The 29-year old died after being struck by a bullet fired at police during a riot in 2019

Attempts to have the cases thrown out against nine Derry men accused of offences linked to the death of Lyra McKee were refused today.

The 29-year old died after being struck by a bullet fired at police during a riot in the Creggan area of Derry on April 18, 2019. A total of ten men from the city were charged with a range of offences and a trial commenced at Belfast Crown Court in May 2024.

Three defendants were charged with murdering Ms McKee, possessing a firearm and ammunition and other linked offences including rioting and both possessing and throwing petrol bombs.

They are not alleged to have fired the gun used to kill Ms McKee but with intentionally encouraging or assisting the gunman on a joint enterprise basis.

The trio are Paul McIntyre, 58, from Kells Walk, 25-year old Jordan Devine from Bishop Street and Peter Cavanagh, 37, from Mary Street – all of whom deny the charges against them.

Their co-accused were charged with offences including rioting and throwing petrol bombs.

They are Christopher Gillen, 45, from Balbane Pass, Joseph Campbell, 25, from Gosheden Cottages, 33-year old Patrick Gallagher from John Field Place, Jude McCrory, 28, from Gartan Square, Joseph Barr, 37, from Sandringham Drive, and 57-year old Kieran McCool from Ballymagowan Gardens.

A tenth defendant, 58-year old William Elliot from Ballymagowan Garden in Derry, passed away in England in last February.

The Crown closed its case against the defendants last year and following this, legal teams representing the remaining nine defendants launched ‘no case to answer’ applications. The defence submitted this on the grounds that none of the defendants have a case to answer based on insufficiency of evidence.

The question for the court, which was sitting without a jury, was whether it is convinced that there are no circumstances in which it could properly convict on the evidence.

As she gave her detailed ruling at Belfast Crown Court today where Ms McKee’s loved ones sat in the public gallery, trial judge Mrs Justice Smyth said: “Having considered all of the evidence I do not consider that there are no circumstances in which I could properly convict any of the defendants charged with murder.”

Regarding the remaining defendants, Mrs Justice Smyth said that whilst there were “weaknesses in the identification evidence”, she said: “Having considered the evidence as a whole, I do not consider that there are no circumstances in which I could properly convict any of the defendants charged with the remaining offences.”

Prior to outlining her conclusion, Mr Justice Smyth said the defendants could be divided into two groups. The first were “masked individuals” alleged to have been involved in the riot – namely McIntyre, Cavanagh, Devine, Gillen and Campbell.

The “unmasked individuals” accused of assisting or encouraging the masked individuals to riot are Gallagher, McCrory, Barr and McCool.

Advertisement

The senior Judge said the prosecution case was “based on circumstantial evidence” including footage from MTV who were making a documentary about Saoradh and who were filming in Derry on the afternoon and evening of April 18.

Other strands of evidence included identification/recognition evidence from PSNI officers at controlled viewings, evidence from imagery analysts and bad character evidence.

Regarding the identification evidence, Mrs Justice Smyth said she was “satisfied” a member of the PSNI’s Major Investigation Team showed footage of suspects to officers in the Waterside District Support Unit because those officers “had specialist knowledge of dissident Republicans suspected of the disorder and the killing of Lyra McKee.”

She told the court she did not accept that the evidence established bad faith or that the purpose of showing the footage was to falsely identify any individual.

However, she added: “That does not in any way justify what can only be regarded as deeply disturbing behaviour by an experienced police officer who displayed an unhealthy desire to identify the perpetrators at any cost.”

Deeming this a breach in her ruling, Mrs Justice Smyth determined this identification evidence was not admissible because the “egregious breaches rendered the recognitions of masked individuals unreliable.”

After concluding her ruling and rejecting all the ‘no case to answer’ applications, Mrs Justice Smyth said all the evidence in the case “must be considered as a whole” and that “final conclusions” about the weight of all the evidence “cannot be determined at this stage of the trial.”

Following this, she addressed the defence to enquire whether any of the defendants wanted to give evidence. Mark Mulholland KC, representing McIntyre, said he needed a little time to consider today’s ruling and consult with his client.

He suggested indicating to the court administratively on Monday when the trial will be in position to reconvene. After other defence barristers took the same stance, Mrs Justice Smyth agreed to this defence request.

To ensure you don’t miss out on all the latest from Belfast Live, be sure to make us your preferred source on Google.

In a tribute from Queen Camilla, read out by Revel Horwood, she paid tribute to the friendship between the hosts, saying: “I have often thought that Strictly is not so much a show about dancing as about friendships: the bonds forged, the struggles overcome and the joy shared in undertaking a joint endeavour.

One camp expresses cautious optimism, hoping the negotiations will prevent another conflict, and evoking memories of the eight-year Iran-Iraq war and the more recent 12-day escalation war with Israel, which left more than 1,200 people dead and more than 6,000 injured in Iran. Twenty-eight people were killed and dozens injured in Israel in the hostilities.

Two of Hollywood’s oldest studios may be consolidating into one. In a shocking twist after a monthslong bidding war, Paramount has emerged as the apparent victor in the fight to acquire Warner Bros.

Netflix, who backed away from the deal Thursday, had hoped to win the movie studio and its vast film library. Paramount wants it all: Movies, cable networks and news.

Almost 10 years ago, Hollywood’s big six became the big five when Disney bought most of 20th Century Fox. Now the big five looks like it’s destined to become the big four, including Universal and Sony, and the business of Hollywood moviemaking is one again in a time of profound transition.

Here’s what we know, what we don’t and some burning questions.

Why did Netflix bow out of the fight?

Simply put, it was no longer “financially attractive,” the company said.

In December, Netflix had reached a deal to acquire some of Warner Bros. Discovery’s assets: Their library, movie studio and HBO. Almost immediately Paramount, who months earlier had expressed interest in purchasing Warner Bros., initiated a hostile takeover bid for the whole company, which culminated in a $31 per share offer this week. Netflix, whose previous offer was $27.75 per share, declined to counter.

“We believe we would have been strong stewards of Warner Bros.′ iconic brands,” Netflix’s co-CEOs Ted Sarandos and Greg Peters said in a joint statement. “But this transaction was always a ‘nice to have’ at the right price, not a ‘must have’ at any price.”

Warner had repeatedly backed the deal it struck with Netflix right up until Thursday evening, when its board continued to recommend Netflix even while calling Paramount’s bid, valued at about $111 billion including debt, “superior.”

David Zaslav, the chief executive of Warner Bros. Discovery, said in a statement that they’re excited about, “the potential of a combined Paramount Skydance and Warner Bros. Discovery and can’t wait to get started working together telling the stories that move the world.”

What are Paramount’s plans with Warner Bros.?

Paramount Skydance chairman and CEO David Ellison has said that he would like to grow their combined slate to more than 30 movies a year, keeping Paramount and Warner Bros. as stand-alone operations.

In documents filed to the Securities and Exchange Commission last month, Paramount said, “Our priority is to build a vibrant, healthy business and industry — one that supports Hollywood and creative, benefits consumers, encourages competition, and strengthens the overall job market.”

They’ve also said they would look for ways to save some $6 billion through job cuts in “duplicative operations.”

Executives at Paramount have argued that merging with Warner will allow it to compete with bigger rivals particularly in the streaming space and bring larger content libraries for its customers.

How is Hollywood responding?

Reminiscent of the hours after the Netflix deal was announced in December, there isn’t much public chatter from those inside the industry yet, but with several awards shows in the near future, including the Actor Awards Sunday, the relative silence is poised to break soon.

The Paramount news broke as promotion is happening for Warner Bros’. latest movie, “The Bride!” Filmmaker Maggie Gyllenhaal told The Associated Press Friday that she didn’t feel prepared to speak to the deal specifically, but she did offer praise for the studio that supported her film.

“I was reading tweets about it as I woke up this morning,” Gyllenhaal said. “I don’t have a position but I do feel really deeply supported by (Warner Bros. Motion Pictures Chairs) Pam (Abdy) and Mike (DeLuca) and I feel that they have been taking a slightly different route than most of the other people around them. They’ve been supporting films that are actually about something while at the same time, I think, encouraging the filmmakers who are making them to reach as big of an audience as possible. That combination is very specific and very precious.”

The current state of Paramount movies vs. Warner Bros.

Warner Bros., among the most filmmaker friendly studios operating, has had a banner year with major blockbusters and critical successes. This year they collected 30 Oscar nominations thanks to “Sinners,” “One Battle After Another” and “Weapons.” Paramount films received zero.

In 2025, Warner Bros. movies (including “A Minecraft Movie,” “Superman” and “Sinners”) also accounted for 21% of the domestic box office; Paramount’s market share was only 6%, driven largely by “Mission: Impossible — The Final Reckoning,” which didn’t even place in the top 10 (it was 11th).

In November, Paramount pledged to up its 2026 theatrical output to at least 15 movies. Before the Skydance merger, the studio was more regularly releasing eight movies a year.

Though Paramount’s less than stellar 2025 has been attributed to the previous regime, Skydance has also not had the smoothest run at the box office, and its biggest hits have centered around Tom Cruise, with “Top Gun: Maverick,” its only billion-dollar film, and six “Mission: Impossibles.” It’s attempts to restart the “Terminator” franchise were less successful.

While Warner Bros. has succeeded with a combination of original and franchise films, Paramount’s slate is decidedly more franchise heavy with intellectual property like “Transformers,” “Scream,” “Sonic the Hedgehog,” and “Paw Patrol” in their arsenal.

Is this a better outcome for movie theaters?

Cinema United, the trade organization representing movie theaters, was vehemently opposed to a Netflix-owned Warner Bros. for fear of what it might mean for movie theaters. Exhibition and box office has not fully recovered since the pandemic — previously the annual domestic box office would regularly surpass $11 billion. Since 2020, it’s only exceeded $9 billion once.

But consolidation is also a concern. Although Paramount has an established background in theatrical distribution, Cinema United worried about that outcome as well, which they explained in a statement to the Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing in early February.

“If Paramount or another major studio ends up displacing Netflix as the buyer, our concerns are no less serious,” the trade organization wrote. “A combination of Paramount and Warner Bros., for instance, would consolidate as much as 40% of each year’s domestic box office in the hands of a single dominant studio.”

In theory, a guaranteed 30 films a year would be a good thing for movie theaters, assuming they all go to theaters and it’s not a combination of theatrical and streaming titles as has happened with a Disney-owned 20th Century Studios. But some are skeptical that will pan out.

Hollywood historian and author Mark Harris wrote on Bluesky that “the idea of a Paramount-WB merger producing 30-40 movies a year is an absurd fiction.” He predicted that first Warner Bros. will become the “classy” label within Paramount, “then it will become the specialty or streaming label. Then it will die.”

Will HBO Max and Paramount+ combine?

This remains unclear. It’s possible there will be a bundling situation as with Disney+ and Hulu.

What will happen to the studio lots?

With Paramount taking on billions in debt and equity for this deal to go through, many are wondering what will happen to the two California studio lots, especially in a moment where productions are rarer and rarer in California.

The storied Paramount lot on Melrose in Los Angeles has 30 stages on 65 acres, hosting productions from “Sunset Boulevard” to “Forrest Gump.” Warner Bros. Studios in Burbank sits on a 110-acre lot with 31 soundstages and 11 exterior sets, where productions have included “My Fair Lady,” “Gilmore Girls” and “Friends.” Both are historic sites in their own right. Warner Bros. also has a massive studio in the U.K., in Leavesden.

Will regulators approve the deal?

That remains to be seen. The U.S. Department of Justice has already initiated reviews, and other countries are expected to do so, too.

When new measures come into effect, anyone violating the rules could be prosecuted and fined up to £1,000

Antisocial driving at a park and ride site in Cambridge has made “people feel unsafe”, according to a councillor. A total of 22 separate incidents were recorded at Babraham Road Park and Ride between April 2024 and mid-January this year.

Babraham Road Park and Ride, between Cambridge and South Cambridgeshire, is facing ongoing issues of inconsiderate vehicle use, dangerous driving behaviour and vehicle stunts, as well as playing loud music, according to South Cambridgeshire District Council and Cambridge City Council. Many of these issues are said to happen in the evening or late at night, and often continue past midnight.

Intelligence from the two councils also suggests that further gatherings are being planned, and that despite reports being made to police, cars often return after being dispersed,

Now, the councils want to implement new measures to stop the antisocial behaviour. They are proposing to introdice a Public Space Protection Order (PSPO) covering the Babraham Park and Ride site. Automatic Number Plate Recognition (ANPR) and already existing CCTV would be used, meaning that councils can track vehicles and issue fines without physically needing to be there.

The new measures would make it a criminal offence to do any of the following within the park and ride:

• Speeding or reckless driving that risks causing harassment, alarm or distress
• Revving, racing and disruptive vehicle behaviour, including unnecessary acceleration, loud engine revving, horn misuse and amplified music causing nuisance
• Dangerous stunts such as drifting, doughnuts, burnouts, wheel spins, J‑turns or wheelies
• Organised meets or racing‑style activity, including entering the site for vehicle display or performance driving
• Threatening or abusive behaviour towards other Park and Ride users

If the PSPO is introduced, anyone violating the rules could be prosecuted and fined up to £1,000 or get a Fixed Penalty Notice of up to £500.

South Cambridgeshire District Council’s Lead Cabinet Member for Environment, Cllr Natalie Warren-Green, said: “Residents have told us just how disruptive and intimidating this behaviour has become, especially late at night. Nobody should have to put up with dangerous driving, excessive noise or large organised meets that make people feel unsafe. “

“We’re proposing this PSPO so we can take stronger action – but it is vital local people help shape it. I would really encourage anyone who uses the Park and Ride, or lives nearby, to take part in the consultation and share their views.”

The consultation, asking for views on the issues, runs until Friday, March 27.

Cambridge City Council’s Cabinet Member for Safety, Wellbeing and Tackling Homelessness, Cllr Mike Todd-Jones, said:“This is not a one‑off issue – it’s been happening repeatedly, and residents deserve better. The proposed PSPO is an important step in tackling these problems, and your feedback will help ensure we get it right. Please take a few minutes to have your say during the consultation. Your voice will make a real difference.”

Afghanistan’s new penal codes set harsher punishments for mistreating animals than for violence against women, according to the UN’s high commissioner for human rights.

Volker Turk told the Human Rights Council in Geneva that the decree “defines several crimes and punishments that contravene Afghanistan’s international legal obligations”.

The decree, shared in an unofficial English translation by the Afghanistan Analysts Network (AAN), says that a man who beats his wife enough to cause a visible wound faces 15 days in prison – if she can first prove her case to a judge.

Meanwhile, the punishment for anyone having animals or birds fight is five months in prison.

For a woman who goes and stays at her father’s house without her husband’s permission, the sentence is three months.

Pakistan war latest: ‘Open war’ breaks out

Urging Afghan authorities to rescind the decree, signed by Supreme Leader Hibatullah Akhundzada in January, Mr Turk said: “It provides for the use of corporal punishment for numerous offences, including in the home, legitimising violence against women and children.

“And it criminalises criticism of the de facto leadership and their policies, in violation of freedom of expression and assembly.”

Mr Turk also said in Geneva: “Women and girls are the present and the future, and the country cannot thrive without them.”

The penal code also lays out different treatment for the same crime depending on social class, ranging from simple warnings for clerics to corporal punishment for those deemed to be at the lowest rungs of society.

It states that scholars and “high-ranking people” face a warning from a judge, while “average people of society” face imprisonment, and “the lower classes” are subject to physical beatings.

Read more from Sky News:
AI willing to ‘go nuclear’ in wargames
Replacing Starmer ‘won’t solve problem’, says Harman
‘I’m not the best father,’ admits ​Zelenskyy

AAN co-director and senior analyst Kate Clarke said on the watchdog’s website that the penal code has not yet been published in the country’s official gazette, but has been circulated to its courts.

She added on the website that the code appeared to have been leaked by someone in Afghanistan’s government, “prompted perhaps by its casual mention of slaves, the permission it gives to husbands to beat their wives and teachers their pupils, and its class-based discrimination”.

The decree is the first full penal code issued by the Taliban since they took control of Afghanistan in 2021, following Western military withdrawals.

In the years since, authorities have issued various prohibitions, including bans on education for girls beyond primary school.

Advertisement

Share

1,607 days since girls were banned from school in Afghanistan

Advertisement

It comes after Pakistan bombed several Taliban targets in neighbouring Afghanistan overnight, leading the country’s defence minister to declare “open war” between the two countries.

Security sources in Pakistan said air and ground strikes hit Taliban posts, headquarters and ammunition depots, while Taliban spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid said air strikes hit parts of Kabul, Kandahar and Paktia.

Advertisement

Share

Pakistan in ‘open war’ with Afghanistan

Islamabad has long accused Afghanistan of harbouring militants carrying out attacks inside Pakistan.

The Taliban says Pakistan’s security is an internal problem.

The show sees contestants answer a series of questions to win counters, which they then drop into a machine, similar to a slot machine at an arcade.

The aim is for each counter to nudge more off the edge, resulting in winning money and sometimes even surprises for contestants.

While fans of the show can see how it plays out for contestants while they compete, they very rarely receive an update on how they’ve spent their money or what they did next after their appearance on the show.

So if you saw #tippingpoint @ITV today you might have seen Jamie talk about using any winnings for IVF with Hayley to give Otis their son a little bro or sis. Well they hit the jackpot with our first Tipping Point Triplets Nova Jasper and Billy ❤️🥹 Not sure it gets much better pic.twitter.com/l4RMvsFVSO

— Ben Shephard (@benshephard) February 26, 2026

However, on X, Shephard, who also presents ITV’s This Morning with Cat Deeley, shared an update about one of the contestants who played in yesterday’s show (February 26).

Jamie was a contestant who said if he won money on the show, he would use any winnings to pay for IVF so that he and his partner Hayley could give their son Otis a sibling.

Ben shared that not only did they give their son a sibling, but they gave him three as the couple welcomed triplets – Nova, Jasper and Billy.

In the emotional update, Ben said: “Not sure it gets much better”.

The full update on the social media platform, which includes photos of Jamie and his family, including the tiny triplets, reads: “So if you saw #tippingpoint @ITV today you might have seen Jamie talk about using any winnings for IVF with Hayley to give Otis their son a little bro or sis.

“Well they hit the jackpot with our first Tipping Point Triplets Nova Jasper and Billy

“Not sure it gets much better”.

The news was met with heartwarming messages from Ben’s followers, including this one, who said: “What a lovely ending, love this!”.

Recommended reading:

This person said: “Just seen this on FB. How lovely is this that man not only won on the show he also won at life. What a beautiful family xx”.

Another commented: “Absolutely amazing. Was praying he’d win”.

Someone joked: “Such an amazing story…surely one of the boys has Ben as a middle name though?”

What’s your favourite game show on TV? Let us know in the comments below.

The victory of the Greens in the Gorton and Denton parliamentary byelection is a landmark for the party. But our new research reveals the Greens have received limited airtime over the last year despite almost doubling their support in the polls and in party membership.

While Reform UK has seen a spike in media coverage since it took a commanding lead in the polls, our research shows the Greens have not received more airtime in recognition of their growing popularity.

Broadcasters have to abide by due impartiality rules, but they have the editorial freedom to balance the airtime of political parties. They consider factors such as a party’s vote share at the last UK general election or a party’s electoral performance at the most recent devolved, regional and local election. Other factors to consider include the latest trends in opinion polls tracking voting intention, and whether what a party is saying the news organisation considers significant or, as the BBC says, whether they are “making the political weather” by setting the agenda.

After winning the byelection, this raises the question: should the Greens now be given more airtime?

Limited coverage of Greens

Our Impartiality project team has been tracking coverage of UK opposition parties on BBC News at Ten and ITV News at Ten, the UK’s most-watched nightly TV news bulletins.

In 2025, we found the Greens were the sixth most covered opposition party, being referenced in just 32 items, behind the Conservatives (375), Reform UK (213), the Liberal Democrats (116), the Scottish National Party or SNP (46) and ahead of Plaid Cymru (10).

We also tracked how often a party was the leading focus of a broadcaster’s report. The Greens led four items – three on BBC and one on ITV. These stories related to the Greens’ May local election campaign, Zack Polanski winning the party leadership in September and the party conference in October. But neither BBC News at Ten and ITV News at Ten covered the announcement or build-up to the leadership contest.

In contrast, Reform UK led 69 items, Conservatives led 45 items, the Liberal Democrats led 14 items and the SNP led 13 items.

The Greens also appeared on only four episodes of BBC Question Time during 2025. That was about a third as often as the Liberal Democrats and Reform UK.
Despite the leadership change, the subsequent surge in membership and the sustained rise in poll ratings (from 11% in August 2025 to 17% in December 2025), broadcast coverage of Greens did not increase at the end of 2025.

This shows a potential inequality in the treatment of the rising left and right parties. The BBC cited improvements in opinion polling as one of the factors behind the increased coverage of Reform UK, but the Green party’s popularity has not received anywhere near the same recognition.

À lire aussi :
What Hannah Spencer’s historic win means for the Green party’s future

In May 2025, news coverage of Reform UK increased substantially following its victories in local and mayoral elections, which broadcasters considered a sign that the party was now a major player in UK electoral politics. Our research even showed in September 2025 Reform UK was referenced on TV news more than the Conservatives, the party that is supposed to be the UK’s parliamentary official opposition.

The question now is whether broadcasters will take the Green party’s victory in Gorton and Denton as a similar sign of its electoral significance and increase media coverage of the party.

While broadcasters have not broken any of the UK’s rules on due impartiality, our new research raises questions about how they have been interpreting impartiality in a new multi-party system.

Traditionally they have relied on allocating airtime according to parties with the largest number of MPs and total vote at the last general election. They have also factored in performances at the latest local, regional or devolved elections. But they now appear to making more subjective judgements about allocating airtime according to the opinion polls or the newsworthiness of parties.

Given the Greens’ growing popularity, their distinctive set of policies, charismatic leader and byelection victory, they might now look set to receive more media attention and scrutiny over the coming months.

I attended both Kaytranada and Fred Again’s concerts, both at Ally Pally, and the difference was remarkable. While there was still a smattering of pesky screens held aloft at any given moment, it was also very common to look ahead and see nothing but heads, arms, and moving bodies. The atmosphere was palpable: more people were chatting, dancing while facing each other (it always amazes me how dancing towards the DJ booth has become so commonplace, something which is also partially result of phone-forward experiences) and locked into the moment. I even spied a few punters with their eyes closed, fully transported.