Students Grace O’Malley-Kumar and Barnaby Webber were killed by Valdo Calocane in Nottingham on June 13, 2023. He also stabbed caretaker Ian Coates, 65, more than an hour later.

TWO students fatally stabbed by a paranoid schizophrenic were tested for alcohol and drugs after they died – but their killer Valdo Calocane was not.

Grace O’Malley-Kumar and Barnaby Webber, both 19, were killed by Calocane in Nottingham on June 13, 2023. He also stabbed caretaker Ian Coates, 65, more than an hour later.

After stealing Mr Coates’ van, Calocane ran over and seriously injured three pedestrians. Calocane admitted manslaughter and attempted murder and was indefinitely detained at a high-security hospital on the grounds of diminished responsibility in January 2024.

READ MORE: “I don’t know how the police could sleep at night”: son of Nottingham attack victimREAD MORE: Nottingham attacks: Victim’s body kept at crime scene for 15 hours, inquiry hears

Grace’s father, Sanjoy Kumar, told an inquiry into their deaths he felt it was “disgusting” that they had been tested.

He said they were told to sign human tissue forms – forms he had never seen himself as a GP and a forensic medical examiner with the Metropolitan Police – otherwise their daughter’s body would not be released to them.

Dr Kumar said: “You had to sign them, but what was not highlighted was that this is a point in time where you are also signing to say that samples could be taken. That was absolutely not pointed out.

“They took samples from our children to test for drugs and alcohol. I was really struck by that being really quite disgusting.

“Our children were tested, but the culprit wasn’t and from there on in, in terms of previous interactions and mental health, that was not made into a big thing at all, that was a flyaway comment.”

Dr Kumar said he found it “shocking” that police notes mentioning a “very minor” assault by Calocane on a police officer two years before the fatal attacks did not reflect how serious the incident was.

He told the inquiry: “When a police officer sustains a punch to the face where you have a haematoma, that is the definition of an ABH injury.

“You have senior police officers coming to the inquiry saying it was a minor offence – I feel very strongly about that. It is unacceptable to strike a police officer in my view.

“To downplay their injuries and not even know the classification of their injuries, is, for someone in that position, really quite despicable.”

Dr Kumar also said he was “dissatisfied” the killer’s mental health at the time of the Nottingham attacks had not been properly examined.

Advertisement

He told the inquiry: “I vociferously complained about the fact that this person’s mental health had not been looked at properly on the day. I was totally dissatisfied that a 360-degree view had been taken.”

He added: “This is a person who, I was told, had been arrested on Tuesday and had been there (in custody) on Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday, and went to magistrates’ court on a Saturday.

“And none of those officers had complained about seeing someone who’s acutely mentally unwell. That is enormously, enormously unusual.”

Dr Kumar said he believes his previous experience as a forensic medical examiner affected what information the police told him.

He said: “My belief on reflection is that I think detectives… knew what I did, what I had done, what my experience was, and I think there was possibly a strategy not to tell me things, because at every point I was being told things, I was questioning things.”

He added: “At each point we are having to cling on to little things and extract as much information as we can because really at every point we are not being given information.”

He also said he “just couldn’t understand” why a hair sample was not taken while Calocane was in custody, adding: “It may have proved nothing but it may have proved everything.”

Dr Kumar said a hair sample did not require Calocane’s consent: “If you’re a detective of any description at all, and I think every detective watching this is going to agree, if you are here to detect crime, that means forensics is really important.

“And a basic part of that forensics is head hair. It may have proved nothing but it may have proved everything. The point is that it wasn’t done and it wasn’t taken, and I just couldn’t understand that.”

The inquiry continues.

The victim suffered swelling, bruising, and hair loss

A 28-year-old woman punched, kicked, and stamped on another woman while demanding money. Natalie Renton, 28, approached the victim, asking for a lighter, in the morning of January 30 in a car park near Maskew Avenue in Peterborough.

The victim, a woman in her 30s, told Renton that she did not have one. But Renton became aggressive and verbally abusive before punching the victim, dragging her to the ground by her hair, and repeatedly kicking and stamping on her face.

Renton, of Bushfield Court, Orton Goldhay, Peterborough, demanded money throughout the attack, but none was handed over. The victim suffered swelling, bruising, and hair loss, and was treated in hospital. Renton fled the scene but was arrested shortly after in Lincoln Road, Millfield.

Renton appeared at Huntingdon Law Courts on Monday, March 23, and was sentenced to 32 months in prison after pleading guilty to assault with intent to commit robbery. The court also imposed a restraining order until 2030, ordering Renton to not approach the victim or attempt to contact her directly or indirectly.

Detective Constable Tisha Morris, who investigated, said: “This was a completely unprovoked attack, with a clear financial motive, which has had a significant impact on the victim, both physically and mentally.

“I hope this result gives the victim some closure in the knowledge that justice has been done.”

Manchester United are set to see Jadon Sancho leave on a free transfer this summer

In the summer of 2021, Jadon Sancho was supposed to be Manchester United’s marquee signing, the recruit to catapult Ole Gunnar Solskjaer’s side from second place to the title. United had spent years chasing him before finally agreeing a £72.9 million fee to bring him back to Manchester – only this time in red.

It was July 23 when Sancho stood in front of United cameras, arms outstretched, stating: “This is my club. This is where I belong.”

Everything that followed told a tale of almost the opposite. Just over a month later, Cristiano Ronaldo strutted through Carrington’s front doors. Debate surfaces to this day as to whether it was a decision that threw Solskjaer’s plans wayward; but suddenly United’s shiny new toy from Dortmund was not the hot topic at Old Trafford anymore.

Get MEN Premium now for just £1 HERE – or get involved in our United WhatsApp group by clicking HERE. You can also join our United Facebook page by clicking HERE and don’t miss out on our brilliant selection of newsletters HERE.

At the time, Sancho was unique in the sense that he was an English player adapting to the English league. At just 21 years old, he had the time and the evidence suggesting he could after three astonishing years in Germany – but his new environment became a whirlwind soap opera. One of the hardest parts about joining United is the attention combined with the pressure of previous success, and Sancho became one of many who suffered.

Since signing five years ago, Sancho has been back on loan to Dortmund, where he only managed two goals and two assists in 14 Bundesliga games; on loan to Chelsea where the West London club opted to pay £5 million not to sign him; and is now at Aston Villa.

He is set to leave United as a free agent in the summer and Dortmund are among the teams being linked with him. The England international has started to find some recent form in the Midlands. With two assists in his last two games and impressive performances to accompany them, the loanee has played a key role in revitalising Villa after a rough patch. Unai Emery might begin looking at him as a permanent option.

None of that will help United earn any sale return on their investment. Sancho’s spell at United has been a disaster, leaving on a free transfer would just sum that up.

Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney took aim at Air Canada CEO’s Wednesday, accusing him of showing a lack of compassion and judgement in his condolences after Sunday’s deadly crash in New York.

Air Canada CEO Michael Rousseau has been summoned to testify at Parliament’s official languages committee after he shared a four-minute condolence video online that only included two French words: “bonjour” and “merci.”

Antoine Forest, one of the two pilots killed in the crash at LaGuardia airport, was a French-speaking Quebecer.

Forest and Mackenzie Gunther died when the Air Canada Jazz flight they were landing at LaGuardia collided with a fire truck on the runway Sunday evening.

Air Canada is headquartered in Montreal, Quebec, where French is the primary language. Rousseau has been criticized for not speaking French previously. He delivered his condolence video message in English, with French subtitles.

“We proudly live in a bilingual country. There are two official languages here and Air Canada has a special responsibility whatever the situation to communicate whatever the situation in both official languages,” Carney said.

“I am extremely disappointed by the message released by the CEO of Air Canada. It shows a lack of compassion, and we will be closely following his comments before the official languages committee as well as the comments coming from the board of Air Canada.”

Quebec’s identity has been contentious since the 1760s when the British completed their takeover of what was then called New France. Quebec is about 80% French-speaking.

A spokesperson for Air Canada didn’t immediately respond to a message seeking comment.

The Office of the Commissioner of Official Languages has received hundreds of complaints about Rousseau’s video.

“I don’t want to make political hay over what remains a tragedy with people still in hospital, but this isn’t the first time that he’s been told to speak French and he should know better,” said Marc Miller, the Minister of Canadian Identity and Culture.

Industry Minister Mélanie Joly said a lot of the victims and their families are francophones and said Rousseau’s video lacked empathy. “It is a question of moral leadership,” Joly said.

Carney said Canadian officials continue to work in close collaboration with their American counterparts to determine how this crash happened.

The language of power often reveals more than it intends. In a rare moment of candour on March 7, the US president, Donald Trump, described the confrontation with Iran as “a big chess game at a very high level … I’m dealing with very smart players … high-level intellect. High, very high-IQ people.”

If Iran is, by Trump’s own admission, a “high-level” opponent, then the sudden revival of a 15-point plan previously rejected by Iran a year ago suggests a disconnect between how the adversary is understood and how it is being approached. It’s a plan already examined in negotiation by Iran and dismissed as unrealistic and coercive. Despite this, the Trump administration is once again framing the “roadmap” as a pathway to de-escalation. Tehran has once again dismissed the gambit as Washington “negotiating with itself – reinforcing the perception that the US is attempting to impose terms rather than negotiate them.

The US president is right about one thing – Iran is not an opponent that can be easily dismissed or overwhelmed. Trump’s own description is a tacit acknowledgement that this is a far more capable and complex adversary than those the US has faced in past Middle Eastern wars, such as Iraq. And that is why the odds are increasingly stacked against the United States and Israel.

This conflict reflects a familiar but flawed imperial assumption: that overwhelming military force can compensate for strategic misunderstanding. The US and Israel appear to have misjudged not only Iran’s capabilities, but the political, economic and historical terrain on which this war is being fought.

Unlike Iraq, Iran is a deeply embedded and adaptable regional power. It has resilient institutions, networks of influence, and the capacity to impose asymmetric costs across multiple theatres. It knows how to manage maximum pressure.

The most immediate problem is lack of legitimacy. This war has authorisation from neither the United Nations or, in the case of America, the US Congress. Further, US intelligence assessments indicate Iran was not rebuilding its nuclear programme following earlier strikes – contradicting one of Washington’s justifications for war. The resignation of Joe Kent as head of the National Counterterrorism Center on March 17, was even more revealing. In his resignation letter Kent insisted that Iran posed no imminent threat.

This effectively collapses one of the original narratives underpinning the US decision to start the war – a further blow to legitimacy.

À lire aussi :
Iran war lacks strategy, goals, legitimacy and support – in the US and around the world

A majority of Americans oppose the war, reflecting deep fatigue after Iraq and Afghanistan – hardly ideal conditions for what increasingly looks like another “forever war” in the Middle East. Current polling shows Trump’s Republicans trailing the Democrats ahead of the all-important midterm elections in November.

The war is both militarily uncertain and politically unsustainable. International allied support is also eroding. The United Kingdom — often trumpeted as Washington’s closest partner — has limited itself to defensive coordination, while Germany and France have distanced themselves from offensive operations. European allies also declined a US request to deploy naval forces to secure the strait of Hormuz. This reflects not just disagreement, but a deeper loss of trust in US leadership and strategic judgement.

US influence has long depended on legitimacy as much as force. That reservoir is now rapidly draining. Global confidence is falling, while images of civilian casualties — including over 160 schoolchildren killed in an airstrike on the first day of the war – have shocked international onlookers. Rather than reinforcing leadership, this war is accelerating its erosion.

Israel faces a parallel crisis of legitimacy – one that began in Gaza and has now deepened. The war in Gaza severely damaged its global standing, with sustained civilian casualties and humanitarian devastation drawing unprecedented criticism, even among traditional allies. This confrontation with Iran compounds that decline.

Striking Iran during active negotiations — for the second time — reinforces the perception that escalation is preferred over diplomacy. The issue is no longer just conduct, but credibility.

Strategic failure, narrative defeat

The conduct of the war compounds the problem. The assassinations of Iranian leaders, framed as tactical victories, are strategic failures. They have unified rather than destabilised Iran. Mass pro-regime demonstrations illustrate how external aggression can consolidate internal legitimacy.

The issue is no longer just the conduct of the war, but the credibility of the conflict itself. Regardless of how impressive the US and Israeli military are, it doesn’t compensate for reputational collapse. When building support for a conflict like this – domestically and internationally – legitimacy is a strategic asset. Once eroded across multiple conflicts, it is extraordinarily difficult to rebuild.

Rather than stabilising the system, US actions are fragmenting it. Allies are distancing themselves, adversaries are adapting, and neutral states are hedging.

The most decisive factor may be economic. The war is already destabilising global markets – driving up oil prices, inflation, and volatility at levels that combine the effects of 1970s and Ukraine war oil shocks.

This is a war that cannot be contained geographically nor economically. The deployment of 2,500 US marines to the Middle East (and reports that up to another 3,000 paratroopers will also be sent), reportedly with plans to secure Kharg Island – and with it Iran’s most important oil infrastructure – would be a dangerous escalation.

For Gulf states, the assumption that the US can guarantee security is increasingly questioned. Some states are reportedly now looking to diversify their partnerships and turning toward China and Russia, mirroring post-Iraq shifts, when US failure opened space for alternative powers.

Iran holds the cards

Wars are not won by destroying capabilities alone, but by securing sustainable and legitimate political outcomes. On both counts, the US and Israel are falling short.

Iran, by contrast, does not need military victory. It only needs to endure, impose costs, and outlast its adversaries. This is the logic of asymmetric conflict: the weaker power wins by not losing, while the stronger one loses when the costs of continuing become unsustainable.

This dynamic is already visible. Having escalated rapidly, Trump now appears to be searching for an off-ramp — reviving proposals and signalling openness to negotiation. But he is doing so from a position of diminishing leverage. In contrast, Iran’s ability to threaten energy flows, absorb pressure, and shape the tempo of escalation means it increasingly holds key strategic cards. The longer the war continues, the more that balance tilts.

Empires rarely recognise when they begin to lose. They escalate, double down, and insist victory is near. But by the time the costs become undeniable – economic crisis, political fragmentation, global isolation – it is already too late. The US and Israel may win battles. But they may be losing the war that matters: legitimacy, stability and long-term influence.

And, as history suggests, that loss may not only define the limits of their power, but mark a broader shift in how power itself is judged, constrained, and resisted.

Since 2019, inspectors ruled that the authority had made unreasonable decisions on 38 occasions — the second-highest number in the country, an investigation found.

The “unreasonable” ruling by the Planning Inspectorate is taken when it overturns a decision made by a council and awards costs to the appellant because an authority fails to follow planning policy, imposes unreasonable conditions, or it wastes time or money.

The  investigation by Sky News found that only Cornwall Council had made more unreasonable decisions  since 2019 than North Yorkshire.

Earlier this year, inspectors ruled against North Yorkshire Council after it rejected plans for up to 200 homes in Peasey Hills, Malton.

The inspector concluded: “The council’s protracted catalogue of failings amounts to unreasonable behaviour that has caused the appellant unnecessary or wasted expense in respect of pursuing the appeal.”

Last year, the council’s actions were again deemed unreasonable when it refused listed building consent for a new access gate and drive at St Trinian’s Hall, in Richmond.

In response to the figures, North Yorkshire Council’s head of development management, Martin Grainger, said the authority would continue to support “positive development across the county, where appropriate”.

He added: “This is evidenced by the number of positive decisions we have issued on planning applications, which exceeds the national average for similar English unitary authorities.

“The figures quoted in this report must be viewed in context. As the country’s largest geographical council, we handle more planning applications than most authorities.

“In 2024/25 alone, we made decisions on about 4,700 applications – compared with the national average of 1,365 for other English unitary authorities.

“Replicated over seven years, that level of demand would equate to more than 32,000 applications – meaning the ‘unreasonable decisions’ quoted represents just 0.1 per cent of all cases we deal with.”

Mr Grainger said the figures quoted spanned a seven-year period and pre-dated local government reorganisation and the launch of North Yorkshire Council in April 2023.

The investigation has been published as North Yorkshire Council comes under increasing pressure to meet government targets for new housing.

Senior councillors have criticised a target of around 4,200 new homes a year — up from 1,384 — which they say puts unprecedented pressure on rural land in the county.

What is lycopene?

OK, but why tinned tomatoes?

Whether you’re hiking up a mountain, heading to the shops or commuting on the train to work, having the best backpack is essential. Formerly only used by schoolchildren, backpacks have become a must-have for everyone, replacing the briefcase as an essential part of every office worker’s arsenal, but they’re also a serious fashion accessory nowadays.

“Backpacks have undergone a seismic reinvention over the last decade, from functional Karrimors for Duke of Edinburgh Award outings to luxurious pieces of kit,” explains Telegraph men’s style editor, Stephen Doig. “They’re now a key part of any sophisticated wardrobe.”

The very best backpacks can save you having to trundle around the airport with a suitcase (and packing cubes can help to cram more in). If you’re heading up into the hills, a good hiking backpack is a lifesaver. Here are my favourite backpacks for commuting to work and meandering in the countryside.

The best backpacks: At a glance

Spain manager Luis de la Fuente believes Arsenal have the second-best midfielder in the world behind Manchester City star Rodri.

Rodri has been one of the most influential players in world football over the past decade, helping Man City win four Premier League titles, four domestic cups and the Champions League.

The 29-year-old won the Ballon d’Or in 2024, becoming the first Manchester City player to win the award and just the second male Spanish player.

De la Fuente believes Rodri is the ‘best in the world’ in his position but insists his Spain teammate Martin Zubimendi is not far behind.

Zubimendi has enjoyed an impressive first season at Arsenal following his move from Real Sociedad, helping the Gunners move nine points clear at the top of the Premier League and challenge in two other competitions.

Mikel Arteta’s £60m summer signing will compete with Rodri for a place in the Spain team at this summer’s World Cup but De la Fuente insists they could ‘play together’ as the European champions look for more silverware.

‘After all the setbacks he went through, Rodri is back at a high level,’ De la Fuente told TVE ahead of Spain’s friendly against Serbia on Friday night.

‘I’ve said before that he is the best in the world, but also on those same occasions [when he was injured] that we are very fortunate.

‘After all, in that position, the number 6 role, we have the two best players in the world: Rodri and Martin [Zubimendi].

‘So I will get ahead of a question you are probably going to ask: can they play together? Of course they can play together.

‘We can play that way [with a double pivot] perfectly well. In my idea of football, they [Rodri and Zubimendi] may occupy a similar role, but they are different players with different characteristics.

‘In fact, Martin is getting into the box more now and scoring goals, but he also has the qualities of a positional player, with balance and outstanding tactical awareness.

‘Rodri has those same qualities too, so having them there gives us security, that kind of structure.

Marie O’Gorman and Mary McGuire targeted seven victims who were under their care at Nazareth House between 1975 and 1981

Advertisement

Two former nuns who subjected children as young as three to physical abuse using belts and slippers at a Scottish children’s home have avoided prison sentences.

Marie O’Gorman, 79, and Mary McGuire, 68, assaulted seven youngsters in their care at Nazareth House in Glasgow’s Cardonald district between 1975 and 1981. The pair appeared before Glasgow Sheriff Court on Wednesday for sentencing, having admitted guilt to multiple charges in February.

O’Gorman, known to the children as Sister Mary Aelred, joined the Sisters of Nazareth congregation in 1963 and was responsible for supervising groups of 10 to 12 children. Throughout her time there, she mistreated three youngsters aged between three and 11 years old, reports the Daily Record.

The court was told she repeatedly hit the children with objects including a harness, slipper and belt. One victim suffered particularly cruel treatment, being made to stand in a cold bath while O’Gorman poured water over her head as punishment for bedwetting.

The child’s ordeal continued as she was then forced to wear a nappy and parade in front of others. O’Gorman also attacked a second child while he was bathing. McGuire, who joined the congregation in 1975, was known to the children as Sister Maria Bernadette.

She confessed to assaulting five youngsters, aged between five and 12, hitting them with objects such as a slipper, a leather belt and a wooden hairbrush. During one particularly vicious incident, a child sustained an injury when the belt buckle struck her eye, leaving her bruised. Both nuns received probation orders on Wednesday, March 25.

McGuire, from Fife, was put under supervision for two years and instructed to complete 225 hours of unpaid work over the next 12 months. O’Gorman, from Dublin, was similarly put under supervision for the same duration.

Each woman was instructed to pay £1,000 compensation to every one of their victims. This represents the most recent case of historical abuse involving nuns from the Sisters of Nazareth.

Carol Buirds, 75, received her sentence in January along with Eileen McElhinney, 78, and Dorothy Kane, 68, for the appalling abuse of children that occurred at two homes in Lasswade and Kilmarnock, spanning 1972 to 1981. Buirds, from Wallsend, Tyne and Wear, was jailed for 15 months. McElhinney, from Bishopbriggs, East Dunbartonshire, received a 12-month Probation Order and was instructed to complete 240 hours of unpaid work.

Want to see more of the stories you love from Belfast Live? Making us your preferred source on Google means you’ll get more of our exclusives… To add Belfast Live as a preferred source, simply click here.

Procurator Fiscal Fraser Gibson, from the Crown Office and Procurator Fiscal Service, stated: “Marie O’Gorman and Mary McGuire were trusted to care for vulnerable children who had almost no support and relied entirely on the adults around them for safety and compassion. Instead of offering that care, they caused them profound and lasting harm.

“It is now a matter of public record that, while working at Nazareth House, both individuals gravely abused the authority and trust placed in them Their offending may have taken place several decades ago, but this type of abuse has never been acceptable and should not have happened.

“The Crown treats all allegations of non‐recent child abuse with the utmost seriousness, and no matter how much time has passed, we remain committed to ensuring survivors are heard and perpetrators held accountable.”