Connect with us

News

Michigan State Troopers caught attempting to plant drugs in bogus DUI arrest- alleges lawsuit. 

Published

on

Michigan State Troopers caught attempting to plant drugs in bogus DUI arrest- alleges lawsuit. 
YouTube video

Dakaria Larriett was driving a friend home at 3:00 in the morning when he saw the flash of a Michigan State Trooper’s siren. Although Larriett was stone-cold sober, he soon discovered this would not be enough to protect him. After accusing him of a minor traffic violation, Officer George Kanyuh began to speculate over Larriett’s sobriety. A lawsuit brought by Larriett alleges that, after subjecting Larriett to a series of sobriety field tests, Kanyuh spent over two minutes unsuccessfully looking for drugs in his patrol car to use as planted evidence against Larriett. Once this failed, Kanyuh and his partner, Matthew Okaiye, took Larriett into custody and forced him to endure even more humiliating ordeals at the police station—including requiring him to defecate in front of them. It’s only thanks to body camera footage that the truth of this incident was revealed, but there are countless cases of similar behavior by police across the country which has never come to light. Taya Graham and Stephen Janis of Police Accountability Report review the case and its implications, speaking directly with Dakaria Larriett about his ordeal.

Written by: Stephen Janis
Production: Stephen Janis, Taya Graham
Post-Production: Adam Coley


Transcript

The following is a rushed transcript and may contain errors. A proofread version will be made available as soon as possible.

Taya Graham:

Hello, my name is Taya Graham, and welcome to the Police Accountability Report. As I always make clear, this show has a single purpose, holding the politically powerful institution of policing accountable. And to do so, we don’t just focus on the bad behavior of individual cops. Instead, we examine the system that makes bad policing possible.

And today we’ll achieve that goal by showing you this video of a bogus DUI stop that led to the false arrest of a man who is still suffering from the consequences of it. A harrowing encounter with Michigan State troopers that led to questionable charges, a humiliating search, and allegations of an officer attempting to plant drugs. But, it also calls into question the whole idea of how DUIs are investigated, all of which we will break down for you as we unpack yet another problematic use of police powers.

Advertisement

And I want you watching to know that if you have video evidence of police misconduct, please email it to us privately at par@therealnews.com or reach out to me on Facebook or Twitter @TayasBaltimore and we might be able to investigate for you and please like, share, and comment on our videos. It helps us get the word out and it can even help our guests. And of course, you know I read your comments and appreciate them. You see those little hearts I give out down there. And I’ve even started doing a comment of the week to show you all how much I really appreciate your thoughts and to show off what a great community we have.

And of course, we have to thank our corporate sponsor. Oh wait, that’s right, we don’t run ads or take corporate dollars, but you can donate below, and we have a Patreon Accountability Report, so if you feel inspired to donate, please do, because we don’t run ads or take those corporate dollars, so anything you can spare is truly appreciated. All right, we’ve gotten that out of the way.

Now, there is no crime more potentially destructive or dangerous than driving while drunk here at the Police Accountability Report, we support efforts by law enforcement to prevent it. However, we have also noticed a troubling trend, as we’ve reported, on questionable DUI arrests across the country. Sometimes it seems that police are overly eager to charge someone driving while drunk, overreach that can have devastating consequences for the people subject to it.

And no DUI stop embodies this problem more than the video I’m showing you right now. It depicts the highly-suspect arrest of a Michigan man who’s being put through a grueling field sobriety test. Despite passing every facet of it, he still ended up in handcuffs, but that was only the beginning of his ordeal. That’s because even after his detainment, police weren’t done subjecting him to the cruelty and violations of our criminal justice system. The details of which we will share with you shortly, but first, the arrest itself.

Advertisement

This story starts in Benton Harbor, Michigan in April of 2024. There, Dakarai Larriett was driving a friend home at 3:00 A.M. when he was pulled over by a Michigan State trooper for, ostensibly, not coming to a stop for a flashing red light. An accusation Dakarai firmly denies. However, from the beginning, the officer began accusing him of being drunk. Take a look.

Kanyuh:

Hey, how you doing?

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

Good.

Kanyuh:

Good. You got a license on you?

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

Yep, it’s in my bag.

Kanyuh:

In the back?

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

In my bag.

Kanyuh:

Oh, go for it. Yeah, the reason I’m sobbing, there’s two red lights there. Make sure you come to a complete stop.

Thank you.

Advertisement

Where you coming from?

Dakarai Larriette:

St. Joe’s.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

St. Joe? Where are you trying to get?

Dakarai Larriette:

I’m dropping him off right here.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

Oh, okay. This address here? With the fence?

Okay. Do you have any paperwork for the vehicle?

Dakarai Larriette:

I’m sorry?

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Any paperwork for the vehicle like registration insurance?

Dakarai Larriette:

I do.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Can I see that please?

Dakarai Larriette:

Sure.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Does alcohol impact your ability to drive today?

Dakarai Larriette:

[inaudible 00:03:51]

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Okay. When was your last drink? Has it been at least two hours?

Dakarai Larriette:

Yes.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Okay. All right. Two hours you said? What was it specifically? Smelling fruity and a little bit of something else on you.

Dakarai Larriette:

There was no alcohol in on me.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

I can smell it on your breath. Something fruity like what were you drinking?

Dakarai Larriette:

There was no alcohol in here.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

No? But it’s been at least two hours.

Dakarai Larriette:

There’s no alcohol on me.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

All righty. Just hop out for me. I’m going to verify, okay.

Taya Graham:

Now Dakarai again politely denied the accusations. As you can see, he’s calm and collected in his answers. The officer did not accuse him of driving recklessly or swerving, instead, he simply ordered Dakarai to get out of the car as he continued to question him. Let’s watch.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

You do the open carry for protection at all or no?

Dakarai Larriette:

I don’t.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Okay. You should, it’s kind of crazy out here. Right back this way for me.

Why are you changing your story on that? I said two hours, and then I said I smell it on your breath, and now you’re denying it at all that’s suspicious to me.

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

I am not commenting any further. I’m not [inaudible 00:05:13].

Kanyuh:

Okay.

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

And so, it appears that based on a “fruity” smell and Dakarai invoking his right not to answer questions, the officer begins what can only be called the most potentially treacherous aspect of American DUI enforcement: the field sobriety test.

Now I want to make something clear before we watch, field sobriety tests are not as scientific as they’re portrayed. The six studies cited by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to justify the use of these tests were not peer reviewed, and reveal a harrowing number of false positives anywhere between 20-40% of the time. Nevertheless, it has become a key tool of law enforcement even though it is important to note that you can refuse to take it. Still, unfortunately, Dakarai is put through a grueling battery of examinations starting with the horizontal gaze test.

Kanyuh:

And then arms down at your side like a pencil dive. Yep, just remain like that and then don’t move until I tie you move. Okay? Do you understand those instructions?

Advertisement

Dakarai Larriette:

Yes.

Kanyuh:

Okay. Is there any reason why you couldn’t stand there like that?

Advertisement

Dakarai Larriette:

No.

Kanyuh:

Okay. Weird question I got to ask you. I’m going to check your eyes. What I want you to do is just follow the tip of my finger with only your eyes. Do not move your head, okay? Do you understand?

Advertisement

Is there any reason you couldn’t do that?

Dakarai Larriette:

No.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

Okay. Are you wearing contacts right now?

Dakarai Larriette:

I am.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

Okay. Same thing, just keep following with your eyes and only your eyes. You got to rub your eyes or something?

Dakarai Larriette:

No.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

Okay. You’re just not tracking it.

How long you had your contacts in?

Dakarai Larriette:

An hour or so.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Hour or so? So they’re not dry or anything?

Dakarai Larriette:

They’re fine.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

They’re fine? Okay.

Taya Graham:

Next, the officer asked Dakarai to do the so-called Walk-and-Turn Test, an assessment, by the way, that can generate false positives 30% of the time and, truthfully, isn’t easy. Take a look.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Good.

See this line here?

Yeah, we can use this line.

Advertisement

See this crack? Go ahead and stand on the crack with your left foot on it, and then your right foot in front of it, heel to toe. See how mine are heel to toe? Go ahead and do so.

When I tell you to do so, you’re going to take nine steps heel to toe, when you get to your ninth step, I want you to turn, taking a series of small steps, come nine heel-to-toe steps, back up that line, all the way to nine. It’s important you’re keeping your arms down at your side, you’re looking down at your toe, and you’re counting out loud. When you begin the test, don’t stop until you’ve completed it.

Taya Graham:

Now, even though he performs the test meticulously, the officer persists in putting him through even more stressful examinations. At this point it seems crystal clear Dakarai has no problem with doing exactly what the officer demands, but he still makes him continue.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Do you understand those instructions?

Dakarai Larriette:

Yes.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Okay. Is there any reason why you couldn’t do that?

Dakarai Larriette:

I don’t think so.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Okay, I’ll stand back here, and whenever you’re ready, you may begin.

Dakarai Larriette:

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 7, 3, 9.

Advertisement

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9.

Kanyuh:

Good.

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

But now, the officer ups the ante. That’s because even though Dakarai passes the so-called Standard Field Sobriety test endorsed by the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration, the officer turns to a battery of non-standard tests that are even less scientific, raising even more questions about the process that includes asking him to recite the alphabet. Let’s listen.

Kanyuh:

So you know your alphabet? Okay, I’m not having you say it backwards, that’s not a real thing. Can you say your alphabet starting at A as in Adam, stop at R as in Robert, A to R. Do you have that ability? Okay, go ahead and do so.

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

A-B-C-D-E-F-G-H-I-J-K-L-M-N-O-P-Q-R.

Kanyuh:

Good.

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

Then, venturing further into non-scientific territory, he asked Dakarai to count backwards.

Kanyuh:

Starting at the number 99. Can you count backwards from 99 to 81?

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

99, 98, 97, 96, 95, 94, 93, 92, 91, 90…

Taya Graham:

But Officer Kanyuh is not done, not hardly, because even though Dakarai passed each test flawlessly, the troop returns to another questionable exam, the One-Leg Stand Test, which once again has been accused of being non-scientific and inaccurate, 30% of the time.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

I want you to stand just like this again, the same drama we’ve always been doing. Good. Remain like that and then don’t move ’til how to move, okay? Do you understand these instructions? Okay. Is there any reason why you couldn’t do this? No? Okay. Whenever you’re ready, you may begin.

Dakarai Larriette:

[inaudible 00:10:22].

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

Remember to look down at that toe.

Dakarai Larriette:

[inaudible 00:10:36].

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

Now as each of these tests unfold one after another, I want you to think about how Dakarai is feeling.

First, he’s flawlessly following orders. One can only imagine how gut-wrenching it is taking these vague, imprecise, if not scientifically questionable, tests with your life hanging in the balance.

And even though he is clearly under duress, he is respectful and steady, and he is obviously not drunk and not high, and yet the endurance test continues with another scientifically-sketchy request that requires him to decide when 30 seconds has elapsed. Just watch.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

Go ahead and just take one step forward. Good. Hit same heels and toes touching just like this. Arms down at the side. When I tell you to do so, I want you to tilt your head back, close your eyes, and when you believe 30 seconds has passed, bring your head forward and say stop. Okay. Does that…

Dakarai Larriette:

Closing my eyes?

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

Yep, closing your eyes. When you believe 30 seconds has passed, look forward, say stop. You understand the instructions?

Dakarai Larriette:

I think so.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

Okay. Is there any reason why you couldn’t do that?

Dakarai Larriette:

No.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

Okay. Whenever you’re ready, begin.

How much time was that?

Dakarai Larriette:

About 30 seconds.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

And then how’d you get there?

Dakarai Larriette:

I’m sorry?

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Did you count 1, 2, 3? You didn’t do one Mississippi or anything like that?

Dakarai Larriette:

No.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Okay. So just 1, 2, 3. Okay, cool.

Taya Graham:

And there’s more. Yes, there’s more. The officer, not satisfied, veers into another non-standard test known as the Finger-to-Nose test, which again is non-standard and is not an accepted test from the National Highway Safety Administration. Still the officer persists. Just look.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

You’re going to keep your hands down to your side, and I’m going to call out an arm, so if I say left, you’re going to take your left arm… This is the tip of your finger. This is the tip of your finger and this is the pad of your finger. Okay? This is the difference. I want you to take the tip of your finger, the tip and touch, the tip of your nose.

Go ahead and tilt your head back and close your eyes. Left, right, left, right, right, left. Good. You follow me.

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

And finally, the officer asks Dakarai to incriminate himself, requiring that he assess his own drunkenness even though it appears he has passed every single test thrown at him. Just listen.

Kanyuh:

On a scale of zero to five, as far as five being unsafe to operate a motor vehicles the most drunk and high you’ve ever been, and then zero being sober, where are you at right now?

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

I don’t know. Is that relevant? I really know what you’re talking about.

Kanyuh:

It is relevant, but if you don’t want to answer it, I don’t care.

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

I have not had any alcohol.

Kanyuh:

Not had any alcohol.

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

I have not.

Kanyuh:

Okay. Now how about marijuana? Did you have had that?

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

Excuse me?

Kanyuh:

Marijuana?

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

I’m sorry, I didn’t understand. What did you say?

Kanyuh:

I said how about marijuana?

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

No.

Kanyuh:

No marijuana? No.

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

Okay. You want to hang out right here for me?

Taya Graham:

Now, apparently the officer has already reached his conclusion about Dakarai’s condition. You can listen here as he discusses it with another trooper who just arrived on the scene. It’s also a rare glimpse into how officers interpret a field sobriety test. Even if, for all intents and purposes, you passed, the point is it seems that no one passes.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

Booze and marijuana. His eyelids fluttered worse than that guy’s.

Okaiye:

He’s got neck pulsation too.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

He had numerous clues on the walk and turn like crazy

Okaiye:

I didn’t catch the standard, but you said walk and turn one night thing and all that?

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

One night stand was the wobbles [inaudible 00:14:52] was 23 seconds, fly with flutter, sways. Finger-nose. Terrible.

Okaiye:

What’s all that? Romberg?

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

99 to 81, he stopped at 89. So even his mental, short-term memory. He’s going to refuse and then search warrant, but…

Okaiye:

He’s showing?

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

In the driving.

Okaiye:

What do you think you? You think is just number [inaudible 00:15:14]?

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

I think he’s got a medication he’s not telling…

Okaiye:

He’s got medication and I’m guessing it’s a medication for… He may be… I think he’s got a medication for that. And with that would be consuming substances like THC, marijuana, alcohol, whatever. You know what that does.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

Yeah.

Okaiye:

Explaining what you’re seeing.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

His driving behavior, I saw lack of smooth pursuit, but he wasn’t very good at following my finger.

Okaiye:

Lack of smooth, and divided attention, abilities affected. Whenever you speak with him, he’s looking away and moving his head, so I think it’s a combination of THC for sure. I didn’t really evaluate him, but you can definitely see impairment for THC. And then I think in his medications, describing medications affecting it, too. It’s performing effects of I’m going to take them,

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

But let me play some audio for you here that brought to Kari a lot of concern. Apparently at roughly 3:25, officer Kanyuh can be seen on body cam rifling through the trunk of his squad car for about two minutes, and then the video goes dark. During those moments. Officer Okaiye seems to say, “Drugs?” And Officer Kanyuh responds, “I don’t think I have any, I had a stash in your somewhere, but I don’t know where it’s at.”

But you take a listen and judge for yourself.

Kanyuh:

I don’t think I have any.

Advertisement

Okaiye:

[inaudible 00:16:59] in the box.

Kanyuh:

Yeah, I had a stash in here somewhere. I don’t even know where it’s at. [inaudible 00:17:11] Don’t know why he thought, but yeah, I’m assuming weed and alcohol.

Advertisement

Taya Graham:

Now I am unfamiliar with any part of a field sobriety test where an officer needs to search for a stash in his own patrol car, but perhaps Michigan State troopers have a unique investigative technique.

And I do understand, as I said before, that drunk driving is incredibly destructive, but it’s equally pernicious to accuse someone of it who’s ostensibly not guilty, and perhaps even worse is to fabricate a crime to make the innocent guilty. Remember, our system is designed to protect the innocent, and yet those safeguards fail as you what the officer does next when he says, “I’m going to take him.”

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

Is it Dakarai? Am I saying that wrong?

Dakarai Larriette:

It’s Dakarai.

Kanyuh:

Advertisement

Darkarai, I told you the reason for the stop was there’s two red lights. Okay? I know they’re flashing, but that’s still, you have to treat it like a stop sign at nighttime. At midnight the lights turn from red to flashing. Flashing red still means stop.

I walk up to the car and I can smell alcohol, whether it’s you or your passenger, that’s why I asked the question, “Have you been drinking?” To which you responded it was two hours ago, and then you denied drinking alcohol.

Dakarai Larriette:

Actually what you stated was, “Was it at least two hours?” Something like that. You kind of inferred something, but no, I’ve not been drinking.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Well, I didn’t mean to give you a leading question.

Dakarai Larriette:

No, but to be clear, I have not been drinking.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

You haven’t had any alcohol?

Dakarai Larriette:

I did stop. Correct. And I did stop at each of those lights.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

I do have an on camera.

Dakarai Larriette:

Okay.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

So it is recorded.

Dakarai Larriette:

All right.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Along with all my sobriety evaluations, which have led me to determine you are under the influence and driving. So now I have to bring you in for a blood draw, and then you have to sit a detox window. I can’t let you operate safely, because I don’t believe that you can.

Dakarai Larriette:

Please explain to me what test I failed.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

Well, they’re not pass or fail, okay? But I’m noticing several signs of divided attention, not being able to focus on the instructions as I’ve given them.

Dakarai Larriette:

Well, I’m being tired.

Advertisement

Kanyuh:

And then fine motor skills being impaired, such as not being able to touch the heel to toe, the rigid body movements, you have sway, and on and on and on. I’ll type up a whole, probably be an eight-page report on this. And then here’s the deal, if you’re right and there’s nothing in your body, everything gets thrown out.

Taya Graham:

He said, “If I’m wrong.” Well that’s an awfully big if, and you will soon learn what happened when Dakarai was tested when we speak to him, and what we showed was just the beginning of the way that Dakarai’s rights and body were violated by these troopers and he will share what happened to him in jail.

Advertisement

But first I’m joined by my reporting partner, Stephen Janis, who’s been looking into the case and going through the documents to report back to us. Stephen, thank you so much for joining me.

Stephen Janis:

Taya, thanks for having me. I appreciate it.

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

So, Stephen, what were the results of the blood test? Was the officer wrong?

Stephen Janis:

Yeah, it turns out the officer was absolutely wrong. The blood test showed no sign of any alcohol or anything else. So really it was a completely negative and actually inaccurate assessment of Dakarai’s state at that time. And so really it shows how flawed these systems are for evaluating people. And so yeah, absolutely nothing, zero, negative, although it took five months to find out.

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

Can you discuss some of the questions surrounding the field sobriety tests and what concerns it raises in these types of cases?

Stephen Janis:

Well, I think one of the concerns it raises is pretty simple. You have something masquerading a science that isn’t as scientific as it seems.

If you look at the studies, they were controlled environments that aren’t similar to what happens when you’re out in the field, and they’re also highly inaccurate, like showing inaccuracy rates of sometimes up to 35%. So I think it’s very, very, very critical to look at these with a cautious eye and not be so willing to embrace an officer’s interpretation of some very subjective test and say, “Well that person is drunk.”

Advertisement

Taya Graham:

Stephen, you also researched a strange statement the officer made, which is that he had over 800 hours of field sobriety training.

Okaiye:

Well, like I said, we’re trained in standardized field sobriety evaluations. We’ve had over 800 hours that, and let’s say he’s wrong, let’s say I’m wrong, let’s say that you are completely fine. In our professional opinion through our training experience, we don’t believe you can operate their motor vehicle safely, so it’s our job as we swore to take an oath to make sure that you get home and everybody else gets home safe. We’re not going to chance it.

Advertisement

What we’re going to have to do is we’ll allow you to park your vehicle, let your friend park your vehicle, whatever, we’re not trying to cost you the money, but we do have to take you to hospital, make sure you’re okay, because the substance we believe you’re taking with your medication, and then get the blood draw done. After blood draw is done, you’ll be detoxed and be free to go. There’s no added charges, nothing like that.

Taya Graham:

We researched the updated Michigan field sobriety test. Does that number sound right to you?

Stephen Janis:

Advertisement

Taya, it’s really interesting. What’s required right now is 24 hours of training for officers, including field training and some classwork, so 800 hours seems highly excessive. The guy really is doing a lot of time in the classroom. I don’t know if that really measures up, or if we can say that’s actually accurate, but right now the standard is much, much lower, and so I think questions remain about this entire arrest.

Taya Graham:

So do you have any insight into why these field tests occur at all? I, Wouldn’t it be easier just to do a breath, or urine, or blood tests and just let the science speak for itself?

Stephen Janis:

Advertisement

Well, I think that’s the big, big question. I know officers need tools to evaluate people, and they need tools to come up with probable cause, but we’ve watched so many of these where there’s so many questions and people really seem to pass them on every ostensible measure, and yet they still end up being arrested. So I think there needs to be a full and thorough evaluation of this process to make sure it’s really generating the results that are helpful in the sense that you’re arresting drunk drivers, but not innocent people, Taya.

Taya Graham:

And now to learn what happened after he was detained, the humiliation he endured at the hands of police and the consequences for him. Since I’m joined by Dakarai Larriett. Dakarai, thank you so much for joining me.

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

Thank you so much for having me.

Taya Graham:

So tell me how this begins. Where were you headed before you were pulled over?

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

Thanks for asking. So I was just dropping a friend off at his home.

Taya Graham:

When you were pulled over, how did the officer approach you? Did he describe why you were pulled over?

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

So when he pulled me over, he mentioned that he believed I ran some blinking red lights a couple of miles away.

Taya Graham:

So the officer put you through a sobriety test. Can you describe what that was like for you?

Dakarai Larriette:

Advertisement

Well, it’s funny, I used to be a ballet dancer, and studied at the Alabama School of Fine Arts, and the way he was describing all of the steps, I thought to myself, “Is this a dance routine?”

It started out initially as an inspection of my eyes and my ability to follow his finger, I believe. And from there it became standing in one place, counting, I guess determining my perception of time and space, and a very complex heel-toe routine. I was asked, do I know the alphabet? And from there I had to do A through R. I did a number countdown and that was just with Officer Kanyuh. Officer Okaiye also inspected me and asked a number of different questions about my ability to drive.

Taya Graham:

I’ve tested myself and my friends stone-cold sober sobriety tests and found them difficult. What was going through your mind during this extensive test?

Advertisement

Dakarai Larriette:

So, I was wearing pajamas. It was 3:00 A.M. I planned to drop my buddy off and then hit right back to the house and go to sleep. So I was not dressed for the weather. We have to remember this was Michigan on April 10th, it’s still winter weather, and I was shivering. I was in this dark alley. It was scary. I thought I was about to be murdered, frankly.

So imagine having to do those tests and you’re thinking this is your last moment on this planet. I was thinking of my family. I had been in Cleveland, Ohio earlier that day for the solar eclipse, and spent some time with my sister, and it just really hit me that that might’ve been my last time seeing her or any of my family members, and I thought about my dog.

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

I’m so sorry.

Dakarai Larriette:

Sorry.

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

I know it’s traumatizing.

Dakarai Larriette:

My dog was in daycare, because I was in Cleveland for the weekend for the eclipse and I was just thinking, “What if my dog was at home by himself all this time when something happened to him?” He’s a nearly thirteen-year-old dog, he’s a senior dog, I’m sorry.

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

Trooper Kanyuh said you were wobbling excessively, that you fluttered and swayed during the one leg stand, and that your walk and turn were terrible, and that there were numerous clues that you were intoxicated. In truth, it’s a blessing to have the body camera, because it shows that you held your leg in the exact position you wanted for 26 seconds, on one foot, with not a single error.

When you listen to the body camera, does it shock you to hear what the officer was saying and how he mischaracterized what happened?

Dakarai Larriette:

I guess the other interesting thing for me, and I guess surprise if you will, was what was happening to my friend in the passenger seat. So, that is not in the video that has gone public, and I have not shared that body cam video, because it is obviously altered. All the videos are altered.

Advertisement

In fact, I made my freedom of Information Act request two, three days after this incident. It took them five months to give me video, and there are missing chunks in the video, audio between the officers even when they’re standing next to each other is inconsistent. So it sounds like it was dubbed, and there are sections that are completely missing audio. You can tell they were obsessed with the car, “Nice car.”

It was just humiliation and my survival mechanism was, “Dakarai, you’re not going to win this battle in a dark alley at 3:00 A.M. two cops. You will not. Be quiet, comply. You can win the war because you are going to have all the evidence on your side. You’re sober, you don’t use drugs. All the evidence is going to support your side of the story.”

And I guess that’s why I was so heartbroken when I heard the word “drugs” uttered by Okaiye because then I thought, “Well you can’t even win when you’re doing the right thing. If they had just found the stash, I would still be in jail and my life would be ruined.”

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

So if I understand correctly, you were pressured into a blood draw at the hospital. It was the best thing, considering that you had no drugs in your system, but still you were pressured into it.

Dakarai Larriette:

Yes, I was absolutely pressured to do the blood draw.

And how did I arrive at the decision to do it? Well, I was told that I would get six points on my license and a suspension if I did not comply. But I thought it was so odd that they wouldn’t just give me a breathalyzer, like something objective, besides a dance routine.

Advertisement

Taya Graham:

The way the officers treated you, I thought, was very demeaning, and I hate to bring this up, but you were accused of swallowing drugs and you were made to go to the bathroom in front of Trooper Kanyuh. This officer appeared very polite on the early body camera, but forcing you to do this is violating.

Dakarai Larriette:

Going into the jail, it’s a typical booking process As one was seen on TV, because I’ve never been through this process before, ever, never been stopped like this, but name, all my identifying factors, et cetera, and fingerprints. All that is collected. And then they put me in this machine that looks like something from TSA and they are scanning me, I presume for any type of contraband.

Advertisement

And there is a novice that is running the machine, and very unclear on how to operate it and they identify what they called an anomaly. And from there on throughout the night, I am being sent through this machine, I presume x-rays, again, and again, and again. So I’m not even really lodged, if you will, in the jail. I go to the cell, I come back, I go to the cell, I come back.

Finally, they brought on a technician that seemed like she actually knew what she was doing. She looks at it and she goes, oh, those are gas bubbles. In the midst of all of this going on, Kanyuh goes, “That looks like a bag of drugs! Confess now or you’re going to face a trafficking charge, too!” At some point I’m going back and forth, back and forth to the cell, and I asked if I could use the restroom.

Kanyuh comes behind me and says that’s where I need to go. It’s just this open toilet that anyone in the room can see and he yells, “Don’t flush!” It was so dehumanizing.

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

It seems to me the officer is very performative in his behavior of being a good guy and a professional on camera, but in the jail he really does change.

Dakarai Larriette:

A couple of follow-ups on that.

So, when he was playing the good guy, good cop and Okaiye obviously tried to do it as well, I just want to go back to something you said. They offered to park my car for me. And I was discussing this with the passenger this morning, and we both just like light bulb moment realized that would’ve been the opportunity to plant.

Advertisement

Taya Graham:

So something that concerns me, is that for about two minutes the officer’s really been searching through his patrol car and then he says to another officer that you seem confused, and then he says he’s trying to find his stash. What do you think this means?

Dakarai Larriette:

It’s a hundred percent drugs, and it’s all written there in very plain, easy-to-understand language not even coded. And you really have to think about not only do we have that which is mind-boggling, but the context of it all.

Advertisement

So the context is he spent two minutes digging through his cop car, the backseat, then he moved to the trunk, whatever he was looking for, he wanted it badly. Okaiye comes around to the back of the car probably trying to figure out what’s going on with this guy, because think about it, I’ve been standing in the cold, waiting after the sobriety test while he’s fumbling around in the car.

So Okaiye comes around to see what’s going on. He says “drugs.” Kanyuh responds, “I don’t think I have any, I knew I had a stash in here.” So he connects drugs to stash. Then there’s a little bit of mumbling, but listen to it intently. They then basically make a comment to each other that I’m going to refuse anyway, meaning I would refuse an opportunity for them to get in my car, to search my car, to park my car, and that’s when they ultimately decide “We’ll just charge him on weed and alcohol.”

Taya Graham:

Did their dash camera show that you allegedly ran through this flashing red light? You calmly told them you committed no moving violations. Can you tell me what the dash camera actually showed?

Advertisement

Dakarai Larriette:

I believe the light they’re referring to was completely green, so that one was thrown out. And then the light that they alleged that I did not stop at, the one that actually was red, I pulled two, I paused, I put my signal on and I turned.

Taya Graham:

I read that it took over five months for you to receive your negative drug and alcohol results. Is that correct?

Advertisement

Dakarai Larriette:

At the hospital, I immediately tested negative for alcohol, and because the hospital was connected to my own healthcare plan, I managed to get that report in real time, and pulled it for myself when I got home that afternoon. And then, of course, they confirmed the result to me when I asked at the jail.

Now in terms of getting the drug test results and Michigan State Police’s version of the alcohol test results, that did not happen until the very end of September. But if you look at the timeline in the request for testing, they knew by middle of April that everything was negative, and it seems like they continued to test, and test, and test. I don’t know if that’s a standard procedure or they were just incredulous that I was negative.

Taya Graham:

Advertisement

Can you tell me what you went through during that time, that five months waiting to be proven fully innocent? It must have been incredibly stressful.

Dakarai Larriette:

My first responsibility was to confirm that there was not a criminal matter at all against me, and the case actually was thrown out within a week, but they refused to give me a receipt or confirmation or anything like that until I received that formal test. But I still haven’t received anything that says that the case is a hundred percent closed. I have not.

So two and a half months I did not have a plastic driver’s license card, couldn’t rent a car. I traveled extensively, and I would contact the sergeant, who I believed to be the bosses of the two troopers, almost weekly. Like, “Hey, what’s going on? Did you guys get the results? This is really inconveniencing my life.” And I would get answers that were very opaque, like, “we’re still working on your test” which really confused me and worried me that there was some tampering happening.

Advertisement

Taya Graham:

What do you want as the result of sharing your experience? What do you hope that outcome will be?

Dakarai Larriette:

I made a commitment that when I was mistreated I would use my resources, my privilege, to help those behind me. And I could have easily just walked away, and took my driver’s license, and been fine, but I decided I have got to expose this, I’ve got to get these troopers off the streets, and I’ve already reached out to some major, major law firms and encouraged them to look into what’s going on in Southwest Michigan. I am already protected. I’m not under any criminal investigation, but when I was in that jail, I knew that there were innocent people in there.

Advertisement

Taya Graham:

If you could speak directly to the troopers who arrested and harassed you, what would you want to say to them? What would you want to tell them if you knew they were listening to you right now?

Dakarai Larriette:

I would want them to know that I’m a person. I’m a human being. People care about me. Think about that. Think about what you’re supposed to be doing in your job. You’re supposed to be taking care of people protecting, not inventing crimes.

Advertisement

Taya Graham:

Now, I want to reiterate what I said at the beginning of the show, drunk driving is a dangerous and destructive crime. And I, for one, understand why police departments and the public emphasize efforts to thwart it. Drunk driving deaths account for roughly one third of all traffic fatalities every year. Roughly 11,000 died in 2023 due to people driving while intoxicated.

But also, I think that what we witnessed in the video of Dakarai’s arrest shows the pitfalls of abandoning common sense and sound science as we try to prevent it, or more precisely what happens when a zeal to address a problem with cops and cuffs overwhelms common sense and the nuance that comes with it.

This is certainly not the only false DUI arrest we have covered. There were the bogus charges against a Dallas firefighter Thomas C, who was forced to retire from his lifelong job as a first responder when officers used another specious field sobriety test to accuse him of driving under the influence, because he freely admitted using his doctor-prescribed Adderall. It took him two years to get his test results, which, although they were negative or too late to save his job.

Advertisement

Or we shared the story of Harris Elias of Colorado, a professional pilot who was pulled over and again, thanks to a biased interpretation of a field sobriety test, ended up with false DUI charges, charges that took months to clear, that threatened his ability to do his job, and later resulted in a major civil rights lawsuit.

All of these share some common problems. Cops are overly eager to bring DUI charges, and because of that, ignoring the evidence that is contrary to their opinions. Add to that a very subjective and flawed field sobriety test, a diagnostic process that seems easily susceptible to the concept of confirmation bias, where the officer administering the test already believes the subject is intoxicated, and thus interprets the results to confirm what he already believes, no matter how the person performs.

And yes, there are imperatives that often lead to the incarceration of the innocent. Well-intentioned organizations like MADD, Mothers Against Drunk Driving, run DUI Ticket Competitions that frequently encourage officers to hand out DUIs in order to receive grants, awards, public acclaim, and promotions. Even the most wholesome goals can be warped when law enforcement is incentivized by quotas and financial rewards.

But I believe something else lies deeper at the very root of these bogus arrests we’ve covered, something more profound than just an officer making a bad decision, or not maintaining an open mind about how to enforce the law. I believe that flawed field sobriety tests are just like the other unjust forms of governance that were originally designed to solve a problem, but in the end seem only to perpetuate them. So what do I mean?

Advertisement

Well, Stephen and I have spent a great deal of time reporting across the country on a variety of issues, and that includes our hometown of Baltimore where we spent five years documenting the use of tax breaks to spur development. As you may or may not know, Baltimore is a city beset by poverty and housing segregation that has struggled to stem population loss. It’s often deemed one of the most violent cities in America, and it has some of the highest concentrations of poverty, with thousands of abandoned homes, and to top it all off the highest property tax rate in the state, almost double the surrounding counties.

Put simply much of Baltimore is part of America’s great inequality machine, incapable of producing enough affordable housing or reasonably priced healthcare for all of us, while increasing the amount of wealth concentrated among the top 1%, a symbol in many ways for how our current system consistently fails to address the needs of the many. And to my point about our flawed system for catching drunk drivers, Baltimore’s response has been equally flawed in addressing the root problem that afflicts our community.

As we outlined in our documentary Tax Broke, one of the city’s primary solutions to population loss has been to award huge tax breaks to these developers. These carve-outs have allowed the wealthiest suburban builders to avoid paying the high rate that the city’s working class is regularly subjected to.

And this is no pittance. Some estimate the city has given away billions in future revenues in order to build luxury developments that ironically do not include affordable housing. Instead, future tax revenue that should help pay for critical services and investment in the city’s future has been handed over to the already wealthy.

Advertisement

Now of course, you’re probably asking at this point, “Taya, what are you talking about? How are tax breaks for development related to unfounded DUI arrests? What on earth are the commonalities between a bad development strategy and an overeager DUI cop?” Well hear me out.

Here’s where it all ties together, and I will even give it a title: America is the Land of the Perverse Incentive. In other words, our country and its great neoliberal project have abandoned the idea that the government can do good and productive things. Instead, the elites have exchanged that idea for the false narrative that only incentives laden with cash can prompt real productive behavior.

In this land of perverse incentives, medical companies are incentivized to bill people for diseases that they do not have. As stated in this report by the Wall Street Journal that found billions of dollars spent on patients who did not have the underlying disease that the medical insurers submitted to the government.

In the land of perverse incentives, private equity firms take over stable companies and load them up with debt so they can pay themselves a dividend. Then, they fire staff and neglect investing in the firm itself, selling a carcass to Wall Street for the vultures.

Advertisement

In the land of perverse incentives, people make more money trading money than they do building things like affordable housing. In fact, Wall Street creates huge funds to purchase single-family homes across the country and then they jack up rents, so middle-class families are stuck without options.

And of course, in the land of perverse incentives, cops who make more DOI arrests are given awards, and departments that make more drunk driving stops are given more money, and thus we have the stories we reported before. And finally, in the land of perverse incentives, one of the poorest cities in the country has doled out billions in tax breaks to wealthy developers who don’t need it, in fact, it’s so absurd that luxury condos on top of the Four Seasons hotel in Baltimore received millions in tax breaks for environmental mediation, even though the records we uncovered showed none was done, and that the condos in question were literally hundreds of feet above the ground where the non-existent pollution was actually supposed to be.

All of this is why we end up with sketchy DOI arrests based on shaky science, or a poor city that can’t build affordable housing, but can fund wealthy developers to build luxury apartments. Why a city rocked with poverty is neglected, while a system that monetizes the sick, so wealthy Wall Street investors can get rich over billing them and pushing them into bankruptcy, is called, ironically, health care.

It’s this thread that connects all the dots of the realities that often seem to contradict themselves. Why would the wealthiest country in the world not be able to deliver affordable medical care to all who need it? And why would one of the poorest cities in the country not be able to build affordable housing if it is at the same time capable of giving away a billion dollars of tax revenue to the ultra rich?

Advertisement

All of these questions are worth asking, because the outcomes are just so difficult to comprehend. Being sick should not be a prerequisite to bankruptcy. Being poor should not mean you pay higher taxes than someone who is unfathomably wealthy. Being sober, by having difficulty balancing on one leg, which was decidedly not the case with our guest, should not lead to an arrest charge and a shattered life.

These apparent destructive inadequacies of governance affect all of us. This inability to use the resources of the people to serve the people ensures that we all suffer. This type of incentivized mayhem that finds form in bad policing should make us all question the priority of those who hold and wield the power. It’s incumbent upon us to hold them accountable and remind them that they serve us, not the other way around.

I would like to thank my guest, Dakarai, for coming forward, courageously sharing his experience and shining a light on this abuse of power. Thank you so much for speaking with us.

And of course, I have to thank Intrepid reporter Stephen Janis for his writing, research and editing on this piece. Thank you, Stephen.

Advertisement

Stephen Janis:

Taya, thanks having me. I appreciate it.

Taya Graham:

And I want to thank mods of the show, Holy D and Lacey R for their support. Thank you.

Advertisement

And a very special thanks to our Accountability Reports Patreons, we appreciate you and I look forward to thanking each and every one of you personally in our next live stream, especially Patreon Associate Producers, John E.R., David K, Louis P, and our super friends, Shane B, Pineapple Girl, Chris R, Matter of Rights, and Angela True.

And I want you to know that if you have video evidence of police misconduct, please email it to us privately at par@therealnews or reach out to me on Facebook or Twitter @TayasBaltimore, and we might be able to investigate for you. And please like, share, and comment on our videos, it can actually help our guests, and you know I read your comments and I really appreciate them.

And of course, once again, we have to thank our corporate sponsor. Wait, that’s right, we don’t have a corporate sponsor. We don’t take corporate dollars. We don’t run ads, but we do have a Patreon, Accountability Reports. So if you feel inspired to donate, please do. You know you never see an ad on this channel, and we’re never going to be sponsored, so anything you can spare is truly appreciated.

My name is Taya Graham and I am your host of the Police Accountability Report. Please, be safe out there.

Advertisement

Creative Commons License

Republish our articles for free, online or in print, under a Creative Commons license.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

News

Over Easy Solar CEO Trygve Mongstad Goes to the Roof

Published

on

Trygve Mongstad

Power comes in many forms, and with newfound approaches to solar, the industry is setting the pace for the climate tech sector. A recent visit to Oslo for the region-defining event of the year — Oslo Innovation Week, powered by Oslo Business Region — found me on top of Norway’s national soccer stadium. Over Easy Solar founder and CEO Trygve Mongstad sat down to discuss an unlikely journey from researcher to entrepreneur, headlining the vertical solar panel revolution.

Dr. Rod Berger: The entrepreneurial path is often as unique as the person behind the solo pursuit. Please share your transition from research to Over Easy Solar. 

Trygve Mongstad: I spent many years as a physicist, and about a decade ago, I was more comfortable in a lab with my dreadlocks. The transition wasn’t immediate, but I was drawn to challenges outside my comfort zone. I realized I wanted to do something impactful and saw an opportunity in solar energy that few had explored. The move was driven by a growing confidence and the supportive societal framework in Norway, which encourages taking risks.

Berger: When you were growing up, were you creative? Would you say you had an innovative spirit early on?

Advertisement

Mongstad: Growing up in Norway with educators as parents made my life quite typical. However, even as a child, I was fascinated by innovation. I remember sketching floating wind turbines at the age of ten. While I was a quiet and shy boy, the idea of creating solutions for environmental challenges was always there.

Berger: You have been public about the impact of your time In Malawi on the work you are doing today. How does the Norwegian ecosystem of support compare with your time overseas?

Mongstad: My experience in Malawi was transformative. It’s one of the poorest economies in the world, yet the enthusiasm and positivity of the people is incredible. I learned a lot about happiness and community values, which differ from Norway’s more structured support system.

Berger: Let’s talk about sustainability and its role in your path forward as a company.

Advertisement

Mongstad: Sustainability has been at the core of my mission from the very start. It’s not just about creating a product; it’s about contributing to a better world. In Norway, sustainability is part of the everyday conversation, and I hope to embody it in my company.

Berger: What challenges have been the most daunting for you as a CEO?

Mongstad: Coming from the research sector, understanding the language of investors has been a challenge for me. The financial climate is tough, and while there’s recognition of the need for sustainable solutions, bridging the gap between innovation and investment remains a daily endeavor. I am encouraged, though, by the increased awareness among investors about the long-term benefits of supporting sustainability-focused ventures.

Berger: How have you navigated the pressures of entrepreneurship while maintaining your stated mission?

Advertisement

Mongstad: It’s about perspective. I regularly reflect on our progress, which helps me appreciate the journey. While many might scoff, I enjoy writing monthly investor reports because they allow me to see our tangible progress. It’s a balancing act, but the drive to create meaningful impact keeps me motivated and focused on the bigger picture.

Mongstad’s understated presentation shouldn’t dissuade onlookers from honing in on Over Easy Solar’s rapid ascent. There is a quiet and engaging confidence about Mongstad that reminds us that it isn’t always the bluster of an entrepreneur that reigns supreme but rather the belief in oneself to constantly churn against convention and comfort toward a common goal.

[I have edited and condensed this interview for clarity.]

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect Fair Observer’s editorial policy.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

How artificial intelligence won the Nobel Prizes

Published

on

Sir Demis Hassabis discovered he had won the Nobel Prize in chemistry this week when his wife — also a scientific researcher — received several calls on Skype to urgently request his phone number.

“My mind was completely frazzled, which hardly ever happens. It was . . . almost like an out-of-body experience,” said Hassabis, co-founder and chief executive of Google DeepMind, the artificial intelligence division of the Silicon Valley search giant.

The chemistry Nobel, which Hassabis shared with his colleague John Jumper and US biochemist David Baker, was won for unlocking an impossible problem in biology that had remained unsolved for 50 years: predicting the structure of every protein known to humanity, using an AI software known as AlphaFold.

Having cracked that long-standing challenge, with widespread implications in science and medicine, Hassabis has his sights set on climate change and healthcare. “I want us to help solve some diseases,” he told the Financial Times.

Advertisement

His team is working on six drug development programmes with drugmakers Eli Lilly and Novartis, which focus on disease areas such as cancers and Alzheimer’s. Hassabis said he expects to have a drug candidate in clinical trials within two years.

His other big areas of focus are using AI to model the climate more accurately, and to cross the ultimate frontier in AI research: invent machine intelligence at par with human intelligence.

“When we look back in 10 years, I hope [AI] will have heralded a new golden era of scientific discovery in all these different domains,” said Hassabis, who was formerly a neuroscientist and video game designer. “That’s what got me into AI in the first place. I see it as the ultimate tool in accelerating scientific research.”

The DeepMind duo was recognised on Wednesday, a day after former Google colleague and veteran AI scientist Geoffrey Hinton won the physics prize alongside physicist John Hopfield for their work on neural networks, the foundational technology for modern AI systems that underpin healthcare, social media, self-driving cars — and AlphaFold itself.

The recognition of AI breakthroughs highlights a new era in research, emphasising the importance of computing tools and data science in cracking complex scientific problems at far shorter timescales, in everything from physics to mathematics, chemistry and biology.

“It’s obviously interesting that the [Nobel] committee has decided to make a statement like this by having the two together,” Hassabis said.

The awards also encapsulate AI’s promises and potential pitfalls.

Advertisement

Hopfield and Hinton were pioneers in the discipline in the early 1980s. Hinton, who is 76 and left Google last year, said he didn’t plan to do further research. He instead intends to advocate for work on the safety of AI systems, and for governments to facilitate it.

By contrast, the DeepMind pair won for work unveiled mainly in the past five years, and remain extremely optimistic about its societal impact.

“The impact of [AI] in particular on science but also on the modern world more broadly is now very, very clear,” said Maneesh Sahani, director of the Gatsby unit at University College London, a research institute focused on machine learning and theoretical neuroscience. Hinton was the Gatsby’s founding director in 1998, while Hassabis worked as a postdoctoral researcher there in 2009, eventually spinning out DeepMind from the UCL institute in 2010.

“Machine learning is showing up all over the place, from people analysing ancient text in forgotten languages, to radiographs and other medical imaging. There is a toolkit that we now have that will push science and academic disciplines forward in all sorts of different directions,” said Sahani, who is also a neuroscience professor. 

Advertisement

AlphaFold’s recent iterations have “ramifications across all of medicine, biology and many other areas” because they are so fundamental to living organisms, said Charlotte Deane, a professor of structural bioinformatics at Oxford university.

“Many were sceptical when they started, but very quickly their program outperformed all other programs to predict protein structures,” said Venki Ramakrishnan, a biologist who won the Nobel Prize in chemistry in 2009 for his work related to protein synthesis. “It really dramatically changed the field.”

AlphaFold has been used by more than 2mn scientists to, among other things, analyse the malarial parasite to develop a vaccine, improve plant resistance to climate change, and to study the structure of the nuclear pore — one of the largest protein complexes in the human body.

Rosalyn Moran, a neuroscience professor at King’s College London, and chief executive of AI start-up Stanhope AI said: “Tool building is blue collar scientific work . . . they are often the unsung heroes of science. For me that was the most exciting part of the award.”

AlphaFold still has shortcomings as reported by its creators earlier this year, including “hallucinations” of “spurious structural order” in cell regions that are in fact disordered. Another challenge facing the use of AI for scientific research is that some important fields of investigation may be less rich than protein analysis in experimental data.

In the physics Nobel, Hinton and Hopfield’s work used fundamental concepts from physics and neuroscience to develop AI tools that can process patterns in large information networks.

The Boltzmann machine, which Hinton invented, was able to learn from specific examples rather than instructions. The machine was then able to recognise new examples of categories it had been trained on, such as images of cats.

Advertisement

This type of learning software, known as neural networks, now form the basis of most AI applications, such as facial recognition software and large language models, the technique that underpins ChatGPT and Google’s Gemini. One of Hinton’s former students, Ilya Sutskever, was co-founder and chief scientist of ChatGPT-maker OpenAI. 

“I would say I am someone who doesn’t really know what field he’s in but would like to understand how the brain works,” said Hinton, a computer scientist and cognitive psychologist, during a press conference this week. “And in my attempts to understand how the brain works, I’ve helped to create a technology that works surprisingly well.”

The AI prizes have also brought to the fore the interconnected nature of scientific discoveries, and the need for sharing of data and expertise — an increasingly rare phenomenon in AI research occurring inside commercial outfits such as OpenAI and Google.

Neuroscience and physics principles were used to develop the AI models of today, while the data generated by biologists helped invent the AlphaFold software.

Advertisement

“Scientists like me have traditionally solved protein shapes using laborious experimental methods which can take years,” said Rivka Isaacson, professor of molecular biophysics at King’s College London, who was an early beta tester of AlphaFold. “It was however these solved structures, which the experimental world deposits for public use, that were used to train AlphaFold.”

She added that the AI technique had allowed scientists like her to “skip ahead to probe deeper into protein function and dynamics, asking different questions and potentially opening up whole new areas of research”.

Ultimately, AI — like electron microscopy or X-ray crystallography — remains an analytical tool, not an independent agent conducting original research. Hassabis insists the technology cannot replace the work of scientists.

“The human ingenuity comes in — asking the question, the conjecture, the hypothesis, our systems can’t do any of that,” he said. “[AI] just analyses data right now.” 

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Money

Neighbours at war over Grand Designs-style clifftop ‘EYESORE’ which ‘looks like a big pile of shipping containers’

Published

on

Neighbours at war over Grand Designs-style clifftop ‘EYESORE’ which ‘looks like a big pile of shipping containers’

NEIGHBOURS are at war over a “Grand Designs”-style home which is said to be an “eyesore” and has been compared to a pile of “shipping containers”.

The property – in a historic stockbroker town in the Home Counties – was constructed on a road where homes sell for more than £1million.

The contentious property has been compared to a pile of 'shipping containers'

6

The contentious property has been compared to a pile of ‘shipping containers’Credit: Solent
The home was approved by the council in 2017 but it wasn't built to the submitted plans

6

Advertisement
The home was approved by the council in 2017 but it wasn’t built to the submitted plansCredit: Solent
The council imposed a demolition order on the property last year but has since done a U-turn on that decision

6

The council imposed a demolition order on the property last year but has since done a U-turn on that decisionCredit: Solent

Plans to build the home were initially approved in 2017 but the landowner made it two metres too high, located it in the wrong place on the plot of land and clad it in a plastic material rather than natural stone and oak.

After an outcry from residents, last year the local council imposed a demolition order on the house.

However, the Independent Planning Inspector, as part of the appeals process, instructed the landowner to make modifications to the building, but they were different to the originally approved planning permission.

Advertisement

Developer Peter Strange was given permission by Waverley Borough Council to build the home in Farnham, Surrey, seven years ago.

The original planning permission was for an “innovative cantilever design”, which would nestle into the woodland backdrop of the steep hillside plot.

The house is positioned just up the road from the Bourne Woods – a location used for the filming of blockbusters such as Napoleon, Gladiator and Harry Potter.

However, the finished building – which appears to be currently unoccupied – was out of line with the submitted plans.

Advertisement

The house was built six metres further to the south than planned, rotated approximately ten degrees from the consented dwelling, and was two metres higher than planned.

And, despite natural stone and oak cladding used in the plans – neighbours said a plastic material was used instead which “radically” changed the appearance.

After the landowner was threatened with enforcement action, Mr Strange – who bought the land in March 2018 for £450,000 – applied for retrospective planning permission for the new home.

How to find a genuine buyer for your property

This application received over 170 objections from locals who cited a variety of complaints.

Advertisement

One objector, Kevin Lester, wrote that it was an “ugly building” which is “far too big” and “imposing”.

“As it is, it looks like a number of Grey Shipping Containers have just been dumped on site, stacked and bolted together,” he said.

The application was not approved and an appeal was later dismissed with an enforcement order for demolition issued.

Last year, Mr Strange sought permission for the “erection of a dwelling with associated works following demolition of original dwelling”.

Advertisement

This application attracted further objection from residents who questioned why they were having to protest the plans again.

Nearby resident Paul Webb branded the situation a “carbuncle” and said the house was “completely out of character” when compared to the neighbouring properties.

As it is, it looks like a number of Grey Shipping Containers have just been dumped on site, stacked and bolted together

Kevin Lester

“The dreadful abuse then carried out by the developers, flouting the Council’s permission and attempting to foist the ‘shipping container’ house in our beautiful area of Farnham was rightly reversed with the demolition order, and it is impossible to believe that the miscreants even have a right of appeal?”

Mr Webb stated the planning process “risks falling into farce” unless the council sends a “clear signal” to developers that “they must abide by the law”.

Advertisement

Despite further push back from neighbours, the council have upheld part of the landowner’s appeal, meaning the property can stay up as long as changes are made in the next 12 months.

Noel Moss chairs the Bourne Conservation group and has lived in Farnham for 10 years.

‘BLOT ON THE LANDSCAPE’

The 88-year-old said the property is a “blot on the landscape”, adding: “What was built there, as an architectural design, is completely out of keeping with other buildings in the area – for example, the nice cottage opposite.

“With my conservation hat on, it is also taking up character of the very nice green space which faces you as you drive into Farnham from the South – that was always a very nice view.”

Advertisement

Mr Moss, who served in the Army for 30 years, said the site was also a ‘very important foraging area for bats”.

“What I think none of us can understand, is how the planning authority – who would also be aware of the character of the area – allowed such a design to go through, and secondly, didn’t check what was being built,” he continued.

“I don’t think the planning authority at Waverley are exempt from criticism on this matter.”

On the update to the plans, he said: “No one, including the planning committee, understands the present situation.

Advertisement

“My view, and the view of other neighbours I talk to, is that they can’t understand if it needs to be demolished.”

Everyone has to stick to the planning law

Louisa Bristow

Jewellery designer Louisa Bristow also lives near the house and admitted she didn’t “mind” what it looked like as it was “a little bit different”, which she welcomed.

But, the 46-year-old said “everyone has to stick to the planning law”, adding: “The rules are they for a reason and we need to follow them.

“Most people live and left live, some people are very vocal – we just don’t want people to take the mick.”

Advertisement

Jamie Dobse, 52, also lives near the property – and admitted he quite liked the “modern” appearance of it.

“I think it’s a shame it’s not occupied now,” he said of the property, “It wasn’t built as it was designed. I think as it was being built, it seemed quite obvious that it wasn’t how it was agreed.

“It seemed quite obviously different to the proposal.”

Mr Dobse, who works as a designer, said it would be “incredibly wasteful” to demolish the “contemporary” house.

Advertisement

“We need more housing,” he added.

Upholding part of the appeal, the planning inspector said: “As revised, the dwelling would nestle comfortably in the woodland setting in local views, retaining the informal rural character and well-wooded appearance of the locality.

“Owing to its greater overall height the permitted dwelling would have been a more visible built feature, even though set back further into the wooded hillside at a slightly different angle.

“Consequently, the revised dwelling would not appear as a prominent built feature in the surroundings, the immediate setting being largely dominated by maturing trees consistent with the visual qualities of the Arcadian Area.”

Advertisement

A Waverley Borough Council spokesperson told The Sun Online: “We need planning laws to protect our local environment and it is vitally important that they are followed.

“The landowner of 17 Frensham Road did not stick to the agreed plans for their development, and the council issued them with an enforcement notice requiring the demolition of the building.

“The landowner appealed the council’s ruling, and an independent planning inspector has given them until 16 August 2025 to modify the building.

“Various changes are required, including the removal of an external staircase, lowering the roofline and the use of timber cladding, otherwise the building will need to be demolished.”

Advertisement

The Sun Online has attempted to track down Mr Strange for comment.

One local resident says the property is 'completely out of character' with the area

6

One local resident says the property is ‘completely out of character’ with the areaCredit: Solent
The property currently appears to be unoccupied

6

The property currently appears to be unoccupiedCredit: Solent
More than 170 objections have been raised about the home in Farnham, Surrey

6

Advertisement
More than 170 objections have been raised about the home in Farnham, SurreyCredit: Solent

Source link

Continue Reading

News

The Ending of ‘We Live in Time’ May Destroy You

Published

on

The Ending of 'We Live in Time' May Destroy You

Warning: This post contains spoilers for We Live in Time.

We Live in Time ends like it begins—with one crucial difference. Eggs just collected from the coop are being cracked into glass bowls on their way to becoming breakfast. Only this time, instead of a woman named Almut cooking for her sleeping partner Tobias, it’s Tobias cooking with their daughter, Ella. He teaches the young pupil how to crack the eggs on a flat surface just as Almut, a celebrated chef, taught him during an early date. Another key difference: an adorably scruffy dog stands at their feet. It’s a callback to a conversation the couple had, after learning that Almut’s ovarian cancer had recurred and was incurable, about how dogs can help children heal from loss. 

It’s a poignant bookend that speaks to the ways we keep our loved ones with us even after they’re gone. Almut had been terrified that she’d be forgotten, or that her kid would think of her as nothing more than a dead mom. The scene telegraphs Tobias’ commitment to showing Ella that her mom had a life outside of their world. 

But it’s the penultimate scene that begs further dissection. And it’s one that a lot of people might be about to dissect as We Live in Time begins to play in theaters on Oct. 11: Since the movie’s premiere at the Toronto International Film Festival in September, the A24 weepie from Brooklyn director John Crowley has garnered mostly positive reviews. In a cinematic landscape that has seen movies aimed largely at female audiences racking up box-office wins, and with a beloved and respected leading duo in Florence Pugh and Andrew Garfield, it’s clear that the appetite for a tear-jerking romance has hardly waned in the half century since Ryan O’Neal held Ali MacGraw on her deathbed in Love Story.

Advertisement

Read more: We Live in Time Asks Too Much of Us

But unlike that iconic film, We Live in Time does not take us to Almut’s death bed. It handles her death metaphorically, clearly alluding to it while keeping her final breaths offscreen and leaving the flatlining monitors to the imagination. It’s hardly novel in doing so—in fact, it harkens back to a long tradition of off-screen expirations, particularly in romantic and family dramas. And, perhaps counterintuitively, this figurative approach ends up being more sob-worthy than its more literal alternative.

We Live in Time
Grace Delaney, Andrew Garfield, and Florence Pugh in We Live in TimeCourtesy of A24

In this scene, Pugh’s Almut, now quite ill, is in Italy for a major European cooking competition when she comes upon an ice skating rink. It’s a made-for-the-movies coincidence: Al had been a competitive skater as a teenager until the death of her skating-enthusiast dad made it too painful to continue. After completing a recipe, she abruptly walks off the competition floor—taking off her chef’s hat like she knows it’s for the last time, because it is, walking up to her family in the stands, moving toward a glowing light that signifies the impending peaceful transition to the other side—we cut to their little family at the rink. She’s demonstrating her skills for the novice Ella (Grace Delaney), as Tobias looks on proudly. Then we see her on the opposite side of the rink. Dad and daughter wave to mom from afar, and she waves back, smiling beatifically. They are saying goodbye. There is a sense of acceptance. No one is sobbing. The scene ends, and we understand in a figurative sense that she is dead.

One one level, this is the stuff of extreme cheese. It left me rolling my eyes even as tears trickled out of them. And yet, on another: thank the lord almighty for sparing us from having to watch Al’s jagged last breath, taken between hollowed-out cheeks and Hollywood’s best not-quite-a-corpse makeup—and having to watch her loved ones watch it happen. We are even spared the immediate aftermath: the coffin being lowered into the earth, the child alone in a corner while well wishers three heads taller schmooze and nosh, the widower donating sweaters to Goodwill.

The movie has, until this point, been rather forthright about the pain of advanced cancer and the treatment that ravages a body in trying to stave off death. Hair loss, nausea, exhaustion, bruising, random bloody noses, the interruption to intimacy. It’s all so awful that Almut considers forgoing treatment altogether so that she can try to really live for six months rather than suffer for 12. It’s about the indignities, too. In one scene, she looks on as another chemo patient nods off to sleep during an infusion, her red wig moving out of place as her head falls toward her shoulder. A nurse comes by and tenderly moves it back into place: the woman doesn’t need to be embarrassed on top of everything else, the nurse knows; her job goes beyond the purely physical.

Advertisement

But We Live in Time stops short of bearing witness to death. It’s in good company in screenwriter Nick Payne’s choice to opt for metaphorical subtlety, especially when it comes to young moms and cancer. Any millennial pop-culture enthusiast worth their salt sobbed over the ending of Stepmom (1998), when Susan Sarandon’s dying mother insists on taking a family photo that includes the young stepmother (Julia Roberts) she’s given grief to throughout the movie. The two women hold hands as the Nikon flashes, “Ain’t No Mountain High Enough” prompts the viewer to cry and smile simultaneously and the photo fades to black, signifying her death, the family moving on but holding her memory dear. In the 1988 tear duct obliterator Beaches, Barbara Hershey’s Hillary sits in an Adirondack chair in the salty air. She hugs her young daughter then returns to watching a yellow sun sink against a mauve sky. Her BFF C.C. (Bette Midler) smiles in her direction, “The Wind Beneath My Wings” triggers the lacrimal glands, and someone literally rides off into the sunset on a white horse. Cut to black funeral limos. In Spike Lee’s Crooklyn (1994), we see Alfre Woodard’s Carolyn weak in a hospital bed receiving her final farewell kisses from daughter Troy (Zelda Harris) shortly before we see Troy in her PJs, refusing to dress for the funeral.

Other films take the tack of film-it-or-it-didn’t-happen. Terms of Endearment (1983) shows us the death of Debra Winger’s cancer-stricken but still very pretty mother of three: her hand falls limp beside her hospital bed, the camera panning up to the faces of her mother (Shirley MacLaine) and estranged husband (Jeff Daniels), taking in the loss. In 2016’s Other People, Molly Shannon’s matriarch dies 49 seconds into the movie—the screen is black and we can only hear the sounds of her family members, pig-piled on the bed around her, sobbing; we don’t see the moment of her death but the millisecond after. In last year’s Maestro, Bradley Cooper’s Leonard Bernstein embraces Carey Mulligan’s pale, weak, headscarf-wearing Felicia Montealegre as she flutters her eyelids and groans quietly; the camera cuts to the window overlooking the verdant green lawn and the sea. Moments later, he’s running onto that same lawn to embrace his children in their grief.

Maestro
Felicia Montealegre (Carey Mulligan) in a headscarf, back toward the camera, with Leonard Bernstein (Bradley Cooper) and their children shortly before her death in MaestroCourtesy of Netflix

There is no one right way to depict death on screen. Movies are about life, and death is a part of life. If you’ve lost a loved one to cancer or something like it, then the movies are either a perpetual trigger, or inexpensive therapy, or both. If you can’t bring yourself to access that grief without an external prompt, you can knowingly sit yourself down for a film that promises to demagnetize them through sheer will and swooning violins. There is a thin line between gratuitous and tasteful, maudlin and real, and that line is not located in the same place for every viewer. A wet cheek competition between Beaches and Terms of Endearment is bound to be too close to call.

But in the case of We Live in Time, I felt simultaneously spared the retraumatization of reliving painful memories shot for shot, and invited to access those same memories to fill in the movie’s intentional gaps. One might argue the scene lacks the gut-punch of Winger or Shannon or Mulligan fading away before our eyes; it is a PG moment in an R-rated movie. The film has given us sex and childbirth, why stop short of death? 

But for a movie defined by grief and loss, whose trailer promises to lift you up, tear you to shreds, then expel you from the theater a little more wizened to the way life giveth and then taketh away, this channeling of Tara Lipinski at death’s door ultimately works. It continues in the long cornball tradition of “did you ever know that you’re my hero,” of Marvin and Tammy dancing playfully on Ms. Sarandon’s grave. A reprieve without sacrificing a release. The memories get folded into the mundane like eggs into pancake batter. Life goes on. It has to.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Business

What we learned from the Post Office boss

Published

on

What we learned from the Post Office boss
PA Media Post Office chief executive Nick Read arriving to give evidence to the Post Office Horizon IT inquiryPA Media

All eyes were on outgoing Post Office chief executive Nick Read this week as he spent three days in front of the inquiry into the Horizon IT scandal.

Mr Read replaced former boss Paula Vennels in 2019 and was brought in to “right the wrongs of the past”.

Wrongful prosecutions may have stopped, but he still had questions to answer about how much the organisation has really changed when he gave evidence.

Mr Read had taken leave of absence from his day job to prepare for the inquiry.

Unlike the appearance of his predecessor, Paula Vennells, there were no tears. But there were some key revelations.

Advertisement

Here are five things we learned from his evidence.

Told not to ‘dig into’ the past

It has become clear that, either by accident or design, Mr Read was not made aware of the scale of the challenge facing him at the Post Office.

Between 1999 and 2015, hundreds of sub-postmasters were wrongly prosecuted when faulty Horizon accounting software made it look as though money was missing from branches.

Advertisement

When Mr Read took the top job in September 2019, the organisation had just lost one High Court judgement to a group of those wrongfully prosecuted sub-postmasters and was about to lose another.

However, there was no reference to the ongoing legal challenges in his job description. The flawed IT system Horizon was not mentioned once.

In fact, the Post Office’s top lawyer reportedly told Mr Read not to “dig into” what had happened in the past.

He was even told there was no “huge PR risk”. He said the organisation was partly in denial, partly in paralysis.

Advertisement

Regarding the people who came before him, Mr Read told the inquiry that many of the Post Office’s former leaders “appear not to have been held to account”.

Frustrated about his own pay

Mr Read’s leadership has been dogged by controversy about his own remuneration. His former HR director claimed he was “obsessed” with getting a pay rise.

He admitted he had been “frustrated at times”, had repeatedly lobbied for more money, and even took legal and PR advice from friends.

Advertisement

Mr Read said it never became a distraction, but did apologise for how “poor” it looked given so many victims are still waiting for compensation.

Claims about bullying, misogyny, and pay had come from people who had left under a cloud, he said.

He even alleged, in his written witness statement, that one of those people, former chair Henry Staunton, had fallen asleep in board meetings.

Government using Post Office as a ‘shield’

Advertisement

New figures released this week show that £363m has already been paid out to former sub-postmasters in financial redress, but many are still waiting.

Before Mr Read began giving his evidence, the inquiry chair emotionally revealed that another victim passed away last week without ever receiving the money she was owed.

The Post Office boss said it was of “deep regret” to him that the process was taking so long. He blamed bureaucracy, not prejudice or penny pinching.

He said it was “astonishing” that it was his organisation managing some of the schemes, given the lack of trust people have in the Post Office.

Advertisement

Could the government be using the Post Office as a “shield” to remove itself from compensation decisions? “That could be a description, yes,” he admitted.

Getty Images Red Post Office sign, with Bureau de Change on a smaller sign hanging underneath itGetty Images

Staff implicated by the scandal still working

For many sub-postmasters, the continued employment of people who investigated them or were at the Post Office at the height of the scandal is a bone of contention.

Mr Read revealed three employees are still being investigated as part of Project Phoenix. That means they’ve been accused of wrongdoing.

He also admitted a “handful” of investigators were still with the organisation – albeit in different roles now.

Advertisement

The chief executive wanted to assure the inquiry he would not ignore specific allegations and would ask people to step back from roles if it helped with sub-postmaster confidence.

However, when he was shown meeting notes suggesting ministers were happy for the Post Office to be more robust and not worry about employment tribunals, Mr Read was forced to admit they had struggled to “move people on” from the organisation.

Contract for sub-postmasters is ‘heavy-handed’

“Where has the money gone?” It is one of the many, as yet, unanswered questions in this scandal.

Advertisement

Mr Read was repeatedly questioned about the whereabouts of the cash put up by sub-postmasters to cover apparent shortfalls in their branch accounts. The boss put a new figure on the missing money: £36m.

Mr Read said he was annoyed it was proving difficult to work out.

He expressed surprise at survey results suggesting sub-postmasters are still facing problems and using their own savings to make losses good.

Meanwhile, inquiry lawyers pointed to new sub-postmaster contracts which still refer to the Post Office’s investigatory powers, including evidential interview processes under caution. Mr Read admitted this might be “heavy-handed”.

Advertisement

Mr Read’s evidence might now be complete, but he has several months left in the role. He assured the inquiry he would spend the time working to bring about more change. Sub-postmasters will be watching closely.

Source link

Continue Reading

Travel

The pretty Europe train ride that goes through medieval cities, ancient castles and beer spas

Published

on

Max Molyneux took a pretty European train ride that goes through medieval cities and ancient castles

STARING at the gigantic copper cauldron where the King of England used to bathe, I kick myself for ­forgetting my swimmers.

It’s not often you get the chance to share the same hot tub as the supreme ruler of the British Empire.

Max Molyneux took a pretty European train ride that goes through medieval cities and ancient castles

5

Max Molyneux took a pretty European train ride that goes through medieval cities and ancient castlesCredit: Supplied
Max's journey began in Prague

5

Advertisement
Max’s journey began in PragueCredit: Getty

I’m in a spa town deep in a Bohemian forest, unearthing areas of the Czech Republic I’d never heard of.

For three exciting days I would be exploring this beautiful central European country entirely by rail.

My journey begins in Prague. The beautiful capital city on the Vltava River is packed with history.

Climbing the hill up to Prague castle is a must.

Advertisement

The fortress is the largest castle complex in the world. Inside its towering walls are historical buildings and museums including the Old Royal Palace and the city’s gothic temple, St Vitus Cathedral.

That evening I catch a train west.

Unlike those in the UK, trains in Czechia run smoothly and are dirt cheap.

Prague is soon far behind as the IC 558 train trundles along, following the Berounka river’s meandering path through the countryside.

Advertisement

I catch snapshots through the window.

Paddle boarders punt down the river.

The ‘ultimate city break’ just a few hours from the UK with beer spas and lager for £1.50

Giggling kids tumble down a giant inflatable slide at a village fete.

As the sun sets the train pulls into the serene spa town of Marianske Lazne in the deep Bohemian forest.

Advertisement

Since local monks discovered the mineral-rich springs in the early 19th century, people have been coming here to drink, bathe in, and even inject the healing water and gases that bubble out of the ground.

The town’s heyday was in the Victorian era when spa treatments were popular among high society.

One such spa obsessive was King Edward VII, who visited Marianske Lanze nine times for weight-loss treatments in a purpose-built room at the Nové Lázně spa.

The hotel is still there and for a hefty price, guests can book a session in the large copper bath he used.

Advertisement

My own treatment takes place at the Falkensteiner hotel and spa, a five-star resort with a 2,500sq metre spa complex, 162 rooms, heated pool, excellent restaurant and stylish bar.

After a buffet breakfast, I’m ushered into a dimly lit wood-panelled room where a bath of warm water the colour of milky tea is waiting.

Max at a beer spa

5

Max at a beer spaCredit: Supplied

The slightly sparkling mineral-rich water is pumped directly from the hotel’s own Alexandra Spring, 800 metres away.

Advertisement

The treatment is said to widen blood vessels, lowering blood pressure and improving circulation to relax the mind and body.

The health benefits of spa treatments like this are taken seriously.
Drinking fountains dotted around the town deliver water from the local springs.

Iron-rich and metallic- tasting it is believed to help alleviate inflammation. I hope it does, because it tastes revolting.

Staying at the spa resort hotels is pricey.

Advertisement

But there are plenty of cheaper hotels in the town and treatments at the spa complexes are available for walk-in customers too.

Czechs are the world’s most prolific beer drinkers, consuming 184.1 litres of it each every year.

Nowhere is this obsession more obvious than in my next stop, the city of Pilsen.

It’s just over an hour away by rail and my train ticket costs the equivalent of £6.

Advertisement

Home of the world-famous Pilsner beer, the town is swimming in the stuff and by the end of the day, I will be too — literally.

Among the most popular brews is the famous Pilsner Urquell. The first ever pilsner beer, it has been brewed here since 1842.

A tour of the Pilsner Urquell brewery is fascinating.

The 90-minute walk-through shows the original brewing method and vats from the early 19th century.

Advertisement

Then, the modern, vastly scaled-up operation, where staggering amounts are brewed, bottled then shipped worldwide.

The tour ends in the miles of subterranean tunnels where the beer was once stored.

Here, brewmasters keep the traditional method alive, brewing the Pilsner in oak barrels.

Comparisons are regularly made to the modern method to ensure it tastes authentic.

Advertisement

And you can judge for yourself, with a glass of cold Pilsner poured straight from the barrel at the end.

I head off to soak up some more beer, this time through my pores.

On the outskirts of Pilsen, at the Purkmistr Brewery, an interesting mash-up has spawned the “beer spa” — a big wooden bathtub full of warm, hoppy lager, minus the alcohol (it dries out the skin).

Submerged up to my neck in barley, hops and yeast with a large keg of pilsner within arm’s reach and Oasis’s Wonderwall playing over the complex’s sound system, I feel I have achieved lager-nirvana.

Advertisement
The serene spa town of Marianske Lazne is deep in the Bohemian forest

5

The serene spa town of Marianske Lazne is deep in the Bohemian forestCredit: Getty
Pilsen is home to the world-famous Pilsner beer

5

Pilsen is home to the world-famous Pilsner beerCredit: Getty

GO: Czech Republic

GETTING THERE: Wizz Air flies from Luton to Prague from £17.99 each way.

Advertisement

See wizzair.com.

For Czech Railway ­tickets see https://cd.cz.

STAY THERE: One night’s B&B at the 5* Falkensteiner Hotel & Spa is from £162.45 per night.

For more information see falkensteiner.com.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 WordupNews.com