A British couple who were detained for nearly eight months by the Taliban in Afghanistan have been released, an official with knowledge of the case has said.

Peter Reynolds, 80, and his wife Barbie, 76, who have lived in the country for nearly two decades, were held after being stopped while travelling home on 1 February.

The couple were freed through Qatari mediation, after they were transferred from Kabul's central prison to a larger prison during the final phase of negotiations, the official said.

It follows months of public lobbying by their family for their release.

Just six days ago, an American woman who was detained with them and subsequently released told the BBC they were "literally dying" in prison and that "time is running out".

Faye Hall, who was let go two months into her detention, highlighted that the elderly couple's health had deteriorated rapidly while in prison.

Two ambulance workers have been arrested over the deaths of six adults, Wiltshire Police have said.

The investigation was launched in 2023 and last year a man in his 30s was arrested on suspicion of six counts of gross negligence manslaughter and four counts of ill-treatment or wilful neglect by a care worker. Police also arrested a 59-year-old woman on suspicion of gross negligence manslaughter.

Wiltshire Police said the two South Western Ambulance Service workers have been released on bail.

"We can confirm a major investigation is under way relating to several adult deaths in and around Wiltshire," said Det Ch Insp Phil Walker from the force's major crime team.

"This investigation has been ongoing since an initial report was made to Wiltshire Police in 2023 and detailed inquiries have been undertaken since to ascertain the facts," he added.

A spokesperson for the ambulance service said it started an internal investigation as soon as it became aware of concerns and had since been "working closely" with police as part of the ongoing investigation.

The service said the two members of staff were "immediately relieved of all duties, including the treatment of patients," adding that one of the individuals is no longer employed by the trust.

"We would like to reassure people that this is an isolated situation and there is no on-going risk to patients. Please continue to call 999 in a life-threatening emergency," the spokesperson added.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

You can receive Breaking News on a smartphone or tablet via the BBC News App. You can also follow @BBCBreaking on X to get the latest alerts.

Animal welfare activists in India are mourning the death of a much-loved elephant they long sought to rehabilitate.

Shankar, the lone African elephant at Delhi's zoo who spent much of his life in isolation, refused food on Wednesday and collapsed by evening. Despite veterinary efforts, the 29-year-old male died within 40 minutes, officials said.

For 24 years, Shankar endured a lonely existence - including at least 13 spent in solitary confinement.

The cause of his death is not known yet. "Investigation regarding the cause of death has been ordered," zoo director Sanjeet Kumar told BBC.

Shankar was among two African elephants that arrived in India in 1998 as a diplomatic gift from Zimbabwe to former India President Shankar Dayal Sharma.

But Shankar's companion died in 2001, said Mr Kumar.

A former zoo official, who did not wish to be identified, said that after his companion's death, Shankar was temporarily lodged with the Asian elephants in the zoo, but the plan did not work.

"They were very aggressive towards one another," he said, adding that Shankar was soon isolated.

"He [Shankar] was playful when his companion was there. They were popular among zoo visitors. Shankar's behaviour changed after the other African elephant died. Shankar never accepted any other elephant's company, neither did they accept Shankar's. He was left friendless," the former official said.

In 2012, Shankar was shifted to a new enclosure that left him virtually in solitary confinement - despite a 2009 federal ban on keeping elephants alone for more than six months. He remained there until his death.

For years now, activists have been demanding that Shankar be removed from the zoo and rehabilitated in a wildlife sanctuary that houses other African elephants.

In 2021, a petition in Delhi's high court sought Shankar's relocation to a sanctuary with other African elephants. Two years later, the court dismissed the petition, directing the petitioner to approach the committee handling transfers of wild animals by zoos.

Until Wednesday, Shankar was among the only two African elephants in India's zoos. The other - also an adult male - lives in Mysore zoo in the southern state of Karnataka.

Zoos have long struggled to find mates for the two African male elephants, with efforts stalled by high costs, regulatory hurdles, multiple approvals, and welfare concerns, The Indian Express reported.

Activists have also criticised the conditions in which Shankar was kept at the zoo in Delhi, describing his enclosure as bleak and inadequate.

"It's heartbreaking to see him die like this," said Nikita Dhawan, founder of the non-profit Youth For Animals, who had filed the 2021 court petition. "It was easily preventable. He (Shankar) did not have any serious health problems. And he was too young."

The average life expectancy of African elephants is 70 years.

Mr Kumar, the director of Delhi zoo, said that there was "no report of sickness or abnormal behaviour" in Shankar's case till Wednesday morning.

Animal welfare activist Gauri Maulekhi said Shankar's death reflects "years of institutional apathy and neglect" and called it a systemic failure demanding accountability.

"An internal inquiry is simply not enough," Ms Maulekhi told BBC. "This was a systemic failure that demands real accountability and must serve as a watershed moment to end the cruel practice of keeping elephants and other social animals isolated in our zoos for good."

Asked about allegations of neglect, Mr Kumar said "all care and upkeep was followed", but declined to take specific questions.

In October 2024, the World Association of Zoos and Aquariums, suspended the Delhi zoo's membership over concerns about Shankar's living conditions, following reports that he was chained, news agency PTI reported.

The global body gave Delhi zoo until April 2025 to either relocate Shankar or improve his care, warning that its membership would be terminated if the deadline was missed.

A day after the suspension notice, a federal minister inspected Shankar's enclosure and said his health looked better. On 15 October, the government announced plans to bring him a female companion, saying Zimbabwe and Botswana had shown interest and formalities were underway.

Officials in Delhi zoo said that they did not receive any more notices from the global body. And Shankar died before a companion could be arranged.

Follow BBC News India on Instagram, YouTube, Twitter and Facebook.

US rapper Cardi B has returned with her first album in seven years, a blistering collection of songs that reference her recent divorce and ongoing beef with another female rapper.

Am I The Drama? - a title inspired by a RuPaul's Drag Race meme - was released on Friday, and is her first full-length album since her 2018 debut Invasion of Privacy.

Rolling Stone described the rapper's sophomore record as a "fittingly grand return for a queen who never left the throne".

Fans welcomed the return of rap's "queen of chaos" as they dissected the album's bracingly honest lyrics.

The US star references her 2024 divorce from rapper Offset, formerly of hip-hop group Migos, rapping: "Last time you [messed] up, I said I was done / Messed up again, I took you back, I was dumb / Should've fell back from you, instead, I gave you a son."

She also raps about his apparent infidelity, commenting that she "could've cheated too".

But she also reflects on her own role in their break-up, telling him: "As a wife I should have realised when you were hurt / But instead I put my music first."

Elsewhere, Cardi B escalates her ongoing beef with fellow rapper Bia, saying her rival's "melatonin flow [is] putting us to bed".

She also challenges listeners to "name five Bia songs, gun pointing to your head", adding that Bia's record label should be thankful for the publicity from the fallout, rapping: "I'm doing you a favour, Epic."

In a 4.5-star reivew, Rolling Stone's Rob Sheffield noted: "She's got a long list of scores to settle, enemies to crush, crowns to claim.

"She's out to remind everyone she's looser, wilder, less predictable, just plain funnier than anyone else in the game."

Cardi B shot to fame in 2015 after appearing on the VH1 reality show Love & Hip Hop: New York.

Having already gained prominence on social media, she went on to release mixtapes and guest on other rappers' hits before releasing her own debut album.

Robin Murray of Clash awarded her second album 7/10, writing: "Turning the focus back to music, Am I The Drama? attempts to pin down the chaos of her life, and - in the most part - succeeds.

"This is a record that feels like an exhalation, a long-awaited memoir that refuses to blot out the truth. [It] doesn't flinch from the explicit, and embraces discomfort."

Cardi B, whose real name is Belcalis Marlenis Almánzar, has remained in the headlines in the years since her first album.

Earlier this month, she was cleared of assault by a Los Angeles jury after a security guard sued her for $24m (£18m).

Emani Ellis had alleged that the US rapper cut her cheek with a 3in (7.5cm) fingernail and spat on her outside an obstetrician's office in 2018.

Cardi B has had three babies since the release of her debut album and has just announced she is pregnant with her fourth.

After nearly 23 years on American airwaves, comedian Jimmy Kimmel's ABC show is on ice.

He was suspended indefinitely by the network after he made comments in the wake of Charlie Kirk's murder, which mocked the president and appeared to cast blame on his supporters.

A lynchpin in the late-night comedy line-up, Kimmel is the latest media personality to fall foul of the Trump administration in its campaign against perceived liberal bias.

The president has launched personal lawsuits against numerous news outlets and social media companies over treatment he believes is biased against him, and filed a barrage of lawsuits against the Wall Street Journal, New York Times and others.

At his urging, Congress has cut funding for NPR and PBS, while other broadcasters, such as Comcast, have faced threats to have their federal licences pulled - in that case over allegations that their news coverage of the deportation of Kilmar Garcia Abrego to El Salvador was distorted.

In turn, some media companies have agreed to changes in editorial and diversity policies, while others, including ABC and CBS, have paid out multi-million dollar settlements.

Kimmel's firing has reignited those debates, coming just weeks after Paramount said it was cancelling The Late Show, the highest-rated programme in late night.

It was abruptly discontinued after Stephen Colbert made critical remarks against the president. CBS, which aired it, maintained the decision was purely budgetary.

• Trump says TV networks 'against' him should 'maybe' lose licence

At the centre of the administration's fight is Brendan Carr, the 46-year-old chairman of the Federal Communications Commission - the country's broadcast media watchdog - once hailed by President Donald Trump as a "warrior for free speech".

The commission regulates radio, TV and satellite airwaves, giving it power over a range of matters, including mergers and decency complaints.

Even before officially assuming his post in January, Carr, a longtime member of the commission, started putting companies on notice that he would be taking an expansive view of his power, with an eye to policing content in unusual ways.

He sent letters to big tech companies, including Apple and Google, demanding information on how they rank news stories and accusing them of participating in a "censorship cartel" - taking on a sector not traditionally within the FCC's orbit.

It's an approach that is broadly in line with the White House.

Kimmel's suspension came after he implied the suspect accused of shooting Charlie Kirk was a conservative, even after Utah officials had said the alleged gunman was "indoctrinated with leftist ideology".

Carr, in an interview with influential conservative podcaster Benny Johnson, threatened to take action against media companies if they did not push back against Kimmel.

Within hours, Nexstar Media - which has a multi-billion merger pending FCC review - and Sinclair, which collectively own dozens of ABC affiliates across the country, suspended Kimmel's programme.

Ultimately, ABC said the show would be "pre-empted indefinitely".

Carr told CNBC that any change to programming reflected evolving business models, rather than directly as a result of FCC pressure or government censorship.

"It's not about any particular show or any particular person," he said. "It's just that we're in the midst of a very disruptive moment right now."

His remarks came as President Trump suggested on Air Force One that most TV networks were opposed to him and should "maybe" have their licences "taken away".

The controversy has reignited concerns about the pressure the Trump administration is putting on media companies - and whether they are willing to fight back at the expense of their bottom line.

Even some conservatives, including Trump ally Tucker Carlson and Kansas Republican Senator Jerry Moran, have expressed misgivings about whether the administration's actions could endanger free speech.

In July, Paramount, which owns CBS, sparked outcry with its decision to cancel Colbert.

The move came days before it won FCC approval for a long-sought merger.

As a condition for the merger's approval, Paramount had committed to ensuring a "diversity of viewpoints" on air and agreed to install an independent reviewer.

Paramount had also previously agreed to a multi-million dollar settlement to resolve lawsuits from Trump, who accused CBS of bias over how it edited an interview with his electoral opponent Kamala Harris.

After the settlement, the network agreed to stop editing such interviews. Disney, which owns ABC, also settled a defamation lawsuit brought by the president.

Experts think the president had little chance of winning either lawsuit in court.

Media companies have proven responsive in the past to pressure from outside activists, said Anthony Nadler, a professor of media and communications at Ursinus College in Philadelphia.

He cited decisions by streamers in 2020 to remove episodes of shows such as Golden Girls and It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia, with references to black face.

But while Disney might be responding to conservative outcry over Kirk's death, he said: "Media companies are pre-emptively censoring themselves when people connected with their organisation face criticism from presidential power."

Analysts said consolidation in the media industry has made it more vulnerable to government pressure, while some decisions might also reflect conservative leanings of owners of media companies, like Sinclair, which runs almost 200 television stations across the US.

Importantly, for many of America's biggest media companies, news and late-night programming tends to represent a comparatively small part of their overall business, which can extend to movies, amusement parks and internet service.

Still, some outlets are holding firm. The New York Times, which is not regulated by the FCC, has vowed it "will not be deterred by intimidation tactics".

Jeffrey Sonnenfeld, professor of leadership at Yale and founder of the Chief Executive Leadership Institute, said the Trump administration in its second term was intruding in business affairs in unprecedented ways.

But he said in this case, he thought Disney would have made a similar decision, even without the pressure.

He noted chief executive Bob Iger also cancelled Roseanne Barr's show in 2018 over an inflammatory tweet and duelled with Florida's Republican Governor Ron DeSantis.

"If Jimmy Kimmel was being removed for being a Trump critic, Iger would hold his ground, but unfortunately [Kimmel] made it hard to do by mocking murder," he said. "Making fun of murder is just not part of Disney's brand."

One of the world's most popular streamers, Tyler "Ninja" Blevins, says trolls "berate" him every day because his number of viewers has fallen.

Ninja was propelled to stardom in 2018 after he played Fortnite on streaming site Twitch alongside rappers Drake and Travis Scott, and NFL player Juju Smith-Schuster.

He now has fewer viewers than at the height of his fame - but still has 67m followers across all platforms, and is the world's third most popular Twitch streamer.

He told the BBC "haters" seem obsessed with the fact he was not quite as popular as he once was.

"I think I'm the only streamer on the planet who was pulling 100,000 viewers [per stream] consistently, but now I get like seven or eight thousand across Twitch and YouTube," he said.

"So that's something that the internet and trolls remind me of every day and the last couple of years have been rough," he said.

Ninja says every day moderators have to remove people from his streams for being rude about his viewership falling.

He admits to having to work hard lately to ignore the trolls.

"It's literally every day that I'm getting berated online", he said.

Mr Blevins puts his fall in viewership down to the shrinking popularity of his favourite game Fortnite.

He is so well known to Fortnite fans that the game created special "skins" - digital items that change a character's appearance - in his likeness.

He remains one of the highest earning streamers with an estimated net worth of $50m, according to Esportsinsider.

Despite the hostility he faces, he says he has no plans to stop playing or retire from streaming.

"I still love it and have a community that is strong and stays with me. I'm a gamer and an entertainer at heart - its in my blood," he said.

The 34-year-old was speaking to the BBC as he prepares for a 24 hour charity stream to raise awareness about skin cancer after he discovered and removed two cancerous moles last year.

He's set a target to raise $250,000 during the online gaming marathon where he will invite doctors to spread awareness about the importance of checking moles for signs of skin cancer.

As well as encouraging fans to donate, he's pledged to donate a large sum himself to cancer charities but says the money is only one part of the mission.

"Me and my wife were going to give to this cause no matter what because it's going to be important to us for the rest of our lives but it's not just about us giving our money its the awareness aspect too," he said.

Ninja particularly wants to encourage younger people to get their moles checked out and hopes that the stream will target his and younger generations.

He says he'll be live for 12 hours of the livestream as he no longer has the energy for longer marathon sessions in front of the webcam.

"I'm 34 - I need my sleep man!" he said.

A British couple who were detained for nearly eight months by the Taliban in Afghanistan have been released, an official with knowledge of the case has said.

Peter Reynolds, 80, and his wife Barbie, 76, who have lived in the country for nearly two decades, were held after being stopped while travelling home on 1 February.

The couple were freed through Qatari mediation, after they were transferred from Kabul's central prison to a larger prison during the final phase of negotiations, the official said.

It follows months of public lobbying by their family for their release.

Just six days ago, an American woman who was detained with them and subsequently released told the BBC they were "literally dying" in prison and that "time is running out".

Faye Hall, who was let go two months into her detention, highlighted that the elderly couple's health had deteriorated rapidly while in prison.

America's late-night TV hosts have rallied behind fellow comedian Jimmy Kimmel after he was suspended by ABC in a row over comments he made about the killing of Charlie Kirk.

Stephen Colbert began his show by saying "we are all Jimmy Kimmel", and said the star's removal was a "blatant assault on freedom of speech".

Seth Meyers declared it was "a privilege and honour to call Jimmy Kimmel my friend", while Jon Stewart and Jimmy Fallon tackled the free speech issue by doing satirical sketches in which they were apparently forced to praise Donald Trump.

Their broadcasts came shortly after the US president said the main networks were overwhelmingly negative about him and could have their licences "taken away".

The row started after Kimmel said in his monologue on Monday that the "Maga gang" were "desperately trying to characterise this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them" and trying to "score political points from it".

He also likened Trump's reaction to the conservative political activist's death to "how a four-year-old mourns a goldfish".

Meyers, the host of NBC's Late Night, began his show on Thursday by saying Trump's administration was "pursuing a crackdown on free speech", before adding sarcastically: "And completely unrelated, I just want to say before we get started here that I've always admired and respected Mr Trump."

To audience laughter, Meyers continued: "I've always believed he was a visionary, an innovator, a great president and an even better golfer."

The host went on to play a succession of clips of Trump declaring he had banned government censorship and brought back free speech in America.

After playing further clips about the Kimmel situation, Meyers said: "It is a privilege and honour to call Jimmy Kimmel my friend, in the same way it's a privilege and honour to do this show every night.

"I wake up every day and I count my blessings to live in a country that at least purports to value freedom of speech.

"And we're going to keep doing our show the way we've always done it - with enthusiasm and integrity..." That was followed by a fart noise, calling back to a previous joke about a horse defecating in front of Trump during his state visit to the UK.

Returning to his point, Meyers continued: "This is a pivotal... this is a big moment in our democracy and we must all stand up for freedom of expression.

"There is a reason free speech is in the very First Amendment. It stands above all others."

On CBS, The Late Show presenter Colbert said: "To Jimmy, I say I stand with you and your staff 100%."

He said Kimmel's suspension was "blatant censorship" and the "latest and boldest action in a long campaign against media critics".

Colbert has had his own show cancelled, which CBS said in July was "purely a financial decision", but which some observers have linked to a looming federal decision on a merger involving CBS's parent company Paramount.

Kimmel's removal came after Nexstar Media, one of America's largest TV station owners, said it would not air Kimmel's show "for the foreseeable future" because his remarks had been "offensive and insensitive". Nexstar is also currently awaiting federal approval for a separate takeover deal.

"So a company apparently capitulating to the whims of the president in order to ensure their merger goes through - has that ever happened before?" Colbert joked.

"Everything is about corporate relationships."

Following his state visit, Trump told reporters of late night shows and networks: "All they do is hit Trump... They are licensed. They are not allowed to do that."

Colbert responded: "Yes they are! Since the beginning... these shows have always talked about the current president, and that happens to be you."

He added: "So no matter what they claim, this is not entirely about what Jimmy said on Monday, this was part of a plan. How do I know that? Two months ago, when the president was tastefully celebrating my cancellation, he posted 'Jimmy Kimmel is next to go'."

On NBC's The Tonight Show, Fallon told viewers: "I don't know what's going on and no-one does. But I do know Jimmy Kimmel and he's a decent, funny and loving guy and I hope he comes back."

He continued: "A lot of people are worried that we won't keep saying what we want to say or that we'll be censored. But I'm going to cover the president's trip to the UK just like I normally would.

"Here we go. Well guys, President Trump just wrapped up his three-day trip to the UK and he..."

A voiceover then cut in to dub Kimmel with the words: "...looked incredibly handsome."

'Perfectly-tinted Trump'

On Comedy Central, Stewart took a similar satirical approach, becoming a fawning and "patriotically obediant host" of an "all-new government approved Daily Show".

He reluctantly lavished praise on the "perfectly-tinted Trump", known for his "charm, elegance and an undeniable sexual charisma".

Stewart later asked the show's seven correspondents if the "naysayers and critics" were right. "Is Donald Trump stifling free speech?"

"Of course not Jon," they replied in unison in robotic voices. "Americans are free to express any opinion we want. To suggest otherwise is laughable. Ha ha ha."

Meanwhile, Former long-serving late-night host David Letterman spoke about Kimmel's suspension at The Atlantic Festival in New York on Thursday.

"I feel bad about this, because we all see where see this is going, correct?" he said. "It's managed media. It's no good. It's silly. It's ridiculous."

Limits to free speech

But not all late-night hosts were in agreement.

Fox News's Greg Gutfeld said: "People come up to me and go, 'If you're a comedian and you're on TV, you should be upset by this'. I'm not really."

Gutfeld's panel of guests criticised Kimmel's comments and argued there were limits to free speech on network TV.

The host also said people who are now defending Kimmel had previously tried to silence right-wing outlets and commentators. "The only way they were going to stop that is if they know it can happen to them," Gutfeld said. "But is that actually fair thinking? I don't know."

Elsewhere, former CNN presenter Piers Morgan said Kimmel had caused "understandable outrage all over America", adding: "Why is he being heralded as some kind of free speech martyr?"

A Taliban official has rejected the idea that the US could retake a key airbase in Afghanistan after President Donald Trump told reporters he wanted it back.

Zakir Jalal, who works in the Taliban's foreign ministry, said the idea of the US maintaining any military presence in Afghanistan was "completely" rejected during talks between the two sides before the Taliban returned to power.

It came after the US president hinted retaking Bagram airbase - the epicentre of Nato forces in Afghanistan for two decades - might be possible "because they need things from us".

The base was handed to the Afghan military shortly before the Taliban took control of Afghanistan.

Trump said at a press conference in the UK on Thursday the US "gave it to them for nothing".

The complete withdrawal of US troops was part of a deal signed during Trump's first administration in 2020, and finished under Joe Biden's in 2021.

But Trump said in March he had planned to keep Bagram airbase "not because of Afghanistan but because of China".

Trump reiterated the importance of its location on Thursday, saying one reason to take Bagram back was because "it's an hour away from where China makes its nuclear weapons".

It is unclear exactly what he is referring to: a BBC Verify investigation in July noted there is a nuclear testing site about 2,000km (1,243 miles) away, in north-western China.

Trump has also repeatedly said that China has since established a presence at the base, which is north of the capital, Kabul. The Taliban have denied the claim.

But a BBC investigation - which examined 30 satellite images from late 2020 to 2025 - found very little activity at the base since the Taliban returned, and no evidence to support China's presence at the base.

On Friday, a Chinese foreign ministry spokesman said "China respects Afghanistan's territorial integrity and sovereignty", adding that "the future of Afghanistan should be in the hands of Afghan people".

The Taliban's Zakir Jalal, meanwhile, wrote on social media platform X: "Throughout history, Afghans have not accepted a military presence, and this possibility was completely rejected during the Doha talks and agreement, but the doors are open to other engagement."

The US and the Taliban have been involved in talks recently, although a meeting on Saturday with the Taliban's foreign minister focused on Americans held in Afghanistan, news agency Reuters reported.

The Republic of Ireland has committed to new legislation that will ensure full co-operation with a reformed UK legacy body dealing with cases related to the Northern Ireland Troubles.

It is part of a "new framework" agreed between the British and Irish governments, to be unveiled on Friday.

It also involves a legacy unit being set-up within An Garda Síochána (the Irish police force) and a €25m (£22m) support fund for victims.

The deal seeks to heal a rift between London and Dublin created by the current Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act.

Victims' groups and political parties have been briefed on the agreement, which will require new legislation to be passed in both the UK and Ireland in the months ahead.

Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn and the Tánaiste (Irish deputy PM) Simon Harris will jointly launch the agreement.

Harris is expected to describe it as "an imperfect opportunity" to deal with the legacy issue.

The two governments have been seeking a reset on legacy issues since the UK general election last year.

A core part of the deal involves significant changes to the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR).

It will be renamed the Legacy Commission, with a new oversight board established.

Irish state bodies, such as the gardaí (Irish police), which do not currently assist ICRIR investigations, will begin co-operating once the changes come into effect.

The new gardaí legacy unit will be a single-point of contact on Troubles-related cases for victims and bereaved families.

A separate body will also be created to accept information about Troubles-related murders.

London and Dublin believe the two bodies reflect what was agreed, but never implemented, under the Stormont House Agreement in 2014.

What is the Legacy Act?

The current Legacy Act, passed by the last UK government in 2023, was widely opposed by Labour, all Northern Ireland parties, several victims' groups and the Irish government.

It created a new legacy body known as the ICRIR to take over all Troubles-era cases from 1 May 2024, including those on the desk of the Police Service of Northern Ireland.

The act shut down all historical inquests.

The act's most controversial element, the offer of conditional immunity to suspects, was disapplied following legal action by bereaved families.

The court ruled this part of the act was incompatible with human rights legislation and the Windsor Framework.

Labour pledged to repeal the Legacy Act and replace it after winning the last election, including agreeing a way forward with Dublin.

The act included controversial measures, such as allowing the ICRIR to grant conditional amnesties in return for information.

However, this and other aspects of the act were later ruled unlawful.

Ireland launched an inter-state case against the UK at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

This is unlikely to be withdrawn until after the UK passes new legacy legislation, which will include the overhaul of the ICRIR.

'This could be doomed to fail'

Emmett McConomy, whose 11-year-old brother Stephen was killed by a soldier in Londonderry in 1982, said any long-awaited new framework to address the legacy of the Troubles must "meet the needs of all victims."

Speaking to BBC Radio Foyle's North West Today programme ahead of Friday's announcement, Mr McConomy said he hopes the new framework will bring "positive change" and be "a step in the right direction" for the many people affected by the conflict in Northern Ireland.

However, he expressed concern about the level of engagement both governments had undertaken with victims regarding the framework.

"Without proper buy-in from victims," he said, "this could sadly be doomed to fail."

"The most important people in all of this are the victims.

"What input have we had into these proposals? For me, I don't believe there has been much consultation - at least none that I am aware of.

"If the people this is designed for are not consulted or brought in at the early stages of developing these mechanisms, then surely they are doomed to fail.

"Transparency, integrity, independence, and a genuine desire to get to the truth and acknowledge families must be at the centre of whatever is being done."

This week tensions flared at a rally in London, the world of boxing paid tribute to Ricky Hatton, and cult show The Summer I Turned Pretty reached its climax.

But how much attention did you pay to what else happened in the world over the past seven days?

Quiz collated by Ben Fell.

Fancy testing your memory? Try last week's quiz, or have a go at something from the archives.

The UK military is focused on defending the nation rather than stopping asylum seekers from crossing the Channel, a cabinet minister has said.

US President Donald Trump sugested that military intervention could be used to deal with illegal migration to the UK during his state visit this week.

But Trade Secretary Peter Kyle has rejected that call, telling BBC Breakfast the UK Border Force has specific responsibility for policing UK borders.

He added the Navy has a "working relationship" with the border force and can be called up on when needed, but was focused on "national defence".

A second migrant has been returned to France after losing an eleventh hour legal challenge against his removal, in a sign the courts are growing colder on such legal challenges under new government guidance.

However, rather than the Labour government's approach of diplomatic negotiations agreeing returns and toughening up court guidance, Trump suggested military force was a better deterrent.

Speaking alongside Sir Keir Starmer at a press conference at the PM's country residence Chequers on Thursday, Trump suggested such force was needed as illegal migration "destroys countries from within".

He said: "You have people coming in and I told the prime minister I would stop it, and it doesn't matter if you call out the military, it doesn't matter what means you use."

Asked about the US president's claims, Kyle told BBC Breakfast: "Well, what he suggested was the military are used, but we have the UK Border Force that is now established and has been reinforced and bolstered and have new powers under this Government.

"The Navy actually does have a working relationship with the UK Border Force, and the Navy can be called upon if needed, so we do have the functional relationship that we need between our military and keeping our borders safe and secure.

"But what we really need at the moment is our military focused on all of those really key issues around the world, directly relating to our national defence."

The new home secretary Shabana Mahmood has vowed to fight what she called "vexatious, last-minute claims" and Kyle described her as "straining at the bit" to make sure the pilot one-in-one-out scheme for migrant returns was a success.

"We're making sure we get as many people as don't have the right to be here returned as swiftly as possible," he said, adding there are "a lot of cases" going through court.

Asked whether there was any target figure for the number of returns, Kyle said: "Our target is to make sure that everybody who comes to our shore and doesn't have the right to stay is removed from the country, that is our target.

"We want to get a full grip on the systm, we want to make sure people see a fuctioning system that's delivering so rapidly, efficiently and swiftly that people don't come here in the first place, that's the deterrent that we need."

About 100 men who arrived in the UK by small boat are currently in immigration removal centres near Heathrow and may be removed to France under the scheme.

The Home Office said more deportation flights are planned into next week and a government appeal has been launched, aimed at limiting the time migrants have to provide evidence to challenge their removal.

More than 5,500 migrants have reached the UK since the scheme came into effect at the start of August but the government is hoping continuing removal flights will act as a deterrent.

Sign up for our Politics Essential newsletter to read top political analysis, gain insight from across the UK and stay up to speed with the big moments. It'll be delivered straight to your inbox every weekday.

A British couple who were detained for nearly eight months by the Taliban in Afghanistan have been released, an official with knowledge of the case has said.

Peter Reynolds, 80, and his wife Barbie, 76, who have lived in the country for nearly two decades, were held after being stopped while travelling home on 1 February.

The couple were freed through Qatari mediation, after they were transferred from Kabul's central prison to a larger prison during the final phase of negotiations, the official said.

It follows months of public lobbying by their family for their release.

Just six days ago, an American woman who was detained with them and subsequently released told the BBC they were "literally dying" in prison and that "time is running out".

Faye Hall, who was let go two months into her detention, highlighted that the elderly couple's health had deteriorated rapidly while in prison.

Concern practice is 'endemic across the game'

Companies 'exploiting a loophole and putting fans at risk'

Inside the Etihad alongside Man City's most ardent supporters

'It's an arms race'

An Eritrean man is due to be flown out of the UK on Friday morning under the government's "one in, one out" deal with France, after a last-minute court bid to delay the departure failed.

He will become the second person removed from the UK under the policy when his flight leaves at 06.15.

This comes a little over a month since the UK and France agreed the year-long pilot scheme of exchanges of migrants in the hope of deterring small boat crossings.

The first flight under the agreement returned one person, an Indian national, to France on Thursday.

• First migrant deported to France under 'one in one out' deal
• Why do Channel migrants want to come to the UK?
• How many people cross the Channel in small boats?

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said the first return demonstrated to people attempting small boat crossings "if you enter the UK illegally, we will seek to remove you".

The Eritrean man set to fly to France on Friday morning arrived in England on a small boat in August.

His lawyers had argued that he may have been the victim of human trafficking.

In a ruling after a three-hour emergency hearing on Thursday, the presiding judge said there was no legal justification to delay the transport of the unnamed man.

Mr Justice Sheldon said there was "significant public interest" in removing him, noting that home secretary was acting in the public interest by pursuing a policy to combat dangerous people smuggling.

He would instead have an opportunity to make his case in France.

"There is no serious issue to be tried in this case that the claimant has been denied procedural fairness," said the judge.

The Eritrean man said he fled his home country in 2019 because of forced conscription - and he spent time in Ethiopia, South Sudan and Libya before coming to Europe.

He said he had lived in France, sleeping rough, and eventually made his way to Dunkirk to try to cross to England.

But in his ruling, Mr Justice Sheldon noted the man had given differing accounts of his allegations of trafficking, and so it was open to the home office to conclude that "his account of trafficking could not reasonably be believed".

The judgement came just hours after the Home Office changed its policy on how to handle modern day slavery claims from English Channel migrants, to make it harder for them to resist being sent to France.

The new policy means that a migrant who is refused protection in the UK because they have suffered slavery or trafficking may only challenge that decision after they have been flown out of the country.

The rule change also came after a different Eritrean man facing a return to France won a temporary delay. The government said it would appeal against that decision.

US President Donald Trump weighed in on illegal immigration to the UK at the end of his state visit.

During a press conference with Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, he suggested using the military to combat small boat crossings.

Starmer countered by affirming that the UK had "a number of cooperation deals with other countries" in place and are taking the issue "incredibly seriously".

The Home Office says that more flights are planned in the coming days, but it is not clear how many passengers will be booked on to each one because of ongoing legal challenges – or threats of them.

Around 100 men are currently in immigration removal centres near Heathrow under the scheme. Each one was detained after arriving in the UK on a small boat and told they were potentially eligible to be returned to France.

The "one in, one out" deal is intended to deter people from turning to smugglers to cross the Channel because of the risk they could be sent back.

It proposes that, for each migrant the UK returns to France, another migrant with a strong case for asylum in the UK will come in return.

Neither government has suggested that the plan will smash the crossings on its own.

Around 5,590 migrants have reached the UK since the scheme came into effect at the start of August.

The prime minister and his team are delighted – and relieved.

State visits are far from a new tool in the British armoury of soft power, but they are frequently a useful one – and particularly with an unpredictable ally with an abiding love for the UK in general and its monarchy in particular.

That was why, back in February and brandished with a flourish, Sir Keir Starmer delivered the King's invitation to US President Donald Trump for a second such visit.

Gratefully received as it was, his British hosts still needed to pull it off, and the prime minister still needed to make it through the potential rollercoaster of a news conference with his guest.

And that is what Sir Keir managed and so hence his team's relief.

They have now – on several occasions – managed to tame Trump during their joint public appearances.

It is not that the two men agree on everything, far from it.

Their instincts, communication styles and politics are wildly different, but Trump's disagreements with Sir Keir were somehow channelled past him, rather than at him.

The UK is expected to recognise a Palestinian state in the coming days - when, from Downing Street's perspective, the president is safely back on his own side of the Atlantic. The president acknowledged to me he disagrees with the prime minister on this.

He said so explicitly, but gently, and only at the end of a lengthy answer which the Starmer would have agreed with the thrust of.

Even his remarks about illegal immigration, while headline making, seem to have less impact in this the second half of the first year of his second term. The president's willingness to comment on the internal politics of an ally feels more priced in, and so carries less shock value for many.

In advance of the news conference, there had been much speculation about the potential for his mood to sour instantly on the mention of the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.

But, confronted by it and asked in particular about Epstein's friendship with the former British Ambassador to the United States Lord Mandelson, he instantly smothered it as if with a fire blanket.

His answer was curious, claiming he didn't know Lord Mandelson – despite them meeting in the White House last week, for a start.

Downing Street may allow themselves to hope theirs is a relationship with the Trump administration that is normalising and - whisper it - at least some of the time bordering on the conventional, and so less demanding on the bandwidth and mental energy devoted to it in its early months.

The caveat, of course, with Donald Trump, is you never know.

This state visit provided the UK with invaluable face time with the president – and so the opportunity to both set out the UK's position and attempt to persuade.

The prime minister has been successful in the former, but the persuasion bit? That's rather more tricky.

US President Donald Trump has suggested some TV networks should have their licences "taken away", as he backed America's broadcast regulator in a row over the suspension of ABC host Jimmy Kimmel.

The Disney-owned network announced on Wednesday evening it was pulling the comedian off air "indefinitely" amid a backlash over his remarks about the murder of conservative influencer Charlie Kirk last week.

On Monday, Kimmel suggested the suspect was a Maga Republican, although authorities in Utah had said the alleged gunman was "indoctrinated with leftist ideology".

ABC took Jimmy Kimmel Live! off air after the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) threatened action over his remarks.

• ABC takes Jimmy Kimmel off air over Charlie Kirk comments

Trump spoke about the issue to reporters on Thursday aboard Air Force One while returning from a state visit to the UK.

"I have read someplace that the networks were 97% against me, again, 97% negative, and yet I won and easily, all seven swing states [in last year's election]," the president said.

"They give me only bad publicity, press. I mean, they're getting a licence. I would think maybe their license should be taken away."

In his monologue on Monday, Kimmel, 57, said the "Maga gang" was "desperately trying to characterise this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them" and trying to "score political points from it".

He also likened Trump's reaction to the death of his 31-year-old political confidant to "how a four-year-old mourns a goldfish".

After the shooting, Kimmel had also gone on Instagram to condemn the attack and send "love" to the Kirk family.

Speaking to Fox on Thursday, FCC chairman Brendan Carr said the suspension of Kimmel was not "the last shoe to drop".

"We're going to continue to hold these broadcasters accountable to the public interest," he said.

"And if broadcasters don't like that simple solution, they can turn their license into the FCC."

Kimmel's suspension was announced on Wednesday evening shortly after Nexstar Media, one of the biggest owners of TV stations in the US, said it would not air his show "for the foreseeable future".

Nexstar called his remarks about Kirk "offensive and insensitive at a critical time in our national political discourse".

Carr praised Nexstar - which is currently seeking FCC approval for a $6.2bn (£4.5bn) merger with Tegna - and said he hoped other broadcasters would follow its lead.

Sinclair, the largest ABC affiliate group in the US, said it would air a special remembrance programme dedicated to Kirk during the original time slot for Kimmel's show on Friday.

Kirk, a high-profile conservative activist and father-of-two, died of a single gunshot wound to the neck while speaking at Utah Valley University in Orem on 10 September.

His widow, Erika Kirk, was named on Thursday as the new head of the organisation her husband co-founded, Turning Point USA.

Tyler Robinson, 22, was charged with aggravated murder on Tuesday, with prosecutors saying they will seek the death penalty.

Writers, actors, former US President Barack Obama and other prominent Democrats condemned Kimmel's suspension.

Obama said the incident represented a new and dangerous level of cancel culture.

"After years of complaining about cancel culture, the current administration has taken it to a new and dangerous level by routinely threatening regulatory action against media companies unless they muzzle or fire reporters and commentators it doesn't like," he posted on X.

Actor Ben Stiller said it "isn't right", while Hacks star Jean Smart said she was "horrified at the cancellation".

"What Jimmy said was free speech, not hate speech," she added.

The Writers Guild of America and Screen Actors Guild (WGA), two Hollywood labour unions, condemned the decision as a violation of constitutional free speech rights.

But others argued Kimmel's suspension was accountability, not cancel culture.

"When a person says something that a ton of people find offensive, rude, dumb in real time and then that person is punished for it that's not cancel culture," said Dave Portnoy, who founded media company Barstool Sports.

"That is consequences for your actions."

Late-night Fox host Greg Gutfeld argued that Kimmel had "deliberately and misleadingly" blamed the killing of Kirk on the activist's "allies and friends".

British presenter Piers Morgan said Kimmel had "lied about Charlie Kirk's assassin being Maga" and his comments caused "understandable outrage all over America".

"Why is he being heralded as some kind of free speech martyr?" he added.

But one of Carr's FCC leadership colleagues, commissioner Anna Gomez, criticised the regulator's stance on Kimmel.

She said that "an inexcusable act of political violence by one disturbed individual must never be exploited as justification for broader censorship or control".

• Listen to Americast on BBC Sounds: Is the Trump administration clamping down on America's first amendment protection of free speech?

BBC News used AI to help write the summary at the top of this article. It was edited by BBC journalists. Find out more.

The US has for the sixth time vetoed a draft resolution at the United Nations Security Council that would have demanded an immediate and permanent ceasefire in Gaza and the release of hostages.

US deputy Middle East envoy Morgan Ortagus said the text did not go far enough in condemning Hamas or recognise Israel's right to defend itself.

All 14 other members of the Security Council voted in favour of the draft resolution - which described the humanitarian situation in Gaza as "catastrophic" and called on Israel to lift all aid restrictions.

It comes as the UN's humanitarian office warns that the last lifelines for civilians are collapsing in Gaza City as Israel expands its military offensive.

• 'Cataclysmic' situation in Gaza City, UN official says, as Israeli tanks advance
• The frantic race to save historic treasures from Israeli bombs

On the global stage, Israel and its closest ally look increasingly isolated.

Speaking prior to the vote, Ortagus said Washington's opposition to the resolution should "come as no surprise".

"It fails to condemn Hamas or recognise Israel's right to defend itself, and it wrongly legitimises the false narratives benefitting Hamas, which have sadly found currency in this council," she said.

After the vote, UN members reacted swiftly to express their disappointment.

Palestinian Ambassador to the UN Riyad Mansour called the US's decision "deeply regrettable and painful", saying it had prevented the Security Council from "playing its rightful role in the face of these atrocities".

Pakistan's ambassador Asim Ahmad described the veto as "a dark moment in this chamber".

"The world is watching. The cries of children should pierce our hearts," he said.

Amar Bendjama, Algeria's ambassador, apologised to the Palestinian people.

"Palestinian brothers, Palestinian sisters, forgive us," he said.

"Forgive us, because the world speaks of rights, but denies them to Palestinians. Forgive us because our efforts, our sincere efforts, shattered against this wall of rejection."

This latest UN vote came just days before world leaders gather for the UN General Assembly where Gaza will be a major topic and key American allies, including the UK, are expected to recognise an independent Palestinian state.

In Gaza, thousands of people are continuing to flee the region amid ongoing deadly attacks as Israeli tanks and troops continue to advance on the third day of a ground offensive.

Olga Cherevko, a spokeswoman for the UN's humanitarian office, told the BBC the situation in Gaza City is "nothing short of cataclysmic".

The Israeli military launched a campaign in Gaza in response to the Hamas-led attack on southern Israel on 7 October 2023, in which about 1,200 people were killed and 251 others were taken hostage.

At least 65,141 people have been killed in Israeli attacks in Gaza since then, according to the territory's health ministry.

The ministry says another 435 people have so far died during the war as a result of malnutrition and starvation, including four over the past 24 hours.

UK government borrowing in August hit the highest level for the month in five years, according to the latest official figures.

Borrowing - the difference between public spending and tax income - was £18bn in August, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) said. That was up £3.5bn from the same month last year and higher than analysts had been forecasting.

The UK statistics body said that while tax and National Insurance receipts increased, they were outstripped by higher spending on public services, benefits and debt interest.

Borrowing over the first five months of the financial year has now reached £83.8bn, the ONS said, which is up £16.2bn from the same period last year.

The borrowing figure for August was higher than expected. The government's official forecaster, the Office for Budget Responsibility, had predicted £12.5bn while City analysts were expecting £12.8bn.

Paul Dales, chief UK economist at Capital Economics, said the latest figures, "highlight the deteriorating nature of the public finances even though the economy hasn't been terribly weak".

He added that this would contribute to the chancellor having to money in November's Budget, "mostly through higher taxes".

An Eritrean man is due to be flown out of the UK on Friday morning under the government's "one in, one out" deal with France, after a last-minute court bid to delay the departure failed.

He will become the second person removed from the UK under the policy when his flight leaves at 06.15.

This comes a little over a month since the UK and France agreed the year-long pilot scheme of exchanges of migrants in the hope of deterring small boat crossings.

The first flight under the agreement returned one person, an Indian national, to France on Thursday.

• First migrant deported to France under 'one in one out' deal
• Why do Channel migrants want to come to the UK?
• How many people cross the Channel in small boats?

Home Secretary Shabana Mahmood said the first return demonstrated to people attempting small boat crossings "if you enter the UK illegally, we will seek to remove you".

The Eritrean man set to fly to France on Friday morning arrived in England on a small boat in August.

His lawyers had argued that he may have been the victim of human trafficking.

In a ruling after a three-hour emergency hearing on Thursday, the presiding judge said there was no legal justification to delay the transport of the unnamed man.

Mr Justice Sheldon said there was "significant public interest" in removing him, noting that home secretary was acting in the public interest by pursuing a policy to combat dangerous people smuggling.

He would instead have an opportunity to make his case in France.

"There is no serious issue to be tried in this case that the claimant has been denied procedural fairness," said the judge.

The Eritrean man said he fled his home country in 2019 because of forced conscription - and he spent time in Ethiopia, South Sudan and Libya before coming to Europe.

He said he had lived in France, sleeping rough, and eventually made his way to Dunkirk to try to cross to England.

But in his ruling, Mr Justice Sheldon noted the man had given differing accounts of his allegations of trafficking, and so it was open to the home office to conclude that "his account of trafficking could not reasonably be believed".

The judgement came just hours after the Home Office changed its policy on how to handle modern day slavery claims from English Channel migrants, to make it harder for them to resist being sent to France.

The new policy means that a migrant who is refused protection in the UK because they have suffered slavery or trafficking may only challenge that decision after they have been flown out of the country.

The rule change also came after a different Eritrean man facing a return to France won a temporary delay. The government said it would appeal against that decision.

US President Donald Trump weighed in on illegal immigration to the UK at the end of his state visit.

During a press conference with Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, he suggested using the military to combat small boat crossings.

Starmer countered by affirming that the UK had "a number of cooperation deals with other countries" in place and are taking the issue "incredibly seriously".

The Home Office says that more flights are planned in the coming days, but it is not clear how many passengers will be booked on to each one because of ongoing legal challenges – or threats of them.

Around 100 men are currently in immigration removal centres near Heathrow under the scheme. Each one was detained after arriving in the UK on a small boat and told they were potentially eligible to be returned to France.

The "one in, one out" deal is intended to deter people from turning to smugglers to cross the Channel because of the risk they could be sent back.

It proposes that, for each migrant the UK returns to France, another migrant with a strong case for asylum in the UK will come in return.

Neither government has suggested that the plan will smash the crossings on its own.

Around 5,590 migrants have reached the UK since the scheme came into effect at the start of August.

US President Donald Trump has suggested some TV networks should have their licences "taken away", as he backed America's broadcast regulator in a row over the suspension of ABC host Jimmy Kimmel.

The Disney-owned network announced on Wednesday evening it was pulling the comedian off air "indefinitely" amid a backlash over his remarks about the murder of conservative influencer Charlie Kirk last week.

On Monday, Kimmel suggested the suspect was a Maga Republican, although authorities in Utah had said the alleged gunman was "indoctrinated with leftist ideology".

ABC took Jimmy Kimmel Live! off air after the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) threatened action over his remarks.

• ABC takes Jimmy Kimmel off air over Charlie Kirk comments

Trump spoke about the issue to reporters on Thursday aboard Air Force One while returning from a state visit to the UK.

"I have read someplace that the networks were 97% against me, again, 97% negative, and yet I won and easily, all seven swing states [in last year's election]," the president said.

"They give me only bad publicity, press. I mean, they're getting a licence. I would think maybe their license should be taken away."

In his monologue on Monday, Kimmel, 57, said the "Maga gang" was "desperately trying to characterise this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them" and trying to "score political points from it".

He also likened Trump's reaction to the death of his 31-year-old political confidant to "how a four-year-old mourns a goldfish".

After the shooting, Kimmel had also gone on Instagram to condemn the attack and send "love" to the Kirk family.

Speaking to Fox on Thursday, FCC chairman Brendan Carr said the suspension of Kimmel was not "the last shoe to drop".

"We're going to continue to hold these broadcasters accountable to the public interest," he said.

"And if broadcasters don't like that simple solution, they can turn their license into the FCC."

Kimmel's suspension was announced on Wednesday evening shortly after Nexstar Media, one of the biggest owners of TV stations in the US, said it would not air his show "for the foreseeable future".

Nexstar called his remarks about Kirk "offensive and insensitive at a critical time in our national political discourse".

Carr praised Nexstar - which is currently seeking FCC approval for a $6.2bn (£4.5bn) merger with Tegna - and said he hoped other broadcasters would follow its lead.

Sinclair, the largest ABC affiliate group in the US, said it would air a special remembrance programme dedicated to Kirk during the original time slot for Kimmel's show on Friday.

Kirk, a high-profile conservative activist and father-of-two, died of a single gunshot wound to the neck while speaking at Utah Valley University in Orem on 10 September.

His widow, Erika Kirk, was named on Thursday as the new head of the organisation her husband co-founded, Turning Point USA.

Tyler Robinson, 22, was charged with aggravated murder on Tuesday, with prosecutors saying they will seek the death penalty.

Writers, actors, former US President Barack Obama and other prominent Democrats condemned Kimmel's suspension.

Obama said the incident represented a new and dangerous level of cancel culture.

"After years of complaining about cancel culture, the current administration has taken it to a new and dangerous level by routinely threatening regulatory action against media companies unless they muzzle or fire reporters and commentators it doesn't like," he posted on X.

Actor Ben Stiller said it "isn't right", while Hacks star Jean Smart said she was "horrified at the cancellation".

"What Jimmy said was free speech, not hate speech," she added.

The Writers Guild of America and Screen Actors Guild (WGA), two Hollywood labour unions, condemned the decision as a violation of constitutional free speech rights.

But others argued Kimmel's suspension was accountability, not cancel culture.

"When a person says something that a ton of people find offensive, rude, dumb in real time and then that person is punished for it that's not cancel culture," said Dave Portnoy, who founded media company Barstool Sports.

"That is consequences for your actions."

Late-night Fox host Greg Gutfeld argued that Kimmel had "deliberately and misleadingly" blamed the killing of Kirk on the activist's "allies and friends".

British presenter Piers Morgan said Kimmel had "lied about Charlie Kirk's assassin being Maga" and his comments caused "understandable outrage all over America".

"Why is he being heralded as some kind of free speech martyr?" he added.

But one of Carr's FCC leadership colleagues, commissioner Anna Gomez, criticised the regulator's stance on Kimmel.

She said that "an inexcusable act of political violence by one disturbed individual must never be exploited as justification for broader censorship or control".

• Listen to Americast on BBC Sounds: Is the Trump administration clamping down on America's first amendment protection of free speech?

BBC News used AI to help write the summary at the top of this article. It was edited by BBC journalists. Find out more.

Concern practice is 'endemic across the game'

Companies 'exploiting a loophole and putting fans at risk'

Inside the Etihad alongside Man City's most ardent supporters

'It's an arms race'

US President Donald Trump has said he "didn't want" London Mayor Sir Sadiq Khan at the state banquet hosted by the King at Windsor Castle.

Speaking to reporters on Air Force One heading back the US, Trump described Sir Sadiq as "among the worst mayors in the world", saying he had wanted to attend the event, but "I asked that he not be there".

The BBC understands Sir Sadiq did not seek or expect an invite to the state banquet, and a source close to the mayor said Trump's politics sowed "fear and division".

This latest war of words adds to the pair's tumultuous feud, with Trump in 2019 calling the mayor "a stone-cold loser" and Sir Sadiq accusing him of stirring up far-right politics.

Trump echoed his past attacks on the mayor's governing of London, calling him a "disaster" on immigration.

"I think the Mayor of London Khan is among the worst mayors in the world, and we have some bad ones," he said.

"I think he's done a terrible job. Crime in London is through the roof."

"I asked that he not be there. He wanted to be there, as I understand, I didn't want him."

In response, a source close to Sir Sadiq rejected Trump's assessment of the mayor's work.

"Trump's politics is one of fear and division. This includes talking down our great capital city," they said.

"London is a global success story - it's open, dynamic and safer than major US cities. Perhaps that's one of the reasons record numbers of Americans are choosing to make London their home."

The pair's long-running row dates back to 2015 when the Labour politician condemned Trump's suggestion that Muslims should be banned from travelling to the US. A year later, Trump challenging the mayor to an IQ test.

The US leader also attacked the mayor's handling of the London Bridge terror attack in 2017.

During the US leader's first state visit in 2019, Sir Sadiq permitted a plan to fly a giant inflatable "Trump baby" blimp to coincide with his trip.

In July, Trump took another swipe at the mayor during a press conference with Sir Keir Starmer in Scotland, calling Sir Sadiq a "nasty person", to which the prime minister interjected saying: "He's a friend of mine, actually."

The US president's second state visit to the UK - unprecedented for a non-royal - was largely marked by pomp and ceremony to signal the warm relations between the two allies.

However, it was also mired by protests as thousands gathered in Parliament Square.

Four men were arrested after images of Trump and sex offender Jeffrey Epstein were projected on to Windsor Castle ahead of the state banquet.

The Republic of Ireland has committed to new legislation that will ensure full co-operation with a reformed UK legacy body dealing with cases related to the Northern Ireland Troubles.

It is part of a "new framework" agreed between the British and Irish governments, to be unveiled on Friday.

It also involves a legacy unit being set-up within An Garda Síochána (the Irish police force) and a €25m (£22m) support fund for victims.

The deal seeks to heal a rift between London and Dublin created by the current Northern Ireland Troubles (Legacy and Reconciliation) Act.

Victims' groups and political parties have been briefed on the agreement, which will require new legislation to be passed in both the UK and Ireland in the months ahead.

Northern Ireland Secretary Hilary Benn and the Tánaiste (Irish deputy PM) Simon Harris will jointly launch the agreement.

Harris is expected to describe it as "an imperfect opportunity" to deal with the legacy issue.

The two governments have been seeking a reset on legacy issues since the UK general election last year.

A core part of the deal involves significant changes to the Independent Commission for Reconciliation and Information Recovery (ICRIR).

It will be renamed the Legacy Commission, with a new oversight board established.

Irish state bodies, such as the gardaí (Irish police), which do not currently assist ICRIR investigations, will begin co-operating once the changes come into effect.

The new gardaí legacy unit will be a single-point of contact on Troubles-related cases for victims and bereaved families.

A separate body will also be created to accept information about Troubles-related murders.

London and Dublin believe the two bodies reflect what was agreed, but never implemented, under the Stormont House Agreement in 2014.

What is the Legacy Act?

The current Legacy Act, passed by the last UK government in 2023, was widely opposed by Labour, all Northern Ireland parties, several victims' groups and the Irish government.

It created a new legacy body known as the ICRIR to take over all Troubles-era cases from 1 May 2024, including those on the desk of the Police Service of Northern Ireland.

The act shut down all historical inquests.

The act's most controversial element, the offer of conditional immunity to suspects, was disapplied following legal action by bereaved families.

The court ruled this part of the act was incompatible with human rights legislation and the Windsor Framework.

Labour pledged to repeal the Legacy Act and replace it after winning the last election, including agreeing a way forward with Dublin.

The act included controversial measures, such as allowing the ICRIR to grant conditional amnesties in return for information.

However, this and other aspects of the act were later ruled unlawful.

Ireland launched an inter-state case against the UK at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg.

This is unlikely to be withdrawn until after the UK passes new legacy legislation, which will include the overhaul of the ICRIR.

'This could be doomed to fail'

Emmett McConomy, whose 11-year-old brother Stephen was killed by a soldier in Londonderry in 1982, said any long-awaited new framework to address the legacy of the Troubles must "meet the needs of all victims."

Speaking to BBC Radio Foyle's North West Today programme ahead of Friday's announcement, Mr McConomy said he hopes the new framework will bring "positive change" and be "a step in the right direction" for the many people affected by the conflict in Northern Ireland.

However, he expressed concern about the level of engagement both governments had undertaken with victims regarding the framework.

"Without proper buy-in from victims," he said, "this could sadly be doomed to fail."

"The most important people in all of this are the victims.

"What input have we had into these proposals? For me, I don't believe there has been much consultation - at least none that I am aware of.

"If the people this is designed for are not consulted or brought in at the early stages of developing these mechanisms, then surely they are doomed to fail.

"Transparency, integrity, independence, and a genuine desire to get to the truth and acknowledge families must be at the centre of whatever is being done."

The Taliban government has removed books written by women from the university teaching system in Afghanistan as part of a new ban which has also outlawed the teaching of human rights and sexual harassment.

Some 140 books by women - including titles like "Safety in the Chemical Laboratory" - were among 680 books found to be of "concern" due to "anti-Sharia and Taliban policies".

The universities were further told they were no longer allowed to teach 18 subjects, with a Taliban official saying they were "in conflict with the principles of Sharia and the system's policy".

The decree is the latest in a series of restrictions which the Taliban have brought in since returning to power four years ago.

Just this week, fibre-optic internet was banned in at least 10 provinces on the orders of the Taliban's supreme leader in a move officials said was to prevent immorality.

While the rules have had an impact on many aspects of life, women and girls have been particularly hard-hit: they are barred from accessing education over the sixth grade, with one of their last routes to further training cut off in late 2024, when midwifery courses were quietly shuttered.

Now even university subjects about women have been targeted: six of the 18 banned are specifically about women, including Gender and Development, The Role of Women in Communication, and Women's Sociology.

The Taliban government has said it respects women's rights in accordance with their interpretation of Afghan culture and Islamic law.

'A void in education'

A member of the committee reviewing the books confirmed the ban on books written by women, telling BBC Afghan that "all books authored by women are not allowed to be taught".

Zakia Adeli, the former deputy minister of justice prior to the Taliban's return and one of the authors who has found their books on the banned list, was unsurprised by the move.

"Considering what the Taliban have done over the past four years, it was not far-fetched to expect them to impose changes on the curriculum," she said.

"Given the Taliban's misogynistic mindset and policies, it is only natural that when women themselves are not allowed to study, their views, ideas and writings are also suppressed."

The new guidelines, which have been seen by BBC Afghan, were issued in late August.

Ziaur Rahman Aryubi, the deputy academic director of the Taliban government's Ministry of Higher Education, said in a letter to universities that the decisions had been made by a panel of "religious scholars and experts".

As well as books by women, the ban appears to have targeted books by Iranian authors or publishers, with one member of the book review panel telling the BBC it was designed to "prevent the infiltration of Iranian content" into the Afghan curriculum".

In the 50-page list sent to all universities in Afghanistan, 679 titles appear, 310 of which are either authored by Iranian writers or published in Iran.

But a professor at one institution, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said he feared it would be almost impossible to fill the gap.

"Books by Iranian authors and translators serve as the primary link between Afghanistan's universities and the global academic community. Their removal creates a substantial void in higher education," they said.

A professor at Kabul University told the BBC that under such circumstances, they are forced to prepare textbook chapters themselves, taking into account the do's and don'ts imposed by the Taliban government.

But the crucial question is whether these chapters can be prepared according to global standards or not.

The BBC has approached the Taliban's Ministry of Education for comment.

Sanctions for doctors guilty of sexual misconduct in the UK are too lenient in around a quarter of cases, a review suggests.

The Medical Practitioners Tribunal Service (MPTS) stands accused of failing victims and compounding their trauma. The criticism is based on the outcomes of 46 cases with offences including harassment, rape, and assaults of patients, colleagues and children.

Some medics were handed suspensions instead of following General Medical Council advice to strike them off the medical register.

The MPTS says it recognises the impact tribunal decisions have on all those involved and will soon publish new guidance for tribunals.

The MPTS is the body that takes evidence and rules on whether doctors are fit to practice in the United Kingdom.

It is independent of but funded by and accountable to the doctors' regulator - the General Medical Council - responsible for investigating complaints and bringing prosecutions against doctors.

This new study by six independent academics, analysed 222 MPTS tribunal cases heard between August 2023 and August 2024.

Of these cases, 46 involved proven sexual misconduct.

Harassment and grooming

One of the 46 cases from 2024 involved a UK transplant surgeon who was given an eight month suspension despite misconduct spanning over a decade.

He was accused of abuses of power, targeting multiple trainees under his supervision, sexual harassment, non-consensual touching during surgery and racism.

The General Medical Council (GMC) wanted to strike him off altogether and, along with the Professional Standards Authority, appealed what was seen as a lenient MPTS decision.

Another more recent case involved a doctor who knowingly entered into a sexual relationship with a vulnerable patient whom he had pursued and groomed from the age of 14.

He was suspended for 12 months rather than struck off.

The panel cited evidence of insight, remediation, and remorse.

The report authors highlighted inconsistency in the sanctions imposed on doctors, a chronic lack of training for tribunal members and poor support for victims and witnesses.

'A system more skilled at facilitating abusers'

Most of these cases involving sexual misconduct - 65% - led to doctors being struck off and barred from practicing, but 35% resulted in only a short suspension.

Nearly one in four sanctions (23.9%) imposed in these cases were more lenient than recommendations from the GMC and in no case did the tribunal impose tougher sanctions.

All the doctors involved in the sexual misconduct cases were men, and almost all of them were consultants, GPs or registrars.

Several cases involved multiple victims, which the researchers say demonstrates repeated and systemic abuse - some over a period of 9 years.

Mei Nortley, a consultant vascular surgeon and lead author of the research says the MPTS needs to consider whether it is doing its job properly.

"Allowing rapists, sexual predators and those who use manipulation and coercion to return as practising doctors brings this into question," he said.

In recent months, the MPTS has begun to update its guidance for tribunals and on sanctions, focusing on sexual misconduct cases.

But the Royal College of Surgeons of England (RCS England) said the finding show the current system of medical regulation is failing.

Vice President Prof Vivien Lees, Vice President of RCS England, said: "Guidance alone is not enough. Tribunal panels must be trained and apply it consistently to ensure fair, robust decisions.

"RCS England will hold the MPTS to account to ensure these vital changes are fully delivered."

The General Medical Council said it takes "a zero-tolerance and proactive approach" to all forms of sexual misconduct.

"Where we feel the sanctions applied by the independent tribunal are too lenient – we can, and do appeal.

"A significant proportion of our appeals are successful and result in stronger sanctions."

Failing staff and patients

Tamzin Cuming and Prof Carrie Newlands from the Working Party on Sexual Misconduct in Surgery (WPSMS) said: "Right now, the system gives little more than a slap on the wrist for abuse, when only erasure and accountability can ensure safety.

"Without reform, powerful perpetrators will continue with impunity.

A spokesman for the MPTS said it was important that doctors had a fair hearing.

"We will soon publish a new suite of guidance for tribunals, covering all aspects of our hearings.

"It will draw together existing guidance and recent case law, as well as best practice from other jurisdictions, to assist tribunals in reaching consistent and well-reasoned decisions," he said.

Joy Crookes knows a thing or two about music.

As a kid, her dad encouraged her to soak up the classics, from Nick Cave and King Tubby to The Pogues and hours of music from Pakistan.

"He'd say, 'This is from your ends of the world, you should hear this'," says the singer, who's of Irish-Bangladeshi heritage.

Before long, she'd bought her first album (Marvin Gaye's What's Going On) and uploaded her first cover to YouTube, playing a cheap guitar she bought in Argos.

Her debut album, Skin, was released in 2021, earning a Mercury Prize nomination for its soulful, perceptive ballads. The following summer, Crookes played Glastonbury's Pyramid Stage for the first time, bursting into tears at the scale of the occasion.

But as a music nerd, who'd devoured back issues of NME magazine as a teenager, she knew what came next: The second album slump.

Except... it never came.

"People think the scary part of your second album is the writing," she says. "Like, 'Oh no, what am I going to say?'"

"For me, I've always got something to [expletive] say, so it wasn't that difficult to write.

Work on her second album, Juniper, started years ago. Crookes posted demos and early sketches on her Instagram feed in 2022, many of which have made the final track listing. So what took so long?

"Making sure that the songs sounded the way they should, to match the songwriting," she says. "That was the hard part."

Take her recent single Perfect Crime. A slinky, smoky dancefloor filler, it finds Crookes giving herself a pep talk as she prepares to plunge back into the dating world.

Fresh and funny and light on its feet – it needed "20 or 30" different takes before she was satisfied.

"It's incredibly janky but, for me, the jank is the important thing," she says. If it was polished, it'd ruin the fun of the song.

"If you go through the individual elements, there are crazy moments that make no sense – but that's what makes the song come together."

If that makes her sound like an obsessive perfectionist, think again. Other songs on Juniper – from the emotionally exposing Mother, to the brutal break-up ballad Mathematics – were recorded in a single session.

On the album's philosophical closer, Paris, she even lets herself sing off key – preferring the honesty of that vocal to a more polished, auto-tuned alternative.

"Growing up, my dad used to talk about how Van Morrison would 'let go' in his songs - there's moments in Listen to the Lion and Astral Weeks where he's just free.

"And I think for the first time ever in my career, and just as a person, I let myself go on this record."

Anxiety attacks

The journey to accepting those imperfections was rough: There's a second, more distressing, reason that Crookes' second album took so long.

The 26-year-old had always suffered from anxiety but, sometime around 2022, it tightened its grip.

After wrapping up the promotion of her debut record, she entered what she describes as a "very hedonistic phase in my personal life".

"I had very little self worth," she explains. "I was constantly trying to escape my body and my life."

During that time, she also found herself in an abusive relationship, the end of which triggered a protracted period of poor mental health.

"The anxiety had become so significant that it had become completely physical," she says.

"It wasn't just panic attacks. I couldn't keep food down. Everything I did involved me having a vomiting attack."

With the help of some "very intrusive" therapy, she began to make a recovery – but it was hard work.

Anxiety had become so familiar that it was like "a part of my family, a part of my friendship group," she says.

Letting go meant unlearning years of habitual behaviour.

It's a process she sings about on First Last Dance: "It's high time you let me go… but breaking up is so hard to do".

"The song is specifically about the vomiting - and how I cannot let [anxiety] take over that much," she says.

"So it's not necessarily, 'Goodbye anxiety, I can't have you any more,' even though I'd love for it to be that simple.

"It's more like, 'I can't have you be so prominent that I physically cannot function'."

The song marked a turning point – something she illustrates by pairing the subject matter with a feathery, Kylie-esque dance beat.

For the rest of the album, she's sorting out her priorities.

I Know You'd Kill is a tribute to her manager, Charlie, whose protective instincts kicked in when a person on the fringes of Crookes' team began behaving in a way that made others "feel unsafe".

"Charlie said,' Well, you know I'd kill for you'," recalls Crookes.

"I couldn't look at her because she looked like diamonds," she adds, confessing she may have been on mushrooms at the time. "I had to turn away from her because she was shining so brightly."

It was a reminder that, as dark as things had become, she had real friends. With their support, and as her mental health improved, Crookes began to rediscover herself.

On the strutting, guitar-driven Somebody To You, she waves goodbye to a suffocating relationship and asks: "Who am I when I'm out of your sight?"

It's not just about romantic partners, she explains, but the music industry, and public perception.

"I've been in this industry since I was a child, and I don't really want to be defined by just music," she says.

"I'd like to think that my life is a plethora of things. My identity is complex."

As if to prove it, she recently made her film debut in Ish – the story of two best friends whose friendship is tested by an ugly and heavy-handed police stop and search.

The role took Crookes, who plays an older sister to the lead character, all the way to the Venice Film Festival, where the movie won the coveted audience award.

She's had other film offers since, but she has her sights set on being part of Gurinder Chadha's sequel to Bend It Like Beckham - on the soundtrack, on the screen, "or preferably both".

The original, which starred Parminder Nagra and Keira Knightley, had a profound impact on her as a child.

"I mean, it literally touches on brownness and Irishness - and you can tell that there was a time where it was meant to be a lesbian story, as well.

"I'm really interested in how [the sequel] turns out," she says.

For now, though, Crookes is gearing up for the release of Juniper. A testament to her strength, it's rich and profound, unafraid to confront complexity, but peppered with heart and humour. The second album slump has been sent packing.

Even so, sending the record into the world has prompted mixed emotions.

"When you overcome stuff like that, one minute you feel so proud and the next you feel so sad for yourself that you went through such a hard time," she reflects.

"It's what makes releasing this album so euphoric and so sad at the same time."

The next album, which she's already working on, will be different. Crookes is happy, relaxed, free. It's a state of mind she couldn't have imagined in 2022.

"It's kind of amazing. I pinch myself every day. I'm making jokes about stuff that would have absolutely floored me two years ago.

"I feel very alive at the moment, and I am so grateful."