Richard Kahn, a longtime accountant for convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, claimed that he didn’t previously grasp the full scope of the late financier’s abuse during a closed-door deposition before the House Oversight Committee on Wednesday.
“I was not aware of the nature or extent of Epstein’s abuse of so many women until after Epstein’s death,” Kahn said, according to prepared remarks obtained by ABC News. “However, it pains me to think, and I deeply regret, that I may have unknowingly assisted Epstein in any way.”
“Had I learned of any of his horrific behavior, I would have quit work immediately,” he reportedly added.
A co-executor of Epstein’s estate, Kahn has faced significant scrutiny for his ties to the late sex predator and his role in overseeing the money manager’s finances for more than 10 years. Survivors have previously accused Kahn and Epstein’s attorney, Darren Indyke, of facilitating and concealing Epstein’s illegal conduct. Both have denied any wrongdoing.
Advertisement
Indyke is also poised to appear for a closed-door deposition with the oversight panel next week.
Kahn said on Wednesday that he tracked Epstein’s gifts, but “did not see them as red flags for abuse or trafficking,” and noted that they comprised a small fraction of his spending. Kahn also said he “had no role in setting up any of Epstein’s companies,” and did not see them as “improper or suspicious.”
House Oversight Chair James Comer (Republican, Kentucky) said that Kahn wasn’t being accused of wrongdoing in remarks ahead of the deposition on Wednesday. He also noted that there was evidence of 64 business entities associated with Epstein and that there was “a lot of money that was being transferred around.”
Democrats met Kahn’s Wednesday statements with scepticism, criticising his vague responses to their inquiries.
Advertisement
“Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking ring would not have been possible without Richard Kahn, who managed Epstein’s money for years, authorized payments, including payments to victims and survivors,” Rep. James Walkinshaw (Democrat, Virginia) claimed to reporters.
“Today we’ve heard from Mr. Kahn a lot of inability to recall, inability to recall emails, messages, activities he was involved in,” said Walkinshaw. “From my perspective, I do not find it credible that he had no knowledge of Jeffrey Epstein’s crimes. If he was ignorant of Epstein’s crimes, he was willfully ignorant of those crimes.”
Kahn also shed light on how Epstein had allegedly obtained his wealth.
According to Comer, Kahn was “under the impression” that Epstein made his money as a tax adviser and financial planner. Additionally, the accountant named five clients who had made significant transactions to Epstein, Comer said.
Advertisement
Those individuals included businessman Les Wexner, hedge fund manager Glenn Dubin, investor and software engineer Steven Sinofsky and investor Leon Black, according to Comer. Kahn also named members of the Rothschild family, Comer said.
Wexner had previously sat for a deposition with House lawmakers and claimed that he had no knowledge of Epstein’s crimes. A spokesperson for him told the publication that he had not transferred money to Epstein, but that he had retained and paid the financier for “wealth management services.”
A spokesperson for Dubin, meanwhile, told the publication that he was not an Epstein client, while Sinofsky declined to comment. A spokesperson for the Edmond de Rothschild bank did not immediately respond to a request for comment.
Comer also noted that Kahn testified that he had not seen Epstein engage in any transactions with President Donald Trump or members of his family.
An easyJet flight from Tunisia to Belfast had to be diverted on Tuesday after a medical emergency on board.
The flight from Enfidha was diverted to Liverpool following the incident. Belfast Live approached the airline for comment after a source told us the flight landed at its final destination more than two hours after the scheduled time due to the incident.
Advertisement
A spokesman told Belfast Live: “Flight EZY3072 from Enfidha to Belfast International on Tuesday evening was diverted to Liverpool due to a customer onboard requiring urgent medical attention.
If you spend any time on social media, you may have noticed a curious trend: wellness influencers singing the praises of nicotine. Not smoking or vaping but nicotine patches and pouches, repackaged as cognitive enhancers, productivity boosters and even weight-loss aids. But does the science support this rebrand, or are we watching a familiar substance undergo a very modern makeover?
Nicotine is primarily a stimulant and derived from the tobacco plant. Small amounts of nicotine are also found in other members of the nightshade family, including tomatoes, aubergines, potatoes and green peppers. However, the levels in these foods are minimal compared with those in tobacco.
Nicotine works by latching on to specific receptors found throughout the body, triggering the release of various brain chemicals such as dopamine, noradrenaline, and serotonin. These receptors, along with a chemical messenger called acetylcholine, play an important role in attention, learning and memory.
The evidence on whether nicotine can enhance cognitive performance is mixed. One large review of 41 trials involving healthy adults – both non-smokers and smokers – found that nicotine produced small improvements in areas such as fine motor skills, attention and aspects of short-term and working memory.
Advertisement
An animal study demonstrated nicotine increased working memory and boosted levels of brain-derived neurotrophic factor, a protein important for learning and brain resilience. However, other research shows that in healthy non-smokers, nicotine often has neutral or even negative cognitive effects.
This difference comes down to starting point. People who already have cognitive difficulties have more room to improve, while those with healthy brain function are already performing close to their best. Because of this, nicotine is unlikely to offer any real benefit to people who don’t have cognitive impairments.
Small experimental studies have explored whether nicotine patches might help people with mild cognitive impairment, with one trial reporting slight improvements in memory test scores over six months. Research suggests nicotine may have protective effects in neurodegenerative diseases like Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s, partly because it reduces inflammation, prevents cell death and supports cognitive function.
Nicotine has also been linked to weight loss and reduced appetite. It appears to influence the parts of the brain that control hunger and makes the body burn more energy by triggering the release of stimulating hormones like adrenaline. While some animal studies suggest nicotine can reduce body weight by speeding up fat burning, there is not yet strong evidence that this holds true in humans
Advertisement
Where nicotine is useful is in smoking cessation. Nicotine replacement therapy is an effective way to help people stop smoking. But this benefit comes from reducing exposure to tobacco smoke, which contains a cocktail of chemicals and cancer-causing agents – not from nicotine itself being healthy.
An effective way to quit smoking. Andrey_Popov/Shutterstock.com
Highly addictive
Nicotine is not harmless and regular use can lead to dependence. Nicotine activates receptors in the brain that trigger the release of several chemical messengers, including dopamine (the so-called feel-good hormone). This surge in dopamine creates the pleasurable sensations and reinforcement that contribute to nicotine’s addictive effects.
Studies in animals show using nicotine during the teenage years can lead to long lasting changes in the brain and behaviour, including higher risk of other drug use, reduced attention and mood problems.
Teenagers have more nicotine receptors in the brain’s reward areas than adults, which makes nicotine’s effects stronger and the developing brain more vulnerable. Similar effects can be seen in a developing baby during pregnancy.
Advertisement
Common side-effects of using nicotine include nausea, vomiting and headaches. It can also cause more serious heart and blood-vessel harms.
Nicotine triggers the release of chemicals such as adrenaline and noradrenaline, and studies show that higher levels of these can raise heart rate, increase blood pressure and make the heart work harder.
Nicotine also damages the inner walls of blood vessels by causing inflammation, raising blood pressure and disrupting normal blood vessel function. The evidence is clear that no nicotine product is safe for the heart and cardiovascular system – a conclusion now officially backed by major health organisations, including the World Health Organization.
Is nicotine safer without smoke? Yes. Is it safe? No.
Advertisement
Reduced harm is not the same as benefit. The scientific picture is complicated: possible cognitive effects, potential therapeutic avenues, but clear risks and strong addictive potential.
The science does not support using nicotine as a cognitive enhancer or lifestyle supplement for healthy adults. What it does support is using nicotine replacement therapy to help people stop smoking. Outside that context, the risks outweigh the hype. Wellness trends come and go, but addiction is far harder to shake.
Skatefest 2026 will take place on Saturday, July 18, promising a full day of skate competitions, live music, street art, and community activities.
The grassroots event is organised by Ryedale Skate School in partnership with Norton Town Council.
It aims to create an inclusive space where people of all ages and abilities can experience skateboarding culture.
Advertisement
RECOMMENDED READING:
Ryan Swain, local skateboard coach and youth advocate, said: “Skatefest is about much more than skateboarding. It’s about community, belonging and giving young people a positive space to express themselves.
“We’ve seen how powerful skate culture can be in bringing people together and building confidence, and we’re proud to be working with Norton Town Council to bring this event back bigger than ever.”
Visitors can enjoy a packed programme throughout the day, including vert and mini ramp competitions, live DJs and music performances, street art demonstrations, and free skate lessons for beginners.
Advertisement
Food and drink vendors, artisan stalls, charity raffles, and a tombola will also be on offer.
Ryan said: “Whether you’re a lifelong skater, someone who’s never stepped on a board before, or just want a great day out with the family, Skatefest is for everyone.
“Events like this help build stronger communities and give young people positive opportunities to connect, learn and thrive.”
Mayor of Norton, Di Keal, said: “Norton town council is delighted to be supporting Skatefest again this year after a hugely successful event in 2025.
Advertisement
“We are installing a second shelter at the skatepark shortly funded by a grant from Live Like Ralph, a charity established in memory of keen skater, Ralph Roberts, who sadly lost his life during the Covid pandemic.
“Ralph’s father, Neil and the Live Like Ralph team visited last year on a fundraising bike ride from Scarborough to Lytham and they loved the skatepark that has been created in Norton. The town council is using the grant to purchase the new shelter, which will be decorated live by a street artist at Skatefest and will feature the Live Like Ralph logo.
“The team at Live Like Ralph will hopefully be joining us to celebrate and enjoy Skatefest and I would encourage families from across our twin towns to visit the skatepark on July 18 to enjoy the event and witness some spectacular skating and stunts.”
The organisers are encouraging local businesses, charities, and independent traders to get involved by hosting stalls or supporting the event.
Advertisement
Interested organisations can contact ryedaleskateschool@gmail.com.
Skatefest 2026 will run from 11am to 5pm on Saturday, July 18.
Should I get a robot vacuum cleaner? Until recently, for most people the answer was no. Even the best robot vacuums had a tendency to mount chair legs and get stuck, wheels feebly pawing at the air, or to have a nervous breakdown in a confined space.
AI has changed all that. “People want robot helpers,” says Colin Angle, the MIT robotics expert whose iRobot Roomba kick-started the whole industry back in 2002. “Rather than clean the whole house, they want to tell their robot vacuum to just clean under the kitchen table, or in the office, but that takes a huge amount of tech.”
The best robot vacuums cost well over £1,000 and even the cheapest are over £300, so these are not toys (although there have been more than a billion views of pets riding robot vacuums on YouTube.) To find out which are worth your hard-earned cash, we put some of the best robot vacuums to the test.
Advertisement
You can read our full reviews below, followed by answers to frequently asked questions, like how long robot vacuums last and which has the best suction. Here’s a quick look at five:
Robot vacuums are constantly evolving and have a fascinating origin. Angle helped design the Sojourner rover that explored Mars and one of his robots was sent to the Fukushima disaster zone. It might be surprising to find this technology trundling around your floor, but the challenges are the same: navigating different surfaces, unusual shapes and unexpected obstacles.
“Now they use cameras not just to see where they’re going and remember where they’ve been, but to understand obstacles,” Angle says.
Advertisement
As well as advanced mapping technology, many robot vacuums can now also mop (although not all), and the docking stations have developed, too. While some simply charge the vacuum between cleans, others remove dust, debris and water from the robot’s on board bins and several even clean and sterilise mop pads. Below, you’ll even find a robot vacuum (the Dreame X50) with a mechanical leg for clambering over obstacles.
Ultimately, the best robot vacuum for your home comes down to the flooring you have and your budget; the more you spend, the more power or functionality you’ll get.
The boy riding the bike was taken to hospital for treatment
A boy riding a bike was taken to hospital after a crash with a car. Emergency services were called to a crash on The Avenue in Godmanchester at around 4.20pm on Wednesday (March 11).
Advertisement
The crash involved a pedal cycle and car. The boy riding the bike was taken to hospital to treat his injuries. The road was closed while police attended.
A police spokesperson said: “We were called at about 4.20pm yesterday to The Avenue, Godmanchester, to reports of a collision between a pedal cycle and a car.
“The cyclist, a boy, was taken to hospital for treatment to injuries believed not to be serious. There were no arrests and an investigation is ongoing.”
The East of England Ambulance Service has been contacted for more information.
The Whitby Coastguard Rescue Team said that it was dispatched to help the man, who was found partway down the slope with a suspected hip injury, after falling from his scooter.
After an initial assessment, the team say it ‘became clear the situation was time critical’ and they began to give care and provided blankets to keep the man warm until Yorkshire Ambulance Service arrived on scene.
Once the crew reached the site, Coastguard officers assisted in transporting equipment down the steep path to the scene.
Advertisement
Following further assessment and pain relief administered by the paramedics, the teams carried out a stretcher evacuation up the cliff path before transferring the injured man safely into an awaiting ambulance.
“Steep coastal paths can be challenging terrain, particularly when using mobility aids. If you ever see someone in difficulty along the coast, call 999 and ask for the Coastguard,” said Whitby Coastguard Rescue Team.
To fairly compare models, we put every dehumidifier through a series of structured, real-world tests. We begin with set up, assessing whether it can be unpacked and running within minutes or if it takes time to figure out.
We also judge ease of use, looking for clearly labelled and responsive controls. We check how easy it is to empty and reinsert the water tank and whether any companion app connects reliably and adds genuine control rather than gimmicks. Design details matter too, so we look at cable length, portability, self-draining features and safety cut-offs. Build quality, durability, extra features and overall value for money are all important.
Next, we assess its effectiveness. First, we measure how well a unit reduces humidity after a hot shower, recording how long it takes to bring the room back to a comfortable 50 per cent. Then, we test laundry mode by hanging a standard load of washing and noting how quickly it dries compared to normal conditions.
Advertisement
Finally, we measure noise levels with a decibel app and track energy consumption over the course of an hour using a plug meter.
A tie that had looked enthrallingly unpredictable, only for the first leg to be set by perhaps the most predictable development possible.
Liam Rosenior had replaced Robert Sanchez with Filip Jorgenson specifically for his footwork, and of course it was a bad goalkeeper pass that set up Vitinha for a decisive goal.
After that, Paris Saint-Germain took a step up – and then another two – and Chelsea didn’t go with them.
The ending ensured this match continued some themes of this Champions League week: erratic goalkeeping displays and Premier League defeats, as Paris Saint-Germain beat Chelsea 5-2.
Advertisement
What will further anger Rosenior was that the scale of the scoreline didn’t really reflect the game. Chelsea’s actual performance hadn’t been in the same sphere as those by Liverpool, Manchester City or Tottenham Hotspur – despite the same actual outcome as the last one.
Chelsea had largely given as good as they got in a game of almost the highest European quality… had it just ended in the 74th minute. He later spoke of a “crazy” final 15 minutes where his team – including himself – didn’t stay “calm”. That was maybe summed up in Enzo Fernandez arguing with Jorgensen and Pedro Neto’s moment with a ballboy, for which Rosenior apologised.
Maybe some of the performance is also fatigue from the Premier League season, which is obviously going to be a discussion over the next week.
Chelsea really have to raise it, though.
Advertisement
Kvicha Kvaratshkelia scored twice to give PSG control of the tie (Reuters)
A 3-2 reverse was eminently salvageable but 5-2? Kvicha Kvaratshkelia is quite an option to bring off the bench, and he duly maximised that extra space to score another trademark exquisitely curling strike.
The most remarkable thing is that it may not have even been the pick of the goals. All of them involved exceptional class, even if they came from errors and fallibility that actually elevated the game in terms of drama.
That was most visible with maybe the best of them, Ousmane Dembele’s brilliant breakaway. Jorgenson could do little about that or Kvaratshkelia’s first, but the third and fifth?
Advertisement
They might decide the tie.
That might haunt Rosenior, especially to make a call so big – and so conspicuous given Antoni Kinsky – this early in his Chelsea career.
There is of course another story to this game.
The European champions may have finally started to play again. They looked like the best team in Europe again.
Advertisement
There is now always a sense of two sides with this PSG. It should never be forgotten they are ultimately a sportswashing project, who have still assembled one of the most expensive sides in history without “stars”.
And yet, in a purely football sense, they are refreshing.
Vitinha lofts the ball over a stranded Jorgensen (Getty)
In a Premier League that has become dominated by high-definition tactical positioning, so many of their players are willing to take someone and have a shot from anywhere.
Advertisement
They go for it.
That isn’t to say that Luis Enrique isn’t highly tactical himself. What he has essentially done is enhance the Spanish positional game for the first time in 15 years, adding dribbling and intensity to a system that is almost supposed to be the antithesis of that. That comes from a lot of hard thinking and hard work, if an admittedly easy schedule to facilitate it.
The end product is nevertheless something that looks so free… if occasionally too free.
PSG have some clumsy moments themselves.
Advertisement
They are far from perfect, and that included last season.
And Chelsea, for their part, did initially prey on that and force more errors.
The back-and-forth of the goals were cases in point.
Advertisement
Bradley Barcola opened the scoring for PSG (Action Images/Reuters)
After Bradley Barcola had displayed precisely this willingness to just let go with the opening goal – a blockbusting strike in off the bar, albeit with considerable space – there was a spell when it looked like they could just overwhelm Chelsea with their live-wire attacking.
If Rosenior will face a lot of questions about the Jorgensen decision, though, he does deserve credit for many of his in-game calls. It is clearly one of his best qualities.
Chelsea duly recalibrated around Enzo Fernandez, who had one of his finest games for the club.
Everything went through him, including the two goals.
Advertisement
It was his pass that put Malo Gusto into space for Chelsea’s equaliser. The finish was strong but it still went through Matvey Safonov.
A theme of the European champions’ more underwhelming 2025-26 campaign has been whether they are missing Gigi Donnarumma. It was hard not to think he’d have saved that… but the Italian wasn’t exactly having the best night for City.
Chelsea began to really press PSG in from there, only for Luis Enrique’s side to exploit their own weakness.
Advertisement
Chelsea were undone by late goals (Ben Whitley/PA) (PA Wire)
This, typically, was done in the most direct way possible: pure pace. After Cole Palmer had a shot well saved by Safonov – no questions that time – Desire Doue showed quick thinking to immediately get the ball to Dembele.
He exhilaratingly surged up the pitch, although Wesley Fofana initially did well to stay with him. Just when it seemed like Dembele might have been pushed wide, he turned in, then went out – and in the process turned Fofana inside out – to finish supremely.
It was the type of move that was so impressive it produced one of those deafening sounds from the crowd, but it wasn’t definitive.
Chelsea again responded. PSG again showed their own fallibility. Pedro Neto displayed his own directness down the left, before squaring for Fernandez to finish emphatically.
Advertisement
It was another supreme goal, and should have been the set-up for a grand crescendo, an operatic back and forth.
Only one team stayed at the level, though, as Jorgensen – and Rosenior – endured a dismal low.
That may well be it for the tie. PSG do not look the kind of team to give up a three-goal lead now they’re European champions.
And they finally look like they can be that again.
Advertisement
Chelsea and Rosenior, by contrast, look like they still have a bit to learn.
When e-cigarettes first appeared around 2010, they were hailed as a breakthrough: nicotine delivery without the toxic tar and combustion byproducts of traditional cigarettes. Public health bodies cautiously endorsed them as a tool for adult smokers to quit, often citing early claims that vaping was 95% less harmful than smoking. More than a decade later, with millions now vaping regularly, the picture is less clear.
A recent study, published in the American Journal of Physiology – Heart and Circulatory Physiology, found that people who vape or smoke have nearly 50% higher odds of elevated blood pressure compared to non-users. This isn’t proof that vaping directly causes high blood pressure – other factors such as diet or exercise could play a role – but it adds to a growing body of evidence that vaping’s early reputation for safety deserves a harder look.
The science behind the concern isn’t complicated. Nicotine in e-cigarette vapour triggers immediate spikes in heart rate and blood pressure. The flavourings and other chemicals can damage the lining of blood vessels – the tissue that prevents clotting and keeps blood flowing smoothly. Research reviews have found elevated rates of heart attack among vapers, particularly among those who also still smoke traditional cigarettes.
The lungs tell a similarly worrying story. A 2022 study comparing vapers, smokers and non-users found that vapers had measurably reduced lung function – even after accounting for any previous smoking history – as well as higher rates of wheezing, coughing and bronchitis-like symptoms. Further research from 2023–25 links vaping to increased airway resistance and asthma flare-ups, with some effects persisting well beyond a single vaping session.
Perhaps the most urgent concern is what has happened among young people. The World Health Organization now describes e-cigarettes as “harmful and not safe”, warning of a new wave of nicotine addiction among teenagers who never smoked in the first place – and who are three times more likely to go on to smoke traditional cigarettes as a result.
Large surveys have linked regular vaping in young people to depression, anxiety and suicidal thoughts, with nicotine’s known effects on the developing brain almost certainly playing a role.
Supporters of vaping argue that its risks are acceptable if it helps established smokers quit – and there is something to this. A 2024 review by Ireland’s Health Research Board found that e-cigarettes do help some adults stop smoking, particularly when combined with behavioural support.
But many people who vape to quit end up doing both – vaping and smoking – which means they are still exposed to tobacco’s most harmful chemicals. And the evidence for traditional nicotine replacement therapies such as patches and gum, backed by decades of clinical trials, remains stronger.
We don’t yet have human data confirming that vaping causes cancer. But this reflects how new the habit is rather than how safe it is. A review of laboratory studies show that e-cigarette vapour causes DNA damage and cell death in ways that look uncomfortably familiar to early tobacco research – research that preceded the smoking-related cancer epidemic by two or three decades.
Safer is not the same as safe
The original message – that vaping is far safer than smoking, and a reasonable tool for quitting – made sense at a time when tobacco was killing enormous numbers of people. But “safer than smoking” is not the same as safe, and that distinction matters enormously when teenagers are interpreting the message as permission to start. NHS Scotland is already clear that vaping carries real risks and is not suitable for young people.
Advertisement
We’ve tasted the bitter waters of tobacco, where delayed action fuelled generations of disease. To fix smoking, we’re now engineering a “solution” that could spawn tomorrow’s crises – akin to ditching petrol cars for electric vehicles to slash emissions, only to grapple with toxic lithium battery e-waste mountains clogging landfills and supply chains.
Both trades address one urgent harm while blindsiding us to downstream perils: leaching chemicals, recycling nightmares and resource wars. With vaping, signals of cardiovascular strain, lung irritation, youth gateways and addiction are flashing red, even if full epidemics lie years ahead.
The sensible conclusion is not complicated. If you have never smoked, don’t vape. If you do smoke and want to quit, patches, gum, medication and proper support remain the best-evidenced options. Vaping may have a role as a short-term bridge – but not as a permanent habit, and not for anyone who wouldn’t otherwise have been a smoker. The warning signs are there. The question is whether we act on them before the long-term consequences become impossible to ignore.
