I arrived at Libbie Mugrabi’s Hamptons home in an ordinary Honda CR-V, leaving it parked on the road beyond the gates. In the driveway sat her $400,000 Rolls-Royce Phantom.

The six-bedroom Bridgehampton property sits at the end of a lengthy drive on roughly seven wooded acres, surrounded by multimillion-dollar residences. Mugrabi received the estate as part of her 2020 divorce settlement with billionaire art collector David Mugrabi.

But following a foreclosure auction last month, the Manhattan socialite was preparing to leave the house behind.

When I arrived shortly after midday last Thursday, the 46-year-old was outside placing possessions into a storage container. She was wearing a short red pajama set.

Mugrabi is being required to vacate the home she once shared with David and their two children after the property was sold at auction amid missed mortgage payments.

She has approximately one month to clear out before facing the possibility of eviction.

After spending time outdoors, taking in the expansive grounds and the sound of birds, Libbie invited me through the front door.

Over champagne, we toured the residence and discussed everything from our shared Jewish background to art and fashion, as well as the deeply contentious end of her marriage to David.

Her office offered perhaps the strongest indication of what Mugrabi hopes to pursue next: a future in fashion.

A canvas covered in pink graffiti displayed the name of her L’Scher label, while clothing, books, documents and merchandise crowded the space.

She presented several recent creations, including a hat marked with the word “DEFY.”

Another design prompted laughter: it featured “C**tessa,” a deliberately vulgar twist on the word Contessa.

She later swapped her sleepwear for a white feather-trimmed jacket from her own collection and posed for photographs.

The rest of the home reflected her passion for contemporary art, including a Damien Hirst piece of undisclosed value displayed in the stark white living room.

In the primary bedroom, designer clothing, footwear, jewelry and handbags overflowed from the huge walk-in closet.

Mugrabi showed me the bikinis she was setting aside for her move to Florida, saying she viewed the relocation as a chance to start over.

“I’m genuinely happy and excited to go. I never want to return to New York. To me, it’s the dirtiest and most corrupt place,” she said.

“The news is all fake … and the people are disgusting. It’s anti-Semitic too.”

But despite insisting she was ready to leave, Mugrabi was clearly incensed about the way she had lost her home and the divorce that preceded it.

Her split from Mugrabi, which began in 2018 and was settled in 2020, became one of New York’s most spectacular society battles, with their fortune and vast art collection at the center of the fight.

Mugrabi has previously described the moment she discovered David with another woman in this very home as the final straw in their marriage.

She told me the same story, saying she had gone upstairs to bed during a July 4 weekend party in 2018 before discovering David downstairs naked with another woman the following morning. 

The precise terms of the divorce settlement were never made public, although reports said she had sought $100 million.

‘I was entitled to half of a billion in the divorce,’ Libbie fumed, the conversation growing more heated. 

‘I settled for just a few paintings, this house and some monthly money.’ 

The Bridgehampton mansion, valued at the time at around $18 million, was one of the major assets she received in her divorce from David.

But it is now at the center of another legal battle.

MORE STORY: Boeing 737 MAX Glitch Discovered That Could Lead to Catastrophic Failure

Libbie took out a $3.5 million loan secured against the property but later admitted she stopped paying it back in October 2024, allowing ownership to cede to the lender.

A subsequent arrangement gave Libbie an opportunity to sell the house herself, which she listed for $25 million, later cutting the asking price to $19 million. 

When she failed to find a buyer before the deadline, the property was put up for sale at a public foreclosure auction.

Libbie described the auction as ‘bogus’ and said she believed her house had effectively been ‘stolen’ from her.

‘Normally, when you have an auction you have to advertise it [properly] to the public but it was never advertised,’ she said. 

‘The auction was rigged, unfair and unjust and my deed was taken.’

Taking occasional hits from her vape, Libbie described the series of ‘humiliating’ events that led to her home being sold for a mere $5.86m.

The auction itself was ‘out of control,’ with locals crowding into Town Hall to watch the drama unfold. 

Libbie’s mother, Jane Scher, was among those in attendance, accompanied by her dog, Botox. 

At one point, she turned to the lender’s attorney, Ryan Mitola of Vallely Mitola Ryan, and reportedly told him: ‘Your client is a d**k.’

Libbie’s sister, Mia Rowe, meanwhile, appeared determined to save the house, repeatedly raising her bid as she was outbid by others. 

At one point, her $7.8 million bid was accepted, seemingly putting the property back within the family’s grasp. 

She held up the auction as she ran to the bank to get the certified check she needed.

But when the bank couldn’t provide it, the property went to the next bidder, Henry Ikezi, an investor and Queens politician.

The drama did not end there.

Police were called and Jane was eventually escorted from the auction with Botox, after an angry confrontation in which she was described as a ‘lunatic.’ 

Dan Russo, the attorney who acted as referee for the auction, later told the Daily Mail that the proceeding was ‘out of control.’

Under the auction terms, Ikezi has up to 45 days to complete the purchase, according to the Post. 

If the transaction is completed and Mugrabi refuses to leave, he can seek to have her evicted from the property by police.

When I left her home at around 8pm, Libbie had given the impression she was ready for a new chapter.

But when the Daily Mail returned to the property a few days later to photograph her before she left, the mood had changed. 

She had initially agreed to meet the photographer at the house, but changed her mind at the last minute and remained inside. 

Outside, a handful of movers continued loading her belongings into a storage pod as the once-bustling estate fell quiet. 

Soon, the house that had been at the center of Libbie’s marriage, divorce and years of legal battles will belong to someone else. 

Commonwealth Bank chief executive Matt Comyn received a $256,500 “people and leadership” bonus for building “exceptional teams” during a year when thousands of employees signed a petition protesting burnout and poor pay, while staff cuts climbed to about 1,000.

CBA employees have expressed anger over the bank’s opaque bonus system, saying it imposes unrealistic performance targets on ordinary staff. At the same time, Mr Comyn was awarded the payout amid widespread reports from workers who described intense pressure and difficulty managing rising living costs.

Mr Comyn’s scorecard, published in Commonwealth Bank’s latest annual report, shows he received a 120 per cent rating and was assessed as performing “above expectations” in the People and Leadership category.

The category represents one of four measures used to determine his bonus. It assesses his performance in “creating exceptional teams”, fostering “a culture of learning and excellence” and “strengthening our talent and succession”.

The payment, however, represented less than 3 per cent of Mr Comyn’s total $9.1 million remuneration package. That overall sum meant he earned the equivalent of the average CBA employee’s annual salary in under a week.

The disclosures come as the Finance Sector Union estimates that more than 1,000 Commonwealth Bank positions have disappeared this year. Around 3,000 employees have also signed a petition condemning the bank’s latest pay offer.

Commonwealth Bank, which reported a record profit of almost $11 billion, remains embroiled in an extended pay dispute with the FSU. The union is seeking an increase that keeps pace with inflation.

A collection of testimonies from 1,700 dissatisfied employees, recently delivered to Mr Comyn, offers a detailed account of growing frustration inside Australia’s largest bank. The submissions describe anger over workload, compensation and the perceived gap between executive rewards and staff conditions.

“We are the backbone and the frontline of CBA. We cop all and everything while the big boys and girls sit behind the fence collecting the fruits of our hard-earned labour, always shifting the goalposts for our incentives,” one employee wrote.

“The rich toss us peanuts, telling us to look away while they bathe in their greed. They ought to remember who actually keeps the business running day to day.”

Another submission said staff were expected to work continuously “like robots”, while senior executives received substantial pay and shares and employees were offered what the writer described as a token $1,000 in stock.

“I struggle to pay my bills and keep up with the rising cost of living, while at the same time hearing about managers going on golf trips and seeing designer-brand bags or hearing about their next trip to Europe,” one worker said.

Alongside criticism of senior management, the employee accounts point to what staff consider an unwinnable bonus system. They argue that the rewards available to executives are vastly out of proportion to those offered elsewhere in the organisation.

Commonwealth Bank’s cash bonus pool is available to eligible employees, including executives. However, payments are made on a “discretionary” basis, with the size of the pool determined by the bank’s “overall affordability”.

Workers say the performance indicators needed to qualify for a bonus are “completely unattainable” and become “harder every year” as the targets change.

One employee said every performance category was so “ridiculously unrealistic” that achieving the full 12 per cent entitlement would require her to “have invented a new way of working that changed how the bank runs”.

‘It’s disgusting that he [Comyn] gets 91 per cent of his STVR [bonus] while most employees have to fight tooth and nail against increasingly unrealistic and unattainable standards just to reach 70 per cent.’

Another person claimed they had ‘exceeded KPIs for three years and never received any discretionary increase.

‘The bank retains significant discretion over bonus outcomes, [and] routinely does not pay employees their full bonus potential.

‘Employees should not be expected to absorb rising living costs while relying on discretionary remuneration that may not be paid at its full potential.’

Several staff members referred to the bank constantly ‘moving goalposts’ to avoid paying staff bonuses, which were still described as ‘subpar’ and ‘offensive’.

Staff also claimed that the bank reduced the amount of people who were eligible for a top rating of ‘exceeding expectations’, and shrunk the bonuses available.

Meanwhile, the bank’s own regulatory disclosure revealed that every one of its 42 most senior staff received a bonus in FY25.

While staff reportedly can make around 12 to 15 per cent of their salary in bonuses, the CEO is eligible for bonuses of 94 per cent.

Additionally, the CEO, group executives and senior executives also have access to a separate budget pool that awards share-based bonuses which vest over several years.

The structure partly explains how despite none of the executives having increases to their base pay, their overall remuneration still jumped by a combined $9million.

CBA’s increased share price accounted for $2.37million out of Mr Comyn’s entire pay packet.

For the bank’s group executives, Angus Sullivan and Mike Vacy-Lyle cleaned up with salary packages north of $5million, while Andrew Hinchliff and Alan Docherty both walked away with $4.8million in the last financial year. 

And while regular workers are assessed on their individual performances, Mr Comyn and his executives are given bonuses based on collective output and the bank’s performance.

In August, after 10 bargaining meetings with the Finance Sector Union, CBA offered pay rises of up to 11.5 per cent over three years, with the biggest increases reserved for its lowest-paid staff.

The union called the offer ‘dismal’ and a ‘slap in the face’, claiming that 71 per cent of staff would receive a below-inflation rise in the first year.

The FSU’s Secretary Julie Angrisano said the offer only widened ‘the already obscene pay disparity between management and the workers’.

‘We should not have working poor in Australia but that is exactly what we are seeing at CBA.’ 

 However, this week the FSU announced the bank had put another offer on the table, which would be considered.

When approached with detailed questions, a spokesperson for Commonwealth Bank said it’s people were ‘central to how we deliver for our customers’.

‘Our people are central to how we deliver for our customers, and we ensure they have ready access to information and guidance about their pay and rewards. This includes detailed explanations of their base pay, variable remuneration and the Employee Share Acquisition Plan. 

Where people have specific questions about their individual situation, they’re able to get answers from our dedicated HR Direct team or they can speak directly with their manager.’

Bill Gates has issued a stark warning about the dangers posed by the rapid advancement of artificial intelligence.

Appearing on NBC’s Meet the Press on Sunday, the Microsoft co-founder urged governments to strengthen oversight of the technology and warned that AI could potentially contribute to events resulting in “a billion deaths.”

“AI is certainly powerful enough to drive events that cause a billion deaths,” Gates told moderator Kirsten Welker. He added that while wiping out all of humanity would be extremely difficult, no previous weapon had combined such extraordinary power with people acting on malicious intent and access to advanced AI tools.

Welker asked Gates what measures could help prevent AI-related disasters, prompting him to outline some of the challenges facing regulators and the technology industry.

Gates said AI could make it increasingly difficult to tell the difference between researchers working on lifesaving treatments and bad actors attempting to develop biological weapons.

“I wish it was easier to distinguish good intent, like I want to design a new drug for a disease, versus negative intent, which is I want to design a tool of bioterrorism,” Gates said.

He argued that the potential consequences make rigorous oversight of the most advanced AI systems essential, and called on the United States to take the lead in creating meaningful safeguards.

“Because those are so close, we do need to monitor any sophisticated model and record exactly what’s being done,” Gates said.

Gates said China was likely to adopt comparable safeguards, but maintained that the United States should move first by setting clear standards for the industry.

“You’ll hear from the industry, it’s a very doable thing. It would not slow them down dramatically,” he said.

He distinguished those protections from the separate question of whether the broader development of AI should be slowed.

“These safeguards, their monitoring, are separate from whether we would be better off slowing down,” Gates explained.

President Donald Trump rejected the idea earlier this month that advances in AI could lead to the end of humanity, telling reporters that such outcomes were “things that won’t happen.”

DON’T MISS: Christopher Battaglia Death And Obituary: Family Mourns – NewsFinale

“We’re leading China in AI. We’re the most sophisticated country in the world, and frankly, I want to keep it that way because whoever wins AI wins,” Trump told reporters at his golf course in Doonbeg while attending the Irish Open earlier this month.

House Republican Speaker Mike Johnson has also weighed in, saying in a CNN interview earlier in September: “We cannot put a moratorium on this because China will overlap us.”

Democrats, by contrast, have appeared more open to regulating the fast-moving technology.

Former Democratic President Barack Obama recently offered his own assessment at a private gathering, according to reporting first published by The New York Times.

“This is something that is moving very fast in private hands, and if we don’t get on top of it, I think it can be dangerous,” Obama reportedly said at an event this month, according to the Times.

Obama, who believes that House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries will be the next Speaker after the November elections, also urged the top Democrat to act.

‘Once you are speaker, I would strongly urge that the Democrats put together a framework for a very public conversation,’ Obama told Jeffries per the Times.

This comes after Anthropic researcher Jacob Coxon sensationally resigned from his position and accused the company and its rival OpenAI of not doing enough to address the potential dangers of the technology earlier this month.

Coxon warned that researchers working in the field believe AI could potentially ‘kill all humans’ by the end of the decade.

Days later, an Anthropic report said that it has stopped several potential plots to build biological weapons using its artificial intelligence this year.

The company determined that scientists were using its platforms to conduct research that could be used to develop biological weapons, according to the company’s new AI misuse report that was obtained by The New York Times.

Anthropic was unable to determine if the research ‘served a legitimate or nefarious purpose,’ the report said.

The firm noted that valid biological inquiry can result in scientific breakthroughs like vaccines, but the company erred on the side of caution because that same research could also be used to create dangerous pathogens. 

For decades, cosmetic procedures have played a major role in Hollywood beauty culture, from fuller lips and defined cheekbones to smoother complexions and expressions that appeared almost completely frozen.

Now, however, an increasing number of celebrities seem to be stepping away from fillers and Botox, choosing instead to showcase their natural features.

The entertainment industry appears to be undergoing a subtle beauty reset. Some actors are embracing facial movement as an essential part of their performances, while other high-profile figures are championing individuality and a less rigid approach to looking youthful.

The change has been dubbed the Great Deflate.

After years of being told that fuller lips, more sculpted cheeks and flawless skin represented the ideal look, stars including Kylie Jenner, Kristin Davis and Megan McKenna have discussed procedures they later decided to dissolve, reverse or remove.

The trend has now prompted fans to ask whether it may even be reaching the upper ranks of celebrity royalty.

Nicole Kidman has recently fueled speculation after appearing more relaxed in a series of public appearances. There is no confirmation that the actress has ever had dermal filler, but her changing look has nevertheless attracted attention.

So what do aesthetic and surgical specialists think? Four experts offer their views on eight women currently in the spotlight…

Nicole Kidman has become the latest celebrity to leave fans questioning whether she is embracing a softer, more natural appearance.

The 59-year-old actress, who has previously said she tried Botox and later regretted it, appeared to show more facial movement during a recent appearance on The One Show with her Practical Magic 2 co-star Sandra Bullock.

Neither Kidman nor her representatives have confirmed that she has reversed cosmetic treatment—or that she has undergone such work in the first place. Even so, recent footage has encouraged fans to examine her appearance closely.

Beneath a video message Kidman recorded for Lane Cove Public School in August, one amused viewer commented: ‘[Oh my God,] did her face actually move (a little)?’

Dr Tom Kamal, an aesthetic doctor and founder of The Dr Tom Clinic, said: ‘In the earlier image, Nicole appears to have greater fullness around the mid-face and under-eye area, which may be consistent with filler.

‘In the newer image, that fullness appears reduced, leaving her features looking softer and more natural.

‘What is interesting is that she does not appear to have experienced major volume loss. This could indicate that, rather than abandoning filler altogether, she may be opting for smaller, carefully placed amounts to retain volume without creating an overfilled appearance.’

Kristin Davis, 61, has spoken candidly about dissolving her fillers after feeling uncomfortable with the way her face had changed. Her decision also came amid a wave of cruel comments directed at her online.

She told The Telegraph in 2023: ‘I have done fillers and it’s been good and I’ve done fillers and it’s been bad. I’ve had to get them dissolved and I’ve been ridiculed relentlessly. And I have shed tears about it. It’s very stressful.’

Lately, the Sex and the City star has been sporting a stripped-back look – proving that sometimes less really is more. 

Anastasia Koles, Aesthetic Nurse and founder of ALTA Medi Clinic London weighed in: ‘Kristin has spoken openly about having facial filler dissolved after being unhappy with some of her previous results. 

‘You can really see the difference in the more recent image, with less fullness through the face and much softer, more natural contours. 

‘It’s a good example of how reducing excess volume can actually make the face look more balanced and rejuvenated, rather than relying on adding more filler.’

Courtney Cox 

In the past, Courteney Cox, 62, admitted that she became so accustomed to having fillers that she failed to notice how much her face had changed. 

It was only after looking at photographs of herself that the Friends star realised she no longer ‘looked right,’ prompting her to have the fillers dissolved in 2017. 

These days, it appears the actress is much more comfortable with ageing – and has made no secret of wanting her face to move hand-in-hand with time. 

NEXT UP: UK Police Arrest ‘Explosive’ Suspects Near US Airbase Amid Iran War

In 2017, she told New Beauty: ‘I’m as natural as I can be. I feel better because I look like myself. I think that I now look more like the person that I was. I hope I do.’

Anastasia commented: ‘In earlier pictures, Courteney’s face appeared fuller and slightly puffier, which can sometimes be associated with filler. More recently, her face looks much more natural, but without obvious signs of significant volume loss. 

‘That could suggest that rather than stopping filler altogether, she may have moved towards smaller, more strategically placed amounts to preserve volume without creating heaviness.’

Melanie Griffith has been open about her experience with cosmetic treatments, including injections to tackle signs of ageing in her 50s. 

The 69-year-old actress eventually admitted her face had become too altered and decided to have the work dissolved, telling Net-a-Porter’s Porter magazine: ‘I didn’t [realise] until people started saying, “Oh my God, what has she done?!” 

‘I was so hurt I went to a different doctor and he started dissolving all of this s*** that this other woman doctor had put in. Hopefully, I look more normal now.’

Professor Ali Al-Hussaini of Elevate Medical & Aesthetic Clinic, said: ‘Melanie appears to have less facial filler than in previous years, particularly through the cheek area, which could suggest that some filler has been dissolved or allowed to wear down. 

‘The result is a softer, less overfilled appearance, with her natural facial contours coming through much more clearly. It’s a good example of how reducing excessive volume can create a more natural, healthier-looking result.

Kylie Jenner

Kylie Jenner’s decision to dissolve her lip filler in 2018 marked a significant change from the look she had become known for. 

Responding to a fan who’d noticed a dramatic change in the TV star’s appearance on Instagram, she wrote, ‘I got rid of all my filler’, adding two flushed face emojis and one smiley face emoji. 

While her once-full lips helped fuel a major beauty trend, especially on social media, Kylie, 29, has since moved towards an overall more natural appearance.  

Anastasia: ‘Kylie appears to have less facial filler than in previous years, which could suggest that some product has been dissolved or simply allowed to wear down. 

‘That said, she still has very balanced facial volume, so it’s quite possible that she has since had smaller amounts placed more subtly and strategically.’

Molly-Mae Hague 

Molly-Mae Hague, 27, has also stepped back from the heavily enhanced look she embraced before she first appeared on Love Island in 2019. 

In October 2020, the reality TV star sensationally announced she dissolved her lip filler and documented the reversal of some of her cosmetic treatments in a YouTube video, saying she had gone ‘too far’ and wanted to feel more like herself. 

Dr Tom said: Molly-Mae Hague: Molly-Mae has spoken publicly about having her cheek, jaw and lip filler dissolved, and her face now looks much softer and more natural. 

‘She may have since had a very small amount of filler placed strategically, but if so, it’s subtle enough that it would be difficult to determine from photographs alone.’ 

Megan McKenna 

Megan McKenna has also moved away from the glamorous ‘Essex’ look she was once known for. 

The former TOWIE star, 33, previously revealed that she became ’embarrassed’ by her lip fillers as they’d prevented her from being taken seriously as a singer while pursuing a music career in Nashville. 

During an appearance on Loose Women in 2019, the 33-year-old revealed she underwent several rounds of dissolvent to remove her filler and has spoken about wanting a more natural appearance. 

Dr Tom said: Megan McKenna: Megan’s lip profile has noticeably changed. Her lips look less filled and more defined, which gives them a much more natural shape. 

‘Her face also appears fuller and slightly puffier in the previous picture, whereas now her features look softer, more refined and more natural overall.’