innermost thoughts, questions, and desires. The majority of people assume that these dialogues will never be viewed by another person,” Younes, president and legal director of the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, said.

Younes warned that the consequences of greater monitoring could extend well beyond those planning violence.

“If people fear their chats can be turned over to law enforcement simply because they express disturbing thoughts/violent fantasies etc, many will be dissuaded from using them,” she told Al Jazeera.

Younes argued that forcing companies to establish systems for monitoring users and reporting conversations could raise serious constitutional concerns in the US, including protections against unreasonable searches.

Meanwhile, Fordham’s Sharma also raised an issue about who could be disproportionately affected by heavy monitoring by AI chatbots.

“The concern is always there about either intentional or unintentional targeting, because if you have models trained on what we consider dangerous speech, they’re almost always going to reflect biases,” she said. “Certain minorities’ speech is over‑flagged as a threat, while other comparable speech is not.

“Even in a world in which everyone is benevolent, we should still be concerned about disparate outcomes,” she said, warning that machines could reproduce such disparities at scale.

‘Not a licensed therapist’ – When do AI companies become liable to report?

While AI companies may face moral pressure to prevent violence, their legal obligations are less clear, legal experts say.

Bryan Choi, a professor of law at the University of Colorado Boulder, said US law recognises a duty to warn in certain circumstances, including when mental health professionals become aware of imminent threats or when a special relationship exists between parties.

But those principles do not necessarily apply to AI companies.

“Under present case law, it seems unlikely that a company such as OpenAI would be held to have such duties to warn,” Choi told Al Jazeera. “The chatbot is not a licensed therapist. There is no special relationship between the company and the victims.”

Choi said existing negligence and product liability laws could potentially be applied to AI companies, but proving responsibility would present significant challenges.

Finding a balance

Fordham’s Sharma suggested that independent institutions could help establish reporting standards rather than leaving decisions entirely to private companies or requiring immediate disclosure to police.

Such bodies she said could develop procedures for assessing threats and explore ways of sharing only relevant information while protecting users’ identities and other personal details.

Meanwhile, Younes argued that users should, at a minimum, be clearly informed about whether their conversations are monitored and what circumstances could lead to information being shared with law enforcement.

“This is almost certainly an issue that will be wrestled with over the coming years, and I’m not sure anyone knows the solution at this particular point in time,” she said.

“Events that have not yet occurred will likely influence how these policies are shaped.”

A teacher fought the teenage shooter and a parent shot him dead, police say on Friday, a day after four people were killed.

The 16-year-old who killed three children and a teacher at an elementary school in the US state of Oregon was a former special-needs student at the school, police and school officials have said.

Bend Police Chief Mike Krantz identified the attacker on Friday, a day after the shooting at Silver Rail Elementary School, as Griffin J. John II.

He said the teenager attacked a classroom of special-needs students, where all the victims were shot.

Steven Cook, superintendent of Bend-La Pine Schools, said John was not enrolled in the local public school system at the time.

“That classroom was a special needs classroom, and the suspect was a special needs student in that school,” Cook told a news conference.

Krantz said John shot his way through locked doors with a 12-gauge shotgun, firing as many as 15 shots, and had about 44 rounds left when he was killed. Police are still trying to determine how he obtained the gun.

Under Oregon law, a minor may possess a shotgun if provided by a parent or with a parent’s consent.

The shooter’s mother, Shauntai Nickerson, separately told reporters outside her apartment: “I’m so sorry, I wish I could have done something.”

A teacher threw her phone at the gunman, then tackled and fought him, likely saving lives, Krantz said, calling her actions “heroic”. She was not injured.

A 36-year-old father, Kaylub Giamanco, who has two children at the school, then followed the gunman inside and shot him dead minutes after the first 911 call.

US President Donald Trump called Giamanco a “great hero”. “It’s a terrible thing, but thank goodness for a man that had a gun and knew how to use it,” Trump said.

The children killed were aged five, eight and 11, and the teacher was Meghan Lambert, 25, police said.

A seven-year-old child and a 54-year-old teacher were taken to hospital in critical condition.

The shooting is the 28th mass killing in the US this year, according to a database by The Associated Press, USA Today and Northeastern University.

The Gun Violence Archive in the US has documented 369 mass shootings in 2026, defined as incidents in which four or more people are shot.

The Everytown for Gun Safety group has counted at least 100 incidents of gunfire on school grounds this year, with 34 deaths.

Authorities have indicated that the shooter was killed by gunfire, though details remain scant about the attack.

At least four people have been killed, including three children, in a shooting at an elementary school in Oregon, part of the northwestern United States, according to statements from law enforcement to CBS and CNN.

The shooting on Thursday took place at Silver Rail Elementary school in the city of Bend, about 160km (100 miles) southeast of Portland.

Authorities have said the shooter is dead, though it is unclear whether he is among the four people included in the initial death toll.

“We’re in the process at this time of going room by room and evacuating each of the people who are in that school,” said Sheila Miller, the communications manager for the Bend Police Department on Thursday. “This is the kind of thing we never want to see happen in Bend. It’s devastating.”

Miller said authorities received a call about a shot fired into a car outside the school at 12:59pm local time (19:59 GMT) and arrived on scene within minutes.

The suspect was shot and killed shortly after, though Miller said she did not know whether police or a bystander had subdued the alleged assailant.

The number and condition of those injured were not immediately known.

Kash Patel, the director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI), said in a post on social media that the agency was on the scene assisting local law enforcement in the investigation.

“We will make every resource they need available,” he wrote.

Oregon Governor Tina Kotek also said she was closely monitoring the situation.

Jeff Merkley, who represents Oregon in the US Senate, was among the political leaders to offer condolences in the wake of the shooting.

“My heart is with the Bend community and all of the students and families affected. No one should have to fear violence at school,” he wrote in a post on the social media platform X.

The shooting prompted protests in New York City as officials defended ICE and Mayor Zohran Mamdani condemned the incident.

The United States Department of Homeland Security has defended Immigration and Customs Enforcement’s (ICE) shooting of a man in New York City while his child was present. Federal officials used the incident to criticise sanctuary-city policies that limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities.

New York officials have condemned the shooting and have called for ICE to end its operations in the city.

The shooting took place on Thursday afternoon when ICE officers attempted to arrest a man identified by New York City police as Oscar Belgal.

Homeland Security officials gave their account of the incident on Friday during a news conference, saying that Belgal refused to exit his car when approached by officers and then accelerated, striking two ICE vehicles.

They said officers then opened fire, grazing Belgal’s neck while his five-year-old child was in the back seat.

According to Homeland Security officials, Belgal received first aid and was taken to hospital before being transferred to a secure detention facility outside New York state. They did not disclose where Belgal is being held.

Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Secretary Markwayne Mullin said that the agents did not know the child was inside the vehicle when they fired.

ICE senior official Marcos Charles said agents had attempted to arrest Belgal as part of an investigation into suspected gang involvement in an earlier shooting of a US Customs and Border Protection officer.

According to US officials, Belgal is an undocumented migrant from the Dominican Republic who had previously evaded arrest and received a five-year sentence for grand larceny in April 2025.

“[Belgal] was a thug,” Mullin said at the Friday news conference. “The absolute worst of the worst.”

Mullin confirmed that officers were wearing body cameras but the footage has not been made public. New York City police released bodycam footage on Friday of police officers on the scene who had responded to a 911 call about the incident.

In other violent incidents involving federal immigration officers, video evidence has contradicted initial accounts from ICE and Homeland Security officials, including in Minneapolis, where footage of the fatal shootings of Alex Pretti and Renee Good challenged federal officials’ descriptions of the encounters.

The latest shooting prompted protests on Thursday night in the Bronx, where the shooting took place, with demonstrators condemning ICE and calling for the agency to be abolished. Tensions rose after NYPD officers clashed with some of the protesters.

New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani condemned the shooting and said he had called US President Donald Trump to demand an end to ICE enforcement in the city.

Speaking to reporters late on Thursday at the scene of the shooting, Mamdani said he had tried unsuccessfully to secure Belgal’s release in phone calls with Trump and Mullin.

“These actions are making the city less safe,” Mamdani said. “ICE is rotten to its core.”

Mullin accused Mamdani of prioritising politics over public safety and said Trump had offered to transfer Belgal to New York police custody if they pursued charges. Mullin said Mamdani refused this offer.

“Tip Toe,” a fine new drama from Russell T Davies premiering Friday on Starz, begins at the end, with Leo Struther (Alan Cumming, phenomenally good), a gay Manchester bar owner, hanging dead from a streetlight outside his house, as a woman screams and his neighbor Clive Goss (David Morrissey) stands breathing heavily on his porch. Then, as so many series do nowadays, it goes back in time — 10 days here — to tell the tale that got them there.

And so you are prepared from the beginning for tragedy, though not everything that happens in its five episodes will be tragic — some of what we see will be sweet and even celebratory — and one might forget for a moment where this is all heading, and even believe that what we’ve already seen will turn out differently.

The series sets off in a comparatively light mood. Chasing a one-night stand who’s stolen his laptop, Leo finds he’s locked himself out of his house, and, dressed only in his underwear, goes next door to ask if he can borrow a phone to call his friend Stephanie (Elizabeth Berrington) to bring him a spare key; here we meet the Goss family, Clive, an out-of-work electrician; his wife, Marie (Pooky Quesnel), who doesn’t like Clive; 16-year-old son George (Jackson Connor), gay and closeted; and 25-year-old son Saul (Joseph Evans), an easygoing hunk who lives at home, secretly makes money on OnlyFans and accepts everyone for who they are. Leo and the Gosses have been living amicably at arm’s length for 14 years, though their lives are about to become closely entwined, with disastrous results.

In an act of something like willful, somewhat disturbing friendliness, or a desire not to have to deal with Leo the next time he’s locked out, Clive makes a copy of Leo’s key and installs a lock box by his door. (By the Chekov’s gun rule, a key copied in Episode 1 is bound to be turned in a lock in whatever later act Davies deems advantageous.) Then, Leo gives Clive work at his bar.

Alan Cumming and David Morrissey play neighbors whose relationship escalates to violence in “Tip Toe.”

(Ben Blackall / Starz)

Leo’s bar, Spit and Polish, sits on Canal Street in Manchester’s long-established “gay village.” It’s a safe space for his employees and regulars, including Zee (Iz Hesketh), who’s been sleeping hidden in the bar, frightened of new flatmates since coming out as a trans woman, and Melba (Paul Rhys, brilliant), a former drag performer who holds down the end of the bar like Norm from “Cheers” and carries a torch for Leo.

Things will go generally downhill from here, in a narrative of escalating misunderstanding — not in the sense of an innocent mistake, of simply getting the wrong end of the stick (though that’s part of it), but as a contemporary habit of mind, blinkered, closed to facts but open to conspiracies. (Clive, a consumer of social media disinformation, believes that AIDS and COVID are fake); he lives in fear.

Directed by Peter Hoar, it’s a rough watch, yet beautifully wrought and delicately performed, inspiring and depressing, hopeless and hopeful by turns Davies has points to make — hanging your protagonist is not subtle — but his dialogue carries a lot of weight lightly; long conversations ebb and flow and rise and fall like compressed playlets. If there is something schematic about the arc, the characters within it, Clive as much as Leo, are completely human. They stand for something bigger than themselves, but they also stand for themselves.

Davies brought gay life in its infinite variety to television with the 1999 series “Queer as Folk” (also set on Canal Street) and gender fluidity to “Doctor Who,” the series he revived in 2005 and returned to in 2023. (The Tardis is currently in limbo.) His “Cucumber,” about middle-age gay men, and “Banana,” about young LGBTQ+ people, are also set in Manchester, where Davies has lived since the late 1980s. “Tip Toe” has been crafted for an age of surging homophobia and anti-gay violence. “The president of America has given these men permission to attack us,” says Melba, as he sits with Leo late one night by the canal. The series’ dark prophet, he gives it its title.

“It’s a storm, it’s a tide, it’s a great big tsunami. We’re in the middle of it right now … If you’d asked me in 1996 what do you think 2026 will be like, I’d have said ‘glory days’ … But they tricked us didn’t they? They let us all come out, so now we’re standing in he open ready for them to shoot us down. I used to walk into a room and just go, ‘Ta-da!’ Now I tip toe, just in case.”

South African President Cyril Ramaphosa has described violence against women as a “national shame” after the discovery of another woman’s body intensified public anger over the country’s persistent gender-based violence.

Eleven women’s bodies have been found in Ekurhuleni, a municipality east of Johannesburg, since July, prompting renewed fear and outrage after years of government promises to tackle violence against women.

Most of the victims were in their 20s or 30s. Some were found stripped and showing signs of sexual violence, according to authorities.

“There are women lying tonight in government mortuaries waiting to be identified, waiting for someone to claim them, waiting to be taken home and laid to rest,” Ramaphosa said in a televised address late on Tuesday.

“How can our hearts not be broken? How can we not be angry?”

He described violence against women as a source of “profound pain and national shame” and acknowledged growing anger among South African women.

Investigation Into the Killings

Ramaphosa said police had so far found no evidence that a serial killer was responsible for the 11 deaths. He stressed, however, that investigators were continuing to examine all possibilities.

Authorities have made arrests in connection with three of the killings, while investigations into the remaining deaths are continuing.

The president said none of the cases would be allowed to go cold, amid growing concerns over whether South Africa’s law enforcement agencies can adequately investigate violent crimes against women.

The latest deaths have revived criticism of the government’s efforts to tackle gender-based violence, despite repeated national campaigns and commitments aimed at reducing the problem.

South Africa’s Wider Crime Crisis

The killings are unfolding against a broader backdrop of severe violent crime in South Africa.

The country has one of the highest murder rates per capita in the world, while corruption, limited resources and weaknesses within the policing system have made it difficult to investigate and prosecute cases effectively.

Only about one in 10 murders is solved, highlighting the scale of the challenge facing investigators.

For communities in Ekurhuleni, the discovery of 11 women’s bodies has therefore become more than a series of individual criminal investigations. It has renewed questions about public safety, accountability and whether years of government commitments are translating into effective protection for women.

Ramaphosa’s remarks reflect the political pressure surrounding the issue as authorities face renewed demands to identify the victims, establish who was responsible for their deaths and prevent further violence.

With information from Reuters.