'I am too connected to myself right now. I am fortunate to have been every size,' wrote Jessica Simpson

The Chicago Tylenol murders were a series of poisoning deaths resulting from drug tampering which killed seven in the 1982

Former Vice President Mike Pence on Tuesday outlined his energy policy plan with the goal to overtake China as the world's top energy producer by 2040.

Former Manchester United winger and Wales manager Ryan Giggs is “relieved” at being cleared of domestic violence allegations made by his ex-girlfriend after charges were dropped. Kate Greville told police and lawyers she did not want to go through the ordeal of a second trial after jurors failed to reach verdicts in the high-profile first trial last year, Manchester Crown Court heard. Giggs, 49, was not in court on Tuesday as lawyers said there was no longer any realistic prospect of conviction and it was not in the public interest for Giggs to go on trial for a second time over allegations made by Greville and her sister Emma. Peter Wright KC, prosecuting, offered no evidence against Giggs at the 20-minute hearing as the allegations were formally dropped. Judge Hilary Manley entered “not guilty” verdicts on the charges of coercive and controlling behaviour and assault against Kate Greville and common assault of her sister. Giggs had been accused of controlling behaviour over a three-year period involving Greville. He was also accused of assault by “losing control” and headbutting Kate Greville and the common assault of Emma Greville by elbowing her in the jaw, during a row at his home in Worsley, Greater Manchester, on November 1 2020. Giggs denied the offences and underwent a month-long trial, ending last August when the jury failed to reach any verdicts, and a retrial was scheduled to begin on July 31. But on Tuesday, prosecutor Peter Wright KC told Manchester Crown Court that the case had been considered at the highest levels at the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) and a decision had been made not to proceed with a second trial. Wright said Giggs’ ex-girlfriend Greville had “indicated an unwillingness” to give evidence in a retrial as giving evidence in the first trial had “taken its toll” on her and her sister Emma. Wright said: “This is not a decision taken lightly.” Chris Daw KC, defending Giggs, said: “Mr Giggs is deeply relieved the prosecution has finally come to an end after almost three years in which he’s been fighting throughout to clear his name. “He has always been innocent of these charges – there’s been very, very many lies told about him in court.” At a series of hearings earlier this year, the court was told of difficulties the prosecution had faced in proceeding with the retrial. These included Kate Greville’s reluctance to now go through with a second trial. Earlier this month, Wright, at a court hearing which could not be reported at the time, said: “What she (Greville) has indicated is a wish not to give evidence by reason of her own mental and physical wellbeing, so seriously affected by the process. “You may recollect at the previous trial for example she gave evidence over a considerable period of time, cross-examined for what was three days, and during the course of that process she was both visibly distressed, weary, and expressed the view that she had felt violated by the defendant’s conduct and in giving evidence while maintaining her account, demonstrating a growing frustration in terms of the process. “I make the observation, a general observation, ambivalence on the part of complainants in these circumstances is not an unknown phenomenon to the courts.” Judge Manley told the prosecutor the question of whether Greville was willing to co-operate or not had to be decided. She added: “The position can’t continue indefinitely.” Wright said: “This is a matter that’s been considered at a senior level both regionally and nationally within the CPS, notwithstanding any objective assessment of the seriousness of the allegations. “What is underlying this is the further general principal consideration of the prosecution of the alleged abusive men so far as coercive and controlling behaviour is considered, the wearing down of complainants, is not to be interpreted by the public and by men as a passport to an acquittal – is that underlying question of considerable public interest that we are continuing with.” But Daw, defending Giggs, told the hearing: “As it stands, the prosecution has no case. “The position we submit is: what matters is the interests of justice. “What we have here is an attempt to cobble together a case built on hearsay and an unwilling witness almost three years after the event. “This is not about the public interest.” A spokeswoman for the CPS said: “At all stages we keep cases under careful review, to ensure our legal test is met. This means there must be a realistic prospect of conviction based upon the available evidence and a prosecution is in the public interest. “We have determined there is no longer sufficient evidence available to proceed in respect of the controlling or coercive behaviour charge and that it is no longer in the public interest to prosecute the remaining assault charges. “This decision was made following detailed discussions with Greater Manchester Police and consultation with the complainants. At no stage has she indicated that the account she gave either in her witness statement, ABE interview (achieving best evidence, the police interview during criminal investigation) or at trial, was untrue Peter Wright KC, prosecuting “It is not the function of the CPS to decide whether a person is guilty of a criminal offence, but to make fair, independent and objective assessments about whether it is appropriate to present charges for the criminal court to consider.” During Giggs’ time at Old Trafford, Manchester United won 13 Premier League titles, two Champions League trophies, four FA Cups and three League Cups. Giggs stood down as Wales manager following a period of leave since November 2020. He won 64 caps for Wales and is co-owner of Sky Bet League Two side Salford. Read More Charity boss speaks out over ‘traumatic’ encounter with royal aide Ukraine war’s heaviest fight rages in east - follow live Manchester United agree deal with Inter Milan for goalkeeper Andre Onana Can England beat the weather to level Ashes series? Fourth Test talking points England may need weather check and bolder approach in fourth Test – Ben Stokes

It's Sunday, and with it comes a new Wordle puzzle to usher you into the

A third consecutive night of strikes on Kyiv comes hours after the Nato summit.

As Manchester City prepare for a week that could fulfil a 15-year objective, the discussion within the rest of the Premier League has not been about their undeniable greatness. It has still been about these 115 charges for alleged breaches of Financial Fair Play rules. Opinions were naturally shared in many executive lounges on the last weekend of the season, with particular attention to how any decision on Newcastle United’s prospective shirt sponsorship deal with events company Sela – which, like the club itself, is primarily owned by Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund – might be relevant to City’s case. There is a belief it could lead the Premier League to a situation where it is accused of treating City by different rules to Newcastle. Pep Guardiola was of course concerned with none of this as he prepared for the FA Cup final. While the Catalan and senior City figures feel this is all overplayed, especially as the club absolutely insists upon its innocence, many others in football stress quite the opposite. There is a belief the true scale is not being grasped, whether City are exonerated or not. Such is the strength of feeling, for now just bubbling under the surface, that many sources from London to Nyon describe it as a “potential Super League moment” in terms of the ructions it could cause. There is “fury”. And, just like that moment back in April 2021, the Premier League is facing severe pressure from several different areas. There was first of all the agitation of the other clubs, who pushed for investigation in the first place. More immediately, there is obviously City’s strenuous defence, one source describing the legal back and forth as “like war”. Most coverage has so far been given to numerous legal challenges and obstructions, particularly as regards the objection to Murray Rosen KC as head of the Premier League’s independent judiciary panel. In terms of the club’s tactics in the case itself, The Independent understands City’s expensive legal team are primarily arguing this is not about “fraud”. That accusation is after all why the entire story has such gravity. City are accused of failing to accurately disclose information, with owner funding alleged to have been disguised as sponsorship from two Abu Dhabi companies, airline Etihad and telecommunications group Etisalat. The Independent has been told the club’s lawyers are arguing this is not about any of that but instead an “associated party issue”. That, covered on page 132 of the Premier League’s handbook, relates to parties “having material influence over the club or entity in the same group of companies as the club”. It is why Newcastle’s Sela case may be relevant, since that would be judged under the same regulations. Those regulations were actually updated after the Newcastle takeover, as the other 18 non-state-owned clubs raised concerns over how they could be outstripped by inflated sponsorship deals from companies in autocratic states such as Saudi Arabia. As it stands, Financial Fair Play regulations allow clubs to make a loss of £105m over rolling three-year periods, so long as that is covered by cash injections from owners. Anything exceeding this would be a breach. In terms of arguing that the current case is about associated parties, City actually attempted the same tactic with the previous Uefa case, that covered the same ground. They insisted that was – under the European body’s terms – a “related party issue”. Uefa’s Investigatory Chamber stated it wasn’t about any of that, and that if it is about failure to accurately disclose information it doesn’t make any difference if the parties are related or not. The Court of Arbitration for Sport came down on the governing body’s side in this aspect, as covered in paragraphs 124 to 135 of the judgement. Paragraph 127 reads that the panel found “the related party issue is separable from the charges based on the Leaked Emails”. CAS did ultimately overturn Uefa’s verdict due to alleged breaches being “either not established or time-barred”. Should the Premier League go down the route of looking at associated parties, it could mean the process going on far longer – potentially years – since this is an exceptionally difficult area to properly prove. More complications arise from the nature of autocratic states, where rulers have almost total executive power. It is why many Premier League executives are keenly watching what happens with the Sela example, especially since the relationship there is more direct. The events management company and Newcastle United have the same primary owner in PIF. This is not to suggest there is anything untoward in that sponsorship, and it is understood there has already been sound advice that it represents “fair market value”, especially given Newcastle’s Champions League qualification. A growing feeling among the other Premier League clubs – who are now acutely conscious of the wider effects of state ownership – is nevertheless that such deals should not be looked at through the prism of associated parties or fair market value. The increasing argument is that they need to be looked at through the prism of equity, since that is what money that ultimately comes from the same owners could be perceived to represent. While there are a number of different ownership examples such an approach could relate to, many sources believe it shows the specific complications of allowing autocratic states to own football clubs. One argument is that the Premier League needs to prohibit associated party sponsorships altogether. “By allowing such rules,” one source explains, “you are effectively saying that, if it’s fair value, it doesn’t matter if it’s equity or sponsorship.” For now, some think there is the possibility that Newcastle will be looked at on a different basis to City. If that happens, it might be setting a precedent for City to follow, or – as one source put it – “write their defence for them”. If the Premier League do look at the latter through associated parties, though, it could see the case go on for over two years, maybe up to four. Other clubs are already furious at the length of time it has taken up to now, forming another pressure on the Premier League. It is why some football figures, as reported by the Independent last week, have long advised the competition that they should have independent units to deal with such cases. They believe it is a farce that the competition could be clouded by such uncertainty for so long. The eventual conclusion of City’s case could lead to an explosion One argument that has been made is that, such is the complexity of a case like this, it requires more forensic financial expertise rather than the extent of legal advice the Premier League is understood to have leant on. “They don’t know the scale of what they’re dealing with,” were the words of one source. The Premier League are absolutely not commenting on anything to do with the case, but a fair counterargument that could be made is that the four-plus years the investigation took shows how seriously this has been dealt with. For all the rancour under the surface right now, though, the eventual conclusion could lead to an explosion. If the panel does reach a guilty verdict, there is first of all the likelihood that City would seek an arbitration hearing before further potential appeals in the High Court and the Court of Appeal. Other Premier League clubs would meanwhile seek the strongest possible punishments – potentially up to expulsion – and the prospect of legal action has privately been raised by individual clubs. Premier League rules do allow clubs to sue each other. If the punishment is weak, though, the current belief is that could lead to a “mutiny” within the Premier League. That may even happen if City are exonerated. All of this comes amid a more febrile atmosphere surrounding the dominance of state-owned clubs, especially as City come to the brink of a treble and Newcastle so quickly and impressively reached the Champions League. It has meant more attention than ever is being paid to the Sela sponsorship. State politics are just one more under-current to the City story, too. As one expert on the area said: “How would UAE-UK relations be affected if one of Abu Dhabi’s prize assets was punished like that?” Read More Premier League sponsorship rules set for major test as Newcastle eye shirt deal with Saudi company Supercharged Newcastle’s four key transfer targets to strengthen for Champions League Young players taking their life should not become a norm – Tareiq Holmes-Dennis The differences between old allies Ten Hag and Guardiola that will decide cup final The year that sportswashing won: A season that changed football forever

WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. President Joe Biden said he will meet with Florida Governor Ron DeSantis when he visits the state

At least 150 people are arrested overnight over the shooting of a 17-year-old during a traffic check.

The Tel Aviv Open tennis tournament scheduled for next month has been canceled because of the Israel-Hamas war

The future of the NHL's Arizona Coyotes is in question, and Chiefs quarterback Patrick Mahomes floated the idea of Kansas City being their new home.The Arizona Coyotes have long been trying to find a new home arena for their team. They currently play in Mullett Arena, the home rink for the ...

It will be No 5 vs No 9 in the UFC featherweight division tonight, as Josh Emmett faces Ilia Topuria in a Fight Night main event. Emmett, 38, is looking to bounce back from a tough loss, having been submitted by Yair Rodriguez in February as the pair fought for the interim title. Prior to that defeat, however, Emmett was on a fine win streak, and the American might even re-enter the title picture with an impressive win on Saturday. He faces a tough test in Topuria, though, with the 26-year-old entering Jacksonville with a 13-0 professional record, including 12 stoppage wins. Most recently, the Georgian overcame Bryce Mitchell in December, stunning the submission specialist by forcing him to tap out. With that win, Topuria entered the top 10 at featherweight, and he can take another step forwards tonight. An undisputed champion will be crowned in July, when Rodriguez challenges official champion Alexander Volkanovski, and the winner of Saturday’s main event may even mark themselves out as the next contender for the gold. Here’s all you need to know. When is it? The event will take place on Saturday 24 June, at the Vystar Veterans Memorial Arena in Jacksonville. The prelims are set to begin at 4.30pm BST (8.30am PT, 10.30am CT, 11.30am ET). The main card is then due to follow at 8pm BST (12pm PT, 2pm CT, 3pm ET). How can I watch it? The card will air live on BT Sport in the UK, with the broadcaster’s app and website also streaming the fights. In the US, ESPN+ will stream the action live, as will the UFC’s Fight Pass. Odds Topuria – 5/2 Emmett – 30/100 Full odds via Betway. Full card (subject to change) Main card Josh Emmett vs Ilia Topuria (featherweight) Amanda Ribas vs Maycee Barber (women’s flyweight) Austen Lane vs Justin Tafa (heavyweight) David Onama vs Gabriel Santos (featherweight) Brendan Allen vs Bruno Silva (middleweight) Prelims Neil Magny vs Phil Rowe (welterweight) Randy Brown vs Wellington Turman (welterweight) Mateusz Rebecki vs Loik Radzhabov (lightweight) Tabatha Ricci vs Gillian Robertson (women’s strawweight) Zhalgas Zhumagulov vs Joshua Van (flyweight) Trevor Peek vs Victor Martinez (lightweight) Jamall Emmers vs Jack Jenkins (featherweight) Tatsuro Taira vs Kleydson Rodrigues (flyweight) Cody Brundage vs Sedriques Dumas (middleweight) Read More Fury vs Usyk: Behind the scenes, laughter is turning to anger Joe Rogan is right: Tyson Fury has ‘no chance in hell’ against Jon Jones How to watch The Ultimate Fighter 31 in the UK Topuria vs Emmett and full UFC Fight Night card tonight How to watch Topuria vs Emmett online and on TV tonight Elon Musk and Mark Zuckerberg ‘dead serious’ about cage fight, says UFC boss