The wife was unable to sleep for the rest of the night after a stranger entered their room

A grieving couple was left shocked when an “intruder” entered their hotel room late at night. Gary and Alison Yates, both from North Yorkshire, travelled to Milton on Bank Holiday Monday (May 4), for Alison’s father’s funeral.

The couple got stuck in seven-hour traffic after a crash, meaning they missed the funeral. As the pair needed to clear out Alison’s father’s house in Milton, they stayed at a Travelodge in Orchard Park, Cambridge.

After a long and “emotional” day of cleaning out Alison’s father’s house on May 5, the pair “crashed out” in their hotel room, Gary said. While both were asleep in bed, the pair were woken up at 11.30pm.

“We were in a deep sleep and at 11.30pm, a man walked into our room,” said Gary. He added: “We sat up in bed and I shouted, as you would. The man said ‘I’m really sorry‘ and said ‘they’ve given me the wrong door key‘.”

Alison was unable to sleep for the rest of the night. Gary went down to reception the following morning and told a staff member. He said he was told that staff were “aware of the incident”, and the manager who was due to be in at 12pm would be in contact with him. The couple left on May 6 and made their way home. They did not hear from the hotel manager until May 8.

“The manager sent his apologies, but we feel like we’ve been fobbed off,“ Gary said. “I’m not expecting them to roll out the red carpet for us, but we just want some closure. Alison is still upset about what happened. She didn’t get to see her dad off, then there was clearing the house and with everything else that happened, this was the icing on the cake.”

A Travelodge spokesperson said: “We are very sorry for this customer’s experience. Any case of an unauthorised person entering a guest’s room is a significant cause for concern and we want to be clear that this should not have happened – our room access security policy was not correctly followed, which is not acceptable. We would like to apologise again to the customer for their experience with us.“

The Yates’ experience follows recent media reporting about a 2022 incident in Maidenhead which saw a man pretend to be a woman’s girlfriend to get a key card for her room. Kyran Smith, 29, raped the woman and was later sentenced to more than seven years in prison for the offence.

Travelodge says the company has commissioned an independent review to examine its policies and procedures led by Paul Greaney KC. A spokesperson said that Travelodge is also working on an internal review to ensure guests’ safety.

Gary believes security needs to be improved at the hotels. He added: “People need to be aware of what’s going on. What I don’t understand is they don’t have chains on the doors. The little lock [on the doors] is just a waste of time. I feel sorry for the poor bloke [who entered the room], he was an innocent party in this.”

The Travelodge spokesperson added that the hotel chain has made recent changes to strengthen room access security policies, including retraining customer-facing colleagues on upgraded policies. They said staff at the Cambridge Orchard Park hotel will receive additional training on room access security and check-in procedures.

Change. It was the one word on the front of the Labour manifesto two short years ago along with a picture of the man offering that change: Mr Starmer.

But there has been no change. Now we are back to the psychodrama that dominated the dying years of the last Tory government, wearing the country down, failing to allow it to move forward, and ultimately leading to its historic defeat.

From that period we learned that once the tide of politics turns against a leader, it cannot be turned back. Theresa May and Boris Johnson both tried resets to no avail; Liz Truss tried to reboot her cabinet after her disastrous Budget, but was soon gone.

It now feels that the tide has turned, terminally, against Mr Starmer. He has run out of resets.

He now looks like a small boat caught in the open sea in a storm. He cannot set a direction. He cannot make progress. Instead, he is at the whim of every passing wave, of every gust of wind.

Many Labour MPs now seem to be clinging to the hope that Manchester mayor Andy Burnham can somehow get himself elected to the House of Commons and take over. Yet that looks a forlorn hope – there are no safe seats for him, and there are no voters who liked to be taken advantage of by one man on the move.

In the cabinet, there seems to be only one contender: Wes Streeting. He has performed competently at health, and, unlike the unfortunate Mr Starmer, he sounds like a human. There is often in a politician’s career just one moment for a strike at the top job – will Mr Streeting take his?

If not, we are back to the dog days of the Tories, when British priorities went a-begging as they battled just to survive. It is no change at all.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Democrats on Monday filed an emergency appeal with the U.S. Supreme Court seeking to halt a Virginia ruling invalidating a ballot measure that would have given their party an additional four winnable U.S. House seats.

The move came after the Virginia Supreme Court on Friday struck down a constitutional amendment that voters narrowly passed just last month. The 4-3 state court decision found that the Democratic-controlled legislature improperly began the process of placing the amendment on the ballot after early voting had begun in the Virginia’s general election last fall.

Democrats argued unsuccessfully that the U.S. Supreme Court has held that, even if early voting is underway, an election does not happen until Election Day itself.

The appeal is the latest twist in the nation’s mid-decade redistricting competition. It was kicked off last year by President Donald Trump urging Republican-controlled states to redraw their lines and was supercharged by a recent Supreme Court ruling severely weakening the Voting Rights Act.

“The Court overrode the will of the people who ratified the amendment by ordering the Commonwealth to conduct its election with the congressional districts that the people rejected,” wrote lawyers for Virginia Democrats and the state’s Democratic Attorney General, Jay Jones. They added, “The irreparable harm resulting from the Supreme Court of Virginia’s decision is profound and immediate.”

The filing is a sign of Democratic desperation after the Virginia decision deprived them of four winnable House seats in the mid-decade redistricting race that President Donald Trump kicked off last year. Democrats are still favorites to recapture the House of Representatives, but their GOP rivals have claimed to have gained more than a dozen seats through redistricting. The voter-approved Virginia map would have partly offset that.

Democrats are taking a legal long shot in asking the justices to reverse the Virginia court’s ruling. The Supreme Court tries to avoid second-guessing state courts’ interpretations of their own constitutions. In 2023, it turned down a request by North Carolina Republicans to overrule a state Supreme Court decision that blocked the GOP’s congressional map.

Politically, the appeal could help a party struggling to compete with Republicans in the unusual mid-decade redrawing of congressional boundaries by providing fodder for election-year messaging about a partisan Supreme Court. The court recently allowed Louisiana Republicans to proceed with redistricting after the justices struck down a majority Black district as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander.

Democrats have been set on their heels because, days after the Virginia ballot measure passed, the Supreme Court’s conservatives reversed decades of rulings and effectively neutered the Voting Rights Act, paving the way for Southern states to eliminate some majority Black districts and further pad Republican margins in Congress.

The Virginia amendment had been launched long before that ruling. It was intended as a response to Republican gains in Texas, Missouri, North Carolina and Ohio, and to blunt a new map in Florida that just became law. Once the Virginia amendment passed, it briefly turned the nationwide redistricting scramble into a draw between the two parties.

That was unraveled by the Virginia Supreme Court’s decision. The justices are appointed by the legislature, which has flipped between the two parties in recent decades, and the body is generally not seen as having a clear ideological bent.

__

Riccardi reported from Denver.

Artificial intelligence has crossed a threshold in the modern workplace. It is being used for everything from helping employees manage schedules to supporting financial forecasts. A similar shift is now unfolding inside research laboratories.

There is currently a boom in national initiatives to accelerate the integration of AI into science. These include the US Genesis Mission and South Korea’s AI Co-Scientist Challenge. But despite clear benefits, we believe these institutional drives are neglecting important issues that carry immense risks for scientific research.

Today, more than half of researchers use AI for work tasks including reviews of academic journals and designing experiments.

AlphaFold is an AI tool developed to predict the structures of proteins for scientific research. Working out protein structures was incredibly time-consuming before its release – taking years in some cases. The same tasks now take hours. AlphaFold was acknowledged by the 2024 Nobel Prize in Chemistry.

AI tools for use in medicine now assist with everything from the interpretation of results from X-rays and MRIs to supporting doctors’ decisions on the diagnosis and treatment of disease.

Our key concern is that hasty adoption of AI may gradually erode the scientific culture and human relationships that sustain rigorous research. It starts with the erosion of core thinking skills among researchers, as a result of an increased reliance on AI to perform that work. This can alienate researchers from the deeper reasoning behind their work.

Loss of independent thinking

Early-career scientists are particularly vulnerable, because they are still developing their scientific reasoning. Troubleshooting skills and the critical evaluation of ideas may be outsourced to AI systems.

AI’s fluent, confident and immediate responses can easily be mistaken for authoritative information. Once researchers begin to treat AI outputs as implicitly correct, the responsibility for judgment calls may gradually shift from them to their machines.

AI’s persuasive arguments, probably drawn from mainstream ideas in their training data, could replace more rigorous, time-consuming and creative research approaches. These are traditionally shaped through critical back-and-forth discussions between researchers.

This can evolve into over-dependence. As reasoning is delegated to AI, researchers become less confident at working unaided. Unfortunately, modern scientific labs are full of conditions that reinforce this dependence, such as intense competition, long hours and frequent isolation.

Limited mentorship and feedback from colleagues that is delayed, critical or politically influenced can enhance this issue. In contrast, AI provides an immediate, patient and nonjudgmental alternative.

Scientists interact with AI systems daily in order to check computer code, revise illustrations or charts, draft the language for grant applications, clarify scientific concepts, and at times, ask for personal advice.

As researchers begin to trust the AI assistant, it can begin to function less like a tool and more like a companion. This phenomenon bears the risk of emotional dependency, too. When ChatGPT-4 was retired, many users expressed a form of grief.

Replacing relationships

Another important concern is the potential for replacement of human relationships in the office or research lab. AI is always available, nonjudgmental, noncompeting – and indifferent to office politics, with no ego to defend. It remembers context, adapts to individual working styles, and offers reassurance without social cost.

Human scientific relationships are more complicated, involving nuance, criticism, time constraints, hierarchy – and sometimes, ulterior motives. For early-career researchers especially, these interactions can feel risky.

Critical feedback from humans can feel adversarial, while AI responses feel supportive. So, early-career scientists might have good reason to prefer testing ideas or seeking validation through AI, rather than their peers or superiors.

The scientific community cannot thrive without opposing ideas, deep scepticism against consensus, vigorous debate and rigorous mentoring. If AI begins to replace these, it threatens the foundations on which scientific progress has always been made.

The current debate on AI safety mostly focuses on errors in models’ responses, or on AI systems circumventing the restrictions imposed on the way they work, known as “jailbreaking”. Such rules have limited effects when it comes to the AI models’ societal and cultural impact.

Given the recent drives to get scientists to work more closely with AI assistants, we should educate our young scientists on the risks of AI dependence. We also need benchmarks to rigorously test AI models for their ability to establish boundaries with users, to prevent overdependence and other unhealthy interactions.

Finally, all of us – but especially institutional leaders – should understand the capabilities and permanence of AI companionship. They are here to stay, and we should learn to make our relationships with them as healthy as possible.

WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court is leaving women’s access to a widely used abortion pill untouched until at least Thursday, while the justices consider whether to allow restrictions on the drug, mifepristone, to take effect.

Justice Samuel Alito’s order Monday allows women seeking abortions to continue obtaining the pill at pharmacies or through the mail, without an in-person visit to a doctor. It prevents restrictions on mifepristone imposed by a federal appeals court from taking effect for the time being.

The court is dealing with its latest abortion controversy four years after its conservative majority overturned Roe v. Wade and allowed more than a dozen states to effectively ban abortion outright.

The case before the court stems from a lawsuit Louisiana filed to roll back the Food and Drug Administration’s rules on how mifepristone can be prescribed. The state claims the policy undermines the ban there, and it questions the safety of the drug, which was first approved in 2000 and has repeatedly been deemed safe and effective by FDA scientists.

Lower courts concluded that Louisiana is likely to prevail, and a three-judge panel of the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that mail access and telehealth visits should be suspended while the case plays out.

The drug is most often used for abortion in combination with another drug, misoprostol. Medication abortions accounted for nearly two-thirds of all abortions in the U.S. in 2023, the last year for which statistics are available.

The current dispute is similar to one that reached the court three years ago.

Lower courts then also sought to restrict access to mifepristone, in a case brought by physicians who oppose abortion. They filed suit in the months after the court overturned Roe.

The Supreme Court blocked the 5th Circuit ruling from taking effect over the dissenting votes of Alito and Justice Clarence Thomas. Then, in 2024, the high court unanimously dismissed the doctors’ suit, reasoning they did not have the legal right, or standing, to sue.

In the current dispute, mainstream medical groups, the pharmaceutical industry and Democratic members of Congress have weighed in cautioning the court against limiting access to the drug. Pharmaceutical companies said a ruling for abortion opponents would upend the drug approval process.

The FDA has eased a number of restrictions initially placed on the drug, including who can prescribe it, how it is dispensed and what kinds of safety complications must be reported.

Despite those determinations, abortion opponents have been challenging the safety of mifepristone for more than 25 years. They have filed a series of petitions and lawsuits against the agency, generally alleging that it violated federal law by overlooking safety issues with the pill.

President Donald Trump’s administration has been unusually quiet at the Supreme Court. It declined to file a written brief recommending what the court should do, even though federal regulations are at issue.

The case puts Trump’s Republican administration in a difficult place. Trump has relied on the political support of anti-abortion groups but has also seen ballot question and poll results that show Americans generally support abortion rights.

Both sides took the silence as an implicit endorsement of the appellate ruling. Alito is both the justice in charge of handling emergency appeals from Louisiana and the author of the 2022 decision that declared abortion is not a constitutional right and returned the issue to the states.

___

Mulvihill reported from Haddonfield, N.J.

___

Follow the AP’s coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court at https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.

Sir Keir Starmer is facing growing calls to stand down after Friday’s disastrous local and devolved election results – the worst on record for the Labour party.

The prime minister has said he will not resign following the results, and in a fightback speech on Monday vowed to “face up to the big challenges ahead”.

But at 81 Labour MPs have now called on Sir Keir to stand down and make way for a leadership contest. The list continues to grow with a wave of statements issued on Monday evening, as the prime minister remains defiant.

There is no formal confidence vote procedure to oust a Labour leader. Any challenger to Sir Keir would instead require the support of 81 MPs – 20 per cent of the party in the Commons – to trigger a contest.

These 81 would all have to back the same candidate to succeed the prime minister.

Four ministerial aides have handed in their resignation amid the chaos, including Joe Morris, a ministerial aide to Wes Streeting, widely considered a potential leadership contender.

Tom Rutland, a parliamentary private secretary (PPS) to environment secretary Emma Reynolds and Cabinet Office PPS Naushabah Khan also resigned while calling on Sir Keir to step down.

Both former deputy prime minister Angela Rayner and health secretary Streeting are seen as potential leadership contenders, although both are yet to make a move against the prime minister.

Greater Manchester mayor Andy Burnham is also seen as candidate, although he is still not an MP after Sir Keir prevented him from becoming Labour’s candidate in February’s Gorton and Denton by-election.

On Sunday, Ms Rayner said that Labour’s approach “isn’t working, and it needs to change”, adding that the party should not have blocked Mr Burnham from attempting to become an MP.

Labour MP Catherine West called on cabinet members over the weekend to challenge Sir Keir by Monday, threatening to start formally gathering names to trigger a contest.

After Sir Keir’s speech on Monday morning, in which he vowed to prove doubters wrong and would not “walk away”, Ms West backed down from leadership bid, but urged Labour MPs to call on the prime minister to set out a timetable for his resignation by September.

The growing list of Parliamentary Labour Party (PLP) members who have spoken out against the prime minister goes beyond the list of usually vocal opponents, echoing the 100-plus strong rebellion over welfare cuts that the cabinet faced last July.

Among them are former transport secretary Louise Haigh, former shadow chancellor John McDonnell and veteran MP Barry Gardiner.

Labour was elected with 411 seats at the 2024 general election – a 174-seat majority – marking the best performance for the party since 2001. With this many sitting MPs, it technically becomes harder for a leadership challenge to be launched against the prime minister, as 20 per cent of these members would be needed to nominate a contender, which translates to 81 MPs.

However, with the figure of Labour MPs voicing their calls publicly, it will be cause for huge concern within Downing Street.

Full list of Labour MPs to either call on Sir Keir to quit immediately or a timetable for his resignation.

A new range of products will be rolled out across Morrisons stores throughout May

Morrisons has made a major change across a range of products sold across its supermarkets in a bid to send a “vital message” to shoppers.

In partnership with the NHS, Morrisons has now begun placing cancer advice on its own-brand bath and shower products. Shoppers will be able to see clear advice printed on the bottles, which will urge them to look out for lumps, skin changes and unexplained bruising upon their bodies.

The supermarket’s new range will also feature messages, including “Be body aware” and “Know the signs of cancer”. They will begin to appear in about 450 Morrisons stores, as well as online, throughout May.

Click here to get the biggest stories straight to your inbox in our Daily Newsletter

David Scott, Corporate Affairs Director at Morrisons, said: “We are proud to be partnering with the NHS again to raise awareness of the symptoms of cancer through the new body awareness messages on our own brand bath and shower products.

“The messaging highlights the importance of spotting the symptoms early and encouraging people to reach out to their GP if something does not feel right, both of which can lead to earlier treatment and ultimately saving lives. It is a vital message and we believe in the importance of helping the NHS reach as many customers as possible to encourage them to get checked and be body aware.”

Ed, who was 27 when he noticed a dull ache in his right testicle, has shared his support for the supermarket’s new range. He first noticed the pain in summer 2024 and when it became sharper a few months later, he got it checked.

He was then diagnosed with testicular cancer after a blood test and ultrasound. After surgery and a short round of chemotherapy, Ed was told he was cancer free within three months.

Ed said: “You just never expect to hear the words ‘you’ve got cancer’, and for me it was a total shock. Thankfully, because I found it early, scans showed that it hadn’t spread anywhere else.

“I went through surgery within weeks and, to give myself the best chance of it not returning, I completed a short round of chemotherapy. Less than three months after my diagnosis, I was told I was cancer free.

“Having NHS messaging on things like shower gels is a great way to get across an important reminder to check for cancer while you might be washing in the privacy of a bathroom.

Advertisement

“It’s especially key for something like testicular cancer, which can easily go unnoticed if you’re not paying attention to your body and checking yourself regularly.

“If you do find something, it’s important not to be embarrassed about it – it could be nothing at all, but it’s always better to get it checked.”

Professor Peter Johnson, national clinical director for cancer at NHS England, added: “If you notice a lump, swelling, skin change or anything else that doesn’t look or feel right while you’re in the bath or shower, please contact your GP practice.

“This campaign is about turning an everyday routine into a simple health check reminder, helping people know their bodies better and spot possible signs of cancer earlier. In most cases it won’t be cancer but, if it is, finding it early can make all the difference.”

An NHS spokesman said it was open to working with other supermarkets who may wish to add labels to their products. Morrisons’ initiative also follows a previous Morrisons and NHS campaign to feature breast and testicular cancer advice on the supermarket’s Nutmeg branded underwear.

There would be no winning goal, though, after Spurs goalkeeper Antonin Kinsky thwarted Sean Longstaff’s powerful stoppage-time strike before a late penalty appeal for Lukas Nmecha’s tackle on Maddison was turned down to leave Tottenham only two points above the bottom three.

The 17-year-old – who cannot be named – was charged with nine separate offences, including causing serious injury by dangerous driving, possession of an offensive weapon, and aggravated vehicle taking.

The collision took place on Walker Fold Road, Smithills, on Tuesday, May 5.

The crash occurred at around 6:25pm (Image: Phil Taylor)

He will appear at Manchester Magistrates’ court tomorrow (May 12).

Greater Manchester Police said: “A boy has been charged following a serious collision on Walker Fold Road, Bolton on Tuesday 5 May.

“A 17-year-old, who cannot be named for legal reasons, was charged with the following offences:

• Causing serious injury by dangerous driving
• Aggravated vehicle taking
• Failing to stop
• Failing to provide a specimen of analysis
• Possession of cannabis
• Possession of an offensive weapon x2
• Possess with intent to supply a controlled drug of Class A x2

“He was bailed but was subsequently further charged with a breach of court bail.

The location of last night’s crash (Image: Phil Taylor)

“He will next appear at Manchester Magistrates Court tomorrow (12 May 2026).”

The incident occurred on Walker Fold Road at around 6.30pm on Tuesday, May 5.

The location of last night’s crash (Image: Phil Taylor)

The 17-year-old girl in the car with the boy received ‘severe, life-threatening injuries’ and was treated at the scene.

A 19-year-old man and an 18-year-old female were also arrested on the scene. Police have been approached for more information on these two arrests.

They were treated for minor injuries.

Record View says the party must must forge a distinctive Scottish path of its own if it is to rebuild post election.

Independence – from Keir chaos

Anas Sarwar tried his best to distance Scottish Labour from the chaos that has periodically engulfed the UK Government since 2024. He even went as far as to call for Keir Starmer to resign as Prime Minister.

Ultimately, it made little difference as many Scots voters had made up their minds on Labour’s performance in the Commons. They don’t like Starmer or his ­Government and were put off voting for Labour at last week’s election as a result.

Starmer was far from the only reason the SNP was re-elected for an unprecedented fifth term but the scale of his unpopularity cannot be denied.

Whether it takes six days, six weeks or six months, the PM will eventually bow to the inevitable and announce he’s making way for someone else.

Scottish Labour in the meantime must take stock of the fact the party has not won a Holyrood election since 2003. It faced an energetic and hardworking SNP brimming with ideas in a couple of those elections.

This time round it faced a tired and lumbering Nationalist government that many Scots are fed up with – hence a turnout of just 53 per cent last week – but still managed to lose heavily.

Perhaps it’s time for Scottish Labour to back its own independence in the form of breaking from the UK party.

A standalone Scottish Labour could contest elections on a policy platform created by and for Scots, with no possibility of being overruled by bosses down south.

The party must forge a distinctive Scottish path of its own if it is to rebuild.

Sticking point

Scottish politics looks like being stuck in the same loop for another five years.

The SNP will demand IndyRef2 and the UK Government will turn down its request. A refusal will be used as a campaigning tool and the SNP will hold on to its large core support of pro-independence backers.

Labour MSP Paul Sweeney’s suggestion of a cross-party convention to agree a trigger point for IndyRef2 is therefore welcome. One party, the SNP, should not be allowed to dictate the terms of such an important vote.

Nor should the pro-UK parties be allowed to get away with sticking their fingers in their ears forever. A mature compromise would be an agreed approach to a second referendum linked to various milestones being met.

An impasse has developed at Holyrood that is stopping political parties from working together.

A new cross-party agreement on IndyRef2 could break the logjam and act as a path to a better politics.

Get more Daily Record exclusives by signing up for free to Google’s preferred sources. Click HERE.