You can see the historic aircraft in action

Spitfires, Hurricanes and the renowned Red Arrows will be flying over Cambridgeshire this weekend. Every year, the Imperial War Museum in Duxford has a flying season with regular air shows throughout spring, summer and autumn giving people plenty of opportunities to watch some aircraft in action.

The impressive air show also offers other activities happening throughout the weekend to keep each visitor happy and entertained. This weekend is one to mark in the calendar if you haven’t already as the Duxford Battle of Britain Air Show will take place on Saturday, September 12 and Sunday, September 13.

You can enter the museum from 8am and the air show will begin at around 1pm, with the flight line closing from about 12pm. The event will end at 7pm.

Tickets for adults aged 16 or over cost £49.50 but you can save 10 per cent if you are a IWM member. Children 15-years-old or younger go free with a standard ticket booking.

Tickets for either the Saturday or Sunday air show are available to buy here.

The flying show is the main event of the day, with many iconic aircraft included in the fly list this year. These include: Supermarine Spitfire MK I X4650 which starred in the 2017 film Dunkirk; Hawker Hurricane MK IIB BE505, the world’s only airworthy two-seat example of the famous Hurricane; Supermarine Seafire MK XVII SX336; and the Red Arrows, one of the world’s premier aerobatic display teams will feature on Saturday only. The display will be between 1.25 and 2pm.

The air show may seem like a long wait from arrival leading up to 1pm but there is an array of activities for families to enjoy throughout the day. The event will host live performances such as the Duxford Dancers, The Umbrella Big Band and D-Day Darlings.

There is a Traditional Steam Fair with a Galloper Carousel, Helter Skelter, Swing Boats and Toy Town ride for young children from 10am to 6pm. There is also a Miniature Steam Train running from 10am to 6pm as well as a Spitfire Design Studio on Sunday only.

For the true aircraft and history enthusiasts, Second World War re-enactors and Living History groups will take you on a journey through time with immersive storytelling. A ticket includes access to the museum’s extensive collections as well, so it is worth saving some time to take a stroll around some of the museum’s displays.

There are also a range of food and drink retailers across the airfield to ensure everyone can find something to enjoy on this action-packed day.

How to get there?

The museum is ideally located near the M11 and takes about 15-minutes to reach from Cambridge. If you are driving, parking is limited and a parking permit must be purchased when you buy the event tickets.

Alternatively, if driving is easier but you are eagerly trying to avoid the inevitable queues on the day, you could consider using the Trumpington Park and Ride. A free shuttle bus service is available from Cambridge railway station and Trumpington Park and Ride, making it easy to access the event.

She said her husband feared she was ‘going to die’ at one point

A woman who experienced a miscarriage was originally told a needed surgery could be done in around two weeks before she was later rushed to hospital in an emergency. The woman, 35, and her husband had been undergoing IVF privately and became pregnant in July following their second embryo transfer.

The woman, who asked not to be named, experienced a miscarriage which was confirmed on August 13. After the miscarriage was confirmed, she opted for surgical management to remove the remaining pregnancy tissue.

However, the couple claim they were told Addenbrooke’s Hospital in Cambridge could not provide the surgery for around two weeks, due to a lack of available surgical capacity/cover.

At the time, the woman raised concerns about whether it was safe or appropriate for a woman with a confirmed miscarriage requiring surgical management to be left waiting for this length of time. She was particularly worried about the risks of bleeding, retained pregnancy tissue and infection, adding it was “unacceptable”.

Following concerns raised by the 35-year-old of the potential risks, a midwife booked her in at another hospital for August 21, more than a week after the miscarriage was confirmed. She was then rushed to Addenbrooke’s Hospital by ambulance after haemorrhaging in the early hours of August 18, days prior to her scheduled surgery at another hospital.

The 35-year-old said she had developed significant bleeding and was passing large clots. She described them as the size of “golf balls”.

She was told she would not receive a scan until the following morning (August 19). The bleeding continued and her blood pressure reportedly dropped. Following escalation, her IV fluids were increased and a scan was performed.

Her blood pressure subsequently dropped again and later that day, she was taken for emergency surgery to remove the remaining pregnancy tissue. She said it was difficult for her to accept that it went from being told there was no timely surgical slot available to requiring emergency surgery after haemorrhaging.

The grieving woman felt as though it shouldn’t have reached a stage where it was an emergency. She said her husband thought she “was going to die” at one point.

The woman said her experience raised questions about “patient safety, access to urgent gynaecological care and the wider provision of care for women experiencing pregnancy loss”. She said this has been “physically and emotionally traumatic”.

Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust (CUH) adheres to treatment guidelines set by the National Institute of Clinical Excellence. A CUH spokesperson said they send their “deepest sympathy” to anyone who experiences pregnancy loss and miscarriage.

After being sent home, the 35-year-old returned to the hospital within days suffering in pain. She said that it was “getting worse” over time at home and ended up being in “complete agony again”.

During this subsequent admission, she again became concerned that the seriousness of her condition was not being recognised. Tests identified infection markers, where the patient required antibiotics before being discharged, she claimed. She said she was left asking what might have happened if they had accepted the initial plan and gone home.

The woman explained that there were individual members of staff who were “exceptional” during her care. However, her concern remains with the system they are working within.

The woman added: “We were already grieving the loss of a very much wanted IVF pregnancy. We then found ourselves fighting for access to surgical care, being taken to hospital by ambulance following haemorrhaging, requiring emergency surgery and subsequently being readmitted with infection.”

She said her and her husband paid for their own IVF and said “not only is it a financial commitment but we have been wanting to do this for three years so it makes it an even harder loss. Addenbrooke’s is meant to be this gold-standard hospital but they didn’t have slots to do a procedure that was needed.”

A CUH spokesperson added: “We always aim to treat patients requiring surgical management after a miscarriage as quickly as possible, and we work with our health partners to provide alternative options so patients can be seen sooner.

“Sometimes waiting times can be longer due to growing demand for our services, but we are working hard to reduce these, and this year have increased theatre space and invested in additional staff.”

Oldham MP Jim McMahon has welcomed plans to give England’s mayors the power to introduce a levy on overnight visitors. But critics have warned it could cause ‘irreparable harm’ to the tourism industry

The Minister for devolution has said the Government’s tourist tax is about ‘proportionality and fairness in the system’, despite critics saying it could cause ‘irreparable harm’ to the tourism industry.

Jim McMahon, MP for Oldham West and Royton, said the plans to give English mayors more powers to introduce an overnight visitor levy on visitors, from 2028, were welcomed by regional leaders.

The tax will be a percentage of the accommodation cost and will apply to hotels, B&Bs and even short-term lets such as Airbnbs. Temporary accommodation and shelters or refuges would not be subject to the levy. The rate will be uncapped but the Government believes mayors won’t charge more than five percent.

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

Mr McMahon defended the move, saying it was about giving elected regional leaders greater freedom to raise money and spend it on local priorities.

“There’s just a growing sense now that too much of the country is being held back by that approach, one by the inability to actually raise revenue to spend on local priorities, but then also just on spending decisions,” he told the Manchester Evening News. “The number of red tape governments… over generations have put on local government and regional government is part of the problem.

“The direction of travel we’re going in is more fiscal freedom for our mayors, recognising that they have a democratic mandate to the local residents that they can be judged through the ballot box.”

The move had already been hinted at by Andy Burnham last month, in his first sit-down interview with this paper. Mr Burnham did not explicitly rule out tax rises, when asked about the financial challenges of delivering his ambitious 10-year-plan for the country.

He said the decision to put up local taxes was for regional mayors, who would be able to impose certain surcharges, such as an overnight visitor levy.

Greater Manchester already has its own City Visitor Charge – a £1 per room, per night fee, that was introduced in April 2023 to pay for measures aimed at attracting more tourists.

Government sources have insisted mayors are unlikely to make the tax too high in order to protect local tourism industries, but the levy’s lack of an upper limit has sparked concern.

Mr McMahon said it was ‘deliberate’, adding: “Government can’t on the one hand say that we trust local leaders to do what’s right for their area, and we believe in that direct democratic accountability between them and their electorate and then say, but by the way, the government is going to bind your hands.”

But he insisted that mayors were aware that the levies would need to be ‘proportionate’.

Advertisement

Mr McMahon said the tax needed to be a percentage of the accommodation rather than a flat fee.

He said: “The reason for that is, you can imagine a weekend in Blackpool, a modest B&B – why on earth should you pay a flat fee that means you pay exactly the same as somebody who’s staying at The Ritz in London.”

He added: “I think there’s a thing about proportionality and fairness in the system, where we have been quite clear about that.”

It is yet unclear how much Greater Manchester Combined Authority could actually raise from this proposed levy. Mr McMahon said it was for GMCA to do the analysis on how much to charge.

“Even in a modest economy, this is money that wasn’t there before,” he said.

Plans for the tax were first announced under former prime minister Keir Starmer.

Angela Rayner, Secretary of State for Housing, Communities and Local Government, outlined the proposals during a meeting with regional mayors in No 10 North in Manchester on Thursday.

She said: “Our amazing towns and cities, and our picturesque rural and coastal communities welcome millions of visitors every year – local leaders should have the power to make the most of that popularity.

“This measure will give mayors the choice to raise and reinvest funding where it’s needed most. It’ll help support the local services, public spaces and attractions that both residents and visitors rely on, with decisions taken by people who know their area best.”

More than 42 million international visitors came to the UK last year, spending more than £32bn.

Downing Street said the levy is about ensuring the benefits of tourism stay in local communities and would only apply to people paying for overnight accommodation.

However, the spokesperson was unable to say if areas without mayors would be able to introduce a visitor levy.

So-called tourist taxes are commonplace across European cities such as Rome, Berlin, Paris and Amsterdam.

Edinburgh introduced a five percent charge this summer.

However, Europe has half the VAT rates on hotels and hospitality – at 10 percent.

Mr McMahon rejected claims this could risk making holidays in Britain more expensive.

“If you go to large parts of Europe or America, you will pay the national sales tax but you’ll also pay a local sales tax on top of that…and then on top of that you can pay an overnight tax,” he said.

“But why do you go away? It’s for the experiences. I think this matters for quality of life, people do like the ability to go around the world in an affordable way. But it’s important that Britain can compete.”

The Government insists the levy will shield families from disproportionate costs for cheaper holidays.

The plans have sparked strong opposition from the hospitality industry.

The owner of Premier Inn, Britain’s biggest hotel chain, said it would be ‘hugely damaging’ and urged ministers to ‘avoid inflicting what could be irreparable harm on this large and vital sector of the economy’.

Industry trade body UKHospitality points out that England already has a higher tax base than many continental destinations with tourist taxes.

“It is simply not true to say that this is a standard thing elsewhere in the world,” said Allen Simpson, chief executive of UKHospitality. “It’s not a question of who levies the tax, it’s a question of the tax level, and we are making one of our biggest export sectors uncompetitive.”

He told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme that the plans would put jobs at risk in some communities, and that the new tourism tax in Edinburgh was “already having damaging effects”. He said holidays in the UK were “already more expensive” than they appeared because of higher VAT.

“What we’re talking about here is an open-ended power for mayors to set tourism taxes at any level they want,” Simpson said. “And remember that if you go to Paris, if you go to Rome, if you go to Berlin, you’re paying a small tourism tax, but it’s capped.”

He continued: “It will be the case that you’ll have holiday parks which can’t open in the shoulder seasons, and of course people who go on holiday will just have that little bit less money in their pocket.”

However, Mr McMahon pointed to popular holiday destinations like Lake District and Cornwall, saying they ‘they deal with the impact of tourism, in terms of being able to fulfill the demands of tourism and provide public services… and just improving that visitor experience‘.

He said it would ultimately be down to mayors to decide whether they will actually impose the levy.

Kemi Badenoch, leader of the Conservative Party, criticised the plans.

She wrote on social media: “Labour’s answer to everything? Tax more. Hotels already face 20% VAT. Now they’ll face VAT on Labour’s new tourism tax too.”

The announcement was also slammed by Reform UK leader Nigel Farage, who said ‘holidays in Britain will become hundreds of pounds more expensive’. He claimed the two Reform mayors in Greater Lincolnshire and Hull and East Yorkshire ‘won’t touch the ‘levy’.

The Conservative shadowing housing secretary David Simmonds said: “VAT is already charged at 20% on hotels – much higher than in other countries – and now they’ll pay VAT on this tourism tax too: a Labour double whammy.”

Henri Murison, chief executive of the Northern Powerhouse Partnership, said local leaders are ‘better placed than Whitehall in deciding how revenue should be spent.

But he warned about the overall tax burden on tourism.

He said: “We do need to consider the balance of tax raised overall by Scottish authorities, in Wales and now the English regions added to that by UK Government.

“In our Budget consultation response, we have called on the government to undertake a review on the international competitiveness of the current rate of VAT on hotel stays and related costs alongside introducing this new Mayoral power to make sure the UK maximises inbound tourism.”

It has been 25 years since the devastating attacks of September 11 2001. Amid the reflection that followed emerged the most comprehensive examination of any terrorist attack in history, the 9/11 Commission Report. Several statements in this forensic diagnosis continue to shape our understanding of those events. These range from the intelligence systems that were “blinking red” in the months preceding the attacks to various institutional “failures of imagination” that left the threat unrecognised.

Yet the commission’s investigation into the circumstances of the 9/11 terrorist attacks was also, fundamentally, a report on how to reimagine and improve security. The commission’s recommendations foreshadowed and legitimised a new model of security that emerged from the ashes of the twin towers, one centred on protecting critical infrastructure using an integrated security architecture.

The 9/11 commission’s blueprint involved integrating agencies, systems and technologies. This principle took many forms. The integration of intelligence reporting is illustrated by UK’s Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre (JTAC). Technology became weaved into security activities. Important spaces were fortified using a “layered security” approach.

Symbolic buildings, financial districts, city centres, stadiums, high-end shopping malls, and especially airports were the first to be upgraded. Passenger preclearance, biometric documents, full-body scanners, armed police patrols and the canopy of surveillance cameras became the building blocks of these contemporary fortresses. With each attack following 9/11, this template is reasserted. Whatever the threat, the answer is always more integration, more technology, more layers, more of the same.

But after 25 years of building these new architectures of security and a vast expenditure of blood and treasure to fight the global war on terror, are we any safer?

Academics and security experts are asking this question. The conclusion is generally that that a similar attack is improbable – though obviously nobody can say for sure. But we offer a very different analysis based on many years spent examining security systems up close.

Our new book, The Empty Watchtower: Counterterrorism After 9/11 draws on two decades of empirical fieldwork. We experienced these developments and their legacies first hand. Across five distinct case studies, we saw expensive, poorly integrated and porous security systems that look the part but are prone to catastrophic failure.

This journey led us into surveillance control rooms and secure sites to study the rollout of biometric security systems in airports, cities and major sporting events. We participated in counterterrorism training programmes in multiple countries and, more recently, conducted ethnographic research while embedded with specialist surveillance units in several European countries.

Advanced surveillance?

The immediate aftermath of 9/11 stimulated a clamour to do something, to bring certainty against uncertain and terrifying possibilities. International airports became another kind of frontier, a key testing ground for new surveillance systems. Technologists recommended fabulous new solutions for identifying hostile actors, all while keeping the flow of law-abiding passengers moving.

But across all five of our recent case studies, we found security staff who did not understand the technical systems they operated, surveillance cameras pointed in the wrong direction – and declining morale. In one location, the crisis management control room – the centre of the fortress – was used for storage.

Over the past decades, the security sector has placed huge emphasis on training staff to conduct behavioural detection – spotting signs of imminent threat through observation of body movement or facial expressions. We spent months in several European capital cities with covert surveillance teams observing the practice.

In several jurisdictions, these teams carried out their missions to a high standard. But what was the standard? Thankfully, terrorism is rare (though less so in countries destabilised by the war on terror). This means that standards are hard to verify in terms of proving a negative; an absence of rare attacks.

It also means that, in many countries, most indicators of a potential threat are rarely more than signs of stress, fatigue, or other maladies that often affect people in crowds. And so, advanced behavioural and technological systems focused on ordinary people as if they had something to hide.

Worse, because of the discretion accorded to counterterrorism policing, and lack of oversight, the full power of the state was sometimes trained on vulnerable people who had broken no law. Worse still, many of these new post-9/11 policing techniques were improperly integrated with technology-based systems. At times, this convergence targeted entire communities, evident in the abandoned Project Champion in 2011, which involved hundreds of cameras being installed in mainly Muslim areas of Birmingham.

Hidden vulnerabilities?

Several countries where we studied counterterror policing, such as the UK and France, struggle with the number and diversity of individuals on their counterterrorism watchlists. Therefore, we cannot afford to rely on the intelligence services to unmask every terrorist network or foil every attack.

Instead, we have become dangerously reliant on the security fortresses, composed of layers of technology and policing techniques. In our book we review several major attacks during the recent past, such as the Brussels airport attack in 2016. We show that successful terrorist attacks disrupt the points at which technology and human systems integrate – separating the layers of security and potentially leading to destabilisation and collapse.

The intersection of these two domains – technology and organisational systems – has been crucial to both the success and failure of security practice. Yet shortcomings exist in each of these components. As our other work has shown, security technology is routinely overhyped, with benefits assumed and failures routinely overlooked. Abandoned experiments with facial recognition technology, unstaffed control rooms, and AI hallucinated “intelligence” all constitute real world examples that speak to an uncritical faith in technology.

The most successful environments we encountered arose from the initiative, competence and motivation of specific individuals.

Following another pattern set out in the 9/11 commission report, responses to terrorist attacks routinely call for more technology and better integration. Systemic failure and absent technology is easily diagnosed. But correcting them is harder, particularly when solutions call for embellishments of the same systems that were the problem in the first place.

This article features references to books that have been included for editorial reasons, and may contain links to bookshop.org. If you click on one of the links and go on to buy something from bookshop.org The Conversation UK may earn a commission.

Semaglutide, often marketed under the Ozempic and Wegovy banners, was first placed on Wada’s monitoring list in 2024. Tirzepatide, commonly branded as Mounjaro, was added this year.

For a substance to move from the monitoring list to the prohibited list, it needs to meet two of three criteria: that it can enhance sport performance, it poses a health risk to an athlete, or it violates the spirit of sport.

Wada has started one study and is preparing another to examine the effects of the drugs in conditions designed to mimic high-level exercise.

“It’s still going to take us a little bit of time to collect all this information, because they are highly controlled studies in very specific conditions,” said Rabin.

“What we want to see is whether some of the pharmacological impact on human physiology that has been observed in obese patients would also occur in non-obese, highly trained people.”

Rabin said potential benefits could also be offset by side effects such as nausea, fatigue and the loss of muscle mass.

“If you’re an athlete and you lose muscle mass, that may be very counterproductive for what you’re trying to achieve,” he said.

“So all these elements show you that it’s not a very straightforward answer.”

Under the usual timetable, a change approved at next September’s executive committee meeting would take effect in January 2028.

A prolific shoplifter who targeted commercial addresses in Cwmbran has been jailed for more than 12 months.

Warren Turnbull, of no fixed address, admitted to multiple counts of theft from a shop when he was sentenced at Newport Magistrates’ Court on Monday 7 September.

Turnbull, aged 46, stole items, ranging from sausage rolls to a microwave, from stores in the Cwmbran area between Wednesday 22 July and Tuesday 1 September.

At the time of his offending, Turnbull was on licence after previously receiving a suspended sentence for multiple theft offences on Monday 22 June.

This week, Turnbull was sentenced to 70 weeks’ imprisonment.

Inspector Laura Paget, from Gwent Police’s Community Action Team, said:

“We’re committed to keeping our communities safe from harm and recognise that theft is not a victimless crime.

“The impact of these offences committed by is Turnbull is hugely felt by our communities, notably businesses and retailers.

“With overwhelming evidence against him, Turnbull had little option but to plead guilty to the 15 offences he faced in court.

“Turnbull’s chaotic lifestyle has led to his offending, and we know this sentence will be welcomed by those businesses and people affected.

“It is crucial that anyone who is impacted by crime, including theft and burglary, reports it to us so we can continue to target criminals, like Turnbull, who make life a misery for businesses in Cwmbran and beyond.”

The fundraiser will take place at Hollywood Bowl on 19th April 2027, in a collaboration between York Against Cancer and Menfulness.

Twenty-two teams of eight bowlers will play five games each, with the remaining games completed by VIP guests and volunteers to reach the 1,000-game target.

Andy Knowles, CEO of York Against Cancer, said: “1,000 Games bowling is about far more than strikes and spares.

“It’s a fun evening that carries a deeper purpose, raising funds for York Against Cancer’s vital work supporting those affected by cancer, and Menfulness and their support for local men, opening the conversation around men’s mental health.

“We’re especially glad to be teaming up with Menfulness, a fellow York-based charity whose work so closely maps onto our own communities across YO postcodes.

“Together, one frame at a time, I know we can really make a difference.”

The event will bring together businesses, community groups and families for an evening of friendly competition and fundraising.

Prizes will be awarded for the highest team score, the highest individual game score and most funds raised before the event night.

The two charities support people across York and the surrounding area, focusing on both physical and mental wellbeing.

The partnership highlights the importance of community support networks and the connections between physical and emotional health.

Jack Woodhams, CEO of Menfulness, said: “We’re incredibly grateful to be joining forces with York Against Cancer for what promises to be a brilliant evening.

“At Menfulness, we know that good mental wellbeing is about connection, friendship and having people around you who understand.

“Events like the charity bowling night bring people together, raise vital funds and help us continue providing opportunities for men to connect and access support when they need it.

“We’re hugely grateful to everyone taking part, fundraising, volunteering and supporting the event; together, we can make a real difference to people across our communities.”

The event aims to raise funds for essential services and also to increase awareness of the impact both organisations have on the lives of people in the region.

Tyler Heard said he saw the dog dash from the rails and in front of his mount My Spritely in the Glass Times EBF Novice Stakes, won by the William Haggas-trained Quite Cheeky

A jockey has spoken of his relief that a dog escaped unharmed when it dashed under the legs of his horse during a race.

The animal crossed the path of Tyler Heard’s thoroughbred My Spritely, a triple-figure outsider running in the Glass Times EBF Novice Stakes at Epsom on Thursday.

Heard, 24, recalled how he was approaching the two furlong pole on the Jim Boyle-trained filly when the dog “came out of nowhere.”

Somehow it just missed the hooves of the horse, out of contention at the time but on the way to completing the seven furlong contest.

“It happened so fast and I saw the dog about two strides before he crossed in front of us,” said Heard, who competes in around 200 Flat races each year and rides out for John and Thady Gosden’s top stable in Newmarket.

“I was shocked to see it on the course and it felt like he went in a gap between the filly’s legs.

“I was praying he was alright. The dog was so small I don’t think we could have come down, but he was lucky not to have been hurt.”

Clerk of the course Andrew Cooper confirmed the dog, which appeared to go back in the same direction it appeared from, was unscathed after the incident.

The stewards’ report read: “An enquiry was held to consider the circumstances surrounding why a dog appeared on the track, approximately two furlongs out.

“The Clerk of the Course was interviewed.

“After hearing his evidence, a report was forwarded to the Head Office of the British Horseracing Authority for further consideration.”

The race was won by the William Haggas-trained debutant Quite Cheeky (7-1), who held he challenge of Astabuen by a neck.

“He’ll stay further and he really enjoyed the cut in the ground,” jockey Cieren Fallon told Racing TV. “He actually surprised me as I wouldn’t have thought he’d travel so well on such an undulating track, it’s just all on raw natural ability.

“He took the preliminaries in pretty nicely and he didn’t really hit his top speed today, because he was having a good look at everything. I couldn’t pull him up he was full of running.”

But the dog remained the post-race talking point for some time, as some people struggled to believe what they had just seen.

“Did anyone just see a dog ALMOST get trampled @EpsomRacecourse? That lil fella was quite lucky!” one racing fan wrote on X.

And another added: “What on earth have I just watched. A dog has run on the track at Epsom. Why is that not on a lead?”

Tears were no doubt shed up and down the country by EastEnders viewers as show legend Kat Slater (Jessie Wallace) found daughter Zoe (Michelle Ryan) dead in her bed.

The iconic mother and daughter duo – famed for their historic ‘You ain’t my mother! / Yes I am!‘ showdown of the early noughties – reunited last year in scenes which fans waited two decades for.

Zoe was at the centre of plenty of drama upon her return, including a quest for her missing son and exposing her relentless stalker, but sadly after just a year her time on Albert Square has come to an end.

Earlier this week, she was on a mission to locate Charlie’s cab and, after finding it online, she planned to get a good price out of the seller, who was quite a piece of work.

Things took a devastating turn when Zoe took a tumble, banging her head on some rubble nearby. A row erupted between Kat and Zoe in the aftermath when the Queen Vic landlady learned that her daughter had made off with the cab without paying.

They put down their metaphorical weapons, however, and shared a heart-to-heart, confessing their loved for one another. Devastatingly, this would be the last time they’d see each other as, once the pain of the injury she sustained took hold, Zoe struggled to stand up straight.

After catching Max Branning (Jake Wood) with Linda Carter (Kellie Bright) in the barrel store of the Vic, she heads upstairs into her bedroom.

Max gave her a lecture and urged her to keep shtum about what she’d witnessed but, believing her to be drunk, he left her alone. Zoe cried out for help – for her mum – but no-one came.

In heartbreaking scenes, Kat subsequently found Zoe dead.

For a first look at what’s to come in the immediate aftermath, here are spoilers for Monday.

What happens next in EastEnders? New spoilers for Monday, September 14

The next episode picks up shortly after this one, with Kat utterly reeling in the wake of having found Zoe’s lifeless body.

Desperately hoping for it to not be real and unable to share what she’s uncovered, she keeps the news to herself.

In an episode seemingly devoted entirely to the Slaters, Jean (Gillian Wright), Mo (Laila Morse) and Lily (Lillia Turner) prepare to move out of No. 31, with Suki Panesar-Unwin (Balvinder Sopal) having followed through on her threat to evict them over unpaid rent.

Lily is upset over losing her family home but Mo attempts to cheer her up. They head over to the Vic to move in, where they intend to begin the next chapter of their lives.

Alfie Moon (Shane Richie), meanwhile, soon learns the truth – he discovers that Zoe has tragically died.

In subsequent scenes, the Slater clan find out what’s happened – and they’re both stunned and heartbroken.

Later in the week, the family attempt to make sense of Zoe’s death and come to terms with such a devastating loss. Kat is utterly broken by what has happened and thus locks herself away from everyone as she tries to process what’s happened.

News of Zoe’s passing filters out into the Square, with the residents of Walford left reeling. And it affects the last individual who saw her alive the most!

EastEnders airs these scenes Monday September 14 at 7:30pm on BBC One or stream from 6am on BBC iPlayer

If you’ve got a soap or TV story, video or pictures get in touch by emailing us soaps@metro.co.uk – we’d love to hear from you.

Join the community by leaving a comment below and stay updated on all things soaps on our homepage.