Home Blog Page 169

Mica Miller Death: Evidence Supports Suicide, Forensic Expert Says

0

Why was Mica Miller’s death ruled a suicide?

Retired death investigator Barbara Butcher discussed the case exclusively with Oxygen, explaining how investigators determine a cause of death in the case examined by Netflix’s Death of the Pastor’s Wife.

“It is generally protocol that any violent death should be treated as a homicide first, until ruled out,” The Death Investigator with Barbara Butcher host said. “And that way, you don’t have a mindset of walking in and saying, ‘Oh, it’s a suicide.’”

Butcher said investigators do not base such a ruling on a single detail. “It’s not any one thing. It’s the police, the medical examiner, and then that victimology,” she said. “So all these things point toward the idea that Mica Miller took her own life, and that was the ultimate determination of the medical examiner and the police department.”

After the Netflix documentary’s release, some members of the public and Mica’s family said they believe her ex-husband, John Paul Miller, may have been connected to her death, despite the official ruling.

“I think people don’t really understand how to deal with the horror,” Butcher said. “The grief, the ultimate sadness of a tragic event like this young woman taking her life.”

What Happened to Mica Miller?

Mica was found dead in the water at Lumber River State Park in 2024 after suffering a fatal gunshot wound.

According to a statement from the Robeson County Sheriff’s Office, doorbell-camera footage showed her leaving her apartment at 11:38 a.m. that day. At 12:12 p.m., she entered Dick’s Pawn Shop in Myrtle Beach, where surveillance video showed her buying a handgun.

The sheriff’s office said Miller called 911 at 2:54 p.m. and reported that she planned to die by suicide.

A fisherman later heard crying followed by a gunshot, and Miller’s body was subsequently found in the water.

Why Do Mica Miller’s Friends and Family Suspect Foul Play in Her Death? 

Mica’s family and friends were immediately suspicious about the circumstances of her death, pointing to years of alleged emotional abuse and John Paul’s seemingly inability to let her go. She had also reportedly applied for a restraining order against John Paul, Time reported.

John Paul has adamantly denied any involvement in her death. The sheriff’s office also confirmed that he was not in the state of North Carolina that day. 

What Did the Sheriff’s Office Conclude About Mica Miller’s Death? 

After reviewing surveillance footage, interviews, physical evidence and the report from the North Carolina Medical Examiner’s Office, the Robeson County Sheriff’s Office concluded in May 2024 that the death was a suicide. 

“Unfortunately, rumors and conspiracy theories were spreading quickly, and assumptions were being made. However, in the end, we must make decisions based on the facts, and evidence that has been gathered,” they wrote in a statement. “While I know it’s not what many people wanted to hear, the evidence is quite clear and compelling, and we are as saddened as anyone that this occurred.” 

Earl Spencer Reveals King Charles’ ‘Contempt’ for Princess Diana

We may receive a commission on purchases made from links.

Nearly 30 years after Princess Diana died in a Paris car crash in 1997, the tragedy remains closely tied to public perceptions of King Charles III. Now, a new claim from Diana’s brother, Charles Spencer, has returned the monarch to the center of a painful royal controversy. In his forthcoming book, “Swan Song: Diana, My Sister,” Spencer recounts a tense disagreement with Charles over Prince William and Prince Harry walking behind their mother’s coffin at her funeral. In an excerpt published by the Daily Mail, Spencer said he fiercely opposed involving the young princes in the procession. Charles, however, reportedly insisted, pointing to his own experience walking behind the coffin of his great-uncle, Lord Mountbatten, 18 years earlier.

Spencer wrote that he reminded Charles he had been an adult when Mountbatten died — a response that allegedly sparked an emotional outburst. “Prince Charles continued his stream of anger, without me interrupting. Then he stopped. I assumed the pause signaled an effort to bring himself under control,” Spencer recalled. “[B]ut then he unleashed down the phone what I have always taken to be his pent-up contempt for Diana, and his horror that the world was so bowled over by her death.” According to Spencer, Charles then said, “‘Rest assured, we’ll forget her soon enough!'” The earl said the remark stunned him into silence before he responded, “‘I can’t believe you just said that,'” and ended the call.

Buckingham Palace pushed back on the account without directly addressing the book’s allegations. “While we do not comment on books as a matter of principle, His Majesty is mindful that the pain of fraternal grief can cloud reason, affect judgment and color memory in ways others do not recognize, even many years after such a loss,” the palace said in a statement reported by People.

Charles was reportedly very jealous of the People’s Princess

The latest Princess Diana claims arrive amid long-running speculation that Charles struggled with the overwhelming attention his then-wife attracted. Diana herself addressed the issue publicly while discussing their turbulent marriage. During her explosive 1995 “Panorama” interview, she described the response she received during a royal tour of Australia. “We’d be going round Australia, for instance, and all you could hear was, oh, she’s on the other side,” Diana said, via PBS. “Now, if you’re a man, like my husband a proud man, you mind about that if you hear it every day for four weeks.” In personal recordings featured in 2017’s “Diana: In Her Own Words,” she was even more direct, claiming Charles “took it out on me — he was jealous,” according to the Express. “I understood the jealously, but I couldn’t explain that I didn’t ask for it.”

Even so, reports have maintained that the future king was deeply shaken by news of Diana’s death. Royal biographer Tina Brown said in the 2017 documentary “Diana: 7 Days That Shook the Windsors” that Charles was devastated by the crash, as reported by Town & Country magazine. Brown also said he immediately understood the fallout he would face, adding: “He knew, instantly, that this was going to be a terrible thing, that… he will be blamed, for the death of Diana.”

In light of Charles Spencer’s revelations, Diana’s fans are absolutely infuriated with Charles and they’re letting him have it on social media. “Too bad. [She] is posthumously [more] popular than him,” one user snarked on X. But not everybody was as quick to take the earl at face value. “I’ve never been a huge fan of Charles,” another penned on Reddit, referring to His Majesty. “But I have no doubt whatsoever that he did not say this.”

Jackie O’s Manager Responds to Relapse Rumours With Cryptic Statement

0

Trapped Under One Roof With My Cheating Ex: A Living Hell

0

Transgender Teen Suicide Data Claims Face Scrutiny Over Methodology

0

“You can have a living son or a dead daughter.”

Parents across the country have encountered versions of that frightening message from doctors, professional medical groups, news coverage and activists online.

The warning is often framed this way: If a child believes their sex does not match their body and is denied gender-transition medical treatment, the child faces an elevated risk of suicide.

For many families, no argument has been more influential in decisions involving puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones or, in some cases, surgery.

It has also weighed heavily on legislators debating limits on transgender medical interventions for minors.

Yet a new report argues that the suicide warning does not hold up.

According to the report’s findings, policies aimed at shielding children from transgender treatments do not lead to higher suicide rates.

Suicide risk is undeniably higher among young people who identify as transgender, a painful fact that calls for serious attention and support.

Children who say they were “born in the wrong body” often experience significant mental-health challenges, including depression and anxiety, both of which are associated with increased suicide risk.

The CDC’s 2023 Youth Risk Behavior Survey found that 72% of transgender-identified high school students said they had experienced “persistent feelings of sadness or hopelessness.”

The commonsense explanation is that such challenges preceded and even led to their gender confusion — with the encouragement of authority figures and sympathetic social-media voices exacerbating mental-health dangers. 

Yet activists and their allies say the real issue is the failure to medically “affirm” these children’s chosen gender identity.

That failure, they say, leads to alarming numbers of suicides among trans-identifying teens.

To justify this claim, they point to studies purporting to show that sex-change treatments improve mental health, and that restrictions lead to worse mental health outcomes, including suicide.

Yet these studies uniformly fall short of scientific standards.

They generally rely on self-reported mental health surveys — a low reliability method. 

One of the most widely cited, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, doesn’t include an untreated comparison group, making it impossible to discern what caused changes in mental health. 

Meanwhile, a study published in JAMA Network Open suffers from enormous attrition from the control group, preventing the comparisons required for reliable results.

Other subpar studies abound — all of them repeated ad nauseam by the media.

Enter our study. 

We are the first to analyze the real-world effects of state restrictions on puberty blockers, cross-sex hormones and surgeries, using CDC data on actual teen suicide rates. 

That research is only possible because, starting in 2022, 23 states — with 47% of the nation’s transgender-identifying youth — restricted all or some trans treatments for patients under age 18. 

These states have in effect provided a natural laboratory, allowing for direct comparison of teen suicide trends with states that haven’t restricted sex-change treatments.

If the activists are right, suicide rates for children would have increased in states with restrictions.

But we found zero evidence that state policies led to increased suicide rates, period.

To start, we calculated changes in the suicide rates of minors who were and were not covered by state restrictions.

We also examined national trends in teen suicide rates, to gauge a potential increase as more trans-identifying youth became subject to restrictions. 

At every stage, we controlled for a wide variety of factors, including suicide trends among young adults who are barely old enough to avoid state restrictions.

This approach separates trends that affect youth suicide rates in general from the specific effects of state restrictions.

Our results were the same across the board: No rise in teen suicides when transgender treatments are banned. 

Activists and their allies may object that our findings neatly conform to our organization’s goal of ending transgender medicine for minors. 

That’s why our report carefully details our methodology — and even contains the data and code we used in our statistical software.

We made our results, our methods and our data completely public so that others can conduct their own analyses to validate our findings.

Transgender activists will continue to use the threat of suicide as a means of bludgeoning society into accepting invasive, irreversible medical interventions for children. 

But unless they can produce evidence for a relationship between state restrictions and suicides, their tactics should be called out for what they are: A manipulative bluff.

Parents and policymakers, armed only with common sense, can’t be blamed for buckling when confronted with a dishonest nightmare scenario. 

Now they have the facts they need to protect children at home, at school and by law.

Evidence, not emotional appeals or baseless assertions, is essential when our kids’ health and well-being are on the line. 

If we’re going to lower the suicide rate among deeply confused teens, we should at least begin with intellectual honesty and genuine compassion — not activism masquerading as medical expertise.

Jay Greene is Director of Research at Do No Harm, where Ian Kingsbury is Senior Director of the Center for Accountability in Medicine.

U.S. House Unanimously Votes to Halt Penny Production

0

The House of Representatives unanimously approved the Common Cents Act, a measure that would end production of the U.S. penny.

In a rare bipartisan vote Monday, Democrats and Republicans backed legislation barring the U.S. Treasury from minting additional one-cent coins. The proposal would also require businesses and individuals accepting cash payments for goods or services to round totals “to the nearest amount divisible by five for the payment or transfer of cash.”

Should the Senate approve the bill, as expected, it would take effect one year later. Lawmakers stressed that pennies already circulating would continue to be accepted as legal tender.

Republican Conference Chair Lisa McClain of Michigan and Rep. Robert Garcia, a California Democrat and the ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, led the House effort behind the measure.

The unanimous House action follows the U.S. Mint’s decision to halt new penny production in November 2025. The legislation would make that pause permanent by preventing any future restart of penny manufacturing.

Making the one-cent coin has become increasingly expensive, with production costs having risen to 3.69 cents per penny—well above its face value. In a press release, the Treasury said ending production could save taxpayers $56 million each year.

The House vote also builds on an earlier directive from President Donald Trump, who instructed Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent at the beginning of last year to stop making new pennies, describing the practice as “wasteful.”

By May 2025, the Treasury had placed its final order for penny blanks, according to the Wall Street Journal.

Olivia Rondeau is a politics reporter for – News based in Washington, DC. Find her on X/Twitter and Instagram.

Inside the Viral ‘Incident’ at a Women-Only Swimming Event

0

A “serious incident” at a women-only swimming session in Melbourne has prompted intense speculation online, as social media users around the world tried to work out what happened.

The regular Sunday night event at Sunshine Leisure Centre in Melbourne’s west was cancelled following the incident. Management initially offered little detail, referring only to “poor behaviour” in a notice that left attendees and online observers searching for answers.

That vague explanation quickly fuelled a wave of theories, with some people suggesting the disruption could have involved anti-trans demonstrators, men trying to enter the session or a political confrontation.

The swimming sessions take place outside regular operating hours and are designed to offer privacy for participants, with only three female staff members permitted to work during the events.

However, Daily Mail understands the women-only swimming session was halted after a physical altercation between female patrons. The dispute is believed to have broken out in the changerooms once the session had finished, reportedly over access to the showers.

Brimbank City Council has since suspended the sessions as it considers how the after-hours program can be managed more effectively. It is understood there was no security present at the event.

A Victoria Police spokeswoman said officers attended the Sunshine Leisure Centre after receiving reports of a fight shortly after 7pm on Sunday.

“No one was injured. A formal report has not been made to police by any of the parties in relation to the incident,” the spokeswoman said.

Sunshine Leisure Centre (pictured) in Melbourne's west is at the centre of a global social media obsession over a 'serious incident' on Sunday night

Sunshine Leisure Centre, pictured, has become the focus of widespread online discussion after Sunday night’s reported incident.

The leisure centre announced the suspension in a cryptic Facebook post on Wednesday

The Melbourne leisure centre confirmed the sessions had been suspended in a brief Facebook post published on Wednesday.

The women's-only swimming event has been cancelled following the drama as it's understood no security staff were on site

The women’s-only swimming event has been cancelled following the drama as it’s understood no security staff were on site 

The centre announced the suspension in a cryptic Facebook post on Wednesday. 

‘Please be aware that following a serious incident involving poor behaviour at our last session, we are temporarily suspending our Sunday night Women’s Only Swimming Sessions until further notice,’ the post read.

‘This pause is to investigate the incident, review the offering, and determine its viability moving forward. We apologise for the inconvenience and appreciate your understanding.’

With officials initially refusing to reveal what had happened, bizarre theories ranged from someone fouling the pool, to swimmers skinny-dipping, to a transgender access dispute, and, in one particularly colourful claim, university students releasing a hippo into the pool that supposedly required a crane to remove.

Scores of people checked in from London pubs, Scottish living rooms, Canadian lunch breaks, Greek couches, Tunisian holidays and Californian offices, flooding the comments section with speculation while wondering why Facebook had served them the post in the first place.

One London pub-goer wrote: ‘I am sat in a pub in London, why this is on my feed I’ll never know… however, what happened?’

Another added: ‘I’m on holiday in Tunisia and need to know.’ 

As speculation ran rife, Brimbank Mayor Virginia Tachos issued a further statement later that day to address ‘incorrect information’ circulating about why the after-hours sessions had been temporarily paused. 

Brimbank Mayor Virginia Tachos (pictured) said council would provide a further update once the investigation and safety assessment have been completed

Brimbank Mayor Virginia Tachos (pictured) said council would provide a further update once the investigation and safety assessment have been completed

‘To be clear, this pause is not due to a protest against the Women’s Only Swim Session by men, nor is it because of a transgender woman allegedly being refused entry. These claims are entirely false,’ she said in a statement.

‘The sessions have been paused following a serious safety incident that occurred on Sunday September 13, where participants and Brimbank Leisure Centre staff were exposed to unruly behaviour that occurred amongst a number of attending patrons.

‘Brimbank City Council does not tolerate violence or unsafe behaviour. The health and safety of our patrons, our staff and the broader community is our absolute priority.’

Cr Tachos said the council was conducting a full investigation and a comprehensive risk and safety assessment to determine whether the program, staffed by three females, could be delivered safely in the future.

‘We know these sessions are important to many women in our community, providing an opportunity to exercise and connect with others in a welcoming, safe and comfortable environment,’ she said.

‘Council has an obligation to ensure they are delivered in a way that is safe for everyone – including the Brimbank Leisure Centre employees who support and deliver the program.’

Cr Tachos said council would provide a further update once the investigation and safety assessment have been completed.

Ed Sheeran ‘Furious’ After Friends Allegedly Throw Him Under the Bus

0

King Charles Reportedly in Dispute With Princess Diana’s Brother Earl Spencer

0

King Charles has become embroiled in a bitter dispute with Princess Diana’s brother after Earl Spencer claimed the then-Prince Charles said of Diana: “Rest assured, we’ll forget her soon enough.”

Buckingham Palace released an extraordinary response to Earl Spencer’s explosive new book, which recounts a painful confrontation he says he had with Charles in the days following Diana’s death.

In a response that reverberated through royal circles, the King’s aides suggested that grief can “cloud reason, affect judgement and colour memory”. The remark was widely viewed as a pointed parallel to the late Queen’s famous response to Harry and Meghan: “Recollections may vary.”

The Palace’s unprecedented rebuke of Earl Spencer followed the Daily Mail’s disclosure of the first details from his searing memoir. The first extract is due to be published on the Daily Mail website and app at 5pm today.

The Daily Mail’s revelations have divided society, with opposing camps rallying behind each side.

One senior establishment figure, described as a household name, told friends last night that Earl Spencer “should be horse-whipped across town”.

The striking statement challenging Earl Spencer’s account has underscored the depth of the King’s anger, particularly because the Palace did not respond publicly to Prince Harry’s memoir, Spare, experts said.

Former BBC royal correspondent Peter Hunt said Charles, who is meeting leaders from some of the world’s top AI developers in Scotland today, is “clearly absolutely incandescent” over the allegation that he suggested Diana would soon be forgotten.

Royal commentator Richard Fitzwilliams called Earl Spencer’s allegations “destructive” and “driven by hatred”, adding: “There is no question that the King, and rightly so, is absolutely furious.”

Majesty magazine editor-in-chief Ingrid Seward said: “I think Diana would be horrified that her brother has revealed this remark by Charles.”

‘When I last met her, six weeks before her death, she was adamant that she and Charles really loved each other. It was so important to her that their children knew that.

‘So she would be horrified that he has shared a comment that could appear to show so much malice. I am sure it was not meant like that. But at the time, the Spencers and the Royal Family were at loggerheads.’

Julian Payne, the King’s communications secretary between 2016 and 2021, said the ‘highly unusual’ statement from the Palace displayed the ‘strength of feeling that there must have been for them to feel that they needed to go out there and correct it’. 

He said: ‘I just don’t recognise the way the King is characterised in those remarks.’

The King is at war with Princess Diana's brother over Earl Spencer's bombshell claim Charles declared 'rest assured, we'll forget her soon enough'

The King is at war with Princess Diana’s brother over Earl Spencer’s bombshell claim Charles declared ‘rest assured, we’ll forget her soon enough’

The King's unprecedented response via the Palace reveals that has been outraged by Earl Spencer's claims, experts have said

The King’s unprecedented response via the Palace reveals that has been outraged by Earl Spencer’s claims, experts have said

Charles and Diana on their last official trip together to South Korea in November 1992

Charles and Diana on their last official trip together to South Korea in November 1992

In Swan Song: Diana, My Sister, the earl tells how in 1997 he clashed with Charles over the idea of Princes William and Harry walking in their mother’s funeral procession. 

Spencer said he insisted Diana would not have wanted William, then aged 15, and Harry, 12, to endure such a public ordeal, telling the then heir to the throne: ‘That’s not going to happen.’

But he claims furious Charles ‘went nuts’ and responded with a ‘stream of anger’ including telling him, just days after the death of the princess that shook the world, that ‘rest assured, we’ll forget her soon enough’.

The first full part of the serialisation of the memoir will be published on dailymail.com at 5pm UK time today.

Last night Buckingham Palace took the highly unusual step of issuing a withering put-down to the incendiary claims about the King.

A Royal spokesman said: ‘While we do not comment on books as a matter of principle, His Majesty is mindful that the pain of fraternal grief can cloud reason, affect judgement and colour memory in ways others do not recognise, even many years after such a loss.’

The caustic response is being compared to the late Queen Elizabeth’s celebrated remark that ‘recollections may vary’ about Harry and Meghan’s outlandish claims in their Oprah Winfrey interview attacking the Royal Family.

A source close to the King said the comment he is alleged to have made about Diana was ‘just not in his nature and it certainly wasn’t in his nature at that time, when he was a man absolutely grief-stricken’.

They pointed out that the then Prince of Wales was the person who overruled Royal protocol to insist that Diana should have a full state-style ceremonial funeral.

The rebuke was issued by the palace shortly after the Mail revealed claims made by Earl Spencer in his book.

Earl Spencer, 62, says he has written the memoir to correct ‘untruths’ told about his older sister.

The astonishing account of the King’s alleged outburst, almost 30 years ago, is described by the earl over several pages.

He says that one of Queen Elizabeth’s most senior aides had told him, in the days before the funeral, that William and Harry would take part in the procession, which is when he responded that this was not what his sister would have wanted and was ‘not going to happen’.

Minutes later, he recalls, he received a phone call from Prince Charles who questioned the Spencer family’s sense of duty and insisted that, 18 years earlier, he had walked in the funeral procession of Lord Mountbatten, his great-uncle.

The memoir describes how Charles ‘went nuts’ after the earl pointed out that the prince had been 30 at the time of Lord Mountbatten’s funeral in 1979.

In one of the book’s most extraordinary passages, Earl Spencer writes: ‘Prince Charles continued his stream of anger, without me interrupting. Then he stopped.

‘I assumed the pause signalled an effort to bring himself under control, but then he unleashed down the phone what I have always taken to be his pent-up contempt for Diana, and his horror that the world was so bowled over by her death. ‘Rest assured,’ he hissed, “we’ll forget her soon enough!”.’

Earl Spencer said that he was ‘so stunned’ by the alleged remarks that he took a few seconds to reply.

‘I can’t believe you just said that,’ I said flatly, before hanging up,’ he writes.

Julian Payne, the King’s former communications secretary between 2016 and 2021, told BBC Radio 4’s Today programme: ‘I personally was working for him during the 20th anniversary of the late princess’s death in 2017 and naturally we ended up discussing her several times during that summer because the media interest was so intense.

‘What I remember was he was very clear that there was never to be any criticism, never to be any pushback on the narratives that were usually highly critical of him – but he was absolutely emphatic that we were to respect her memory and not undermine it in any way.

‘So it seems to me very odd that in the moment itself with the grief of his family and his own shock that he would choose that moment to use those words. It’s just not language that I recognise.’

BBC royal correspondent Sean Coughlan said the Palace see the allegation against Charles as ‘being entirely out of character for a man with a deeply compassionate nature, who at the time was dealing with his own grief and that of their two sons’.

Royal expert Phil Dampier described the palace statement as ‘extraordinary’, adding: ‘The days of never complain never explain have gone… not surprisingly.’

Commentator Richard Fitzwilliams told GB News: ‘I think it is something that the Royal Family obviously have taken very seriously with an extraordinary statement.’

He added that royal observers will now be considering whether the Duke of Sussex will also respond to the book’s contents.

Mr Fitzwilliams said: ‘People will be asking what did Prince Harry know about this book and what its contents are. Will he in fact be speaking about this? Will he be reacting? I sincerely hope so because it’s a scandalous thing to accept to say that his father made these statements.

‘Here you’ve got a situation where it will be interesting to see what Prince Harry says, if anything, about this because he’s been speaking about so many topics linked to the royal family since they’ve stepped down as senior working royals.’

Sky News royal correspondent Laura Bundock said the Palace statement was a ‘really remarkable intervention’ and a ‘very robust response’ which is ‘beyond punchy’.

She added: ‘It is, as they say very unusual for them to make any comment about a book. They normally do not comment on books.’

Ms Bundock also pointed out that the palace did not respond to Prince Harry’s memoir Spare, but the new book is a ‘very different situation’.

She continued: ‘At this point they feel they simply cannot stay silent given who has written the book, Diana’s brother, given the subject of the book, Diana herself, and given the nature of the allegations made.’

The Earl, Diana and Charles at the Earl's 21st birthday party in 1985 at the Mirabelle restaurant in London

The Earl, Diana and Charles at the Earl’s 21st birthday party in 1985 at the Mirabelle restaurant in London

From left, the Earl, Prince William, Prince Harry and Charles at Diana's funeral on September 6, 1997

From left, the Earl, Prince William, Prince Harry and Charles at Diana’s funeral on September 6, 1997

Diana’s death on August 31, 1997, aged 36, sparked a global outpouring of grief.

On September 6, 1997, six days after Diana’s death, Earl Spencer delivered a defiant eulogy at her funeral that was later named one of the greatest speeches of the 20th century.

His raw oration in Westminster Abbey was delivered after he walked alongside William and Harry, as well as Prince Charles and Prince Philip, behind Diana’s coffin in a funeral procession through central London.

The new book includes a string of further extraordinary claims about Diana’s failed marriage to Charles and the tumultuous aftermath of her tragic death in a car crash in Paris.

The revelations are set to plunge Buckingham Palace into a fresh storm just weeks after the return of the Duke and Duchess of Sussex and their children to the UK from California.

The exclusive serialisation will begin on dailymail.com later today at 5pm.

Described as ‘historic’, Swan Song is due to be published worldwide next Tuesday – in the UK by Penguin Michael Joseph, a division of Penguin Random House.

Police in the Netherlands are still investigating what publishing sources say is the ‘extremely suspicious’ overnight theft of four copies of the book from the back of a parked lorry earlier this week.

Today, several senior Royal Family members will be seen in public carrying out official engagements.

Charles is set to address bosses from some of the world’s leading AI developers – Nvidia, Anthropic and OpenAI – about the future of artificial intelligence.

He is expected to tell a summit at Dumfries House in Scotland that the new technology should be in the ‘service of humanity, community and the natural world’.

Diana’s son William and his wife Kate, the Prince and Princess of Wales who also hold the titles of the Duke and Duchess of Rothesay in Scotland, are set to make their first official visit to Isle of Bute.

The day is to include visiting their namesake town of Rothesay and follows their visits to the Isles of Mull and Iona last year.

The Duke of Sussex is also expected to make his first public appearance since returning to the UK – appearing at the inaugural Invictus Spirit Awards ceremony in London.

The Duchess of Edinburgh’s visit to Zambia, to try to celebrate the relationship between Zambia and the UK, is among other royal engagements.

Elsewhere, Princess Anne will attend the opening of a new History Centre at the German Military Cemetery in Staffordshire.

Extracted from Swan Song: Diana, My Sister by Charles Spencer, to be published by Michael Joseph on September 22, £28. © Charles Spencer 2026. To order a copy for £23.80 (offer valid to 10/10/26; UK P&P free on orders over £25) go to www.mailshop.co.uk/books or call 020 3176 2937. 

NBC Reporter Eliana Moreno’s Brother Warns of Scammers Exploiting Her Helicopter Crash Death

0

The grieving brother of NBC reporter Eliana Moreno has warned that scammers are allegedly trying to exploit his sister’s death through unauthorized online fundraisers.

Johan Moreno of Brooklyn issued the sharp warning in a post on X Wednesday night, a day after Eliana Moreno was one of three people killed in an NBC helicopter crash in Los Angeles.

“At this time, our family and her fiancé are not collecting monetary donations,” he wrote. “Any online donation pages are not endorsed by our family. Thank you for your well wishes and understanding.”

Moreno, a writer, also shared a throwback photo of his sister at work inside NewsChopper 4, the Eurocopter AS350 that crashed Tuesday in Chatsworth.

“RIP sis, I will love you to the end of time,” he wrote. “My family and I just went through the worst day of our lives. We appreciate all the support and love.”

Tributes have continued to pour in for Moreno, 38, after officials confirmed she was aboard the helicopter when it went down while covering a fatal bus collision in Chatsworth.

Mourners have left flowers at a makeshift memorial at Whiteman Airport in Pacoima, where NewsChopper 4 was based and departed for its flights.

“She was just so wildly good at what she did,” Los Angeles aerial photographer Jake Asner, who created the memorial, told the Los Angeles Daily News.

“She had the scanners on, she was talking to … assignment desks … and controlling the camera. …. She did it like it was a piece of cake.”

Asner said the airport was the fitting location for the memorial because it was a place “she loved.”

Jonathan Gonzalez, an NBC Los Angeles reporter, said Moreno was “damn good” at what she did, describing her as “one of a kind,” according to NBC News.

Moreno and the copter’s pilot, George Marciniw, were killed while reporting on a bus collision– as was Guatemalan national Edy Gutierrez Mejia, 29, who was on the ground. 

The cause of the crash is still being investigated and the National Transportation Safety Board expects to release a preliminary report within 30 days. 

Investigators will seek surveillance video from nearby buildings and review the helicopter’s logbooks as part of their probe.

The helicopter’s charred wreckage is also being examined and will be moved to a secure facility for further investigation.

The final report could take as long as 18 months to be published, but Fabian Salazar, the NTSB investigator-in-charge, said the livestream video documenting the copter’s final moments is “probably the most important evidence.”

The video shows the camera zooming out before several alarms sound as the helicopter begins its descent.

Then Moreno was heard asking, “You can’t pull up?”

The video then cuts out – which appears to be the moment the helicopter crashes.