Man guilty of murdering couple before dumping remains on bridge

A man has been found guilty of murdering a couple before dumping their remains in suitcases near Clifton Suspension Bridge in Bristol.

Yostin Andres Mosquera, 35, was found guilty at Woolwich Crown Court of murdering civil partners Albert Alfonso, 62, and Paul Longworth, 71, in July last year in their flat in Scotts Road, Shepherd’s Bush, west London. He then dumped their remains in suitcases near Clifton Suspension Bridge, Bristol.

Mosquera, who was staying with the couple, “decapitated and dismembered” them, froze parts of their remains and put the rest in luggage, according to the prosecution.

He is alleged to have repeatedly stabbed Alfonso, who suffered injuries to his torso, face and neck. Longworth was attacked with a hammer to the back of his head and his skull was shattered, jurors heard.

Alfonso enjoyed “extreme sex”, and Mosquera, whom he met online years earlier, was part of that world, jurors heard.

The 62-year-old was stabbed to death during a filmed session. The court was shown footage of Mosquera singing and dancing in the aftermath of the attack.

Prosecutor Deanna Heer KC said that Mosquera planned to hurl the suitcases over the bridge to dispose of the remains after the “calculated” and “premeditated” killings.

Mosquera admitted to killing Alfonso but claimed it was manslaughter by reason of loss of control. He pleaded not guilty to murdering the men and instead insisted Alfonso killed Longworth.

He alleged that he feared for his own life and believed he was going to be killed when he stabbed Alfonso. He claimed he thought that Alfonso would do to him what he claims he had already done to Longworth, adding he felt “intimidated” and threats had been made to his family in Colombia.

His defence counsel suggested his actions after stabbing Alfonso, including singing and dancing, could be an outburst as he was overwhelmed by what had happened.

The jury deliberated for five hours and three minutes before they unanimously found Mosquera guilty.

The judge, Mr Justice Bennathan KC, said he would sentence Mosquera on 24 October after ordering a psychiatric report.

“I am not going to pass sentence on you today, although the only one I can pass on you is one of life imprisonment,” he said.

“I am going to order a psychiatric report on you. It is in your interests to cooperate with the psychiatrist so that I can decide the minimum term you are going to serve.”

The judge then acknowledged the difficult nature of this case for jurors, thanking them personally: “We put serious demands on jurors, in this case more than most.

“It went on much longer than the two weeks you were expecting. In this case, you have had to look at a very tough video.

“They were terrible, brutal events, and to read about it is a dreadful thing – but to see it is really shocking. If you do want to seek help, then speak to the court staff – above all, thank you.”

Detective chief inspector Ollie Stride of the Metropolitan Police described it as “one of the most harrowing murder investigations” he had ever dealt with.

The senior investigating officer in the case told PA: “I think certainly this is probably one of the most traumatic, harrowing murder investigations I’ve dealt with by virtue of that video, and the fact that it took place during their sexual activity in their own home.”

Double decker bus crashes into bridge in Manchester

Emergency services declared a major incident after a double decker bus had its roof ripped off after crashing into a bridge in Manchester.

Greater Manchester Police said they were responding to a collision between a bus and a bridge at the junction of Barton Road and Trafford Road in Eccles around 3pm on Monday.

“Emergency services are currently on scene as part of the ongoing work. Please avoid the area as road closures are currently in place.”

At least 15 people were injured, North West Ambulance Service, who received a call around 3pm, declared a major incident shortly afterwards and treated people at the scene.

Footage circulated on social media appears to show a yellow double decker bus hitting a bridge with a 3.5m height limit signposted on it.

Some 10 emergency ambulances, advanced paramedics, the Hazard Area Response Team (HART) and colleagues from North West Air Ambulance attended the scene.

Patients were taken to Salford Royal and Manchester Royal Infirmary hospitals. The ambulance service stood down the major incident status around 4.22pm, but continue to remain on scene.

Transport for Greater Manchester confirmed the bus was a 100 service and was in operation at the time of the incident.

Vernon Everitt, Transport commissioner for Greater Manchester, said: “First and foremost, our thoughts are with everyone on board the bus. Our absolute focus has been on supporting emergency services in their response, with some people treated at the scene and some taken to hospital.

“An immediate and urgent investigation into the circumstances is underway and we are working closely with the investigation team at Greater Manchester Police and the bus operator, Stagecoach.

“This is clearly a distressing situation for everyone involved and we’d like to thank emergency services for their swift response.”

Road closures have been put in place and the area remains busy. An investigation is underway at the scene and the damaged bus has been removed from the scene.

The transport operator warned some local congestion might take place as diversions were put in place into the evening.

“In order to support people making journeys in the area, bus tickets are being accepted on the Eccles and Trafford Park Metrolink lines while road diversions are in place,” the operator said.

Police responded to a similar incident in which a double decker bus crashed into the bridge on Eccles Lane back in April 2023.

Farage defends protesters outside Essex asylum hotel as ‘concerned families’

Nigel Farage has defended people protesting outside an asylum hotel in Essex, claiming most were “genuinely concerned families”.

The Reform UK leader insisted violent scenes outside the hotel were caused by “some bad eggs”, alleging clashes were between the “usual far-right thugs” and far-left anti-fascist activists, known as Antifa.

Some of the demonstrators have been seen wearing black face coverings, similar to those often worn by members of Antifa, but it has not been verified whether the group has attended the protests.

Mr Farage also claimed “civil disobedience on a vast scale” will break out unless migrants stop arriving to the UK on small boats.

Six people were arrested on Sunday evening after a string of protests outside the Bell Hotel in Epping, which is believed to house asylum seekers. Eight police officers were injured following clashes at what had started as a peaceful demonstration on Thursday evening, while the latest rally on Sunday saw more than 100 protesters assemble, with some chanting “save our kids”.

The events were organised in response to the arrest of an asylum seeker, who was later charged with sexual offences against a teenager and adult in the town, eight days after arriving to the UK via boat. Hadush Kebatu, 38, from Ethiopia, who denies the allegations and remains in custody, is charged with three counts of sexual assault, alongside inciting a girl to engage in sexual activity and harassment without violence.

Mr Farage did not condone violence seen outside the hotel – however, he did say it should “serve as a stark warning to this government that the British people will not put up with this betrayal for the next four years”.

When asked whether the scenes were understandable, he told The Times: “I don’t think anybody in London even understands just how close we are to civil disobedience on a vast scale in this country.

“Of course, there were some bad eggs that turned up at Epping. There were the usual far-right thugs, but equally, what about Antifa? Why? Why are Antifa allowed to go to these demonstrations, to wear balaclavas, to not be identified, to do gestures, last night, of them shooting at members of the public. Why are they there? So it isn’t all far-right thuggery, as you might sometimes hear from our prime minister.

“But do I understand how people in Epping feel? You bet your life I do.”

He continued: “Don’t underestimate the simmering anger and disgust that there is in this country that we are letting in every week, in fact, some days, many hundreds of undocumented young males, many of whom come from cultures in which women and young girls are not even treated as second-class citizens.

“So the answer is, yes, I do understand the genuine upset and anger, and I’ll bet you that most of the people outside that hotel at Epping weren’t far-right or far-left or anything like that. They were just genuinely concerned families.”

Hope Not Hate, an anti-fascism campaign group, said the series of gatherings outside the hotel began with largely peaceful intent, but were co-opted by actors intent on causing violence.

Footage and photography from Thursday and Sunday’s events show people with links to groups such as the British National Party (BNP), Britain First, Patriotic Alternative and neo-nazi group Blood & Honour were all in attendance. The Bell Hotel has regularly attracted anti-migrant protests organised by groups such as these since 2020, according to Hope Not Hate.

Downing Street described the scenes at Epping as “clearly unacceptable”.

The prime minister’s official spokesman said: “Peaceful protest is a cornerstone of our democracy, but it’s clearly unacceptable to see police coming under attack as they ensure that peaceful protest is able to take place.

“And I think Essex Police put out the statement making very clear: people who protest peacefully, lawfully and responsibly cause us and the wider public no concern. However, we can never and will never tolerate criminal violence, and I think the Prime Minister will obviously echo that.”

Trump team bars WSJ from Scotland trip after Epstein report: Latest

The White House has removed a Wall Street Journal reporter from joining President Donald Trump on his visit to Scotland this week, following the paper’s report on his relationship with Jeffrey Epstein last week.

This follows the president’s $10 billion defamation lawsuit against the newspaper and the journalists who wrote the story, as well as right-wing media mogul Rupert Murdoch and parent companies News Corp and Dow Jones.

Meanwhile, an Epstein accuser twice told the FBI that Trump had ties to the disgraced financier, according to a new report.

Maria Farmer said she urged the bureau to investigate people in Epstein’s social circle, including Trump, in 1996 and again in 2006 after a “troubling encounter” at Epstein’s office in 1995, she told The New York Times. The White House denied that Trump ever visited Epstein’s office.

The report lands amid MAGA backlash over the Trump administration’s handling of the Epstein case.

Amid the fallout, Democrats have accused Trump of trying to “change the subject” by promoting Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard’sconspiracy theory involving former President Barack Obama being linked to the origins of the Russia investigation into Trump’s 2016 campaign.

New documents reveal Palace plot to replace royal yacht Britannia

Newly released official files have shared discreet manoeuvring by Buckingham Palace officials to influence the government’s decision on replacing the Royal Yacht Britannia.

By 1993, the 39-year-old royal vessel was nearing the end of its operational life, prompting John Major’s Conservative government to consider a significant £50 million investment in a new yacht.

It was widely believed that Queen Elizabeth II strongly favoured the commissioning of a new yacht, but the Royal Family was keen to avoid any public appearance of political interference.

However, documents from the National Archives at Kew reveal how senior courtiers privately approached Downing Street.

Their aim was to persuade the then Prime Minister to issue a Commons statement highlighting Britannia’s “inestimable value” to the nation.

This thinly veiled attempt to garner support for a new vessel was swiftly rejected by the Cabinet Office, with officials warning that any such comments would be “highly prejudicial”.

One senior official caustically remarked that the Palace’s assertion of the Queen’s “indifference” regarding the yacht’s future “hardly rings true”.

The issue of a new yacht came at an extremely difficult time for the government and for the Palace, with support for the royals at a low ebb.

There had been an angry public backlash the previous year when ministers announced the taxpayer would pick up the bill – which eventually ran to £36 million – for the restoration of Windsor Castle following a catastrophic fire.

In the aftermath of her “annus horribilis” – which also saw the separation of Charles and Diana – the Queen agreed that she would for the first time pay taxes.

With Mr Major due to announce the historic move in a statement to parliament, the Queen’s private secretary Sir Robert Fellowes saw an opportunity to secure what would amount to a show of support for a new yacht.

He asked the prime minister’s principal private secretary Alex Allan if Mr Major would insert a passage referring to the importance of Britannia as well as the Queen’s flight and the royal train.

He suggested the prime minister should tell MPs that it was not just a question of cost “but also the style in which we wish our head of state and members of the royal family to represent us” in their public duties.

“It is always difficult to put a price on prestige but I have no doubt that over the years these items have been of inestimable value to this country.”

Sir Robin’s proposed addition to Mr Major’s statement went on: “I would also like to make clear that there is not, and never has been, any pressure from the Queen to build a replacement for HMY Britannia.

“Should the government decide it is in the national interest for the yacht to be replaced that would be of course another matter.”

However, Nicolas Bevan, the official heading the working group set up to consider the future of the yacht, warned that the proposed remarks could be “prejudicial” to any future decisions.

“For example to say that the royal yacht has been of inestimable value to this country will not be a helpful remark if ministers in due course decide not to replace Britannia,” he said.

“Equally it hardly rings true to suggest that it is a matter of complete indifference to the Queen as to whether Britannia is replaced or not.”

Despite the palace’s protestations of neutrality, the files suggest courtiers were involved in what amounted to some not-so-subtle lobbying on behalf of a new yacht.

On 13 May, 1993, senior government officials, led by the cabinet secretary Sir Robin Butler, were invited to a “splendid lunch” on board Britannia where they were regaled by the former lord mayor of London, Sir Hugh Bidwell, and the Earl of Limerick, a senior banker, on the value of the yacht to UK business.

Expressing his thanks afterwards to the master of the Queen’s household, Major General Sir Simon Cooper, Sir Robin noted that the setting had “brought home the issues to those involved in a unique way”.

However, when news of the meeting leaked out, government press officers were instructed to impress upon journalists – unattributably – that the Queen and royal family were “not fighting any kind of rearguard action on the yacht”.

Despite misgivings over the costs, the Major government finally announced in January 1997 that they would build a replacement yacht if they were returned to power in the general election later that year.

The move was however widely interpreted as a desperate attempt to shore up support among wavering Tory voters, and when Labour was swept to power in a landslide they promptly reversed the decision.

When Britannia was finally decommissioned – after returning the last governor of Hong Kong, Chris Patten, following the handover to China – the Queen, who rarely displayed any emotion in public, was seen to shed a tear.

When my friends were facing cancer, a community of people stepped up

When I was younger, I used to worry incessantly about my parents getting cancer. I’d lay awake at night, ruminating on what would happen to my brother and I if they did. Who would support us? Thankfully, both are still cancer-free, well into their seventies.

However, now that I’m a parent myself, I worry about my children. Many people believe that cancer only really happens to people in old age, but that’s just not true. One beloved friend’s daughter died of leukaemia in 2020, aged just five; an unthinkable horror that changed the lives of everyone who knew her and her family.

And with Macmillan Cancer Support reporting that almost 3.5 million people in the UK are living with cancer, I also worry about my friends – parents themselves, their lives touched by cancer. One friend sat me down in our favourite local café, our toddlers playing at our feet, to break the news that she was about to undergo a double mastectomy. We cried together.

Another friend, Sarah, a single parent to two teenage girls, was diagnosed with breast cancer the day before we heard that King Charles had cancer, and a month before the Princess of Wales, Kate Middleton, announced her own diagnosis in March last year. It seemed like cancer was everywhere.

As a result, Sarah put 2024 on hold – she missed her daughter’s last sports day and last concert at primary school and had to find a whole new way of co-ordinating family life.

“I’m lucky in some ways that my children are teenagers, so they are able to look after themselves to some degree – but I’m also a single parent, so there are some things that they can’t do, or struggle with, due to their age,” she tells me.

“I have even set up multiple alarms on our Alexa reminding them to put their packed lunches in their bags or leave for school, just in case I can’t get up.”

Sarah says she thought she knew quite a lot about cancer prior to her diagnosis, but now admits she “really didn’t”. She explains: “There are so many terms and procedures to understand – stages and grades, not to mention over 100 different chemotherapy drugs.”

Sarah tells me about the exhausting cumulative effect of chemotherapy, which she endured every three weeks during her cancer treatment: “After the very first lot, I slept for a few hours and felt much better pretty quickly. For my last rounds, I slept for 48 hours solid and even days later, I needed to have a nap in the middle of the day and was in bed by 8pm.”

Sarah’s now finished chemotherapy and, a year on from her diagnosis, is turning 50. She’s throwing a huge party to celebrate not only the birthday milestone, but getting over this “annus horriblis” – a year she couldn’t have gotten through without the people around her.

“People can do so much for us when we are unwell – and I am forever grateful,” she says. “I’ve been really overwhelmed by the support that my friends have given me; from ferrying around my children to and from after-school events and sleepovers when things get bad, to my 75-year-old neighbour mowing the lawn. One friend popped round with a huge pot of pasta sauce and I even had a gift box from a recruiter at work.”

What talking to my strong, resilient friends about their cancer journeys has made me realise most, is the power of community: for when we receive the worst news imaginable, what we need is people around us to see us through. A community of other women: friends, school mums, neighbours.

They had people willing to make them food, pick up their children, go shopping for them or to just sit with them and listen. They had support when they decided to raise money for cancer support charities, when they did fundraisers such as hosting a Macmillan Coffee Morning.

It takes a village to raise a child – and that village will be with you every step of the way when you need them most.

Find out how you can help raise vital funds by hosting a Macmillan Coffee Morning. Sign up now on the Macmillan website

Macmillan Cancer Support, registered charity in England and Wales (261017), Scotland (SC039907) and the Isle of Man (604). Also operating in Northern Ireland.

Ukraine latest: Moscow opens door to Trump-Putin meeting in China

Europe has promised more air defence systems and ammunition for Ukraine hours after Kyiv was hit by another barrage of Russian drones and missiles overnight.

Speaking at a meeting of the Ukraine Defense Contact Group (UDCG) on Monday, UK defence secretary John Healey said Ukraine and its allies stand at a moment of “maximum opportunity” to bolster Kyiv for negotiations to end the war. He called on the UK and other allies to use Donald Trump’s 50-day ultimatum to Vladimir Putin to start a “50-day drive” to arm Ukraine ahead of any talks.

Politico reported London and Berlin confirmed that Germany will spend €170 million in UK-led procurement of air defence ammunition for Kyiv.

The announcement comes only hours after Russia unleashed one of its largest aerial assaults on Ukraine in recent months, launching 450 drones and missiles, according to Ukraine’s air force.

The hours-long attack killed two people and wounded 15, including a 12-year-old, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky said.

The heaviest strikes hit Kyiv’s Darnytskyi district, where a kindergarten, supermarket and warehouse facilities caught fire. In Kyiv’s Shevchenkivskyi district, a drone struck the entrance to a subway station where people had taken cover.

Meanwhile, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov confirmed that Vladimir Putin would visit Beijing for events to mark the 80th anniversary of the end of World War Two in September, and said there could be a meeting with Donald Trump if he is there too.

Tony Blair urged to repay £10,000 for discounts on designer clothes

Prime minister Tony Blair was advised to repay thousands of pounds in discounts which he received on designer clothes, according to newly-released official files.

Papers released to the National Archives show that No 10 officials recommended he should pay back more than £7,600 on items bought from designers Nicole Farhi and Paul Smith.

The discounts were negotiated by his wife Cherie’s controversial friend and style adviser, Carole Caplin, who bought clothes for Mrs Blair.

Ms Caplin told officials that because she bought the clothes wholesale she was able to to secure discounts of up to 60 per cent – including on items bought for Mr Blair as well.

However, officials were concerned that such large discounts would not be available to ordinary members of the public.

According to the files, between July 2001 to December 2002 the couple spent £8,021.50 with one designer alone – Nicole Farhi – when the retail price would have been £20,855.

It meant the total discount they received came to £12,8343, more than the total amount they spent.

Initially, officials advised that Mr Blair should repay the discounts he received in full – around £10,000 – and that Mrs Blair should pay back half the benefits she obtained – £28,000.

Clare Sumner, a No 10 official, wrote: “We are not arguing that anything has been done wrong, indeed nothing has. The issue is one of public perception.”

However, after discussions with the cabinet secretary Sir Andrew Turnbull it was agreed that Mrs Blair did not receive any “preferential or beneficial treatment” in her role as prime minister’s wife.

It was agreed, however, that the suppliers would in future have to sign confidentiality agreements to ensure there was no incentive for them to provide goods cheaply in order to exploit the fact they the prime minister’s wife wore their clothes.

But for Mr Blair, however, officials said they believed he still should pay the full amount, advising him to write cheques for to £1,116 to Paul Smith and £6,532 to Nicole Farhi.

Ms Sumner wrote: “For you, we still think the simplest thing is to pay for your clothes in full and that Carole should be made aware of this for the future.”