The motorcyclist was found lying in the road.

A motorcyclist has been taken to hospital after being found on a Cambridgeshire road. Cambridgeshire Police were called to Ramsey Road at 6:50pm on Monday (February 23) with reports of a motorcyclist lying in the road.

Officers attended. The motorcyclist was taken to Peterborough City Hospital by ambulance.

The police are now asking for anyone who witnessed the incident to come forward. Anyone with information should contact the police quoting incident 457 of the 23 February.

A spokesperson for Cambridgeshire Police said: “Police were called at 6.50pm last night to a report of a motorcyclist lying in the road. He was taken to Peterborough City Hospital by ambulance.

“Anyone who witnessed the incident should contact the police quoting incident 457 of the 23 February.”

To get more news and top stories delivered directly to your phone, join our new WhatsApp community. Click this link to receive your daily dose of CambridgeshireLive content.

We also treat our community members to special offers, promotions, and adverts from us and our partners. If you don’t like our community, you can check out any time you like. If you’re curious, you can read our Privacy Notice .

The arrest of Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor was, without a doubt, a shocking moment. The release by US officials of 3.5 million pages of documents regarding Mountbatten-Windsor’s longtime friend, the disgraced financier Jeffrey Epstein, have led to multiple allegations of wrongdoing on the part of the eighth in line to the throne – which he denies.

But as an expert in British and Commonwealth history, I’m baffled by some of the headlines claiming that this moment is “the worst constitutional crisis” in the modern age.

In fact, the affair pales in significance beside the abdication crisis of 1936. The latter has tended to be portrayed in the media as a romantic saga of forbidden love – with the young Edward VIII being forced to choose between the crown and his desire to marry his soon-to-be twice divorced lover, Wallis Simpson.

Yet in retrospect, it more resembles a rather genteel coup, with raised eyebrows taking the place of tanks on the palace forecourt.

A set of key establishment figures, including the prime minister, the archbishop of Canterbury and the editor of the Times, effectively used the marriage crisis to lever from the throne a monarch whose morals and judgement they distrusted.

There might have been room for a compromise on the matter. Edward raised the possibility of a “morganatic marriage” with Wallis, under the terms of which any offspring would not be in line to the throne. Yet prime minister Stanley Baldwin, who kept negotiations over the king’s future tightly under his own personal control, would not hear of this.

The stakes were infinitely higher than in 2026. Britain was still a great global economic and military power, and its monarch was the figurehead of an empire of more than 500 million people. The British government was deeply concerned that the damage done to the monarchy’s prestige could weaken its own authority overseas.

Meanwhile, at home, the right to vote for all adults was still a relatively new experiment. A government still dominated by the rural and urban elites worried about how working-class voters would react to a scandal at the pinnacle of Britain’s social hierarchy. Luckily for them, the British press and the BBC maintained a wall of silence around the king’s relationship with Simpson until just days before the abdication. This ensured that the government’s narrative dominated the headlines.

Ejecting Edward from the throne brought about the accession of his brother, whose debilitating shyness made him ill-suited to a public role.

The abdication crisis had concrete constitutional repercussions. In its immediate wake, the government of the Irish Free State, which had been granted dominion status by the Anglo-Irish Treaty of 1921, passed two bills designed to weaken ties with London and the crown.

They removed all mention of the king and his representatives from the Irish constitution, while allowing the monarch a limited role in the country’s diplomatic relations. The following year, the taoiseach (as he then became), Éamon de Valera, introduced a new constitution under which southern Ireland effectively became a republic in all but name.

The abdication crisis signalled very publicly that the monarch was obliged to follow the will of the of the civil authorities, even in matters relating to his private life. Arguably, this played an important role in the evolution of the British constitutional monarchy, helping to ensure its survival into the 21st century.

Even the death of Diana, Princess of Wales, in 1997 certainly seemed at the time to present a more serious threat to the House of Windsor than the current scandal. In sharp contrast to the deferential restraint of the press in 1936, the media seemed determined to whip up public grief in ways that many observers found disturbing.

The mood of the moment found expression in hostility towards the members of the royal family, including Queen Elizabeth II herself, for their supposedly “unfeeling” response to the tragedy. Downing Street felt obliged to step in when the palace proved incapable of handling the public relations fallout of Diana’s death.

Is the monarchy under threat?

Recent polling has suggested that public confidence in the crown is at an all-time low. Yet although support for the outright abolition of the monarchy has grown in recent decades, it remains relatively low at only around 15%.

Furthermore, the crown is so deeply embedded in the British political system that no government – without a staggering amount of self confidence and a lot of time on its hands – is likely to embark on the task of extracting it.

By contrast, of course, it will be relatively simple to remove Mountbatten-Windsor from the line of succession in UK domestic legislation, although the British government will want to coordinate this with the other Commonwealth realms which could prove more complicated.

The royal family has time to redeem itself. And as Winston Churchill pointed out, it’s a mistake to ever let a good crisis go to waste.

Looking ahead to what may be a lengthy reign, Prince William, who has given strong hints that he is impatient with the status quo, has the perfect excuse when he accedes to the throne to sideline opponents of reform.

For a would-be reforming king, there’s plenty of low-hanging fruit. There’s the antiquated honours system with its embarrassing use of the label “empire”. There’s the headship of the now largely obsolete Commonwealth, with its own embarrassingly imperial connotations. And with less than half the population of England and Wales now describing themselves as Christian, renouncing the supreme governorship of the troubled Church of England seems long overdue.

Although the fate of a disgraced uncle may be relatively peripheral to all this, Mountbatten-Windsor is still a potent symbol of the dangers of business-as-usual. His fall might just be the crisis the royal family needs.

Tottenham asked John Heitinga to stay on as coach after Thomas Frank departed, but he left as he felt his situation was ‘pointless’ in north London.

The Dutchman was only appointed as a coach at Spurs in January, brought in to work under Thomas Frank after an unsuccessful spell in charge of Ajax.

His stay at Tottenham was very short, with Frank axed earlier this month after a string of poor performances and results.

Heitinga went with him, meaning he was a Spurs coach for just 32 days, leaving the club languishing in a relegation battle in the Premier League.

The former Netherlands international’s agent, Rob Jansen, claims that Tottenham wanted Heitinga to remain after Frank’s exit.

The coach even hoped he could step up to become manager, but the club decided he had not been around long enough to warrant that promotion.

Igor Tudor was brought in as interim manager, taking charge until the end of the season.

Jansen says Heitinga certainly had options to stay, but felt that working under a new manager, with new coaches, only for him to be replaced again at the end of the season, seemed pointless.

‘He was allowed to stay. They even asked him to stay,’ Jansen told the KieftJansenEgmondGijp podcast, via Sport Witness.

‘All other coaches, all Scandinavian, left. And after three weeks, they told him: “Please stay and see out your contract here.” That’s quite an achievement for someone who worked there for three weeks.

‘But he said: “Yes, but now Igor Tudor, a Croatian coach, is coming with a whole staff for three or four months”. That man is always hired for emergency jobs.

‘That almost never works. Why they did that is a mystery to me. And then another coach will come in. So, you can leave twice. That new coach will also come in with 45 people. He said, “This is pointless, Rob. I have to leave now”.’

On the possibility that Heitinga could have stepped up to become Spurs boss, Jansen said: ‘There was a chance he would take over; we had that in mind. Only: the club didn’t. After three weeks, they decided it was too soon. So, then you have an interim manager.

‘What does the management do, or in this case, the owners, the Lewis family? They opt for some kind of security. They hire someone with a track record, someone known as a crisis manager at struggling clubs for a few months.

‘That saves their image. Unless they dare to continue with Heitinga and a new staff, but they won’t.’

Tudor started his reign with a 4-1 defeat to Arsenal on Sunday and is back in action at Fulham this Sunday in the Premier League.

MORE: When is the Champions League draw and who can Arsenal, Chelsea, Liverpool, Man City, Spurs and Newcastle play?

MORE: John Terry speaks out on frustration over Chelsea job snub

MORE: Paul Scholes names Arsenal star he would ‘love to play with’ despite criticism

Horner, who joined the team in 2005, led Red Bull to eight drivers’ championships and six constructors’ championship titles.

He was dismissed after a controversial 18 months that started when a female employee accused him of sexual harassment, an allegation that was made public in February 2024.

He was twice cleared of the claims, firstly after an internal investigation conducted by a lawyer, then by another lawyer who dismissed the complainant’s appeal.

The Briton left with a £52m payout but he said he felt a “real sense of loss”, and blamed Red Bull managing director Oliver Mintzlaff and Red Bull advisor Marko Helmut for his exit.

“It was all rather sudden. I didn’t really get the chance to say a proper goodbye,” he said.

“I think this was a decision that was made by Oliver Mintzlaff with Helmut advising from the side-line.

“I think ultimately things changed within the business, within the group. The founder died, and after Dietrich [Mateschitz]’s death, I think probably I was deemed to have maybe too much control.”

Watching President Zelenskyy and first lady Olena Zelenska in the centre of Kyiv lead a minute’s silence to honour the tens of thousands of soldiers who have died on the fourth anniversary of the Ukraine war was a sobering moment. 

European prime ministers and dignitaries had come to Maidan Square in Kyiv as an act of solidarity and remembrance as they set candles in front of the sea of crosses, photos and flags that now adorn this makeshift memorial for those killed in this conflict.

But equally, there is an acknowledgement from those gathered that when it comes to this war, there is no end in sight: the leaders who arrived in Ukraine to mark this anniversary expect to be coming back next year, too.

For Yvette Cooper, the foreign secretary, the trip was a moment to focus not just on sanctions, weapon supplies and territory, but to try to highlight the war Vladimir Putin is waging against women and children in Ukraine as he wages a “war on Ukrainian culture”.

“I think one of the things that’s been clearly happening, the way that so many children have been stolen, the ways in which, in the temporarily occupied territories, they are trying to change the education system, trying to choke out the Ukrainian language,” she said.

“It’s an attempt really, not just about territory, but to have a war on Ukrainian families, to have war on Ukraine history and culture and identity,” the foreign secretary told me in an interview in Kyiv.

But even as she arrived in Ukraine, issues at home plaguing the government and her foreign office brief were dominating the agenda, with the former US ambassador that she sacked, Peter Mandelson, arrested and taken in for hours of questioning by the police as Ms Cooper took an overnight train to Ukraine.

The foreign secretary, who sacked the ambassador just days into her job in September, reiterated her position that Lord Mandelson “should never have been appointed” and, in a rare flash of emotion, told me that “vile” emails were exchanged between Lord Mandelson and paedophile financier Jeffrey Epstein.

In one of the emails released by the US Department of Justice, Epstein replies to Lord Mandelson asking how being free from jail felt, by saying “she feels fresh, firm and creamy”. Lord Mandelson replied by calling Epstein a “naughty boy”.

“That’s just vile,” she told me. “It makes me feel so angry.”

“I’ve been really clear, Peter Mandelson should never have been appointed as ambassador to the US and I think some of what has been so, so deeply frustrating about all of this is that really at the heart of all of these should be the victims of Epstein, they’re women and and children who faced the most horrendous criminal exploitation trafficking and that really should be the focus.

“As you know, when I was home secretary, I made it a mission for the government to halve violence against women and girls over the next 10 years.

“That’s a strategy now that the prime minister has championed. And now, as foreign secretary, I am making tackling violence against women and girls something that is an international theme for us as well.”

Advertisement

Share

Beth says she’s never seen the foreign secretary so furious.

On that issue, Ms Cooper used her time in Ukraine to meet female victims of Russian aggression and sexual violence and the “voices for children” charity with Olena Zelenska to highlight the plight of thousands of children stolen from their Ukrainian families by Russia.

Yevgen Zakharov, a civil rights activist working at the Civil Liberties Centre, told the foreign secretary on her visit there that Putin “wants to eliminate Ukrainian identity”.

“This is his crazy idea, a genocidal intent is there,” he said.

Throughout these visits, we heard stories of women in Russian-occupied territory being beaten, sexually abused, falsely imprisoned and sent to Labour camps.

Elena Jagapova spoke of how she was taped to a chair, beaten until bloodied, sexually abused and sent to a labour camp. Another, Julia, told us of how her children – then 10 and 17 – were abducted by the Russians, and her 19-month battle to get them back.

Ms Zelenska says more than 20,000 Ukrainian children have been stolen by the Russians as part of their campaign to eradicate Ukrainian culture, through repressing the language, forcing indoctrination and trying to brainwash children.

“We heard stories not just of torture, but also of this attempt to really destroy Ukrainian culture and identity as well,” said Ms Cooper.

“That’s why it’s so important that we provide support for Ukrainian families, support for Ukrainian services but, also, make sure that you could have the kind of special tribunal, the kind of court processes, international court processes, that can pursue exactly those questions and can make sure that there is some justice and accountability.”

The UK has made it clear to Ukraine that it will play a part in helping set up war crime courts when this conflict finally ends, in echoes of Britain’s role in the Nuremberg trials that punctuated the Second World War.

But when that moment comes is hard to see. Those who gathered in Ukraine on Tuesday did so with a weariness that has come to characterise an attritional war in which Russia isn’t winning, but neither is it defeated, as Europe and the US give enough support for Ukraine to fight on, without the firepower – or sanctions against Russia – for it to truly succeed.

Mr Zelenskyy warned on the eve of the fourth anniversary that Putin had already started World War Three and Ukraine was the outpost, the frontline pushing Putin back.

Ms Cooper doesn’t want to use that language, but she does acknowledge that Russian aggression is here to stay, and allies must support Ukraine for however long it takes.

To that end, the UK introduced another sanctions package on Tuesday, and is pushing the US and Europe about a maritime services ban to make it much harder for Russia’s shadow fleet to transport Russian oil.

The frustration is that the US, in trying to pursue peace talks – and reportedly in favour of Russian demand that Ukraine cede the 20% of the Donbas territory not under Russian occupation as part of any truce, is reluctant to squeeze Russia economically right now.

So this war grinds on. For the Ukrainians and allies, one glimmer of hope is that Russia is now losing more men that it can mobilise on the battlefield.

Ukraine hopes that if it can increase the casualty rate to 50,000 Russians a month, then Putin might be forced to consider conscription, which could prove politically difficult and begin to stall his momentum.

That Russia has sacrificed an estimated 500,000 lives in order to gain less than one per cent of Ukraine’s territory tells of the attritional war in which these two sides are locked – and with the horrific loss of life.

In the meantime, Britain and Europe will try to put more pressure on the US to bring in more aggressive sanctions against Russia, to financially starve Putin’s war machine.

But for all the signs of solidarity on Tuesday, there is little to show in the way of concrete steps to peace. Ukraine hopes for a game changer in the coming months, but is reconciled to more anniversaries like today.