NEW YORK (AP) — Democratic leaders, desperate to compete in red states where their party brand is toxic, are embracing something new this midterm season: Not backing Democrats.

In states like Nebraska, Idaho and Alaska, Democratic officials are, in some cases, looking past their own party’s candidates while subtly encouraging — or even openly promoting — independent candidates they hope can outperform the Democratic label. The Democratic National Committee and some of its allies in Washington are quietly supporting the new strategy.

Meanwhile, some of the independent candidates are chatting in a group text about their approach as they plot a path that could shake up Congress, which is consumed by partisan gridlock.

Nebraska Democrats this week chose a nominee for U.S. Senate, Cindy Burbank, who said a major campaign priority was to ensure a Democrat wouldn’t be on the fall ballot to pull support from independent Dan Osborn. Shortly after polls closed, Burbank reiterated her plan to drop out in the coming weeks during a private conversation with a party official, according to state Democratic chair Jane Kleeb.

Democratic leaders believe Osborn, who came within 7 points of winning a Senate seat in 2024, has the best chance to defeat Republican Sen. Pete Ricketts.

Democrats’ pivot toward independents is part of an intentional strategy in some places — and something closer to a wink and a nod in others — that covers a handful of high-profile Senate and House and even statehouse contests. Independent Senate candidates are also running in states like Idaho, South Dakota and Montana, where Democratic leadership has so far been unwilling to fully embrace the independents, although many view them as the Democrats’ best chance to stop Republicans this fall.

“For some states, and Nebraska is one of them, where Democrats are 32% of the electorate, this is a long-term strategy for us,” said Kleeb, who also serves as a vice chair to the Democratic National Committee.

Kleeb said her state party is backing independents in at least four state legislative seats in addition to the U.S. Senate: “We have to build a coalition with independents in order to win elections so we can do good work for the people. Period.”

Some of the Democratic Party’s national political machine appears to be on board.

The Democrats’ fundraising site, ActBlue, serves some of the independent candidates, as do popular Democratic-allied website builders. At the same time, some of the party’s campaign committees in Washington quietly provide logistical support in some cases, while avoiding public criticism of the independent candidates even in some races where there is a Democratic nominee.

“The Democratic Party’s brand is awful right now,” said Democratic strategist Josh Schwerin. “The combination of the brand problem and the existential nature of the threat that our country is facing requires us to have a big tent and look for candidates who can win.”

There are risks

for the Democratic Party

Some Democratic donors, strategists and party leaders from other states have privately pushed back, insisting Democrats should not look past their own nominees for short-term political gain. They want Democratic officials, in Washington and on the ground in red states, to work harder to make the Democratic brand more attractive — even if it takes several more years to be competitive.

“What’s the independent going to do for the Democratic Party if they win?” asked Democratic strategist Mike Ceraso, who sees the shift toward independents as an attempt to disguise Democrats in some cases. “We’re the party of truth and honesty and integrity, but we’re playing these stupid political games?”

And there is no guarantee that the independent candidates, if elected, would support all of the Democrats’ policy priorities or even Democratic leadership in Congress.

In Idaho, independent Senate candidate Todd Achilles, an Army veteran and former Democratic state legislator, said he won’t be caucusing with either party if elected. He explained his politics as “straight down the middle,” and said he believes in individual liberties.

“Idahoans should be able to live how they want,” he said. But the Democratic Party was a bad fit because it “has given up on little red states like Idaho.”

On his list of problems with Democrats is that the party made a big mistake by initially running Joe Biden again for president in 2024. But he also said “the shine is coming off” Trump, whom Idaho voters backed by 36 points in 2024.

Achilles said he and other military veterans running for Senate as independents chat in the text chain and are “very much on the same page.” He says the group wants to see “guardrails,” including term and age limits and campaign finance reform.

“The priority is to get Congress functioning again,” he said. “We gotta break the grip of the two-party system.”

‘I’ll never vote for a Democrat’

In South Dakota, Navy and Air Force veteran Brian Bengs has launched an independent bid to defeat Republican incumbent Sen. Mike Rounds, who’s seeking a third term this fall.

Bengs ran as a Democrat against Senate Majority Leader John Thune four years ago and lost by 43 points.

A lifelong independent, he said he got turned down by the party this time when he sought to run with its organizational support but without the label. Still, he insists he can win without the party’s formal backing.

One key lesson from his 2022 campaign, he says, was how hard it was to break through with the Democratic Party label.

Voters would immediately ask, “What are you?” he recalled.

“When you say, ‘I’m a lifelong independent running as a Democrat,’” Bengs said, the response was quick. “‘I’ll never vote for a Democrat.’ And that was it,” he said.

“So that takeaway soured me on running again in any party system, because it was just a soul-sucking experience.”

In Alaska, some Democrats believe that commercial fisherman Bill Hill, a retired school superintendent, may represent their best hope in defeating first-term Republican Rep. Nick Begich for the state’s only House seat.

Hill, a lifelong independent, raised more than $780,000 in the first three months of the year, besting Democrat Matt Schultz, a pastor, who raised $578,000.

The state Democratic Party declined to endorse Schultz at its recent convention, which Hill also attended. The House Democrats’ campaign committee in Washington has also declined so far to promote Schultz’s candidacy. Hill, meanwhile, is racking up local union endorsements.

Hill’s message to voters, he said, is the same for Republicans, Democrats and independents: “You need to be pragmatic about who you choose to support in this election cycle, because at the end of the day, we need a change in the House seat in Alaska.”

A spokeswoman for the National Republican Senatorial Committee criticized independents like Osborn, Bengs, Achilles and Seth Bodnar, who is running in Montana, as “fake Independents who would push liberal Democratic policies in the Senate.”

Currently, there are two independents in the Senate: Maine Sen. Angus King and Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders. Both caucus with Democrats.

In an interview, Hill said he’s unlikely to caucus with Republicans in Washington if elected, but he’s not committing to joining Democrats either. He was reluctant to criticize the Democratic Party or Trump.

Hill acknowledged the challenge of running for Congress as an independent, but said there are benefits, too.

“There’s freedom,” he said. “I can truly represent the working people of Alaska.”

Manchester City felt like favourites coming into the FA Youth Cup final. The Under-18s have been the best team in the league this season again and had star quality they could bring in for knockout games that have spent the season training and playing up.

In the case of Ryan McAidoo, there was a winger who had scored on his senior debut for City and on the opposite flank Reigan Heskey had also given United Under-21s plenty of problems last week in a semi-final defeat. These were two of the players who everybody in the squad knew would be in the starting XI as soon as Oliver Reiss’s side had booked their place in the final.

However, they were also strong favourites last year when they went to Aston Villa on an obscene run of 27 games won in a row and then proceeded to lose. Shortly after, they lost the league championship match to the same opponents and a phenomenal season had a sour ending.

Click here to find out the latest Manchester United news in our daily newsletter

As good as City were then ahead of facing local rivals United – 40 years on from the first Manchester derby to grace the FA Youth Cup final – there was that nagging doubt in the mind of Reiss and his players: what if they lost again? What if all the high standards of the last nine months led to no silverware again?

Those doubts were enough to make sure that City made full use of the home advantage that they kept despite not having the Etihad available to play at. The players are far more at home with the Joie Stadium than they would have been at Old Trafford, yet still the squad went the extra mile and trained on the pitch ahead of the game rather than their usual spots at the training ground.

And while Reiss wanted to build the game up for the young Blues, he deliberately did not tell any of his players that Pep Guardiola was among the watching crowd on the night. They found out for the first time after the match, meaning they had not had to process that during the game and risk it impacting their performance.

There were nerves out there regardless, and that manifested physically for several players as the celebrations for Heskey’s late winner turned into a mass stretch before Heskey and McAidoo were replaced with cramp. Another player went down at the full-time whistle as the bodies of the players betrayed their state.

“I think the main part of the cramps maybe at the end were of course the energy and the intensity we had in the second half but also again when you are a little bit nervous, everything is a little tougher for your body and that’s why it’s so important to play in these games where we have a little more pressure, there are more supporters around us and things like this,” said Reiss.

“This is also the reason why we are not talking about, ‘Hey guys, stay calm, it’s a normal game.’ It isn’t a normal game, so I like to increase it a little bit, to make it maybe bigger – not bigger than it is, but just to be realistic, it is a big game, and a lot of people are watching, and this is what happens with you here. But next time it’s not the first time again, so this is then development and learning, and they need games like this to develop, especially these things.”

Reiss has known all season of the special talents at his disposal – particularly for this competition – but he also learned from the final defeats last year that such individual skill is not enough. The team were not enough of a collective, and that has been addressed this season.

The spirit in the group has been excellent all year, and Reiss has put more emphasis on the players simply enjoying being in training together with their mates. High standards have always been demanded, but steps were taken consciously to make sure it has been an environment where the players can enjoy their football and being with each other.

If Heskey’s winner took the headlines, the goal was made by left-back Jake Wain pouncing on a loose ball near the centre-circle and first playing McAidoo through in the box and then receiving the ball back and slipping it to his other winger. Wain’s only previous minutes in the competition this season were two minutes against Fulham and six against Everton, yet a player who has not been one of their most regular contributors saved one of his best moments for the biggest occasion.

For all the controversy around not playing the game at a big stadium, Reiss had made clear that winning is an important part of development as well. Especially after losing those finals, getting over the line in whatever fashion possible feels significant to the players.

“I’m over the moon,” said captain Kaden Braithwaite. “Obviously, last year we fell so short, so to do it this year with this group of players is a real good feeling. Obviously I think this year we’re as close as ever, our group is as close as ever. The relationships we have are worth a whole life, so yeah, we’re so good to do with the team we have.

“I feel like football, especially in the academy, you need to be winners – that’s what drives you to the next point of your career. So obviously to win today is a really good feeling and a step forward in the right direction.

“Everyone has different pathways, the next step for all of us is to play professional football at the end of the day, no matter how long it takes us, we all want to be at the top and we’ll all give 100% to be on that top, so yeah I think that’s the next step.”

Before that, two days of celebrating and then another final awaits as City head down to Stamford Bridge next Friday to face Chelsea. That will be another tough test against one of the best academy sides in the country, but once again City will feel ready for it – and now those nagging doubts about winning will have gone away.

Indonesia’s first giant panda cub is thriving and preparing for his public debut later this month, veterinarians have confirmed.

The furry cub, nicknamed “Rio,” was observed squirming during a recent check-up where his hearing and eyesight were assessed, confirming his healthy development.

At 169 days old, Satrio Wiratama, or Rio, now weighs 10 kilograms (22 pounds) and has begun walking independently, climbing on his mother, and sampling bamboo shoots. His growth, particularly his teeth, is noted to be faster than average.

Veterinarians are closely monitoring his progress to ensure he adapts well to crowds ahead of his introduction at the Indonesian Safari Park, located outside the capital, Jakarta.

Bongot Huaso Mulia, a veterinarian overseeing Rio’s development, stated: “What’s important to note is that all of Rio’s senses are active; he has the ability to understand the environment, assess the situation, adapt to more people, and hear sounds, even in certain levels of noise. We will train him gradually.”

Rio was born on 27 November to 15-year-old pandas Hu Chun and Cai Tao. The pair arrived in Indonesia in 2017 as part of a 10-year conservation partnership with China, residing in a specially built enclosure at the park in Cisarua, West Java province, approximately 70 kilometres (43 miles) from the capital.

The two adult pandas have a large fan base in Indonesia. Rio’s birth has drawn many panda enthusiasts, and his public debut has been eagerly anticipated, with numerous requests on social media to see him soon.

The three of them are living in a three-tier temple known as the Panda Palace on a hill surrounded by about 5,000 square meters of land (1.2 acres) and equipped with an elevator, sleeping area, medical facilities and indoor and outdoor play areas.

Rio’s name symbolizes the hope, resilience, and shared commitment of Indonesia and China in protecting endangered species.

Pandas are China’s unofficial mascot and Beijing‘s loans of the animals to overseas zoos have long been seen as soft-power “panda diplomacy.”

Giant pandas have difficulty breeding and births are particularly welcomed. There are less than 1,900 giant pandas in their only wild habitats in the Chinese provinces of Sichuan, Shaanxi and Gansu.

Rio was born through artificial insemination. Besides having a new individual, Rio also provides new genetic data on giant pandas, which can help research in Indonesia and in China, said Aswin Sumampau, president director of the park.

“This is the moment we’ve all been waiting for, a small victory for us, as we’ve managed to breed a species that is extremely difficult to breed.

“Just imagine, for the past two years, no pandas were born at any ex-situ conservation facility worldwide. Taman Safari has managed to do that,” Sumampau said.

Sebastian Sawe ripped open a carbohydrate gel sachet and slurped it five minutes before the start of the 2026 London Marathon. Sixty minutes later, he inhaled another one before smashing through the two-hour marathon barrier.

Sawe might have been the first sub-two-hour marathon runner, but he’s certainly not the first to be powered by an energy gel. It’s estimated that over 70% of marathon runners use gels.

Long before energy gels were a thing, endurance athletes used all sorts of foods to fuel their athletic feats – from sugar lumps and coffee, to chocolate, beer, wine and even egg whites and brandy.

But from the 1970s scientists caught up with athletic practice. Research demonstrated that carbohydrates were effective in fuelling prolonged endurance exercise, with foods containing glucose and fructose (forms of sugar) proving to be the most effective fuels.

Thanks to decades of research, athletes today can use energy gels to provide fuel. These are precise, scientifically-calibrated carbohydrates in the form of maltodextrin and fructose blends encapsulated in a hydrogel.

But while these modern gels promise fast energy and improved performance, not all scientists are convinced they live up to the hype – and for many athletes, they come with uncomfortable side-effects.

So are gels really worth it, or should athletes stick to simpler, if less glamorous, sources of fuel?

Fuelling with energy gels

When we eat a meal, our bodies steadily breakdown the carbohydrates from food in the stomach. These carbohydrates are then gradually turned into glucose (simple sugar) in the blood.

Glucose is typically then transported to the muscles and liver where it’s stored as glycogen. This makes it easy for the body to access the stored energy when needed.

But our glycogen stores only last around 90 minutes before being depleted. Once it runs out, it can affect your performance. So many endurance athletes need to reach for carbs during long races and training runs to ensure they don’t run critically low on fuel.

In practical terms, energy gels offer a fast, convenient and concentrated source of carbohydrates that can be consumed mid-race without slowing down. Compared with whole foods, they’re easier to digest and more precisely dosed, helping runners maintain a steady energy supply.

However, this convenience comes at a cost. Gels can be expensive, some athletes find them unpalatable and they’re often associated with gastrointestinal discomfort – especially when taken in large amounts or without sufficient water.

Simpler options such as sports drinks or sugary foods may deliver similar energy, but typically lack the portability and precision that gels provide.

Research also shows there’s a lot of variation between available products. A survey of 31 gel product ranges (51 flavours total) across 23 brands found extreme variation in serving size, carbohydrate content, free sugars and especially osmolality (how concentrated a solution is). This has implications for how and when you should use gels and the effects they might have on your body.

Gels also may not really offer any additional benefits over other products, such as sports drinks.

A 2010 study found that gels and drinks deliver carbohydrates to the muscle at the same rate. This was later supported by a 2022 study which found drinks, gels and chews ingested were also no different in the benefits they conferred.

The only real advantage of using gels is their convenience, as they can be easily stored and consumed mid-run.

Gels may also have downsides. The most commonly reported issue is gastrointestinal distress, affecting around 10-20% of people according to one study.

Hydrogel drinks and products form gels in the stomach. The idea is that by encapsulating carbohydrates it helps to reduce the amount of water that crosses the intestinal barrier. This is supposed to prevent bloating and cramps. It’s also claimed that this enables more effective transport of carbs into the bloodstream.

But studies have not consistently shown better performance or less gastrointestinal distress compared with standard carbohydrates, even when calories are matched.

Concentrated gels make their way to small intestine but their sugar concentration is higher than surrounding blood and tissue so water is pulled into the gut. This may be why gels cause bloating and cramps if you don’t drink water alongside them.

How to use gels effectively

If your run is under 60 minutes, you probably don’t need gels.

If your run is 60-90 minutes or more, fuel before you feel empty. Aim for around 30-60g of carbs per hour.

Even if you don’t feel hungry, taking on small, regular amounts of carbohydrate – for example a few sips or a partial gel every 15–20 minutes – can help maintain energy levels before fatigue sets in

For very long races, you should aim for around 60-90g of carbs per hour. A mix of glucose and fructose appears to be most useful when intensity is high.

The most important thing is to test gels while training. Don’t use them for the first time on race day. This is to ensure your body can tolerate them and you know whether they effectively benefit your performance or not.

A small proportion of runners are much more prone to gastrointestinal issues, so if you experience this switching brands can make a big difference.

But if you find gels bother you no matter what, you could always reach for some of the foods endurance athletes used before gels were ever a thing – such as bread, fruit, sugar lumps, bananas, dates and rice cakes. Just make sure you practice with these in training as well to know how they work for your body.

While these foods work well when training at lower intensities, gels remain popular because they provide standardised dosing and are easy to consume at speed.

In the US state park of Robbers Cave, Oklahoma, Carolyn Wood Sherif is standing squinting up at the sun. The two wooden cabins before her rattle with shrieks and cries from excited 11-year-old boys. They have been split into two groups of 11 and encouraged to bond.

Over three long, laborious weeks in the summer of 1954, Wood Sherif watches as these boys become enthusiastically dedicated to their allocated groups. When instructed to compete for resources, they grow hostile towards their opponents. The experiment descends into inter-group violence and aggression.

This research was among the first naturalistic psychological studies to show how group formation can lead to prejudice and intense conflict. It is considered a classic study upon which the subdiscipline of social psychology – how mind and behaviour are influenced by the presence of other people – was born. Wood Sherif should have made her academic career from it.

But in many ways, scientific research is a culture, a club. There are people with the power to warmly invite others to participate, and others who are intentionally kept out. Many female scientists have suffered because of this power imbalance.

‘A wife helping her husband’

Wood Sherif ran the Robbers Cave study with her longstanding collaborator, colleague and husband, Muzafer Sherif. Yet while he enjoyed an illustrious career, her intellectual contributions to social psychology were literally written out of the historical record.

Wood started working as Sherif’s research assistant in 1944. At the time, his department at Princeton University did not allow women to be faculty members or graduate students, but he had the power to make an exception. They married a year later.

The pair collaborated extensively for over a decade. Wood Sherif was often the driving force behind their research, yet her scientific writing was often attributed solely to her husband. Wood Sherif’s name was removed from academic papers when they were circulated. “I was seen as a wife helping her husband,” she later recalled.

After her husband was awarded the American Psychological Association’s Distinguished Scientific Contribution Award in 1968, Wood Sherif began to realise that social psychology might never welcome her in the same way. She joined the American women’s movement, a national campaign for legal, social and political gender equality. This connected her with more women in her discipline who were having similar frustrated experiences. Finally, Wood Sherif found a welcoming academic home.

She turned her focus sharply to identifying and exposing the presence of bias in psychology. Her core thesis was that it was flawed because most research was based on men’s experiences and treated male behaviour as the “normal” standard, leading to distorted and damaging views of women.

This series is dedicated to lesser-known, highly influential scientists who have had a powerful influence on the careers and research paths of many others, including the authors of these articles.

In 1979, Wood Sherif wrote my favourite psychological paper of all time. The paper, titled Bias in Psychology, offered a demolition job of psychological science over 16 glorious pages.

She warned that psychologists had gone awry by attempting to mimic the methodologies of the “hard sciences”, such as physics and chemistry, without first considering how these standards did not naturally apply to the scientific study of human beings in context.

Wood Sherif argued that people should be studied within their social context. She criticised psychologists for reducing complex human experiences into compartmentalised units that might have been easier to study, but were disconnected from real life.

She explicitly rejected the discipline’s reliance on experimental methods. Rather, she implored her peers to embrace the messy human aspects of their work in order for it to be useful, writing:

What goes on in our laboratories, clinics and classrooms must be seen for what it is: cultural phenomena and events where we can learn about individuals, provided we understand the times and the larger societies of which they are parts.

Wood Sherif set the agenda for a new, critical subdiscipline: feminist psychology. This includes analyses of how gender shapes both our experiences as people and the work we do as psychologists. Longstanding male bias in psychology has served as its manifesto.

As she pivoted away from social psychology, Wood Sherif’s work became funny, personal and prophetic. In their 1998 reappraisal of her seminal 1979 paper, psychologists Rhoda Unger and Arnold Kahn noted how her writing “provokes and excites as well as amuses”.

Sadly, this writing was also largely ignored. Cited predominately by feminist scholars, it never gained the discipline-wide impact it deserved.

The story of Wood Sherif, and psychology’s longstanding rejection of her work, has had a powerful impact on me. She helped me understand that we cannot evaluate the state of our science without first evaluating who is welcome within it. This is the crux of my own research, which I categorise as “feminist metascience”.

The garden of forking paths

Wood Sherif died in 1982 aged 60, but her ideas are arguably more relevant now than ever. Following widespread concerns about the replicability of psychological research in the 2010s, many psychologists are realising their research may be less objective than was previously believed.

Issues such as confirmation bias and the “garden of forking paths” (the many flexible decisions researchers make during analysis that can produce misleading results) are receiving widespread attention.

But while psychology is now in an era of science reform, there are two parallel conversations going on – by those who continue to insist upon reproducibility to strengthen psychological research, and those trying to reform the science as communal, compassionate and open to issues of bias.

The latter approach has been championed by a new generation of women in the discipline. They are forced to repeat the same critiques Wood Sherif made decades ago, because her warnings about bias and objectivity were not heeded.

There are, of course, many other examples of women’s contributions being written out of the scientific record. As I document in my new book Absent Minds: The Untold Story of the Women who Changed Psychology Forever, women have time and again been relegated to supporting roles as wives, secretaries or assistants of scientists, rather than scholars in their own right.

There is one, simple, enduring lesson that stories like Wood Sherif’s tell us: listen to women.

This article features a reference to a book included for editorial reasons, and a link to bookshop.org. If you click on this link and go on to buy something from bookshop.org, The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

As a subscriber, you are shown 80% less display advertising when reading our
articles.

Those ads you do see are predominantly from local businesses promoting local
services.

These adverts enable local businesses to get in front of their target audience – the local
community.

It is important that we continue to promote these adverts as our local businesses need
as much support as possible during these challenging times.

The Syed Taalay Ahmed Memorial Shield Tournament, taking place in Hartlepool, will honour the late Syed Taalay Ahmed.

It will also raise funds for charities, taking place at High Tunstall College of Science, the former school of Syed Taalay Ahmed, on May 16 from 11am to 4pm.

Syed Taalay Ahmed (Image: MTA)

Now in its fourth year, the event has raised more than £13,000 since 2023.

Syed Taalay Ahmed, a respected journalist, humanitarian and member of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community, was killed at the age of 31 in an armed ambush while filming a humanitarian documentary in Ghana.

Organisers said: “This year is especially poignant as the tournament returns to Hartlepool and to High Tunstall College of Science, where Taalay himself studied.

“It is an opportunity not only to remember his remarkable life but to continue the charitable work and values he dedicated himself to.”

Syed Taalay Ahmed (Image: Supplied)

A proud Hartlepudlian, Mr Ahmed played cricket for Hartlepool Cricket Club, Wolviston Cricket Club and Hartlepool Power Station Cricket Club.

He also played football for The Gents FC, earning respect across the sports community.

Funds raised this year will support three causes.

The Syed Taalay Ahmed Memorial Shield Tournament will take place in Hartlepool (Image: Supplied)

The first is The Syed Taalay Ahmed Scholarship, which helps underprivileged young people in Ghana access education.

The second is Alice House Hospice, which supports people with life-limiting illnesses across Hartlepool.

The third is Hartlepool Baby Bank, which provides essential supplies for families in need.

Members of the public are encouraged to attend and support the event.

For more information, sponsorship opportunities or to donate, visit the fundraising page at www.justgiving.com/team/syedtaalay2026.

A Which? pensions expert shared three methods anyone can use to boost their pension, plus advice for people in their twenties

A pensions expert has explained how much people could gain by increasing their contributions from a young age. According to Which? pensions expert Holly Lanyon, even small amounts can make a big difference if you ‘start early’.

Appearing in a video shared on @Whichuk’s TikTok page, the expert explained just how much people could gain if they start boosting their contributions in their twenties. The post was titled: “Three simple ways you can boost your pension.” In the post, Holly explained: “Here are three ways you can boost your pension.

“Increasing your contributions, even by a small amount, can make a big difference over time, especially if you start early. Just to give you an idea, if you were earning £25,000 and you increased your contributions from the minimum of 5% of your salary to 7% from the age of 22, you could end up with a pot worth an extra £52,000.”

She continued: “Adjusted for inflation, by the age of 68, this rises to an extra £79,000 if you contribute 8%. Some employers will even match your contributions, which will further boost your pot.”

Sharing further advice, Holly urged viewers to make sure they get every pound they are entitled to. “Basic rate taxpayers usually get tax relief added to their pension contributions automatically.

“So if you wanted to top up your pension by £100, you’d only need to pay in £80 as the government would add £20. If you’re a higher or additional rate taxpayer, you may need to proactively claim the extra tax relief you’re entitled to by heading to the HMRC website,” she explained.

The expert concluded: “Sacrificing a part of your salary isn’t about rituals, offerings or spells. It’s a brilliant way to boost your pension pot and reduce the National Insurance you have to pay.

“There’s currently no limit on the amount that you can pay into your pension using salary sacrifice, but from April 2029, an annual cap of £2,000 will apply. You’ll still be able to pay more than this into your pension, but contributions above the cap will no longer be exempt from National Insurance.”

Advertisement

In the caption, Which? wrote: “Three simple pension changes could make a major difference to your retirement savings. It might be tempting to cut or stop payments if money gets tight, but this could end up costing you in the long run.

“Better still, if you can afford to make extra contributions from time to time – for example, after receiving a bonus – it could significantly boost your pension over the long term.”

Netflix’s latest true crime film examines the theories behind Mackenzie Shirilla’s case and ‘why did she do it’

Advertisement

Netflix’s latest true crime documentary explores several theories surrounding an extraordinary car crash case, though some questions still remain unanswered.

The shocking feature-length documentary, titled The Crash, has been streaming since this week (May 15) and is certain to keep armchair detectives thoroughly engrossed.

According to its synopsis, it examines the investigation that unfolded after a car carrying three young adults slammed into a brick building at 100 miles per hour in Strongsville, Ohio, leaving two dead and one seriously injured.

Dominic Russo and Davion Flanagan both died at the scene. Dom was the boyfriend of the driver, 17 year old Mackenzie Shirilla.

While it initially appeared to be a tragic accident, detectives soon uncovered something far more sinister. Shirilla was subsequently arrested, charged and convicted of murder. Although she could spend the remainder of her life behind bars, her parents continue to maintain her innocence, reports the Mirror.

They dispute the prosecution’s claim that Mackenzie deliberately drove the car into the wall. So what drove Mackenzie Shirilla to crash the vehicle? Here’s everything you need to know, according to the new Netflix documentary.

Why did Mackenzie Shirilla crash the car?

The Netflix documentary explores a number of theories as to why the car crash occurred. This encompasses arguments and suggestions put forward by both the prosecution and the defence team representing Mackenzie throughout the trial. According to an interview given to a local news station in 2025, Shirilla’s parents Steve and Natalie claim that their daughter suffered a medical event right before the crash and did not intentionally kill her boyfriend and friend. They say they had a neurologist review evidence.

However, neither this evidence nor testimony from an expert witness suggesting a medical episode was presented as a defence during the trial. Dominic’s mother Christine revealed that her son and Shirilla had been in a relationship for four years and moved in together in 2021.

His brother alleged that the couple had ‘broken up many times’ throughout their relationship. Christine also disclosed that her son’s relationship with Shirilla had become ‘strained’ in the months leading up to the crash. There were reported incidents of ‘fighting’ and a video circulated in which Shirilla threatened to break into her boyfriend’s house.

Get Netflix free with Sky

This article contains affiliate links, we will receive a commission on any sales we generate from it. Learn more

£5.99

£0

Sky

Get the deal here

Sky is giving away a free Netflix subscription with its new Sky Stream TV bundles, including the £15 Essential TV plan.

Advertisement

This lets members watch live and on-demand TV content without a satellite dish or aerial and includes hit shows like Stranger Things and The Last of Us.

Prosecutors ultimately argued that she deliberately crashed the car to kill Russo and bring their troubled relationship to an end. The evening before the crash, the three attended several gatherings with friends. Data retrieved from their phone activity indicates that they began making their way home at around 5:30 a.m.

While the journey started without incident, the vehicle accelerated sharply just minutes before the crash. A forensic mechanical expert assisted with the investigation and analysed the car’s event data recorder, which is essentially the vehicle’s equivalent of a black box. The data revealed that the accelerator pedal was fully depressed with no application of the brake just seconds before the collision. This indicates that there was no attempt to lift a foot off the accelerator or apply the brakes.

The data also established that there was a sharp steering movement to the right, and the car shifted between neutral and drive in the moments preceding the crash. The reason for either of these occurrences remains unknown.

In the Netflix documentary, the lead prosecutor suggests the two victims may have been attempting to regain control of the vehicle. This has not been proven, and it could not be established whether it was the driver or a consequence of the car’s movement at speed.

Shirilla maintains she has no recollection of what occurred in the moments leading up to the crash. It was determined that she had traces of marijuana in her system, but nothing else.

The forensic expert further noted there was “no indication of any precrash mechanical or electrical failure that may have caused a loss of accelerator control, a loss of braking or a loss in the ability to steer the vehicle”.

While some questions may linger over the case, the Judge remained convinced. In her sentencing remarks, Judge Russ said: “This was not reckless driving. This was murder. The video clearly shows the purpose and intent of the defendant. She chose a course of death and destruction that day.” Shirilla received a sentence of 15 years to life for both murder charges. She is presently serving 15 years to life with the possibility of parole.

The Crash is streaming on Netflix

Connecting with nature is a desire many people share throughout the summer months and one scenic walk has been praised for its “magical” beauty – and it’s less than two hours from Cambridge

Advertisement

A “magical” walk has been praised for its ethereal beauty and connection to nature – and it’s less than a two hour drive from Cambridge city centre.

There’s a wealth of scenic and historic walks to enjoy throughout Cambridge but for those looking for something a little further afield, Norfolk may have the answer. A Norfolk mum keen to showcase the best the area has to offer recently praised a historic ruin with expansive grounds bathed in swathes of snowdrops.

This “beautiful” plant is recognised by its drooping, bell-like, bright white flowers, which create a delicate yet distinctive look.

The destination in question is Walsingham Abbey, a historic house in Walsingham, north Norfolk, which is also home to the ruins of a medieval priory, Our Lady of Walsingham. The Abbey’s grounds are a popular destination thanks to the abundance of snowdrops carpeting the surrounding woodlands.

The so-called “snowdrop season” at Walsingham Abbey typically lasts from late January until the end of October. In the springtime, the grounds are also home to daffodils, bluebells and wild garlic.

Mum Jes shared a video of a walk through Walsingham Abbey, showcasing the “amazing” snowdrops. Over the top of the footage, which was posted on TikTok, Jes added text which reads: “I think I just found the most magical place in Norfolk”.

In the caption, the mum elaborated: “If you’re looking for the prettiest spring walk in Norfolk, this is it. The medieval ruins [are] surrounded by thousands of snowdrops.”

The video has racked up hundreds of thousands of views, with fellow TikTok users flocking to the comments section to share their thoughts. One person said: “Ooohhhh I went a couple of years ago but it looks more amazing with snowdrops!”

Another said: “Wow nature is beautiful, what an amazing place” while a third commented: “I lived in Walsingham for 19 years, beautiful place to visit”.

Someone else took issue with the admission charge and said: “It’s lovely but £7.50 per person to go for a walk?”

To which, another replied: “Usually I agree but places like this are disappearing. The money helps upkeep the place. If it helps the environment, the wildlife, the insects, I’m all for it. It was only £6 last time we went though”.

And another shared: “It’s a shame there’s not proper funding for it, I appreciate the money goes towards the up keep and I’m glad it is still around”.

Getting there

Travelling by car is the simplest method and can take as little as 1 hour and 30 minutes, depending on traffic.

A common route is to head from Cambridge onto the A14 East/North, then the A11 towards Norwich. Pick up the A47 (towards King’s Lynn). Then, follow local roads via Fakenham to Little Walsingham (often A148/B1105 depending on sat-nav).

By public transport – Get the train from Cambridge King’s Lynn, then a bus to Fakenham. You’ll need to get another bus to Little Walsingham, or you can take a taxi.

Alternatively, visit by getting a train to Norwich (often via Ely). Get a bus to Fakenham from the city centre, then you can take more public transport or a taxi.