One must admit, the Duke and Duchess of Sussex have a knack for commandeering the headlines. The latest seismic shift in their saga involves their decision to exchange the sunny climes of California for the notoriously drizzly skies of the UK, a revelation that has certainly made waves.

This move comes as quite the surprise, especially considering Prince Harry’s emphatic declaration to the BBC last May. At that time, he expressed doubt about ever bringing his family back to Britain, making this reversal particularly eyebrow-raising.

In the realm of backtracking, this one is quite a spectacle. But then, it’s no shocker given the pattern of unpredictability we’ve seen from both Harry and Meghan.

There is, after all, a laundry list of previous controversial statements. Consider the so-called ‘secret’ nuptials purportedly blessed by the Archbishop of Canterbury in their backyard, which turned out to be fictitious. Or Harry’s claims that they never labeled the Royal Family as racist, despite viral footage of their candid Oprah interview hints otherwise, referring instead to what might be termed ‘unconscious bias’.

Moreover, Meghan’s assertion during that same Oprah interview about the royal decision to withhold a prince title from young Archie sparked further debate. Contrary to her claims, it was a matter of established protocol—children did not receive such titles as great-grandchildren of the sovereign until the passing of Queen Elizabeth II, not due to any familial dispute.

And let’s not forget Harry claiming in his memoir, Spare, that he was at Eton when he received a phone call from a courtier informing him of the Queen Mother’s death – when in reality he was skiing in Klosters with his father.

Just a few examples. So I suppose that, really, none of us should be too surprised that he has now changed his mind.

It’s official: Britain is no longer a prison from which Harry and his family felt compelled to escape – with maximum drama and fanfare – for the sake of their sanity. It is now the place they once again plan to call home.

No matter that they’ve shredded the Royal Family’s reputation; no matter that they’ve characterised the British Press and public as ‘toxic’. They’re coming home, whether we like it or not. And woe betide anyone who complains.

Or dares to question their motives. Ostensibly, they are doing this so the children can benefit from a British education and get to know their extended family. But we all know there is more, much more to it than that.

It’s not just that all those lucrative contracts have melted away, leaving little but jam and flower sprinkles in their wake. It’s also that the couple’s status as royals – so important since without it he is really just a balding middle-aged man with very little experience of real work or life and she is just a retired soap actress – is a fast-depreciating asset.

They need to re-establish their royal credentials, and how better to do it than to plug straight back into the source: Britain, and the great British public. In the US they were small fish in a big pond; here, they will be big fish with plenty of opportunities to ingratiate themselves. Mark my words, there will be a charm offensive. Who knows, we might even get to see the children’s faces.

Cynical? Perhaps. But to my mind there’s an even more self-serving reason they’re coming home: FOMO. Fear of missing out.

When the Sussexes left, they were arguably the Royal Family’s most popular asset. A lot of people thought their departure would damage the institution in the eyes of the public.

But the opposite happened. As one by one the embittered pair lobbed their truth bombs across the Atlantic, people began to sympathise with the beleaguered royals back home. Many felt that, while Harry had some grounds for complaint, he went too far in pursuing satisfaction.

They badly miscalculated – and instead of being diminished by their absence, the remaining royals have actually flourished. The whole saga seems to have brought them closer together, created a more tight-knit unit. They’ve faced the Andrew crisis together; they’ve weathered ill health together.

There has been a real sense of a family united, and it has served them well. Harry and Meghan, meanwhile, have seemed increasingly embittered.

But the sad truth remains: King Charles is not a well man. That older generation of royals is fading and new faces are emerging. And as the tectonic plates of the monarchy shift and a new royal topography emerges, Harry risks being left high and dry. Had he and the duchess made a roaring success of their American escapade, this might not matter. But they did not. They’ve run out of road, and they need to turn back.

We all hope and pray that the King will lead a long life like his parents but, sadly, that may not come to pass. If, when that moment is upon us, Harry and his family were still in self-imposed exile across the pond, they might have found the way back into the royal fold was barred for good, or at the very least made much harder.

It’s no secret that there is no love lost between Harry and his brother William, future king, or their respective wives. Theirs is a deep, complex rift that has developed over the course of the past decade, starting when Prince William first sounded a note of caution about his brother’s romance with the then Ms Markle.

The pair even came to blows when, later on, bullying allegations arose against the duchess (which she vehemently denies), and William confronted his brother.

According to Harry’s own account, the Prince of Wales called the duchess ‘difficult’, ‘rude’ and ‘abrasive’, which he (Harry) took to be a ‘parrot[ing of] the press narrative’. He then writes that William ‘grabbed me by the collar, ripping my necklace, and . . . knocked me to the floor’.

That was just the start of it. Bit by bit, the brothers have drifted in opposite directions to the point where Prince William is now reportedly ‘apoplectic’ about this latest turn of events, with insiders claiming the Waleses were completely ‘blindsided’ by the announcement.

In other words, if Harry wants to get his snout back into the royal trough, he has to do it while his father is on the throne. Otherwise, there is no guarantee.

From William’s point of view, this is an obvious land grab, made all the more frustrating since the Prince and Princess of Wales have always behaved impeccably in fulfilling their royal duties, whereas Harry and Meghan have not. The idea that his little brother is just going to swan back in and steal his thunder – which, given the nature of the personalities involved, is inevitable – must be enraging. It really is Cain and Abel.

What’s worse, there is every chance that, with the help of old allies and Harry’s uncle, Charles Spencer, the duke and duchess will swiftly establish some sort of rival court in the Cotswolds, where they reportedly plan to settle.

With the children at school, they will find new charities and causes to occupy their time and it won’t take long before a pseudo-royal ecosystem begins to form around them – one unencumbered by protocol and precedence.

Everything now depends on King Charles’s response. He is in an impossible (and heartbreaking) position, as any parent who has ever had to arbitrate between warring siblings will understand. Plus, of course, he is still receiving treatment for cancer. I can’t even begin to imagine how exhausted he must be by it all.

Once again, Harry proves that nothing and no one will stand in his way.

A man recognized as potentially the longest-incarcerated prisoner in the United States has passed away at 101 years of age. Throughout his imprisonment, his execution was scheduled no less than eight times, yet each time it was deferred. Despite his conviction for murder in Connecticut, he steadfastly proclaimed his innocence.

Francis Clifford Smith, whose life came to a quiet close in late June, died peacefully in his sleep at 60 West. This Connecticut-based secure nursing facility specializes in the care of aged individuals within the justice system, as per the facility’s statement.

Smith, who was on the brink of his 102nd birthday, was cremated without a funeral service, marking the end of a long and complex life.

“In essence, it was old age,” noted David Skoczulek, spokesman for 60 West, in an interview with the BBC. “His passing involved minimal family engagement, yet we ensured his departure was conducted with respect, aligning with his wishes and maintaining his dignity.”

Smith was 25 when he was first sentenced to death for the fatal shooting of Grover Hart, a 68-year-old night watchman at a Connecticut yacht club, during an attempted robbery on July 23, 1949. Smith was one of two men arrested in connection with the killing. The other man, George Lowden, took a plea deal and initially implicated Smith, although Lowden later said authorities had beaten him into making the statement and refused to testify against Smith at trial.

Over the next 76 years, Smith was scheduled to be executed eight different times, but he was spared on each occasion, according to the Boston Globe.

He continued to maintain his innocence up until his death, his friends told the BBC.

“I’m in here on no evidence at all,” he told the Boston Globe in 2023.

Over the years, questions about the evidence against Smith emerged as a witness recanted, Lowden repudiated his earlier statement implicating Smith and another man claimed responsibility for Hart’s killing. Those developments contributed to repeated efforts to prevent Smith’s execution and obtain a new trial.

“I’m not even sure he was present at the murder,” Major Leo Carroll, one of the officers who had interrogated Smith after his arrest, testified to the Board of Pardons right before his eight planned execution, according to the Boston Globe.

A key witness later recanted her account linking Smith to the crime, while Lowden repudiated his earlier statement implicating Smith. Another man serving time in Alabama later claimed that he, rather than Smith, had been involved in Hart’s killing.

Smith nevertheless never received a new trial. A judge who reviewed the other man’s confession rejected it as not credible, and Smith’s murder conviction remained intact.

Smith’s death sentence was commuted to life in prison in 1954.

He served 76 years behind bars, except for three short stints of freedom, including 12 days on the run after he escaped in 1967.

Then, in 1975, he was granted parole and remained free for about 10 months before he was arrested on larceny and weapons charges and returned to prison for violating parole. The Boston Globe reported that he was not ultimately convicted of those charges.

Records indicate Smith declined or refused to participate in several later parole efforts, although he later disputed that characterization and said he could not remember. But in 2020, he agreed to go on supervised parole to the nursing facility where he recently died.

He reportedly had dementia at the end of his life. Connecticut’s Department of Correction has not confirmed this diagnosis but said Smith was struggling with issues associated with old age.

“He was 101 and a half,” Andrius Banevicius, the public information officer for Connecticut’s Department of Correction, told the BBC. “He did pretty well as far as longevity is concerned.”

My dear friend, someone I’ve cherished as family for many years, finds solace in food as her primary source of happiness. With my circle dwindling, she, along with my husband, is among the few loved ones I have left. Several years back, she saw a doctor who urged her to shed some pounds, but instead, her weight increased.

Attempts to discuss her health concerns are often met with responses that suggest she’s already aware, yet no changes follow. Unfortunately, her husband’s struggles with weight don’t help, as they frequently dine out. Various health issues plague her, most of which could significantly improve with an 80-pound weight loss.

The situation tugs at my heart, as I ponder writing her a heartfelt letter. Watching her take no action while grappling with severe health troubles, including a heart condition, is tough. Her body suffers, from aching knees and feet to a liver strained by medication. Dropping much of the extra weight could reduce her medication reliance and enhance her physical mobility.

It’s frustrating that my words, expressing how much her family and I need her presence — from her children and husband to her young granddaughter — seem ineffective. I’m torn between whether writing her a letter explaining my feelings would be inappropriate. — Finding My Voice in Idaho

I am guessing that you’ve already shared these concerns with her directly. Reiterating them in a letter might not be as impactful as you hope. Your friend and her husband have made dining out a bonding experience. Unless they both acknowledge the serious health risks involved and decide to make changes, it’s unlikely anything will shift in their lives.

There is a group that has been mentioned in this column many times called Overeaters Anonymous. It is a self-help group with a long and successful history. In these meetings there is no weighing, no shaming, no dues or fees for members. (They are self-supporting through their own contributions.) While it might not be something your friend is willing to explore, it might make you feel better to suggest this to her if she’s unaware of it. The website is oa.org.

DEAR ABBY: My mother has accused me of removing personal papers from her file cabinet. I have never gone into her file cabinet, nor have I ever removed any papers. This accusation is extremely hurtful. It has strained our relationship. I place great emphasis on honesty and integrity. I am now considering taking a polygraph test to validate my defense. Should I follow through or just let it go? — HONEST DAUGHTER

DEAR DAUGHTER: Let it go. A polygraph test has a wide margin of error, so it wouldn’t provide conclusive proof anyway. Instead, try to understand that your mother’s accusation may come from frustration with herself at having misplaced the papers. She was wrong to take it out on you, but please show that you can be more forgiving than she has been.

Dear Abby is written by Abigail Van Buren, also known as Jeanne Phillips, and was founded by her mother, Pauline Phillips. Contact Dear Abby at or P.O. Box 69440, Los Angeles, CA 90069.

Following the tragic death of actress Hayden Panettiere, her on-and-off boyfriend, Brian Hickerson, has spoken out through his legal team.

This statement arrives merely four days after the 36-year-old Panettiere was discovered unresponsive in her South Carolina apartment, shocking fans and the entertainment world alike.

“The investigation into Hayden’s passing is currently underway, and it is crucial that investigators are given the time and space to conclude their work,” remarked Sloan Ellis, Hickerson’s lawyer from the Ellis Hinton law firm.

Ellis further noted, “As has been publicly reported, authorities have affirmed that there were no indications of foul play involved.”

“In order to honor Hayden’s memory and support her grieving loved ones, we will abstain from further comment at this moment,” Ellis concluded, emphasizing the need for privacy and respect during such a difficult time.

Hickerson, 37, was at the apartment where Panettiere died, along with his brother Zach Hickerson, police confirmed on Tuesday.  

A Greenville police officer who responded to the residence Sunday afternoon was met by the brothers and then observed paramedics performing CPR on an unresponsive woman, according to a police report. 

‘The patient did not seem to have any obvious physical reasons to be unresponsive,’ the officer noted. After attempting lifesaving measures, the emergency workers declared Panettiere dead at 2.31 pm on Sunday.

The Greenville County Coroner’s Office has said Panettiere’s cause of death remains under investigation, however a dispatcher said she had a ‘cardiac arrest’ during a 911 call from her apartment.

The dispatcher could be heard in the audio saying that Panettiere had suffered a suspected overdose, and sources told TMZ that Narcan – a nasal medication used to treat an opioid overdose – was also found on a mattress at the property.

Panettiere, who soared to fame in the TV shows ‘Heroes’ and ‘Nashville’ while enduring struggles with alcohol addiction and depression, would have turned 37 on Friday.

She first began dating Hickerson in 2018, however, their on-off relationship became tumultuous as he was arrested several times on domestic violence charges. 

Panettiere had spoken of her troubled childhood in the spotlight in recent months and revealed intimate details of her relationship with Hickerson in her memoir published three months before her death. 

She had an 11-year-old daughter with her ex-partner, Wladimir Klitschko, a former boxer turned Ukrainian government official who has full custody of the youngster.  

In her memoir, titled This Is Me: A Reckoning, Panettiere alleged that Hickerson once beat her so severely that she had to remain in her house for weeks to keep her injuries from the public. 

She said she tried to keep the alleged abuse from the police because she feared the public would find out, and described her relationship as a ‘very dark and complicated time in my life.’

Hickerson was arrested for one alleged incident in May 2019, and court records show he was charged with injuring a spouse or girlfriend. 

He pleaded no contest to the allegations in April 2021, and he was sentenced to 45 days in county jail and four years’ probation. 

Just three days before Panettiere’s death, Hickerson’s request to reduce his past felony charges was denied by a judge.  

Panettiere’s relationship with Hickerson appeared to end in 2020, and in July of that year, she filed for a restraining order against him. The outcome of her request is not stated in court records. 

The Greenville Police Department said in a statement that ‘the preliminary investigation’ into Panettiere’s death ‘has not indicated any signs of foul play or suspicious circumstances.’

An autopsy found ‘no signs of trauma were discovered that would have contributed to the death.’