The Proclaimers have sharply criticised the Harry Potter cast members who distanced themselves from JK Rowling following the author’s outspoken comments on transgender issues and women’s rights.

In a forthright new interview, the Scottish duo, long associated with liberal politics, took aim at Daniel Radcliffe, Emma Watson and Rupert Grint, describing them as “f***ing bairns” who, they said, owed much of their success to Rowling’s work.

Their remarks emerged on the same day that Craig and Charlie Reid, the 64-year-old Edinburgh-born twins behind the hit anthem “I’m Gonna Be (500 Miles),” said the political left was “losing their mind” after the pair withdrew their support for the SNP.

The brothers also challenged activists campaigning for expanded transgender rights, claiming that some within the movement were “truth-phobic.”

Rowling, the creator of the Harry Potter series, has been at the centre of an ongoing public backlash in recent years over her views on women’s rights and the protection of single-sex spaces.

She argues biological sex is foundational to women’s safety, though a host of stars have chosen to distance themselves from such a view.

Craig, from Edinburgh, told The Telegraph: ‘There’s women, actual women, who are threatened with violence and de-platformed because they have the territory to say that a woman is an adult human female.’ 

His brother Charlie later added: ‘Those f***ing bairns who Rowling made massive fortunes for… It was not necessary that each of them stood up and agreed with her, but you would have though someone would stand up and say, “We live in a free country. Thank goodness we have freedrom of speech!” 

‘She is exercising her point of view. I do not necessarily support it, but I support her right to say something. I don’t remember any of them saying that.’  

Rowling previously vowed ‘never to forgive’ Harry Potter movie stars Radcliffe, Watson and Grint for criticising her views, accusing the trio of ‘cosying up to a movement intent on eroding women’s hard-won rights’.

Rowling later doubled down on her criticism of Watson, who played Hermione Granger in the films, arguing her views on trans rights were due to her lack of ‘real life’ experience last September.

Just weeks earlier, the actress had blamed a driving ban on being a child movie star, saying it had left her ‘unable to do some pretty basic life things’.

Rowling raged: ‘I wasn’t a multimillionaire at 14. I lived in poverty while writing the book that made Emma famous.  

MORE STORY: Michigan Man, 20, Killed by Suspected Lightning in Florida

It came after Watson said during an appearance on On Purpose with Jay Shetty that her support for trans rights did not mean she had turned against the woman who shaped her life.

She added: ‘I really don’t believe that by having had that experience and holding the love and support and views that I have, mean that I can’t and don’t treasure Jo and the person that I, that I had personal experiences with.’

Rowling insisted she did not expect Watson, Radcliffe or Grint to agree with her on everything and they ‘have every right to embrace gender identity ideology’.

The Proclaimers, who shot to fame in the late 1980s, were speaking to the press ahead of the release of their 13th studio album You May Offend tomorrow. 

The project is expected to reflect the twins’ new world view, with certain tracks arguing for the political right to voice controversial views such as the gender debate. 

Charlie and Craig had been lifelong liberals but revealed this week that they no longer support the SNP over Nicola Sturgeon’s policies on self-ID.  

They say that in this year’s Holyrood elections, they could not vote for the party, accusing its leadership of doing ‘real damage to the cause’.

Craig blamed Sturgeon’s 2022 Gender Recognition Reform (Scotland) Bill that would have made it more straightforward for people to legally change their gender.

The legislation, supported by Scottish Labour, the Lib Dems and the Greens, was ultimately blocked by the Conservative government.

He claimed it was Sturgeon’s support for gender self-ID that he said led to ‘violent men, including convicted rapists, being sent to women’s prisons’.

He said the policy was ‘unforgivable’ and added that gender critical women are ‘shouted down’ by people who ‘are male and who think that because they put on a dress, and they put on make-up, that that makes them female’. 

Meanwhile Charlie pointed to figures with highly controversial views on the transgender community such as Graham Linehan and JK Rowling and claimed those who campaign for more rights for the trans population are ‘truth-phobic’.

Yet he also denied being transphobic, continuing: ‘I’m not against a man identifying as a woman, dressing as a woman… All I’m against is saying that he actually is a woman when he’s not a woman.’

Elsewhere, their views were more in line with their liberal identities. The pair railed against the ‘moron’ Donald Trump, the ‘ignoring of international law’ and even said that children are ‘being groomed’ into joining the military by organisations such as army cadets.

A bizarre audio illusion has split the internet, with listeners fiercely debating what they think they can hear.

The viral clip, shared by New Zealand podcast The Morning Shift, features a short, looping sound that appears to repeat the same phrase again and again.

But the mystery has sparked widespread disagreement, as people online cannot seem to settle on what the voice is actually saying.

For some listeners, the words are unmistakably “no way, no way, no way.” Others are just as convinced the recording says “well, well, well.”

Introducing the clip on the show, host Marc Peard challenged his co-hosts to listen closely, asking them to “tell me what you hear being said in this audio.”

While one presenter said he could hear the phrase ‘nowhere’, the other was certain he could hear a woman of about 27 years old crying.

Mr Peard then claimed that this was something called a ‘phantom word illusion’.

He added: ‘The phantom word illusion is something that exists in all of us. Whatever we hear in that track is actually a key to your subconscious.’

The strange illusion has left viewers divided on TikTok. 

One commenter wrote: ‘I heard a woman saying “no way” over and over and over.’

‘I heard well done, well done, well done,’ contested another.

Meanwhile, one social media user insisted that they ‘heard brown bread for some reason’.

In contrast, a few confused viewers said that they couldn’t make out any meaningful words at all.

One commenter said that they heard ‘beeping’, while another anxiously wrote: ‘I didn’t hear anything does that mean I’m brain dead?’

While the wide variety of apparent messages might seem strange, it is actually a well–documented scientific phenomenon.

The so–called phantom word illusion was first discovered in 1995 by the psychologist and musicologist Professor Diana Deutsch of the University of California, San Diego.

Despite the mistaken insistence of podcast host Mr Peard, the tracks aren’t ‘just sound’ and do actually contain words.

The illusion is generated by playing two tracks, each containing two words or one word with two syllables through stereo speakers or headphones.

Although the tracks are identical, the left and right sides are offset in time so that they overlap and clash.

Our brains are normally excellent at picking out individual words and phrases from all the chaotic noise that surrounds us.

However, we are best at distinguishing sounds at the pace of human speech, which is 15 or 20 phonemes – the basic units of sound – per second.

By staggering and overlapping the two tracks, the phantom word illusion essentially overwhelms our brain’s ability to make sense of audio input.

According to Professor Deutsch’s explanation, posted on her blog, this gives us ‘a palette of sounds from which to choose, and so can create in our minds many different combinations of sounds’.

After a while, we start to hear new words and phrases coming from one or both of the two speakers – with right–handed people being more likely to hear words on their right.

Some people even hear a third stream of words emerging from some space between the speakers or headphones sides.

In tests, participants often insist that these words are being spoken in a foreign accent, while non–native English speakers insist they can hear phrases in their first language.

Interestingly, Professor Deutsch also believes that the words people hear reveal something about our subconscious.

She says: ‘People appear to hear words and phrases that reflect what is on their minds – rather as in a Rorschach test.

‘I can guess who is likely to be on a diet, as they report words like “I’m hungry”, “Diet Coke” or “feel fat”.

‘And students who are stressed tend to report words that are related to stress – if I play these sounds close to exam time, students may well hear phrases like “I’m tired,” “no brain,” or “no time.”‘

Similarly, women are more likely to hear positive phrases such as ‘love’, while men more commonly hear sexually explicit phrases.

Although that sounds pretty spooky, Professor Deutsch actually believes the phantom word illusion could be the scientific fact behind several supernatural phenomena.

Some paranormal enthusiasts believe that the dead can contact us through sound recordings, known as electronic voice phenomena.

Ghost hunters even employ special devices, such as the ‘spirit box’, to capture audio from vacant radio stations in the hope that voices from beyond the veil will slip through.

While thousands of people swear to have heard something in these recordings, Professor Deutsch believes these are just another example of the phantom word illusion.

A coroner has directed a local council to hand over thousands of records connected to the inquest into the killing of 10-year-old Sara Sharif.

Sara was discovered dead at her family’s home in Woking, Surrey, in August 2023, after enduring what a judge later described as among the most horrific offending he had ever seen.

The schoolgirl had suffered more than 100 injuries after being restrained by her father, 43-year-old Urfan Sharif, who placed a plastic bag over her head and fixed it in place with parcel tape.

She was also attacked with a cricket bat, a metal pole and a rolling pin, strangled so violently that her neck was broken, burned with an iron and subjected to bite injuries.

The day after Sara’s murder, Sharif fled to his native Pakistan with his wife and accomplice, 32-year-old Beinash Batool, before calling 999 to admit the killing, apparently believing he had escaped justice.

But he was captured and extradited to face trial at the Old Bailey, where he and Batool were jailed for life with minimum terms of 40 years and 33 years, respectively, in December 2024, after the murderous pair were found guilty of Sara’s murder.

Now, Senior Coroner Richard Travers has ordered Surrey County Council to disclose 24,606 documents relating to Sara’s siblings at a pre-inquest review into her death. 

Leading up to her murder, Sara lived with several siblings, as well as her father, stepmother and uncle.

Earlier this year, it emerged Sara’s five siblings – who now live in Pakistan – would remain with their grandfather in the city of Jhelum, where they have resided since October 2023. 

Their future whereabouts, and who would ultimately hold custody of them, were at the centre of a court battle in Pakistan between the UK council and the family. 

The children were made wards of court in England after their sister’s death, with Surrey County Council since pushing for their return to the UK. 

On Thursday, Mr Travers said he wants ‘all of the pages’ pertaining to Sara’s siblings to be disclosed to him.

But Alethea Redfern, representing the authority, argued against the full disclosure of the documents and said many are ‘irrelevant’ to the inquest.

Ms Redfern said there must be a review of the paperwork by the council, adding some of the documents relate to matters that have ‘no connection’ to the circumstances of Sara’s death.

She said disclosure of all the documents, which are in an electronic format, will go beyond what is ‘necessary’.

However, Mr Travers said he doesn’t understand what the council’s ‘issue’ is with him obtaining the pages.

He said: ‘This is going to be an order of the court. It is not up to Surrey County Council to decide what’s to be disclosed and what’s not to be disclosed.’

Mr Travers requested all pages be released to him by the afternoon of October 2. 

If they are not, he said he will require the attendance of the authority’s chief executive at the coroner’s court.

The inquest into Sara’s death was to begin in April 2027, however, Mr Travers said he will adjourn the proceedings to a later date, in October.

The coroner said he is not prepared to ‘rush’ proceedings and added inquests are ‘important hearings’ that must be done ‘properly’.

RELATED: NASA Discovers Mysterious Holes on Mars as Scientists Investigate Their Origins

During Thursday’s proceedings, three individuals due to give evidence at Sara’s inquest applied for anonymity to prevent their identities from being reported by the press.

The coroner also heard submissions and said he will make a decision at an unknown later date.

Concerns were raised regarding Sara’s care within a week of her birth in 2013, with her parents known to social services as early as 2010. 

In the run-up to her murder on August 8, 2023, a previous safeguarding report found neighbours heard bloodcurdling screams but failed to report it as they ‘feared being branded as being racist, especially on social media’.

An occupational therapist sent to the home two years before Sara was killed noted the schoolgirl, then aged eight, was the only person in the house wearing a hijab but failed to question it, ‘although she has reflected that she may have been reticent to talk about it for fear of causing offence’.

It was later revealed the head covering was hiding bruises inflicted on Sara by her father and stepmother.

A review said it was ‘concerning that race was a bar to reporting possible child abuse’, noting ‘white fragility – or a defensiveness’ is ‘triggered when white individuals encounter racial stress’ causing them to focus on their ‘own feelings of victimisation’ rather than those being harmed.

The Surrey Safeguarding Children Partnership also found there were at least four missed opportunities to save ‘a beautiful little girl with a lovely smile and a loud laugh,’ concluding ‘different actions could and should have been taken and the system failed to keep her safe.’

England’s Children’s Commissioner, Dame Rachel de Souza, said Sara was ‘killed by those who should have loved her, but let down by every service.’

Even before his daughter’s death, Urfan Sharif was known for violence after being accused of attacking two children and three women, including Sara’s mother Olga Domin.

But he was never charged with any offence.

After arriving in the UK on a student visa, the taxi driver held one woman at knifepoint, choked another with a belt and imprisoned one girlfriend for five days while he sent her passport off for a marriage application in a bid to secure residency in the UK.

Yet Sharif managed to dodge blame and a child protection plan was closed in 2011 ‘without any evidence that father had addressed his abusive behaviour’.

Social services were called repeatedly after Sharif was accused of biting, hitting and slapping children but no further action was taken after he blamed Ms Domin.

Sara was taken into foster care in 2014 at the age of two, but despite the local authority believing she should be adopted, only a 12-month supervision order was put in place ‘without adequate safeguards’.

Meanwhile, her father spent his time drinking and gambling, eventually leaving Ms Domin to fly to Jhelum where he secretly married his cousin in an Islamic ceremony before he returned to embark on a third marriage with Batool.

In 2016 Sharif was ordered to go on a domestic violence perpetrator programme where he ‘admitted to extensive and wide-ranging domestic abuse’.

But he only attended eight of the 26 sessions and experts said there was ‘not enough evidence’ he had changed his behaviour.

Despite the report making ‘quite shocking reading’, its significance ‘became lost within the system’ when a social worker failed to complete an analysis and it was not added to Sara’s safeguarding report.

A family court later decided to award Sharif custody in 2019 based on a flawed report by an inexperienced social worker which had critical ‘gaps’ in information about Sharif as they were under ‘pressure to file the report on time’.

Sara’s Polish mother was made out to be ‘the problem’ and her ‘voice became lost’ because there was no interpreter to explain what was happening, leaving her ‘marginalised’ and ‘cut off’ from decisions about Sara’s fate.

Consequently, a report found ‘red flags’ regarding Sara’s care were missed as there was an ‘assumption that because the court had decided that Sara could live with him there was no need to be unduly concerned.’

In December 2024, a jury found Sharif and Batool guilty of murdering Sara following a ten-week trial where they heard she was subjected to a ‘campaign of abuse’. 

At the Central Criminal Court, both Sharif and Batool were sentenced to life imprisonment, to serve minimum terms of 40 years and 33 years in prison, respectively. 

Lady Joan Branson’s death may have been avoided had she been prescribed a widely used blood-thinning drug to reduce the risk of clots, an inquest has concluded.

The 80-year-old wife of Sir Richard Branson died on 24 November 2025 after going into cardiac arrest, triggered by a sudden blockage in her lung.

That blockage is understood to have stemmed from deep-vein thrombosis, or DVT — a potentially fatal blood clot that most commonly forms in a vein in the leg.

Lady Branson had been taken to hospital after a fall at a private Caribbean retreat left her with fractures to her pelvis and hip.

However, despite a longstanding history of blood clots and being considered “at very high risk of developing DVT”, she was not given anticoagulant medication while in hospital.

Nor was she given compression stocking in the first 48 hours of her admission, oversights which coroners say could have cost her her life. 

The body uses blood clots to prevent excessive blood loss, but these clots can become dangerous if they keep blood from circulating properly. 

DVT affects some 60,000 people in the UK every year and can be dangerous as blood clots can travel to the lungs, cutting off oxygen and blood supply – known as a pulmonary embolism. 

As many as one in four deaths are related to blood clots, making DVT a leading cause of preventable hospital deaths and disability. 

However, it’s estimated that up to a third of cases go undiagnosed because the symptoms are often mistaken for other problems, or non-existent. 

Blood clots often form when blood flow slows, often during periods of prolonged immobility. 

Risk increases sharply with age and with certain medical conditions including cancer. 

Being obese, smoking, taking hormone replacement therapy or the combined contraceptive pill are all known to increase the risk of DVT.

High blood sugar levels and cholesterol, that come with uncontrolled diabetes, can also damage the lining of blood vessels and encourage clotting. 

Women are also significantly more likely to develop the life-threatening condition during pregnancy, and for six weeks after giving birth.  

Long distance travel can also increase the risk, particularly when journeys exceed four to six hours, whether by air, car, train or ferry. 

But sometimes DVT can happen for no obvious reasons. 

The NHS lists four red-flag warning signs, including throbbing pain in one leg – usually in the calf or thigh, swelling, red or darkened skin around the painful area and swollen veins. 

These symptoms can also occur in the arm, if this is where the blood clot appears.

Rarely, people may experience just lower abdominal pain. 

Anyone who thinks they have DVT is advised to book an urgent GP appointment or seek help from NHS 111.

If symptoms occur alongside shortness of breath and chest pain this is a medical emergency, requiring immediate treatment at A&E. 

While there is no one-stop way to prevent DVT, lifestyle changes can significantly reduce the risk. 

The NHS recommends maintaining a healthy weight, keeping active and trying to stand up every hour, drinking plenty of fluids to avoid dehydration and not smoking. 

Those who regularly travel for four hours or more should wear loose clothing, compression socks and avoid sitting for long periods of time where possible, to help minimise the risk. 

The NHS also states that healthcare teams should check if patients are at a high risk of DVT.

If doctors find this to be the case, patients may be given treatment to prevent it, such as blood-thinning medicines like rivaroxaban. 

Blood-thinning medications typically need to be taken for at least three months, to reduce the risk of another blood clot occurring. These medicines are usually taken as tablets. 

In an email sent to the court, the couple’s daughter, Dr Holly Branson highlighted her mother’s history of blood clots, dating back over a decade and said she would not have refused anticoagulants had they been offered. 

When asked why the drugs weren’t prescribed, the lead doctor on her case, Dr Basir Kunduzi said he decided to delay prescribing anticoagulants until Lady Branson had undergone a CT, to ensure there was no internal bleeding the drugs could have worsened. 

But the inquest heard the decision not to administer the anticoagulants to Lady Branson would haunt him for the rest of his life, as he expressed his condolences to the family. 

On Instagram, Sir Richard described his wife as the ‘most wonderful mum and grandmum’, signing off: ‘She was my best friend, my rock, my guiding light, my world. Love you forever Joan x.’