The five women behind Brigitte Macron’s perfect French look

Just why is it that we never see the French first lady, Brigitte Macron, commit a fashion faux pas?

How is it that this 72-year-old grandmother can, for example, pull off black leather trousers, really quite short dresses, or a swimming costume for a cover shoot?

With the Macron’s three-day state visit to the UK this week providing yet another welcome opportunity for scrutiny of Madame Macron’s impeccable wardrobe. With those impossibly toned, glossy bronzed legs, the power blow-dries and endless outfit wins she always seems to exemplify faultless French chic.

The explanation to the questions above can be found within the Mme Macron Venn diagram of style. The French first lady has at her disposal a long list of extremely cool and effortlessly elegant French style icons from which to borrow all manner of trademark looks and ripped-up rulebooks (French women adore a broken fashion rule).

This Venn diagram features some of the heroines of French-girl style, from film stars Brigitte Bardot and Catherine Deneuve to rock-chic fashion editor Carine Roitfeld, to the most iconic French fashion plate of all, Coco Chanel, with Brigitte Macron standing in the middle of it all, assimilating all of their signatures and making them her own.

Sensuality, age defiance, and lots and lots of leg are at the core of it. So what exactly are the components of the ultimate Venn diagram of Brigitte chic?

Bare-legged, kohled eyes, teak-tanned – the superficial similarities between Brigitte and the former French Vogue editor-in-chief, Carine Roitfeld, are plain to see. (Note: that pulling off this formula requires innate French insouciance and je ne sais quoi in order to avoid looking like a superannuated Towie star, as we Brits inevitably would be given the same treatment.)

Of course, it wouldn’t do for Mme Macron – at least in her public-facing guise – to go the full rock’n’roll Roitfeld, all femme fatale black leather pencil skirts, lace tights and dresses slashed to the thigh. But Roitfeld’s influence is still clear to see: just a year younger than Brigitte Macron if the ex-Vogue editor says it’s fine for grandmothers – as they both are – to wear towering heels with (some way) above-the-knee skirts, douse themselves in bronzer, and scaffold their eyelashes with whacking great shelves of black mascara, who are we to argue?

Most wouldn’t even dare to take inspiration from the blonde bombshell that was Bardot – who are we, after all, to think there could be any physical connection? But, as we are so often told, French women are made of different stuff (not to mention, calorie-negative croissants).

They are just naturally confident in their God-given sex appeal – while we wear pants, they wear lingerie, while we wear PJs, they wear negligees.

None more so, it seems, than Brigitte Macron, the glamazon of first ladies – the woman who arranged to be photographed in a blue floral halterneck swimsuit on a Biarritz beach for Paris Match ahead of her husband’s 2016 presidential campaign.

Smooth, tanned legs, beachy, undone hair, and the victorious smile of a woman who’s bagged a handsome younger husband, there was a clear resemblance of a confident, carefree “Bardot does Cannes” – the original sex bomb; the epitome of feminine sexuality. This is surely Mme Macron’s unspoken cause, to remind women that they too can be sexy whatever their age.

Did any woman in French history have a better blonde blowout than the iconic French film star Catherine Deneuve?

If glamour, polish and sex appeal are your watchwords (as they evidently are with Brigitte Macron), why wouldn’t you take a leaf out of Deneuve’s playbook and infuse your hair with buttery blondeness, volume and lift?

Of course, expensive, high-maintenance hair is a terribly middle-aged French woman pursuit, because they all know that, as ably demonstrated by Mme Deneuve, big blonde hair is a fast track to voluptuousness when the body is perhaps less inclined (the Macrons, by the way, are understood to spend €62,000 a year on hair and make-up, as revealed in 2018 by the French Court of Audit). What’s more, a golden crown of bouffy hair creates a perfect frame for wearing more make-up than is strictly necessary.

But the Deneuve reference is not just concerned with big hair – or, indeed, their shared love of late Parisian designer Yves Saint Laurent (which Deneuve commissioned for her first meeting with the late Queen Elizabeth II – and which always, always lends an elegant, sophisticated simplicity). It’s about an attitude, one that is cool, sexy and a little edgy, with so much going on beneath the surface. It’s all tres, tres French.

As any fashion historian will tell you, the French chanteuse Françoise Hardy set the benchmark for wearing leather with effortless chic. In fact, she famously “double leathered” with a black leather biker jacket and black leather trousers while sitting on the back of a motorbike, her luxuriant, fringed hair unfettered by any unsexy safety equipment.

Brigitte Macron might not be able to do the motorbike, but she can – and regularly does – do the skinny leather pants. Worn black like Hardy, with yet more of Mme Macron’s beloved sky-high heels, the French first lady ably demonstrates what Theresa May was just never going to grasp – that succeeding with leather, is all about sex.

You don’t achieve sex appeal by wearing leather, but rather, you pull off leather when you have an innate ability to deploy some sensuality. Sometimes you just have to leave it to the French.

There surely isn’t a French woman of any standing whose fashion sense isn’t informed by Coco Chanel. And of course, Brigitte Macron would not be doing her job as ambassador-in-chief of French fashion if she were not seen to be wearing plenty of Chanel.

But that’s not really the point here. It’s not just about being able to have an ample, Chanel-labelled armoury of classic design, good taste and French chic – as displayed this week when Queen Camilla and the French first lady visited Chanel, Brigitte Macron wearing a red boucle long line jacket from the fashion house (think, as ever, a strong shoulder, a nipped waist and flattering tailoring).

Non, it’s about “liberté”. Chanel’s fashion philosophy was about freedom of movement and independence so when Brigitte Macron teams a blazer with jeans (admittedly unlikely on this state visit but clearly in evidence on many a walkabout), you know who paved the way for that.

Chanel style is also about ensuring that you are the statement as opposed to your outfit. With Brigitte Macron’s style signature being legs, lashes and a distinct lack of apology for not dressing her age, Coco would surely be proud.

‘I will not go quietly’: Gregg Wallace slams BBC after being ‘sacked’ over Masterchef claims

Gregg Wallace has launched a tirade against the BBC after being “fired” following a MasterChef misconduct investigation, in which he was “found guilty of inappropriate language”.

The presenter, 60, released a lengthy statement on Instagram claiming he has been axed by the broadcaster, where he has worked for the past 21 years, after a six-month investigation into his on-set behaviour.

An official report into the allegations is due on Thursday (10 July), but Wallace said he has decided to share the findings prematurely after allegedly being “exonerated of all the serious allegations which made headlines last year”.

However, Wallace “apologised without reservation” for the language he was found “primarily guilty of”, stating: “I recognise that some of my humour and language, at times, was inappropriate.”

Later in his post, Wallace said he had recently been diagnosed with autism.

The presenter ranted about the BBC’s decision to fire him, saying he “does not take it lightly” after “21 years of loyal service”.

“I cannot sit in silence while my reputation is further damaged to protect others,” he wrote.

“I have now been cleared by the Silkins report of the most serious and sensational accusations made against me.

“The most damaging claims (including allegations from public figures which have not been upheld) were found to be baseless after a full and forensic six-month investigation.”

Wallace accused the BBC of “peddling baseless and sensationalised gossip masquerading as properly corroborated stories”.

“I was hired by the BBC and MasterChef as the cheeky greengrocer. A real person with warmth, character, rough edges and all. For over two decades, that authenticity was part of the brand.

“Now, in a sanitised world, that same personality is seen as a problem.”

“My neurodiversity, now formally diagnosed as autism, was suspected and discussed by colleagues across countless seasons of MasterChef.”

He concluded his lengthy statement by vowing to “not go quietly”.

“I will not be cancelled for convenience. I was tried by media and hung out to dry well before the facts were established. The full story of this incredible injustice must be told and it is very much a matter of public interest.”

Wallace stepped away from hosting the BBC cooking competition after a host of historical complaints came to light last year, which led to an external investigation by the show’s production company Banijay UK.

Wallace, 60, has hosted the BBC cooking show alongside John Torode since 2005 and has also fronted other programmes including Inside the Factory, Big Weekends Away and Supermarket Secrets.

In late 2024, it was reported that the BBC had been made aware of complaints as far back as 2017, while it was claimed that a letter had been sent to the broadcaster in 2022 stating that women had been made to feel “uncomfortable” in the 60-year-old’s presence.

The MasterChef presenter has faced a string of allegations, including of making “inappropriate sexual jokes”, asking for the phone numbers of female members of production staff, and undressing in front of and standing “too close” to women working on his shows.

Kirstie Allsopp alleged Wallace once made a comment to her about his sex life, which left her “so embarrassed” she thought she “might cry”.

The Sunday Times reported that BBC executive Kate Phillips raised concerns that Wallace’s behaviour was “unacceptable and cannot continue” after broadcaster and former Celebrity MasterChef contestant Aasmah Mir complained about inappropriate comments during filming.

The newspaper claimed Wallace received another warning the following year after a complaint was raised about his behaviour on the quiz show Impossible Celebrities.

The Sunday Telegraph reported producer Georgia Harding, who worked on MasterChef between 2014 and 2015 and later Eat Well For Less, claimed she raised concerns about “inappropriate” behaviour from him while working on the show.

She alleged the presenter undressed in front of colleagues and “made inappropriate sexual jokes” in front of the crew and people appearing on the shows.

The former greengrocer was also accused of making lewd comments and asking for the personal phone numbers of female production staff in a letter that Dawn Elrick, a producer and director, claimed to have sent to the BBC in 2022.

Elrick told the Observer, the letter had been submitted with the support of industry union Bectu, and added she also submitted the allegations to the corporation via Navex Global, an external whistleblowing service.

Allegations were also raised by staff members about Wallace’s behaviour on Channel 5’s Gregg Wallace’s Big Weekends to BBC News.

He also faces allegations of inappropriate sexual comments from 13 people across a range of shows over a 17-year period, as reported by BBC News.

UK urged to bring Afghan heroes to safety after major blunder

The British government has been urged to hasten the relocation of hundreds of Afghan heroes to the UK after Ministry of Defence (MoD) failures saw them left at the mercy of the Taliban.

Thousands of applications for sanctuary from Afghans were rejected despite their having credible links to the UK special forces (UKSF). The High Court heard this week that one UK special forces officer oversaw the blanket rejection of 1,585 cases during the summer of 2023.

Ministers had initially denied that Afghan commandos, known as the Triples, had been paid by the UK government, but were forced to backtrack and announce a review of 2,000 applications.

Around 600 Afghan allies, whose applications were among the initial 2,000 re-examined, have been granted approval to come to the UK.

Now government lawyers have said that a further estimated 2,500 applications have been identified for review after the MoD realised the significance of rediscovered payroll data, paving the way for hundreds more to be brought to sanctuary.

Former veterans minister Johnny Mercer has said he is “shocked and appalled” by the failings in the MoD’s initial handling of the applications. Campaigners and former military chiefs called on the government to speed up the relocation of these brave soldiers to the UK.

Colonel Simon Diggins, former defence attache in Afghanistan, said that poor records had been kept by the UKSF, affecting the lives of the Triples soldiers.

He said: “We know that these individuals’ lives are in danger. There is a real imperative to do something about it and to do it quickly. The accusation of poor data-keeping is fair, but now we have some records there is also an imperative to come up with a quicker way of dealing with [the evacuation of the soldiers].”

Sarah Fenby-Dixon, Afghanistan consultant at the Refugee Aid Network, said: “It is vital that the review process for all cases is speeded up, as even after being granted eligibility, some people are waiting many months or even years before being transferred to safety.”

A former senior member of the Triples, who is now in the UK, has brought the legal challenge against the government’s processing of applications, with the case reaching the High Court this week. Thomas de la Mare KC, for the claimant, argued that guidance on how resettlement decisions were made should be made public, and likened the failings to “a crime scene”.

In a witness statement to court, a senior civil servant said a new “phase two” of the Triples review would re-examine “at least several hundred, although this may be as many as 2,500 applications”. The MoD said this would probably bring in soldiers who had served in the later years of the conflict in Afghanistan.

Around 130 cases from the initial review will be moved into phase two, lawyers told the court.

The High Court heard how the initial review was prompted when senior civil servants became concerned about how resettlement applications were being decided.

It has since emerged that there was an effective “blanket practice of automatic refusal”, which left these highly trained Afghan soldiers at the mercy of the Taliban.

A particular UK special forces officer was overseeing hundreds of rejections during a “sprint” in the summer of 2023 to rush through decisions, the court heard.

The MoD said the officer’s approach to decision-making was “lax and unprofessional” and that they had reached “decisions far too quickly”. MoD caseworkers were also “overly reliant” on UKSF personnel, and were “not consistently exercising their own independent judgement”, the government found.

MPs have previously raised concerns about the potential bias of UKSF personnel who hold power over the resettlement of Afghan allies, amid an ongoing inquiry into alleged crimes by the UKSF in Afghanistan between 2010 and 2013.

Some of the Afghan commandos who applied for UK sanctuary could be witnesses to the events being examined by the independent inquiry.

Mr Mercer, who expressed concerns about decision-making to senior civil servants in early 2024, said: “When I raised what was happening with the most senior officers and civil servants in the UK government, one in particular from UKSF claimed he was offended that I had, and [that] it was offensive to the UKSF. He was either lying to my face as a cabinet minister, which is serious enough, or is so deeply incompetent he didn’t know.”

The MoD estimates that around 5,000 people were members of the Triples, working alongside the UKSF, during the Afghan war.

General Sir John McColl, the UK’s former special envoy to Afghanistan, said he believed the MoD had “worked really hard to do the right thing for the Triples”. He said it is good that the MoD is re-examining up to 2,500 more cases, and pressed for resources to be given to the team in charge of dealing with Afghan cases.

He added that the delay in help was “a combination of the record-keeping not being particularly good and that the withdrawal was as chaotic and fractured as we all recall”.

“We are now nearly four years on since the withdrawal, and in that time these people have been in great danger; some of them will have been in harm’s way as a consequence of the delay, which is very unfortunate,” he said.

Col Diggins added: “If there are potentially 2,000 more people, who with their family members could equal up to 10,000 people, that’s a big number. We have an obligation to them for their service, but we need to think differently about how we do the evacuations.

“We also need to ensure that if we are going to bring people from Afghanistan to this country, they are supported by a proper programme of integration when they get here.”

Prominent Thatcher minister Norman Tebbit dies, aged 94

Norman Tebbit, the eurosceptic, anti-immigration former cabinet minister known as one of Margaret Thatcher’s most loyal supporters, has died aged 94.

The Conservative grandee, who served as employment secretary and Conservative Party chairman in the 1980s, played a key role in Tory politics for a generation and would remain one of the biggest influences on the rightwing until his late years.

As employment secretary he took on the trade unions and told Britain’s 3 million unemployed to “get on your bike” to find a job. As chairman of the Conservative Party from 1985 to 1987 he helped Mrs Thatcher secure her third general election victory.

A loyalist to Thatcher from 1975 when he was part of the team of rightwing Tory MPs who masterminded her surprise leadership victory, Lord Tebbit would earn the nickname “Chingford skinhead” for being one of the hardest Thatcherites in her cabinet.

The Tory grandee was one of the few to relish his Spitting Image puppet claiming that it helped model his public persona as “Thatcher’s enforcer”.

He suffered grave injuries in the IRA’s bombing of the Grand Hotel in Brighton in 1984, which left his wife, Margaret, paralysed from the neck down, with both narrowly surviving the terrorist atrocity.

But the harder side of him was evident in 1990 when he coined the infamous “cricket test” on whether immigrants supported England at the sport as a test for whether they were really British.

He always maintained that Tory MPs had betrayed Margaret Thatcher when she was ousted in 1990 and carried an enmity with Lord Michael Heseltine, whose challenge would force her out, for the rest of his life. The two would later play roles on opposite sides in the Brexit debate.

Tributes poured in following the news of his death, with Tory leader Kemi Badenoch saying he “was an icon in British politics and his death will cause sadness across the political spectrum”.

Meanwhile, former Tory Cabinet minister Sir Simon Clarke described Lord Tebbit as a “political giant” who was “combative with his opponents, fiercely loyal to his friends, somebody who would never accept Britain in decline”.

Lord Tebbit stepped down as an MP in 1992, replaced by former Tory leader Sir Iain Duncan Smith, and was then given a seat in the House of Lords.

He died peacefully in his home in Bury St Edmunds at 11.15pm on Monday, after having retired from politics three years ago.

He was latterly remembered as one of the most prominent supporters of leaving the EU and advocates for Brexit in the run up to the 2016 referendum and beyond.

Leading the tributes, Ms Badenoch described Lord Tebbit as an “icon” of the party.

She said: “Our Conservative family mourns the loss of Lord Tebbit today and I send my sincerest condolences to his loved ones. Norman Tebbit was an icon in British politics and his death will cause sadness across the political spectrum.

“He was one of the leading exponents of the philosophy we now know as Thatcherism and his unstinting service in the pursuit of improving our country should be held up as an inspiration to all Conservatives. As a minister in Mrs Thatcher’s administration he was one of the main agents of the transformation of our country, notably in taming the trade unions.”

But she noted that it was his “stoicism and courage in the face of terrorism” following the IRA bomb in 1984 “which inspired us”.

Sir Keir Starmer also issued a statement, with his official spokesperson saying his “thoughts are with Norman Tebbit’s children and family at this difficult time” and describing him as a “major figure in politics during the 1980s”.

“Many will remember the great strength he showed in the face of the atrocious IRA bombing at the grand hotel in Brighton, and the courage that he and his wife showed in its aftermath. He will be missed by many”, the spokesperson added.

Paying tribute to the former Tory Cabinet minister, who campaigned against integration with Europe, Eurosceptic think tank the Bruges Group said: “Today we mourn the loss of a political titan without whom the Thatcher revolution may have looked very different.

“A passionate Eurosceptic, Lord Tebbit also served as President of the Bruges Group, leading our years-long campaign against EU integration.”

His former chief of staff Lord Michael Dobbs, author of House of Cards, told BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme: “Politics misses people of that sort of character who believe so deeply in what they are pursuing.”

Ex-minister Sir Conor Burns, who worked for Margaret Thatcher, said: “I was fortunate to count him as a friend. Norman was a true Thatcherite revolutionary. Lady T always acknowledged his importance to her success. He was always candid, direct and shrewd. Sometimes his honesty made others uncomfortable which he relished! Norman said what many thought but didn’t have the courage to say. His was a genuine journey of social mobility based on talent – made in harder times when the rise of a white working class man of talent was admired.”

Shadow business secretary Andrew Griffith added: “Sad to learn of the death of Lord Tebbit, a great Conservative whose values Britain could use a great deal more of today.”

Former Tory cabinet minister Sir Simon Clarke noted: “Norman Tebbit was a political giant: combative with his opponents, fiercely loyal to his friends, somebody who would never accept Britain in decline.”

Long after retirement, Lord Tebbit remained a support of rightwing causes in the Tories including becoming honorary president of the Bowe Group. He would be a regular speaker at meetings of the European Research Group (ERG) of Tory Brexiteer parliamentarians.

Former cabinet minister Nadhim Zahawi said: “Norman Tebbit was a giant of Conservative politics and Conservative ideals. A man who looked after his beloved wife beautifully after the horrific terror attack by the IRA. A man who nurtured and befriended young conservatives like me. He was great company on a weekend in the country.”

‘Naive and arrogant’: Why a wealth tax won’t help the UK

Any attempt by Rachel Reeves to plug the gap in the UK’s public finances through a wealth tax would be “naive”, with very few success stories from other nations, experts have warned.

The chancellor may need to find as much as £30bn in savings through either cutting costs or raising taxes ahead of her Budget, with Keir Starmer’s government under pressure to find ways of raising funds for the public purse.

But leading tax lawyer Dan Neidle, now of Tax Policy Associates, claims a wealth tax would actually have a detrimental effect on the UK’s tax take – and that the government would be “arrogant” to think it would work in this country.

“What’s being proposed is radically different from every other existing wealth tax. Current real world wealth taxes are either full of loopholes so the mega wealthy don’t pay (such as Spain), apply to the middle class (Norway), or both (Switzerland),” Mr Neidle told The Independent.

“The idea that we can do something different is naive. It’s arrogant to think that we in the UK can achieve a holy grail everyone else has been too stupid to find.”

A wealth tax is essentially a way of taxing the total value of an individual’s assets, rather than just their income, Deutsche Bank’s chief UK economist Sanjay Raja explained.

That can be on assets such as property or shares, but also luxury goods, cash, bonds or other valuables.

Mr Raja warned that a wealth tax is not only difficult to implement but also costly and requires close monitoring, including regularly valuing assets.

“From an economics view, the advantage of a wealth tax is that it reflects someone’s long-term ability to pay or contribute to government finances, as opposed to being taxed solely on their income tax,” he told The Independent.

“In theory, the aim would be to reduce economic inequality, since wealth tends to be more concentrated than income.

“In reality, it’s very difficult to implement wealth taxes. Issues around asset valuation on businesses or real estate makes it difficult, complex, and costly to do across an entire country. It requires significant upskilling, infrastructure capacity and personnel to implement effectively and fairly.

“There is also a big problem of liquidity. On paper, some people may be classified as ‘wealthy’ or meet the threshold for a wealth tax – however, in practice, they may lack the cash to pay the tax given illiquidity of some assets.”

When it comes to taxing the wealthy, plenty of nations have taken a similar approach.

There are not, however, too many nations who would say their method has been an unmitigated success.

Stuart Adam, a senior economist at IFS, pointed out that plans in other countries have been ditched along the way, with other changes to taxation offering more realistic and successful long-term outcomes.

“International experience of annual wealth taxes is not encouraging – they have been abandoned in most of the developed countries that previously had them,” Mr Adam said.

“There are strong reasons to radically reform how we currently tax the sources and uses of wealth; this includes reforming capital income taxes in order to properly tax high returns. An annual wealth tax would be a poor substitute for doing that.”

Chris Etherington, private client tax partner at RSM UK, added that people affected by any change in tax rulings could be more likely to simply reallocate assets accordingly – if they could even be properly assigned a taxable value in the first place.

“There are huge practical challenges with introducing a wealth tax, in particular the need to regularly value assets and agree these with HMRC,” he said. “Those affected are likely to change their behaviour and circumstances in response to a wealth tax. It might result in a redistribution of wealth amongst someone’s family, rather than benefitting the wider UK population.

“A number of countries have experimented with wealth taxes over the years, but there are few success stories, and many have repealed them. There are simply easier ways of generating additional tax receipts.”

Mr Neidle explained the process wealthy individuals would take in determining whether the approach being considered for the UK would be prohibitive for them – and why the idea of the super rich fleeing the UK is not exactly what it seems.

Generally speaking, it’s accepted that investors may look to achieve long-term average returns of eight per cent or so.

While that may differ wildly between different types of investment, it gives a starting point for working out how much a tax may impact when it’s on more than just income.

“A 2 per cent wealth tax doesn’t sound like much, but for someone earning an 8 per cent return on their assets, that plus existing dividend tax creates an effective rate of 60 per cent – and on a year when assets decline, an effective rate of over 100 per cent,” Mr Neidle explained.

“That creates an incentive to avoid the tax out of all proportion.

“The tax would apply to just a few thousand people but these are some of the most mobile people in the world. Often they live in several countries, spending a few months a year in each. Asking whether they will ‘leave’ the UK is the wrong question; it’s whether they spend a bit less time in the UK and become non-resident.”

The final argument may, perhaps, come down to whether such a move to bring in a wealth tax – or any other type of tax – raises more money, or sees more money leave the country.

One report by the Centre for Economics and Business Research think tank estimated that if more than 25 per cent of non-doms departed the UK, the overall change would be a net cost to the Treasury.

In terms of what has been seen elsewhere already, the answer is clear, insisted Mr Neidle.

“Conventional wealth taxes have been estimated to retard an economy by 1 per cent. The uber-wealth taxes being proposed would be more dramatic still,” he said.

“The wealth tax is the ultimate in the fantasy view we can get something for nothing, tax other pdaneople and raise lots of money with no consequence. There are always trade-offs, and the downsides of the wealth tax are particularly severe.”

How Macmillan Cancer Support built a movement that reaches everyone

Jota may have been driving at high speed before crash, police say

Diogo Jota is thought to have been driving when he and his brother Andre Silva died in a car crash last week, Spanish police have said.

The Liverpool footballer and father-of-three was killed alongside his brother, also a footballer, after the £180,000 acid green Lamborghini they were travelling in burst into flames following a suspected tyre blowout last Thursday night in Zamora, Spain.

A spokesperson for the Guardia Civil of Zamora said that tests being carried out by its traffic division showed Jota was driving the car at the time.

The spokesperson added that the car was thought to be travelling above the speed limit on the road, which local media reports is 120kmph (74mph).

In what is only the Civil Guard’s second statement since the fatal crash, the spokesperson said: “The expert report is being carried out and finished, where, among other things, they are studying the marks (tread) left by one of the wheels of the vehicle.

“Everything also points to a possible high excess of speed over the permitted speed of the road.

“All the tests carried out for the moment point to the fact that the driver of the vehicle was Diogo Jota.”

The report has not yet been finalised but will be handed over to the court in the town of Puebla de Sanabria, Zamora.

Jota and Silva were found dead after the car crashed on the A-52 in Palacios de Sanabria near the city of Zamora at 12.40 am on Thursday.

Pictures of the aftermath of the crash showed debris scattered along the side of the road, including what appeared to be charred parts of the vehicle.

Footballers, family and fans gathered for the funeral of the brothers, which took place in their native Portugal on Saturday.

Jota’s long-term partner Rute Cardoso, whom he had married just 11 days before the accident, was in attendance, as were his parents.

Tributes poured in from around the world, with Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer, Oasis and Cristiano Ronaldo among those who mourned the loss of the brothers.

The devastated family and friends of Jota and his brother Andre Silva gathered for a moving funeral on Saturday, two days after their tragic deaths.

Dozens of stars and high-profile figures from across the footballing world arrived for a sombre service in Gondomar, near Porto, tears flowing as they bade goodbye to the brothers. The service took place in the same church where Jota was married just two weeks earlier.

Liverpool manager Arne Slot said after Jota’s death that the “sense of shock is absolute” for the club.

“Diogo was not just our player. He was a loved one to all of us,” he said. “I could say so much about what he brought to our team but the truth is everyone who watched Diogo play could see it. Hard work, desire, commitment, great quality, goals. The essence of what a Liverpool player should be.”

The six traits that make someone cool, according to science

Last week, I sang in a choir performing Eighties hits in a working man’s club, and I was taken back to a time when I felt cool. When I was a twentysomething fashion designer living in London, out every night at the latest clubs, wearing outfits I’d rustled up on the sewing machine that day, it felt like I was at the heart of the cultural zeitgeist, living the dream.

But here’s the thing, it was my dream, my culture and my version of cool. The choir I was singing with was at a working men’s club – the one where Kate Moss recently shot a video with Ray Winstone for the cooler than cool Perfect Magazine, and a week before that, where the Gallagher brothers reunited for their Adidas shoot.

The hardly touched seventies interior has appeared as a backdrop for a Gucci advert and the recent Amy Winehouse biopic. But it wasn’t any of this that made it cool for me. Having fun, playing dress-up and not giving a s*** apart from the pure joy that our choir gave felt like the coolest thing. So, is cool about aesthetics or attitude? Or both? Is it even possible to measure what’s cool, as surely everyone’s idea of cool is personal to them? And in an era when algorithms filter what we see, hear, and buy – has cool lost its authenticity? Has it become less about self-expression and more about following fads?

I’m now a trend forecaster and I’m often asked, “What’s the latest colour? What’s trending? What’s cool right now?” My usual response is “Whatever you like – that’s what’s cool.” Honestly, I just don’t care.

A recent study published in the Journal of Experimental Psychology surveyed nearly 6,000 participants from 12 countries around the world who rated cool people on a range of personality traits and values. The study found they had six things in common: extroverted, adventurous, open, autonomous, powerful and hedonistic came out on top.

Note it didn’t mention being on trend once.

We’ve been through quiet luxury, maximalism, nostalgia core, coastal cowgirl… you name it, we’ve seen them all and while they are fun ways to dress up and feel good, the concept of cool is much more than a TikTok trend. For me, cool is about being original, groundbreaking and independent – oh and funny. Funny is very cool, but more of that later.

The idea of “cool” originated in post‑war African American jazz culture and spread globally through beat poetry, music, movies, and global media to become what we now recognise as the ultimate aspiration – or absolute worst nightmare – depending on your perspective.

Fashion especially is suffering from this aesthetic burnout as the constant cycle of online micro-trends has made keeping up exhausting, with rules that shift weekly. A growing backlash against this force-feeding of information is seeing consumers crave surprise, authenticity and the power to reclaim their own organic decision-making.

In fact, many of the truly cool people are stepping away from fashion trends altogether. Forget “try-hard” looks or performative alternative styles – they’re embracing their inner basic-ness. Trying too hard to be cool is, ironically, not cool at all.

Social media accounts like the tongue-in-cheek @socks_house_meeting exemplify this shift. This satirical, anonymous voice comments on east London’s microcultures and cool tribes, with memes that parody the hyperlocal identities of Hackney, earning it a cult following of 144,000.

Likewise, @real_housewives_of_clapton takes a satirical swipe at east London hipster aesthetics – mocking natural wine obsessions, run club culture, Salomon trainers, and niche diets. And yet, this influencer who-isn’t-an-influencer has shaped local culture by promoting physical events, products, and charitable collaborations.

Cool in 2025 is about being self-aware and funny, particularly in the UK. You can like something uncool as long as it’s done with irony or layered meaning. While launching his new culture and entertainment platform, EE72, stylist Edward Enninful, often seen as a curator of cool, posted a list of 72 things he likes right now on Instagram – Love Island, Sade, bucket hats and Miley Cyrus all made it… Making something uncool – cool – using humour, authenticity and owning the narrative before the algorithm rhythm does is the ultimate flex.

There’s also a strange irony in the uncool becoming cool. Think of the much-maligned Marnie Michaels from Girls, now rebranded by Millennials as a relatable trailblazer for her emotional honesty and self-awareness. Or Paris Hilton, once the overexposed poster girl of 2000s bimbo culture, now reclaimed as a camp, ironically chic icon.

Nostalgia plays a big part in this, especially for Gen Z and Millennials, and TikTok is the home of nostalgic cool – but, again, with humour. Think: “Everyone’s chasing trends, but I’m over here eating Babybels in silence like it’s 2002.”

Whether it’s a desire to recapture simpler childhoods, contrasted with the uncertainties of adulthood and a longing for a sense of stability, nostalgia is fuelling the coolest cultural and fashion movements.

A recent psychology study concluded that cool is measurable and transcends cultures – even across diverse societies – and is a mix of being creative, self‑driven, bold and occasionally morally ambiguous. But I’m not sure I fully agree. Yes, being cool is about being an authentic, confident cultural trailblazer, but I also see it as a complex, shape-shifting social currency, part aspiration, part irony, part rebellion – that varies by tribe, location, and vibe.

My own relationship with cool has evolved over time (I’m now in my sixties). I have and always will be interested in current music, fashion and lifestyle trends, but I try to forge my own path. For me, being truly cool is (and always has been) about embracing individuality and being authentic. Whether you’re singing in a choir at the local working men’s club, starring in an indie film, or building a platform on social media, if you’re doing your own thing without giving a damn what others think, you’re officially cool. Oh and funny, you’ve got to be funny. Really funny.

Being Funny (see above)

Geeky kids: Being quirky, emotionally complex, genre-defying, techy and creative. Those who once felt out of place are now cultural leaders on TikTok and Substack and are where it’s at.

Middle-aged women: Yes you heard it here first, Gen X understand analogue and digital life, relate to older and younger generations, prioritise realness over perfection and know how to party. Kim Gordon, Alanis Morrisette and Chloë Sevigny are the poster girls.

Offline or anti-algorithm Curation: Those in search of authentic connection are turning to no online presence or smaller platforms like Letterboxd, Are.na, or niche Substacks to escape TikTok fatigue.

AI as a creative tool: Using AI tools for writing, design, and art is becoming mainstream – but cool creatives use them with signature handwriting to make them their own, rather than relying on default settings.

Hyper-local: Supporting local artists and microbrands, working in your community gardens or creating local events is way cooler than globalised luxury.

Anti-perfection: Enough with the quiet luxury style, breathwork apps, ice baths, psilocybin microdosing and sleep optimisation. It’s cool to be hedonistic and messy. Think Lola Young, Charli XCX and Gen X (see above).

And this year’s colour? Buttercup yellow if you really want to know.

You can find Jane Kellock’s work on her Substack here