An investigation is now underway to determine what happened. Investigators from the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) will be looking at the speed the plane was moving, the staffing of the air traffic control tower at the time, and if anybody was ejected from the aircraft, according to Garcia.

The assault took place on a bus on February 11, 2026

A teenage girl was allegedly assaulted while travelling on a bus in Cambridge. The assault took place at around 2.40pm on February 11, when the victim boarded a bus in Puddicombe Way, Cambridge.

The girl sat down on the bus, and a man who boarded at the same time as her. He then sat behind her and assaulted her. Cambridgeshire Police would like to speak to a man pictured on CCTV in connection with the incident.

A police spokesperson said: “Police have released CCTV images of a man they would like to speak to in connection with an assault on a teenage girl in Cambridge. At about 2.40pm on February 11, the victim boarded a bus in Puddicombe Way and sat down.

“A man, who boarded at the same time, sat behind her before assaulting her.” Anyone with information should call police on 101 or contact them online and quote reference 35/11620/26.

Do you want more of the latest Cambridgeshire news as it comes in from across the county? Sign up to our dedicated newsletter to make sure you never miss a big story from Cambridge or anywhere else in the county. You can also sign up to our dedicated Traffic and Crime newsletters for the latest updates on the topics you are most interested in.

Brits have experienced three ‘holidays of a lifetime’ with the Maldives, Tokyo and Great Barrier Reef topping the list, using loyalty points to make them more affordable

The typical Brit has experienced three ‘holidays of a lifetime’ – with destinations like the Maldives, Tokyo and the Great Barrier Reef featuring amongst the most sought-after locations. Previously considered something taken once in everyone’s life, Brits are finding new ways to make dream trips a priority with 46% believing it’s more achievable than 10 years ago.

Research involving 2,000 adults found that stunning natural scenery (50%) and high-end accommodation (45%) rank as the primary factors when defining a once-in-a-lifetime holiday. Remarkably, 71% of savvy travellers are now leveraging loyalty points to fund trips that would otherwise stretch their finances.

The findings coincide with Virgin Red’s fourth annual report, The Points Index, titled ‘Living the Dream Holiday’, which highlights how Britons are increasingly valuing loyalty schemes to access extraordinary travel experiences.

Company data revealed that throughout 2025, consumers redeemed 31.2 billion points towards travel experiences, representing a 13% rise compared to the previous year.

Across the UK, point-spending surges occur in May and July and reach their peak in September, potentially aligning with back-to-school tiredness. The research also discovered that 21% who might reserve a major trip would do so to mark a significant birthday.

A third (34%) are currently in the midst of planning a big holiday, with 39% prioritising beach and relaxation holidays abroad – and only 19% opting for shorter getaways. Other key elements of a once in a lifetime trip include exceptional food and drink (40%) and experiences unique to the region’s culture (38%).

Amongst those surveyed by OnePoll.com, nearly three-quarters (74%) have paid for part or all of their flights using loyalty points, whilst 29% have used points to upgrade their flying experience.

Andrea Burchett, chief loyalty officer at Virgin Red, said: “Loyalty is fundamentally reshaping how consumers think about travel. Trips once seen as ‘once in a lifetime’ are becoming achievable, as consumers increasingly treat points as a strategic currency.

“Even amid economic uncertainty, points are helping consumers prioritise meaningful travel, loyalty is helping make it possible.”

TOP 10 ‘HOLIDAY OF A LIFETIME’ DESTINATIONS – ACCORDING TO BRITS:

1. The Great Barrier Reef, Australia
2. Maldives
3. Tokyo, Japan
4. Hawaii, USA
5. Sydney, Australia
6. The Amazon Rainforest, Brazil
7. The Galápagos Islands, Ecuador
8. Machu Picchu, Peru
9. New York City, USA
10. Seychelles

When living with a partner, you might be sharing more than just the same home, lifestyle and interests. You might also share various microscopic organisms residing on and in you.

This community of microorganisms, which consists of mainly bacteria, viruses and fungi, is known collectively as the human microbiome. The various microbiomes found throughout the body all play an important role in health.

From birth, the human microbiome is shaped by our interactions with our mother, who introduces diverse microorganisms that build our immune and digestive systems. As we get older, social interactions with our close community continue influencing this delicate ecosystem.

The people we live with have huge influence on what microbes we have in our microbiome. In fact, it’s thought that partners share around 30% of their resident microbes in the gut alone.

But it isn’t just the microbes in your gut that may be similar to your partner. The microbes in many other parts of the body may also be shared with your loved one – and this could potentially affect your health.

Gut microbiome

Diet and lifestyle are thought to have the greatest influence on the gut microbiome’s make-up. But studies on couples have found that living with your partner can also influence the microbiome.

Couples living together may share 13% to 30% of their gut bacteria. This was true even when diet (which many couples share) was factored out.
Research also shows that couples who live together have greater microbial diversity compared to people who live alone.

This is good news for couples who co-habitate, as a more diverse gut microbiome is correlated with lower risk of irritable bowel syndrome, cardiovascular diseases and potentially high blood sugar.

But it might not all be good news. Research shows that some of the bacterial species couples share can have varying effects on health.

Take the bacteria from the Ruminococcus family. While some species of Ruminoccocus benefit health, others have been linked to negative health outcomes, including diabetes and irritable bowel syndrome.

So these bacteria may not always offer the same benefits in different demographics. This highlights the complexity of resident gut bacteria and their health impacts.

Oral microbiome

Sharing an oral microbiome with our partners might seem obvious considering we regularly exchange saliva when we kiss. A ten-second kiss alone can exchange up to 80 million bacteria. The more kisses a couple shares, the more shared salivary bacteria they will have.

Although most of these bacteria will quickly pass through our mouth and into our gut when we swallow saliva, research show that couples actually share many of the same longer-term tongue microbes that form the foundation of the oral microbiome. Research even suggests that 38% of the oral microbiome is shared in couples living together – compared to only 3% in couples who don’t live together.

Sharing this proportion of your oral microbiome could have many potential health effects.

A healthy oral microbiome is important for protecting against tooth decay and it has anti-inflammatory properties. Some researchers also suggest the oral microbiome’s health effects may extend as far as the gut and nervous system.

But some of the bacteria that couples tend to share may also have potentially harmful health effects.

Couples are more likely to have similar numbers of the bacteria Neisseria in their gut compared to single people. Neisseria can reside in the mouth for long periods of without causing disease.

Some Neisseria bacteria can be harmful and may cause meningitis. Yet some Neisseria bacteria actually fight against these meningitis-causing species, stopping them from overgrowing and causing harm.

So while you may want to avoid kissing someone when they’re poorly for obvious reasons, it turns out that a kiss even when you’re healthy can transfer all sorts of bacteria between the two of you.

More research is needed to really understand what overall effect sharing these bacteria with your partner has on health.

Skin microbiome

The skin microbiome is the most unique and personalised microbiome, tailored to each person. It’s even sometimes referred to as our microbial fingerprint.

Being the most exposed microbiome, the skin microbiome has evolved to be adaptable to external factors such as the climate and cosmetic products. No matter what, these bacteria work hard to remain at an equilibrium.

Close contact with our partners – and even pets – has a huge influence on what bacteria live on our skin. After comparing the gut and oral microbiome, researchers found the skin microbiome to be the most similar among couples.

It isn’t just the bacteria on your arms or hands that are shared, either. Research shows that couples shared 35% of the bacteria living on their feet, and around 17.5% of the bacteria on their eyelids.

You may not even need to touch your partner to have the same skin bacteria as them. Factors such as sleeping in the same bed and walking on similar surfaces are thought to explain why such a large proportion of our skin microbiome is similar.

This is because humans naturally shed bacteria in a similar way as dogs shed fur. We leave traces of our bacteria on everything we touch – and we also easily pick up bacteria from our environments.

The shared effect of living together on the skin microbiome is so great that researchers were able to use computer models to accurately predict 86% of cohabiting couples based off of their individual bacterial samples alone.

But while it’s clear that couples share much of the same skin microbiome, the health effect that this has is not currently known.

While sharing bacteria with your partner may sound alarming, there’s often no cause for concern. Bacteria teach our bodies how to fight infections, they help us digest foods and even produce key nutrients. The bacteria we share with our partners are often harmless and sometimes benefit our health rather than hindering it.

MIAMI (AP) — The federal trial of a former Miami congressman accused of secretly lobbying for Venezuela’s government during the first Trump administration begins Monday with Secretary of State Marco Rubio set to testify over his interactions with his old friend.

Prosecutors allege David Rivera was a hired gun for former President Nicolás Maduro, leveraging Republican connections from his time in Congress to push the White House to abandon its hard line on Venezuela’s socialist government.

Rivera, who at one time had been Rubio’s roommate in Florida, allegedly persuaded then Foreign Minister Delcy Rodríguez — now Venezuela’s acting president — to award him a $50 million lobbying contract to be paid by state oil company PDVSA. As part of the alleged foreign influence campaign, prosecutors say Rivera was aided by Texas Republican Rep. Pete Sessions and a convicted Cali cartel associate as he sought meetings with the White House and Exxon Mobil on Maduro’s behalf.

The trial offers a rare glimpse into the often unseemly role Miami — long a haven for exiles, corruption and anti-communist crusaders — plays in shaping U.S. policy in Latin America. As such, it is perhaps fitting that Rubio, Miami’s most prominent politician, is set to take the stand Tuesday about his meetings with Rivera while the former congressman and an associate were allegedly helping Maduro mount a charm offensive in Washington.

Also likely to face scrutiny is Rodríguez, who relied on Rivera to set up meetings in New York, Caracas, Washington and Dallas in a bid to build U.S. support for normalizing relations with Venezuela — an effort that failed at the time but now appears within reach, albeit on unequal terms, following Maduro’s ouster and the ascent of his more pragmatic aide.

“This case is about two things: greed and betrayal,” prosecutor Roger Cruz said in his opening statement Monday. “The evidence will show that for $50 million these two defendants made a pact to secretly lobby for Nicolás Maduro, the communist director, and his second in command Delcy Rodriguez.”

Indictment details alleged covert lobbying and money-laundering scheme

An 11-count indictment, unsealed in 2022, charges Rivera and Miami political consultant Esther Nuhfer with money laundering and failing to register as a foreign agent.

Prosecutors allege that to hide their work, Rivera set up an encrypted chat group called MIA — for Miami — with his main conduit to the Maduro government: Venezuelan media tycoon Raúl Gorrín, who was subsequently charged in the U.S. with bribing top Venezuelan officials.

Members of the group used playful code words to discuss their activities: Maduro was the “bus driver,” Sessions “Sombrero,” and millions of dollars “melons,” according to prosecutors.

Rivera, 60, denies wrongdoing. His attorneys counter that his one-man firm, Interamerican Consulting, was hired by an American subsidiary of Venezuela’s state-owned oil company — not PDVSA itself — and therefore did not need to register as a foreign agent.

His consulting work, they say, was focused on positioning Venezuelan-owned Citgo in the U.S. energy industry and was wholly distinct from his peacemaking efforts, which involved working with Maduro’s opponents to usher in leadership less hostile to the U.S.

But plaintiffs in a parallel civil case accuse Rivera of doing little of the promised work and using the contract as cover for illegal lobbying. Of the roughly $20 million he received, $3.75 million went to a South Florida company that maintained Gorrín’s luxury yacht.

‘No turkey’ without Rubio

Rubio’s expected testimony is highly unusual — not since Labor Secretary Raymond Donovan testified at a mafia trial in 1983 has a sitting member of the president’s Cabinet taken the stand in a criminal trial.

While Rubio isn’t charged and there’s no indication in the indictment that he acted improperly as a senator at the time, prosecutors say Rivera viewed him as a key ally in his outreach to the White House. For Rubio, prosecutors said in a pre-trial hearing last week, contact with Gorrín offered a backchannel to Caracas at a time U.S. authorities had detected a possible death threat against him from Venezuelan socialist party boss Diosdado Cabello.

Rivera and Rubio met at the senator’s Washington home on July 9, 2017, according to the indictment. Rivera, the indictment says, told Rubio that he was working with Gorrín, who had persuaded Maduro to accept a deal in which he would hold free and fair elections.

“Remember, U.S. should facilitate, not just support, a negotiated solution,” Rivera texted Rubio two days later as the senator was set to meet Trump, the indictment says. “No vengeance, reconciliation.”

Following a second meeting between Rubio, Rivera, Gorrín and others, Rivera remarked in the chat that the bus driver — Maduro — would have to pay him for setting up the meeting with Rubio. Without the senator’s support, Rivera said, there would be “no turkey,” he wrote.

The outreach quickly unraveled, however. Later that month, Trump sanctioned Maduro and labeled him a “dictator,” launching a “maximum pressure” campaign to unseat the president. Rubio took to the Venezuelan airwaves to press the White House’s agenda.

“For Nicolás Maduro, who I am sure is watching, the current path you are on will not end well for you,” Rubio said July 31, 2017, in a rare 10-minute address to the Venezuelan people that aired on Gorrín’s network.

The State Department declined to comment.

Outreach to Exxon for Rodríguez

After the contract was signed, Rivera and Gorrín arranged a meeting in New York City between Rodríguez, then foreign minister and a PDVSA board member, and Sessions, whose Dallas-area district included Exxon’s headquarters.

Later, Sessions tried to broker a meeting for Rodríguez with Darren Woods, who had succeeded Trump’s then Secretary of State Rex Tillerson as CEO of Exxon. Rodríguez was looking to resolve a long-running investment dispute and lure Exxon back to Venezuela in order to revive the OPEC nation’s collapsing oil industry. The meeting never happened as Exxon rebuffed the outreach.

Almost a year after helping Rivera make inroads with Exxon, Sessions secretly traveled to Caracas for a meeting with Maduro arranged by Gorrín and Rivera, the indictment says. As part of the effort, Sessions also agreed to deliver a letter from the Venezuelan president to Trump.

The defense team also wanted Maduro and White House chief of staff Susie Wiles to testify. Maduro, through a lawyer, said he would invoke his constitutional right to remain silent if compelled, while prosecutors successfully quashed an attempt to subpoena Wiles, who was a registered lobbyist for Gorrín’s Globovision network at the same time the media magnate was working with Rivera.

Before being elected to Congress in 2010, Rivera was a high-ranking Florida legislator. During that time he shared a Tallahassee home with Rubio, who eventually became Florida House speaker.

Rivera has previously faced controversy, including allegations he secretly funded a Democratic spoiler candidate in a 2012 congressional race. Last year, federal prosecutors dropped the case after an appeals court threw out a sizable fine imposed by a lower court. Rivera was also investigated — but never charged — for campaign finance violations and a $1 million contract with a gambling company while serving in the Florida legislature.

Rivera has denied any wrongdoing and said both investigations were politically motivated.

A Channel 4 reality show contestant, 33, has shocked viewers after revealing he is a grandfather. Yes, you read that correctly.

The new series, The Hunt: Prey Vs Predator, drops a group of 10 into the ‘vast, unforgiving forest’ where they are pitted against one another in a game of ‘cat and mouse’ all for the prize of £100k.

During introductions among our group of adventurers, ex-military man-turned-dentist Nathan revealed he was a ‘father of six’, which was already a shock to his co-stars, including prison officer Marc.

Nathan, married to his wife Carly, then casually added: ‘And a grandfather of one’, although he quickly caveated that ‘we don’t use the word grandad because it’s really uncool, so we use Papa’.

In a separate chat to the camera, he joked: ‘Life is always on the go. This is a break, this is a holiday.’

Nonetheless, the grandfather revelation left fans gobsmacked.

‘He’s 33 and he’s a grandad!?,’ X user Tom James Clark wrote.

‘Surprised no one had follow-up questions for Nathan being a grandad at 33!?,’ MishyMoo added.

‘Nathan. A grandad, at 33?!!!’ Millie echoed.

Shedding more light into his hectic life, he shared ahead of the series premiere: ‘Me and my wife run a casting agency and two private drama schools. Life’s busy. I’m a normal lad from the north and I’m just up for a bit of a laugh.’

Discussing what motivated him to sign up for the show, he said: ‘I really want to do this to prove to myself that I can.

‘I’ve got a condition called FND [Functional Neurological Disorder], which means that I have seizures and I also get weakness in my left-hand side, so it’s a personal challenge to see whether I can still get up and run around a forest.’

In order to win, he’ll have to be the last one standing after a cutthroat game of ‘action-packed hunts’, and ever-shifting allegiances.

More generally, fans have gotten behind the strategy-based new show.

‘Between this and handcuffed, Channel 4 is kind of bringing back good reality competition shows,’ luke praised.

‘I really enjoyed tonight’s The Hunt prey vs predator premiere, like the format of this new game,’ Darrennpassey agreed.

The Hunt: Prey vs Predator airs tonight at 9pm on Channel 4.

Got a story?

If you’ve got a celebrity story, video or pictures get in touch with the Metro.co.uk entertainment team by emailing us celebtips@metro.co.uk, calling 020 3615 2145 or by visiting our Submit Stuff page – we’d love to hear from you.

MOMA Foods is recalling various porridge pots and sachet products because of possible mouse contamination at the manufacturing site, making them “unsafe to eat”.

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) has warned consumers “do not eat” the affected products and instead return them to the store where they were purchased for a full refund.

Sunday 22 March 2026. MOMA Foods is recalling various porridge pots and sachet products because of possible mouse contamination #FoodAlert https://t.co/ZcBEqAqWP1 pic.twitter.com/1FrDYUyX61

— Food Standards Agency (@foodgov) March 22, 2026

Advertisement

Full list of MOMA Foods porridge products being recalled

The nine MOMA Foods porridge products included in the recall, according to its website and the FSA, are:

• MOMA Almond Butter & Salted Caramel Porridge Pot 55g (1pk, 8pk and 12pk) – M5296, M5297, M5303, M5304, M5315, M5339, M5342 (batch codes)
• MOMA Apple, Cinnamon & Brown Sugar Porridge Pot 65g (1pk and 8pk) – M5261, M5328, M5329, M6026, M6027
• MOMA Banana & Peanut Butter Protein Porridge Pot 65g (1pk and 8pk) – M5248, M5251, M5304, M5307
• MOMA Blueberry & Vanilla Porridge Pot 65g (1pk and 8pk) – M5283, M5284, M5285, M5335, M5336, M6027, M6028
• MOMA Cranberry & Raisin Porridge Pot 70g (1pk, 8pk and 12pk) – M5293, M5294, M5295, M5321, M5322, M5329, M5330, M5331
• MOMA Golden Syrup Porridge Pot 70g (1pk, 8pk and 12pk) – M5241, M5244, M5245, M5261, M5293, M5311, M5314, M5346, M5349
• MOMA Plain No-Added Sugar Porridge Pot 65g (1pk and 12pk) – M5279, M5280, M5281, M5308, M5309, M5310, M5311, M5345,
• MOMA Almond Butter & Salted Caramel Porridge Sachets 7x40g (1pk and 5pk) – M5289, M5290
• MOMA Apple, Cinnamon & Brown Sugar Porridge Sachets 6x40g (1pk and 5pk) – M5293, M5294, M5295

MOMA Foods added: “Even though the chance of contamination of any of the above products being affected is low, we have taken this precautionary step to ensure the safety of our consumers.”

The company confirmed that no other products are affected.

MOMA Foods and FSA issue “do not eat” warning

Both MOMA Foods and the FSA have both warned consumers “do not eat” the nine porridge products mentioned in the recall.

MOMA Foods said: “Any consumers who have purchased affected MOMA porridge products are asked not to consume them.

“Instead, they should return the products to the store where they were purchased and a full refund will be issued.”

Shoppers can also email getintouch@momafoods.co.uk for more information.

The FSA added: “Point of sale notices will be displayed in all retail stores that are selling these products and on their website.

“These notices explain to customers why the products are being recalled and tell them what to do if they have bought the products.”

RECOMMENDED READING:

What is a product recall?

If a food product has a problem that makes it unsellable, it may be ‘withdrawn’ (taken off the shelves) or ‘recalled’ (when customers are asked to return the product).

The FSA issues Product Withdrawal Information Notices and Product Recall Information Notices to inform consumers and local authorities about food safety issues.

In some cases, a ‘Food Alert for Action’ is issued.

This provides local authorities with details of specific actions to be taken on behalf of consumers.

WASHINGTON (AP) — Most Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders believe President Donald Trump has done more harm than good on the issue of immigration and border security in his second term so far, according to a new AAPI Data/AP-NORC poll.

About 6 in 10 AAPI adults say Trump has hurt immigration and border security “a lot” or “a little,” according to the survey from AAPI Data and The Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research, compared with about 4 in 10 U.S. adults in a January AP-NORC survey. About two-thirds of AAPI adults — who are generally more likely to be Democrats than U.S. adults overall — also say Trump has “gone too far” when it comes to deporting immigrants living in the U.S. illegally, compared with about half of Americans in general.

Trump’s administration has instituted sweeping immigration measures since he took office, but the past two months have been especially tumultuous. This past January, Trump suspended processing immigrant visas for citizens of 75 countries. Arrests at the U.S.-Mexico border have fallen dramatically, but the number of Immigration and Customs Enforcement arrests and detentions have soared. In December 2024, daily detentions averaged just under 40,000. Last month, they numbered about 70,000.

The survey was conducted on the heels of the January fatal shootings by ICE agents of two U.S. citizens and their detainment of a Hmong American man — clad only in his underwear — in freezing temperatures.

These immigration crackdowns hit close to home for Jeff Ugai, who lives in Hawaii. On his island, Kauai, nearly four dozen people were arrested in November in immigration raids.

“It seems like the current administration’s efforts have been more almost about cruelty than they have about actually establishing an immigration system that makes sense to this country,” said Ugai, 39, who is a Democrat.

Most AAPI adults believe Trump has crossed a line with deportations

AAPI adults, one of the fastest-growing demographics in the U.S., broadly don’t support Trump’s tough tactics on immigration, the poll found. A separate AAPI Data/AP-NORC survey last fall found that unhappiness about Trump’s immigration approach had risen from earlier in the year.

“We’re also seeing opposition to policies that may not involve violence or violations of due process, but still involve things like banning immigrants from entire countries where there is a history of visa overstays or deporting immigrants who are married to U.S. citizens,” said Karthick Ramakrishnan, founder and executive director of AAPI Data.

In this poll, around 4 in 10 AAPI adults say deporting immigrants living in the U.S. illegally should be a low priority for the U.S. government, an increase from about one-third just after Trump took office. About one-third of AAPI adults now say these deportations should be a moderate priority, and only about 2 in 10 say they should be a high priority.

Fran Peace, 75, of Oroville, California, still sees deporting immigrants here illegally as a high priority. But the Japanese American retiree disagrees with stopping people based on “stereotypes” like their looks or if they have an accent. She also is open to a citizenship path for those who’ve lived here for years and haven’t committed a crime.

“I don’t think you should just have to go back automatically, but the laws don’t say that,” Peace said. “If you’re illegal you go back. But I think there should be some concession made for the people that have been here a long time.”

Most AAPI adults are unhappy with immigration enforcement tactics

Most AAPI adults, 73%, have a “somewhat” or “very” unfavorable opinion of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, known as ICE.

AAPI Republicans have a much less negative view of the agency than AAPI adults overall, with only about one-third saying they view ICE negatively. But only about one-quarter of Republicans overall had an unfavorable opinion of ICE in a February AP-NORC survey.

There’s also widespread opposition to several hardline immigration policies, with about 6 in 10 saying they oppose large-scale immigration enforcement operations in neighborhoods with high populations of immigrants, and about 7 in 10 against allowing immigration enforcement agents to cover their faces when arresting people.

Prohibiting face coverings would be like body cameras, “helping keep people accountable,” Ugai said.

AAPI adults divided over whether illegal immigration threatens US workers, welfare

The AAPI adult population is split on whether immigrants here illegally have a large impact on social welfare resources and crime. About 4 in 10 AAPI adults think immigrants in the U.S. illegally pose a “major risk” of burdening welfare and safety net programs. A similar share see this as “a minor risk.” Only about one-quarter see “not a risk at all.”

On the question of whether immigrants here illegally will commit crimes, about one-third of AAPI adults see this as a “major risk,” while about half think it’s a “minor risk.” Only 15% say it’s “not a risk at all.”

Peace credits Trump with driving down crime like drug trafficking because before his second term, the U.S. “practically had open borders.”

But Daniel Kim, 65, of Las Cruces, New Mexico, thinks that immigrants pose little risk in terms of crime.

A Democrat and Korean American, he previously volunteered at a church to assist refugees with food and donations. He stopped going to his own evangelical church over church leaders’ insistence on remaining apolitical.

“The church leadership just could not make the connection or could not find it in their hearts to think (about) the issues involved with the treatment of foreigners in our country,” Kim said.

___

The poll of 1,197 U.S. adults who are Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islanders was conducted Feb. 2-9, 2026, using a sample drawn from NORC’s probability-based Amplify AAPI Panel, designed to be representative of the Asian American, Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander population. The margin of sampling error for all respondents is plus or minus 4.6 percentage points.

This poll is part of an ongoing project exploring the views of Asian Americans, Native Hawaiians and Pacific Islanders, which are usually not highlighted in other surveys because of small sample sizes and lack of linguistic representation.

When there’s a major crisis in the UK, you may hear the name Cobra being mentioned in the news.

It sounds very ominous – and to a large extent it is, when you find out more about why Cobra meetings are held.

They’re essentially emergency briefings which are called when there’s a national or regional crisis, or during events abroad with major implications for the UK.

The name comes from where these meetings are held – in the Cabinet Office Briefing Rooms, which can be abbreviated to COBR.

You might be able to tell where this is going – one of the rooms is designated the letter A, leading to the handy acronym Cobra.

The rooms are located at 70 Whitehall, which is the Cabinet Office main headquarters just behind 10 Downing Street.

There has only been one – rather blurry – photo released of Briefing Room A, which was sent out after a Freedom of Information Request in 2010.

Those involved in briefings can include security and intelligence officials, civil servants, military chiefs, senior government ministers and leaders of emergency services, depending on what sort of crisis has taken place.

The Prime Minister will usually chair Cobra meetings, especially if the crisis at hand is more severe. However, this isn’t necessary, and another person can be nominated to chair.

It is roughly equivalent to the White House Situation Room, which became famous during the operation to kill Osama Bin Laden in 2011.

A meeting was first called to respond to the miners’ strike of 1972, and has since covered events including 7/7, the Paris attacks, the 2017 Westminster attacks, and the Covid pandemic.

Among the more recent Cobra meetings was prompted by the Israeli attacks on Iranian nuclear sites last year, which led to the so-called Twelve-Day War.

Iran was to be the focus of a Cobra meeting again today, with Keir Starmer gathering ministers and officials to discuss the conflict in the Middle East.

Measures to keep fuel prices affordable and avoid an escalation in the cost-of-living crisis would likely be discussed.

Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@metro.co.uk.

For more stories like this, check our news page.

MORE: ‘My daughter was murdered and cut into pieces – I’m haunted by her terrible last moments’

MORE: Jackie Weaver using her authority and national icon status to heal Handforth Parish Council five years on

MORE: Domestic abuse campaigners say the government must spend more to keep women safe

Klevi and Nivalda Pirjani were jailed for life after murdering their tiny son Miguel Pirjani in November 2024 after being “systematically abused” by his parents

This is the harrowing moment a couple were arrested after murdering their 13-week-old baby.

Klevi and Nivalda Pirjani were jailed for life after murdering their tiny son Miguel Pirjani in November 2024 after being “systematically abused” by his parents. Police have now revealed shocking bodycam footage showing the sick parents’ attempts to feign ignorance over the murder.

The video also included the 999 emergency call, where it was revealed the baby had stopped breathing, and had already starting turning a different colour. Mum Nivalda Pirjani tried to appear confused when police told her the baby had a fractured skull, whereas dad Klevi burst into tears on the floor.

Little Miguel was left with numerous broken bones and a bleed on the brain, after being subjected to repeated assaults during his short life. The husband and wife later blamed one another for his death, with the mum claiming the dad had “lost control” before headbutting and kicking their son.

Advertisement

READ MORE: Baby killer claims her freedom is being blocked – because she refuses to admit her guiltREAD MORE: Heartbreaking moment woman weeps over body of Brit drowned on dream holiday

Both were sentenced to life in prison earlier today at Liverpool Crown Court. Nivaldi Pirjani was handed a life sentence with a minimum term of at least 15 years and three months behind bars.

Klevi was told he must serve at least 19 years before having any chance of release. He appeared to be wiping away tears as he learned his fate, closing his eyes and hanging his head at one stage before taking of his glasses and rubbing his eyes.

Nivalda meanwhile showed no reaction, sitting with her arms folded as she was jailed for life. Klevi also looked to his left towards his wife at once stage before he was taken down to the cells, while she remained facing forwards.

Sentencing, Mr Justice Baker, the High Court judge who presided over their trial, told them: “The best of medical science could not save Miguel Pirjani. He died from the irreversible effects of severe trauma to the head and neck.

“Migel was 13-and-a-half weeks old when he died. You were his parents, and you killed him by what must have been an act of appalling violence, intending him to suffer really serious harm. It is possible that you intended to kill him to be rid of him, but I am not sure that was your intention.

“I am sure that the fatal trauma Miguel suffered involved a heavy blow or series of blows to the right side of his head. Precisely how that was inflicted, I cannot say. Whether there was a single blow to head or several, I cannot say.

“Whether Miguel’s head was battered onto a hard surface or some blunt object was battered onto his head, I cannot say. I cannot even say which of you did that. I think it is more probable that it was you Klevi.

“I cannot say precisely when or how Miguel was fatally battered or even be sure about which of you fatally battered him. Only you two know. You have chosen not to tell anyone. What exactly happened to Miguel that morning remains the guilty secret of a warped relationship where you came first to one another. The interest of Team Klevi and Nivalda came first.

“The jury were sure it was encouraged by the other of you, both of you intending Miguel to suffer at least grievous bodily harm. The fatal assault was not a one off incident that came out of the blue.

“There must have been an escalation in the violence against Miguel in the final few days, culminating in the assault on the 24th of November. It did not matter which of you launched the final fatal assault. You were in this together, encouraging each other and intending that defenceless infant boy to suffer really serious harm.

“It was an abuse of power and gross abuse of trust of the bond between a baby and parents. I consider there to be no mitigation available to you Klevi. I acknowledge the difficult start you had in life, affected by armed conflict and the deaths of your father and young sister. However, I do not believe that offers any reason to reduce the sentence.

“In your case Nivalda, you were of previous good character. You were suffering from post natal depression and estranged from your own family.

You have shown a measure of remorse through your parting words to Miguel and through some of what you said to the jury. That is rendered a little shallow by your determination to fight your trial, which extended to trying to limit your criminal responsibility.”