Header image: AI-generated illustration by WordUp News.

Jemima Goldsmith, the TV producer and former partner of Russell Brand, has publicly accused him of “violence, coercive control and abuse”, saying she had to call police to remove him from her home during a violent incident in 2014. She made the claims in a long statement on X on Monday evening, shortly after Brand was sentenced to 10 years and six months in prison for rape and sexual assault.

The allegations are Goldsmith’s own account and have not been tested in court. She said she did not press charges at the time. Brand has not been reported as responding to them in any of the coverage reviewed here.

What Jemima Goldsmith said happened in 2014

Goldsmith, 52, said she was “strongly and unequivocally” on the side of Brand’s victims and was “in awe of the courageous women who came forward” at his trial. She then described her own experience. “I have had my own personal experience of his violence, coercive control and abuse,” she wrote, adding that she had called police to have him removed from her house during a violent incident.

She said she chose not to press charges or go public because she was worried about how press attention would affect her then-teenage children. She said she has neither seen nor spoken to Brand since 2014, and that the episode “was a difficult period in my life which has had a lasting impact”, though she said her pain “pales in comparison” to that of the women who testified. Reports indicate the pair were together for roughly a year, from around late 2013.

She also said she helped the journalists behind the 2023 Channel 4 Dispatches documentary and the Times and Sunday Times reporting on Brand. According to her statement, she had agreed to testify about his “abusiveness” if the newspaper that published the accounts were ever sued. Sunday Times chief news correspondent Rosamund Urwin, who worked on that investigation, told the BBC that Goldsmith had helped her “a lot”.

Why she spoke out now: the harassment injunction

Goldsmith said she felt she had “no choice” but to share personal details because of what she called misleading reports and speculation about a harassment injunction. She and Brand obtained it against a woman who had been booked to give Brand a massage at Goldsmith’s home in June 2014. The injunction came to light after Brand’s conviction, having been highlighted by the campaign group Tax Policy Associates. Coverage differs on the date: the BBC and NME report it as 2015, while the Guardian initially said 2014 and later amended its article to clarify the circumstances.

Goldsmith said the masseuse was at her house for about 30 minutes and that she was present throughout. She said she “did not see anything untoward”. She said the woman later told police she had been pushed in the back by Brand and attacked by Goldsmith’s dog. According to Goldsmith, police reviewed her statement and CCTV footage and found there was no case to answer. Both she and Brand denied the allegations at the time, NME reports.

Goldsmith alleged that the woman then sent “vicious antisemitic and threatening” messages and spread “untrue” claims about her online. She said she agreed to a harassment order, suggested by Brand’s lawyer, solely to stop her and her family being targeted. The Guardian said it could not reach the woman for comment.

Goldsmith added that she had instructed her lawyer in December last year to propose varying the order so the woman could speak to police again. She said she was told any change would also need Brand’s agreement, and that she has no way to compel him. Renewed coverage of the injunction, she said, had exposed her to “vile hatred and abuse online”. Urwin told the BBC she had seen that abuse and that the story was “much more complicated than they realise”.

The sentence behind the statement

Brand, 51, was convicted last Thursday at Southwark Crown Court of one count of rape and three counts of sexual assault, involving four women and offences between 2004 and 2009. He was cleared of two further rape charges and one of attempted indecent assault. Sentencing him, the judge said he had shown a “casual arrogant disregard to any woman’s right to say no”, and that his fame had led him to believe he could “act when you liked and how you liked”.

Under sentencing guidelines, offenders jailed for four years or more for certain serious violent or sexual offences are released at the two-thirds point, which in Brand’s case would be seven years. He would then be likely to spend the rest of the sentence on licence. A van believed to be carrying him was seen arriving at HMP Wandsworth after the hearing.

Detective Superintendent Andy Furphy of the Metropolitan Police called the sentence a “significant milestone” and described Brand as a “dangerous offender”, paying tribute to the women who came forward.

For Goldsmith, the timing matters. Her statement ends with her saying she is “glad and relieved” that Brand has “finally faced justice”. The claims she makes about her own treatment, though, remain her allegations alone: no charges were brought over the 2014 incident and none of the sources report any legal proceedings arising from it.

Explore more on this topic with Vexel Search.

Header image: AI-generated illustration by WordUp News.

A civil servant fraud trial at Southwark Crown Court has ended with a jury finding Kashim Chowdhury guilty of nine counts of fraud, after the court heard he held overlapping full-time public sector jobs without telling his employers. He has been remanded in custody and has not yet been sentenced.

What the jury decided

Chowdhury, 56, from Whitechapel in east London, was unanimously convicted after about seven hours of deliberation. The verdicts were eight counts of fraud by false representation and one count of fraud by failure to disclose. One outlet reported his age as 55, but the BBC and the Evening Standard gave it as 56.

The court heard he worked for eight public sector employers between February 2020 and September 2023, earning almost £350,000 in total. According to the BBC, prosecutors said he fraudulently earned more than £284,000 during the periods when his jobs overlapped. The Standard reported that jurors were told of more than £280,000 in gross pay for months when he held more than one full-time post.

How the prosecution said it worked

Prosecutors told the court Chowdhury gave inaccurate information about his employment status on application forms and did not disclose that he was already a civil servant. Once hired, they said, he did not tell his employers he was working elsewhere. Lucy Organ, prosecuting, said: “Clearly, he would not have been employed by his employers if they had known he had multiple other full-time jobs.”

The court heard he began at Tower Hamlets Council in February 2020 and took a second job at Defra in April 2021. A third post, at East London NHS Trust, followed for four months in 2022. He later gained roles at the Department of Health and Social Care, the UK Health Security Agency, the Department for Business and Trade, the Food Standards Agency and the Home Office. By spring 2023 he was being paid for up to five full-time posts at once. At one point he was contracted to work 183 hours a week, more hours than there are in seven days.

Prosecutors said he exploited the remote working that became commonplace during the Covid-19 pandemic. The court heard he told employers he was caring for his mother, who had dementia and was later diagnosed with terminal cancer in 2023. Prosecutors also said he used sick leave to cope with the load. In March 2023 he was on sick leave from four organisations while, the court heard, still working for the Home Office without telling it he was ill.

Evidence from managers

Several managers gave evidence about his performance. Dan McCartney, who managed him at Defra, said he had to “effectively tell him what to do the whole time” and that Chowdhury kept his camera off on video calls for four to five months, citing technical problems. McCartney said that because no formal performance measures applied, Chowdhury was given a permanent post and stayed about two years.

Aleesha Adams of the UK Health Security Agency described a May 2023 video call in which, she said, Chowdhury coughed heavily, waved tissues at the camera and appeared to be wearing white make-up that came off as he sweated. Chowdhury told the jury he had not been wearing make-up. Adams also said he had joined the call using a Defra email address and blamed a technical error. She told jurors she believed he was lying and escalated her concerns. He left the civil service in September 2023.

The defence account

Chowdhury told the court that work was his “lifeline”. He said he feared losing his livelihood after being made redundant from the Department for Education in 2013 and being diagnosed with PTSD. He told jurors he had not been thinking clearly when applying for jobs because of stress, distress and trauma. Ms Organ told the jury he had lied in evidence, which she said showed “the level of deceit he has descended to.”

Remand and what comes next

Judge Mark Weekes remanded Chowdhury in custody on his birthday, saying he faced a “very significant custodial sentence”. The Standard reported that the prosecution suggested a starting point of five years, within a range of three to six. The judge said the likely sentence gave “every incentive” not to surrender, noting that Chowdhury had access to substantial funds. He also said Chowdhury had “suffered mental health crises”. The BBC reported that bail was refused partly because of the seriousness of the offences and partly for Chowdhury’s own wellbeing.

Sarah Melo, a specialist prosecutor at the Crown Prosecution Service, called the conduct “sustained and deliberate dishonesty” and said the CPS would seek to reclaim the money under the Proceeds of Crime Act. A Defra spokesperson said he had “abused the trust placed in him as a public servant” and that the department would use all available avenues to recover the proceeds. The sources did not give a sentencing date.

Explore more on this topic with Vexel Search.

Header image: AI-generated illustration by WordUp News.

The latest Jon Venables parole review has ended with the child killer staying in prison, after he told the panel considering his case that he was not asking to be freed. A summary of the Parole Board’s findings was published on Monday 9 November 2026.

Venables was ten years old when he and Robert Thompson took two-year-old James Bulger from the Strand shopping centre in Bootle, Merseyside, in 1993. The review took place in private, as such hearings do. According to the published summary, Venables began by submitting an opening statement accepting “the need to undertake further offending work in custody”, and said he was therefore “not seeking release”.

What the Parole Board panel heard

The panel considered evidence from probation officers based in the prison and in the community, three psychologists and a psychiatrist. All but one of those professionals concluded that Venables should remain in custody. The summary does not say which of them took a different view.

Panel members recorded specific concerns. They questioned how well Venables would work with probation staff if released, and “how open and honest he would be in supervision”. They also found “a need for further work in custody to address his sexual interests”. The panel concluded it was “not satisfied that Mr Venables was suitable for release”.

The summary also described how Venables expressed remorse. It said he “articulated his protracted and extreme remorse for his crime”, and that professionals judged this to be “genuine and sincere”. The panel also heard a victim personal statement that “clearly conveyed the devastating impact” of his crime and offending.

A history of release and recall

Venables and Thompson were convicted of murder after a three-week trial at Preston Crown Court. Both were released on life licence in 2001 with new identities, protected by a court injunction. Venables was recalled to prison in February 2010 after indecent images of children were found on his computer. He was freed again in August 2013 with a second new identity, then recalled in November 2017 over the same type of offending. His case was last considered by parole judges in September 2020.

That record shapes how the board now views risk. Its stated priority is further work in custody on the issues behind his recalls, rather than a return to supervision in the community.

Reaction from James Bulger’s mother

Kym Morris, a spokeswoman for James’s mother, Denise Fergus, told Sky News that Ms Fergus’s “overwhelming feeling today is relief”. She described the outcome as “the decision she has desperately waited for”, and said the prospect of Venables’s release had caused Ms Fergus “enormous anxiety”. “Given his repeated offending,” Ms Morris added, “her concerns extend beyond her own family to the safety of other children.”

The sources do not say when Venables might next be eligible for review. They do show that this Jon Venables parole outcome was shaped as much by his own position as by the panel’s findings. He told the board he accepted that more work was needed, and nearly every professional who gave evidence agreed.

Explore more on this topic with Vexel Search.

Header image: AI-generated illustration by WordUp News.

The Russell Brand sentence handed down at Southwark Crown Court on Monday totals 10 years and six months in prison, after the 51-year-old was convicted of one count of rape and three counts of sexual assault involving four women between 2004 and 2009. Under the sentencing guidelines described by the BBC, he would be released at the two-thirds point, which in his case is seven years.

How the Russell Brand sentence breaks down

According to the BBC’s account of the hearing, the judge, Mr Justice Bennathan, imposed nine years for the rape. He added 18 months, nine months and eight months for the three sexual assaults. The offences were spread across several workplaces and settings in London during the early years of Brand’s fame. Brand was found not guilty of two further counts of rape and one count of attempted indecent assault.

The verdicts came on Thursday, at the end of a four-week trial. Brand showed no visible reaction in the dock as the sentence was read. Before being taken to the cells, he mouthed “I love you” to his wife, Laura, who was in court. The Evening Standard reported that he also told her “we’ll be OK”.

What the judge said about fame and power

The judge’s remarks focused on the role of celebrity. He described Brand as a “sexual predator” and criticised his “staggering arrogance”. He said Brand’s status had protected him until 2023, when journalists from the Sunday Times, the Times and Channel 4’s Dispatches set out a series of misconduct allegations. Women then made complaints to police.

Mr Justice Bennathan told Brand he had a “casual arrogant disregard to any woman’s right to say no to you”. He said fame had led him to believe “you could act when you liked and how you liked”. He also said the evidence showed that Brand’s entourage during the peak of his celebrity had “indulged your dreadful behaviour”. He paid tribute to the bravery of the women who gave evidence.

Statements from the women in court

Victim impact statements were heard before sentencing, one from behind a screen. One woman said she had lived in “shock and turmoil for years” and had thought of herself as “damaged goods”. She added: “A leopard may change its spots but it’s still a leopard.”

Another, who was assaulted in 2005, said hearing Brand’s voice on television had made her jump. She said she hoped he would not be allowed to hurt any more women. The woman Brand was convicted of raping described feeling “anxious, humiliated and overwhelmed”. She said she struggled to sleep and eat, had to take time off work, and now lives with trauma. A fourth woman said that after the assault she lost trust in people and no longer felt her working environment was safe.

Release terms and what comes next

The BBC reports that Brand’s sentence is excluded from the early release scheme, because sex offenders are exempt. Offenders jailed for four years or more for certain serious sexual or violent offences are released at the two-thirds point. After release he is likely to spend the rest of the term on licence, with conditions that could include wearing a tag. He must also sign the sex offenders register. The Standard reports that this will be for life.

Brand had already spent four nights in HMP Wandsworth and was expected to return there, according to the Standard.

The question of an appeal is open, and none has been confirmed in the sources. The Standard quoted Raj Chada, head of criminal defence at the firm Hodge Jones & Allen, who is not part of the case. He said there could be “no mistaking the gravity and sickening nature of Brand’s offending”, but that Brand’s lawyers would probably view the Russell Brand sentence as harsh. In his view they would “most likely” argue that the judge had made an example of Brand under media scrutiny. That is one lawyer’s outside assessment, not a statement from Brand’s team. Any appeal would be a matter for the courts.

Header image: AI-generated illustration by WordUp News.

The Chessington evacuation on Sunday morning left visitors turned away and emergency vehicles at the gates of one of Britain’s best-known theme parks, but police now say the threat that prompted it has produced no evidence of a continuing danger.

The Metropolitan Police said it became aware on the morning of Sunday 8 November of “a threat made… against a theme park in Chessington”. In a statement it added that the matter “has been assessed, and no security issues have been identified”. The force described it as “believed to be an isolated incident with no wider risk to the public.” The sources do not say who made the threat, what form it took or what it said. No arrests or charges have been reported.

What visitors saw at the park

Reports on social media described guests being turned away from the resort, and images showed police at the scene. The Mirror reported seeing officers and sniffer dogs at the site, though it noted the circumstances behind the closure were unclear at that point. An unofficial fan account, Chessington Buzz, told followers there was a park-wide evacuation and that emergency services were attending, “as is often standard”. It asked people to “let the teams do their jobs”.

The park itself posted a notice saying the resort was closed. Guests due to visit that day were told their tickets would be accepted at Legoland Windsor, or they could contact customer services after 2pm. The park apologised for the inconvenience and promised further updates.

Operator says “well-rehearsed” procedures were used

A spokesperson for the operator, Merlin Entertainments, described the event as a “security incident”. They said the company worked closely with the Metropolitan Police and “immediately implemented our well-rehearsed safety procedures”, closing the resort as a precaution. The spokesperson said the incident had since been resolved.

The timetable that followed is fairly clear. The Chessington hotel is due to reopen on Monday 9 November. The wider resort will reopen “as planned” on Saturday 14 November, so the Chessington evacuation does not appear to have changed the date on which the park was already due to welcome visitors again. The spokesperson thanked guests for their patience and staff for their “swift response and support.”

Roadworks, not the incident, behind traffic delays

The Independent also noted continuing delays on the A243 Leatherhead Road near the park, between Fairoak Lane and Barwell Business Park. It attributed them to ongoing roadworks rather than to the incident, so drivers in the area should not read them as a sign of further disruption.

Much about the Chessington evacuation remains unexplained. The Met has not said how the threat was communicated or whether any inquiry is continuing. For now, the picture from police and the operator is of a precautionary closure that was followed by an assessment finding no security issues, with the site set to return to normal operation next weekend.

Header image: AI-generated illustration by WordUp News.

Poland is in mourning after the Krakow mass shooting, in which six people were killed and more than a dozen injured on Saturday in the city’s historic Main Square, according to an Associated Press photo gallery published by The Independent.

What is known about the Krakow mass shooting

The material available is brief. It says a gunman opened fire at several locations in the Main Square, one of the best-known public spaces in Poland. Six people died and more than a dozen were hurt. The report gives no further detail on the circumstances of the attack.

It does not say whether anyone has been arrested or charged, and it gives no information about the person said to be responsible. It also does not name the dead or injured, describe how seriously the wounded were hurt, or say what response emergency services and police mounted. Without that information, nothing can responsibly be said here about who was behind the attack or why it happened. Those questions will be for Polish authorities to answer, and for any court proceedings that follow.

A Mass for the victims

The clearest development in the source is the public response. A Mass was held on Sunday to honour those killed. The Independent’s gallery, dated 8 November 2026, runs to 14 images. It was curated by AP photo editors, with the byline of photographer Beata Zawrzel, and shows the Main Square as the country grieved.

The square is a historic heart of Krakow, so an attack there on a Saturday, followed by a memorial Mass the next day, shows how a violent act in a familiar public place can quickly become a moment of national mourning. The photographs focus on that mourning rather than on the attack itself.

What remains unclear

The source is a photo gallery with a short caption, not a full news report. It confirms the death toll, the number of injured, the location and the Sunday Mass, and little else. Details such as the timeline of the shooting, the identities of those affected and the state of any investigation are not covered. WordUp News will update this report if confirmed information becomes available from police or official statements.

For now, the confirmed picture of the Krakow mass shooting is limited: six people dead, more than a dozen injured, and a country gathering in the square to remember them.

Explore more on this topic with Vexel Search.

Header image: AI-generated illustration by WordUp News.

The Krakow shooting has left at least six people dead and 15 injured, Polish authorities said, after gunfire erupted in the city’s historic Main Market Square on Saturday afternoon. Prosecutors said on Sunday that investigators are treating the attack as a terrorist offence. The death toll rose from the five reported in the first hours after the incident.

What happened in Main Market Square

Regional police said reports began arriving at around 3pm on Saturday that a person in a car was firing at people in the square. Krakow is Poland’s second-largest city and a popular tourist destination. A spokesperson for local firefighters told Polsat News that shots were fired from a passing vehicle. The city government confirmed the incident on X.

Witnesses described panic. One man, who gave his name only as Konrad, told the news website Interia he saw shots fired from a driver’s side window and ran to the police station on the square, where people were sheltering on the floor. Daisy Hersey, a British tourist from Hove, told the BBC that people “piled in” to the restaurant where she was sitting and that she saw “the fear on their faces”. Unverified footage on social media showed people fleeing and bystanders trying to resuscitate casualties.

Suspect in hospital, officers credited

Police said a suspect was shot by officers and arrested. He remains in hospital in a critical condition. Authorities have identified him only as a 24-year-old Polish national from the town of Ostrowiec Swietokrzyski. Interior minister Marcin Kierwinski said officers fired at the attacker three minutes after the first report and “prevented a much larger massacre”. No charges had been reported in the sources reviewed, and the suspect’s alleged role will be a matter for the courts.

Police said the man was wearing tactical clothing and carrying a military-style rifle. According to Radio Kielce, an AR-15-type weapon was used, and officers found a backpack, magazines and a bayonet in the car’s boot. Polish media reported that the vehicle, a black Subaru, belonged to the suspect’s father, who is reported to have had registered firearms.

Terror investigation and international fallout

Prime Minister Donald Tusk told a crisis meeting that three bodies, two women and a man, were found at the suspect’s home, roughly 125 miles north of Krakow. He said there were “strong indications” they were members of the suspect’s immediate family. Those deaths are separate from the six killed in the square, and it is not clear from the reports how they are being counted or investigated.

Mr Kierwinski said the suspect held “very radical views” and “was fascinated by far-right ideologies”. Defence minister Wladyslaw Kosiniak-Kamysz described the attack as an “act of terror” and said the suspect was not a soldier and had no military links. The Central Bureau for Combating Cybercrime is reportedly examining the suspect’s online activity. These are the officials’ statements, and the investigation is continuing.

The attack drew in several countries. A British national was among the dead, police said. An interior ministry spokesperson said five injured foreign nationals came from Britain, Austria, Germany, Portugal and Russia. The Independent reported that UK prime minister Andy Burnham expressed solidarity with Poland, and that foreign secretary Ed Miliband said the government “deeply mourns” the British victim. The Foreign Office urged British nationals in Krakow to follow local authorities’ advice.

Mayor Łukasz Gibała announced an official mourning period in the city until Wednesday. With the suspect critically ill and the inquiry at an early stage, further details about the victims, the weapons and the wider investigation are expected to emerge.

Explore more on this topic with Vexel Search.

Header image: AI-generated illustration by WordUp News.

The Culture Secretary has warned that the kind of conduct examined in the Russell Brand case is “probably happening today”, arguing that the media and entertainment industries have not changed enough to protect people who speak up.

Lisa Nandy was speaking to Sky News on Sunday, days after Brand was convicted at Southwark Crown Court of one count of rape and three counts of sexual assault. He is due to be sentenced on Monday. Because sentencing has not yet taken place, this report is limited to what has been said in court and by officials.

What Nandy said about the industry

“Hand on heart, I don’t think we can say that this couldn’t happen today,” Nandy said. “In fact, I would wager that this is probably happening today, and I don’t think that the industry is doing enough to tackle it.”

She said she could not see what had changed in the way many media and entertainment institutions help people come forward, or in how they protect and support them. She stressed that these industries carry a particular responsibility, as politics does. Short-term, flexible contracts and large power imbalances are common, she said, and speaking up “can really cost you your reputation and cost you opportunities”.

The Independent reports that people from institutions including the BBC have approached Nandy with allegations of their own.

Whistleblower protections and court reform

Nandy urged media organisations to join the Creative Industries Independent Standards Authority, an industry body that protects whistleblowers. She said the Government is “considering what further steps we can take”. The Independent reports that making whistleblower protections mandatory for media organisations is among the possibilities.

The fallout has also reached the justice system. According to the Independent, Andy Burnham has announced a review of how rape cases are conducted in court, intended to stop victims feeling that they are the ones on trial. The Prime Minister called the behaviour at the centre of the Russell Brand case “horrifying”, praised the bravery of the women involved and declined to rule out legislative change.

The verdicts and what comes next

The Standard reports that the jury found Brand, 51, not guilty of two further rape charges and one count of attempted indecent assault. After the verdicts, a senior detective said Brand had used his “influence, status and fame to prey on and exploit women”.

The Metropolitan Police has since said further allegations against him are being investigated. Commissioner Sir Mark Rowley said he “wouldn’t be surprised if many, many more come forward”. No new charges have been reported in the sources.

Brand has spent three nights in custody. The judge, Mr Justice Bennathan, has told him to expect a significant custodial sentence. The sentencing hearing on Monday will show how the court views the offences. Meanwhile, the political debate Nandy has opened is likely to continue over whether voluntary industry standards go far enough or the Government should require them.

Explore more on this topic with Vexel Search.

Header image: AI-generated illustration by WordUp News.

The Krakow shooting on Saturday left six people dead and 15 wounded in one of the busiest tourist spots in Poland, and the country spent Sunday in shock. Authorities say a gunman drove into Main Square in the city’s Old Town and opened fire before police shot and wounded him. Prosecutors are treating the case as a terrorist offence.

What happened in Main Square

According to police, the attacker wore military-style clothing and a bulletproof vest. Krakow police spokesperson Katarzyna Cisło said he drove to several points around the square and fired at each stop, which is why people were wounded in multiple locations. She described a “wild ride” around the square and said he appears to have acted alone.

Cisło said he kept firing at officers even after he was hit. Video posted by witnesses shows people running into side streets and first responders trying to resuscitate victims. In one clip, a police officer is seen firing at the man on the ground before slowly collapsing himself.

Visitors described taking shelter wherever they could. British tourist Neil Thaxton said shop staff hurried him and his wife into the back of a gift shop, locked the doors and turned off the lights. Both were unharmed.

Victims and the wounded

Four women and two men were killed. Regional Governor Krzysztof Klęczar said four of the dead were Polish, one was a British man, and one was a woman from another country whom officials had not yet named. The wounded included people from Britain, Portugal, Russia, Germany and Austria.

Two police officers who confronted the gunman were seriously hurt. On Sunday Klęczar said one remained in a coma and the other had regained consciousness. Officials appealed for blood donations.

What authorities say about the suspect

The suspect is a Polish national. The sources differ on his age: the Associated Press initially reported 25, while a later update put it at 24. Police have not released his name. Reports say he remained in critical condition after several operations, and none of them mention any charge against him.

Interior Minister Marcin Kierwiński said the man held “very radical” and “ultranationalistic” views and that “everything indicates that he was fascinated by far-right ideologies.” Authorities have not said whether he belonged to any organised extremist group. Prosecutors have opened an investigation into murder and attempted murder, including attacks on police officers, which they say constitutes a terrorist offence.

Police also found three bodies at the family home in Ostrowiec Świętokrzyski, about 150 kilometres (93 miles) northeast of Krakow. They identified them as the suspect’s mother, father and sister and said they likely died of gunshot wounds. Prime Minister Donald Tusk called it “the next acts of this tragedy.” The sources do not say who was responsible for those deaths, and the investigation continues.

The weapons and the wider context

Police recovered four firearms at the scene, from the attacker or his car. Seven more were seized from the family home, bringing the total to 11. Klęczar said the suspect’s father legally owned more than 10 guns and that the suspect also owned firearms. A shooting club where he is believed to have trained said it offered only “static shooting” at stationary targets and that he was never trained in dynamic, tactical or combat shooting.

Mass shootings are uncommon in Poland, which has about 37 million people and roughly 411,000 gun permit holders, though interest in gun ownership has been growing. In mid-October, three school attacks in the central province of Mazovia within four days left one person dead and several wounded, including children.

Kacper Rekawek of the International Center for Counterterrorism in The Hague said the attacker’s gear and appearance resembled those of far-right “lone actors” elsewhere in Europe. “We have had attempts before,” he said, “but now we can say that these kinds of attacks have become successful in Poland.”

Mourning and security response

Krakow will be in official mourning until Wednesday. Mayor Łukasz Gibała said the city will stay open to visitors, adding: “The square will belong to us again.” The St. Mary’s Trumpet Call, played hourly from the tower of St. Mary’s Basilica, was paused overnight in tribute. It was the first time it had been missed since World War II. In Warsaw, Mayor Rafał Trzaskowski announced extra security measures, including road barriers on main Old Town streets.

Explore more on this topic with Vexel Search.

Header image: AI-generated illustration by WordUp News.

Three people remain in police custody after a suspected Gloucester sword attack near a Catholic high school, while a fourth person has been released on bail, Gloucestershire Constabulary has said. The force has not said anyone has been charged, and all those arrested are presumed innocent.

What police say happened in Tuffley

Officers were called to Chalford Road, close to St Peter’s High School in Tuffley, shortly after 8.50am on Friday. According to police, it was reported that two people, one of them carrying a sword, had been seen chasing two 17-year-old boys. The pair who were allegedly being chased are said to have fled the scene on foot.

One of the boys suffered what the force described as a “superficial wound believed to have been caused by the sword”. The second boy was not physically hurt. Armed officers were sent to search for those involved, and St Peter’s and the nearby Willow primary academy were both placed in lockdown.

Arrests in the Gloucester sword attack investigation

Police say a 19-year-old man was arrested overnight on suspicion of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and affray. On Saturday morning an 18-year-old man handed himself in. He was arrested on suspicion of possessing an offensive weapon, assault and affray.

Later on Saturday the force announced that a third person, a 17-year-old boy from Gloucester, had been arrested that morning on suspicion of assisting an offender. Reports say all three are from Gloucester. The two men and the boy remain in custody for questioning.

A woman arrested on Friday on suspicion of assisting an offender has been released on police bail while inquiries continue. Being arrested on suspicion of an offence is not evidence of guilt, and no charges had been reported at the time of the sources.

Lockdown and reassurance for parents

The timing of the incident, at the start of the school day, drew concern from the community. A pupil at St Peter’s told the BBC the situation was “really scary” and that students were kept in their classrooms for several hours. Parents were sent messages by the school saying there had been an incident but that matters were under control.

Detective Inspector Sophie Dawkins of Gloucestershire Constabulary’s CID said the force “completely understand[s] the concern this incident would have caused, especially when it happened near a school at drop-off time”. She said armed officers had searched the area with help from a drone unit and the National Police Air Service. Neighbourhood officers were also in the area to reassure parents, she said, adding that there is not thought to be a wider threat.

Appeal for witnesses and footage

Police are asking anyone who saw the incident and has not yet spoken to officers to come forward, as well as anyone with dashcam or other footage. Information can be submitted to Gloucestershire Police online, quoting reference number 53260095808.

The investigation into the Gloucester sword attack is continuing, and officers have said inquiries are ongoing. Early reports differed on how many people had been arrested as the situation developed, but the latest police position is three in custody and one woman on bail.

Explore more on this topic with Vexel Search.