The peer may have been sent three separate payments of $25,000 (£18,000) by Epstein in 2003 and 2004, documents released by the US Department of Justice on Friday appear to show. A spokesman for Lord Mandelson told Sky News: "Neither he nor his husband, Reinaldo Avila da Silva, has any record or recollection of receiving payments in 2003 or 2004 or know whether the documentation is authentic." The former business secretary and EU trade commissioner further questioned the authenticity of the documents, citing false claims he had a US social security number, questionable US-dollar cheque payments into UK banks, incorrect beneficiary details, and multiple basic errors in dates, spelling and formatting. Lord Mandelson said: "There are also multiple formatting errors in the documents and I would like JP Morgan to confirm on the record that they are certain these documents are authentic and that the individual cheques are also authentic. "Until this fact checking has been achieved I maintain my original position which is that I have no record and no recollection of ever receiving these sums and that these statements are false." Mandelson was the Labour MP for Hartlepool at the time when the files suggest the payments were alleged to have been made. The first, on 14 May 2003, was sent to a Barclays account held by Reinaldo Avila da Silva, Mandelson's partner, listing Mandelson as BEN - typically short for the beneficiary of the funds. Another document in the DOJ release suggests a potential payment of $25,000 on 24 June 2004, and apparently sent to an account which names Peter Mandelson as the account holder. A third payment is dated 30 June 2004. In August of that year, Mandelson was appointed as the UK's EU commissioner. Pressure is growing on both Lord Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor to testify before the US Congress over their links to Jeffrey Epstein. It comes after even more information linking the pair to the paedophile financier was released over the weekend. Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has lost all his titles and associated royal roles due to his links to Epstein, while Lord Mandelson was sacked as the UK's ambassador to the United States. There have also been calls for the New Labour grandee to be stripped of his peerage. And on Sunday, Trevor Phillips delivered a blunt message to his friend of nearly 50 years, warning Lord Mandelson that his political career was over. Speaking to Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips, Housing Secretary Steve Reed said: "If anybody has information or evidence that they can share that might help to understand what's gone on and bring justice for these victims then they should share it. "Whether that is Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, whether it's Lord Mandelson, or whether it's anybody else." The minister added that people have a "moral obligation to share what they know". In the latest tranche of Epstein files, it was revealed Lord Mandelson was "trying hard" to change government policy on bankers' bonuses at Epstein's behest in December 2009, in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. By that point, he had returned to the UK government and was business secretary. The documents also showed correspondence in September 2009 between Epstein and Lord Mandelson's husband, Reinaldo Avila da Silva, who asked the financier to pay him thousands to fund an osteopathy course and other expenses. Epstein was released from prison in July 2009, having pleaded guilty to trafficking a minor. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has said that Andrew should give evidence to the US Congress, which is investigating Epstein, if asked. Now pressure is building on Lord Mandelson to do the same. Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp told Sky News that both Andrew and Lord Mandelson should "give all the assistance they possibly can" to authorities investigating Epstein. Trevor Phillips said at the start of his own show that he had known Lord Mandelson for almost half a century. He went on: "I have not spoken personally to Lord Mandelson about the release this weekend of documents, messages, photographs and videos related to the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein. "He was invited to join us this morning but declined. "However, he has told this programme that neither he nor his husband, Reinaldo Avila da Silva, has any record or recollection of receiving payments in 2003 or 2004, or knows whether the documentation is authentic. "He does accept that Reinaldo received a loan of $10,000 from Epstein whilst he, Mandelson, was a senior cabinet minister, and he acknowledges that in the same period, Epstein was amongst those who lobbied him on important policy matters. "There's no suggestion that Lord Mandelson has done anything unlawful. "But I would claim the friend's privilege to tell Peter that he has been, at best naive and foolish, at worst greedy and duplicitous. "Whatever is true as far as politics and public office are concerned, for Peter Mandelson, this is the end." Read more:Key findings from the latest Epstein filesClear Epstein welcomed into Andrew's family foldEpstein sent thousands to Mandelson's husband Phillips finished: "The question now is whether the price of his misjudgement is to be paid only by the man himself, or whether those who trusted him and elevated him to the peerage, and to one of the highest diplomatic posts available, should also share in his ignominy." Asked to comment on Lord Mandelson and Epstein, Sir Keir said: "Obviously he was removed as ambassador in relation to the further information that came to light in September of last year and I've nothing more to say in relation to Peter Mandelson." 👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈 Lord Mandelson has previously offered an unequivocal apology to Epstein's victims. Being pictured or mentioned in the Epstein files is not an indicator of any wrongdoing. Andrew paid millions to Virginia Giuffre, a woman he has claimed never to have met, to settle a civil sexual assault claim in 2022. In a statement issued on 17 October 2025, the former prince reiterated that he "vigorously" denies the accusations against him.

After saying goodbye to his family for another week, the then 34-year-old salesman wandered into the Frog and Bucket comedy club in Manchester and, to avoid paying the £4 entry fee, signed up for the open mic night that was taking place. Only a handful of people were in the room, his name was called to go on stage and from there, John Bishop began his career in comedy. "I found this thing that I just loved, but I was never sure it would be a job ever," he tells Sky News. "It took a number of years for me to build up to it and I was 40 when I left my job, so it was a completely different stage than what you see in the film. "What you see in the film is someone who all of a sudden finds something that they never knew would be the right thing for them." The Scouse stand-up comic adds: "I wasn't nervous when I handed in my notice because I knew I could do it. You know, the big thing with stand-up comedy is it's a meritocracy. "You know if you're good because you make more people laugh in the room than the other acts on the bill. "And because it's the support of the community, which again is something you see in the film, they'll push you on if you are good, people will let you know. "By the time I was ready to leave my job, it was either stay as someone who's a decent comedian or try and make the leap and see what happens." It was that story he recounted to actor Will Arnett when they met by chance on a barge in Amsterdam. Joined by Mark Chappell, the three began creating what would become the new film Is This Thing On?, directed by Bradley Cooper. Bishop was involved in the early stages of the script but took a step back to allow Arnett and Chappell make it their own. The story, now set in America, follows Alex Novak, a finance professional who stumbles into the New York comedy scene. 'It wasn't even crickets, it was silence' Reflecting the early stages of a comedian's journey means Arnett had to purposely create jokes that wouldn't land - and perform them to real crowds. "It was important to us that he doesn't come out and be the Michael Jordan of comedy the first time," Arnett explains. "There was a night that I bombed particularly badly, and what was so glaring was the contrast because I'd done the same material five minutes before and it had gone really well." Arnett adds: "It wasn't even crickets, it was silence. At first that was really daunting and very scary, and at the same time, there's something kind of magical about bombing that much because it's so quiet and you have to stay up there and do it. "And it's also perversely funny to you as well. You're like, wow, this is really not working." The film isn't just about finding your correct path in life, but also taking the active decision to choose what is right for you. Its main characters, Alex and Tess, played by Arnett and co-star Laura Dern, are shown going through the ordeal of a divorce. Read more from Sky News:Prince Harry's court case: What's happened so far?Oscar nominations 2026: The full list There's no pinpoint reason behind their separation, but instead the film explores their journey in finding their own passions in life. The separation sparks Tess's own identity search as a woman who had dedicated her life to a sport she no longer plays. Dern says the film served as a reminder to make a conscious decision to choose happiness. "Every day we have to reignite our passion," she says. "The luxury of having lives where - whether it's being in partnership or parenting... If we're lucky enough to have a job we actually love, even still life happens to us and you have to work to reignite your joy." Is This Thing On? is in cinemas now.

The peer may have been sent three separate payments of $25,000 (£18,000) by Epstein in 2003 and 2004, documents released by the US Department of Justice on Friday appear to show. A spokesman for Lord Mandelson told Sky News: "Neither he nor his husband, Reinaldo Avila da Silva, has any record or recollection of receiving payments in 2003 or 2004 or know whether the documentation is authentic." The former business secretary and EU trade commissioner further questioned the authenticity of the documents, citing false claims he had a US social security number, questionable US-dollar cheque payments into UK banks, incorrect beneficiary details, and multiple basic errors in dates, spelling and formatting. Lord Mandelson said: "There are also multiple formatting errors in the documents and I would like JP Morgan to confirm on the record that they are certain these documents are authentic and that the individual cheques are also authentic. "Until this fact checking has been achieved I maintain my original position which is that I have no record and no recollection of ever receiving these sums and that these statements are false." Mandelson was the Labour MP for Hartlepool at the time when the files suggest the payments were alleged to have been made. The first, on 14 May 2003, was sent to a Barclays account held by Reinaldo Avila da Silva, Mandelson's partner, listing Mandelson as BEN - typically short for the beneficiary of the funds. Another document in the DOJ release suggests a potential payment of $25,000 on 24 June 2004, and apparently sent to an account which names Peter Mandelson as the account holder. A third payment is dated 30 June 2004. In August of that year, Mandelson was appointed as the UK's EU commissioner. Pressure is growing on both Lord Mandelson and Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor to testify before the US Congress over their links to Jeffrey Epstein. It comes after even more information linking the pair to the paedophile financier was released over the weekend. Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor has lost all his titles and associated royal roles due to his links to Epstein, while Lord Mandelson was sacked as the UK's ambassador to the United States. There have also been calls for the New Labour grandee to be stripped of his peerage. And on Sunday, Trevor Phillips delivered a blunt message to his friend of nearly 50 years, warning Lord Mandelson that his political career was over. Speaking to Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips, Housing Secretary Steve Reed said: "If anybody has information or evidence that they can share that might help to understand what's gone on and bring justice for these victims then they should share it. "Whether that is Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, whether it's Lord Mandelson, or whether it's anybody else." The minister added that people have a "moral obligation to share what they know". In the latest tranche of Epstein files, it was revealed Lord Mandelson was "trying hard" to change government policy on bankers' bonuses at Epstein's behest in December 2009, in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis. By that point, he had returned to the UK government and was business secretary. The documents also showed correspondence in September 2009 between Epstein and Lord Mandelson's husband, Reinaldo Avila da Silva, who asked the financier to pay him thousands to fund an osteopathy course and other expenses. Epstein was released from prison in July 2009, having pleaded guilty to trafficking a minor. Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has said that Andrew should give evidence to the US Congress, which is investigating Epstein, if asked. Now pressure is building on Lord Mandelson to do the same. Conservative shadow home secretary Chris Philp told Sky News that both Andrew and Lord Mandelson should "give all the assistance they possibly can" to authorities investigating Epstein. Trevor Phillips said at the start of his own show that he had known Lord Mandelson for almost half a century. He went on: "I have not spoken personally to Lord Mandelson about the release this weekend of documents, messages, photographs and videos related to the convicted paedophile Jeffrey Epstein. "He was invited to join us this morning but declined. "However, he has told this programme that neither he nor his husband, Reinaldo Avila da Silva, has any record or recollection of receiving payments in 2003 or 2004, or knows whether the documentation is authentic. "He does accept that Reinaldo received a loan of $10,000 from Epstein whilst he, Mandelson, was a senior cabinet minister, and he acknowledges that in the same period, Epstein was amongst those who lobbied him on important policy matters. "There's no suggestion that Lord Mandelson has done anything unlawful. "But I would claim the friend's privilege to tell Peter that he has been, at best naive and foolish, at worst greedy and duplicitous. "Whatever is true as far as politics and public office are concerned, for Peter Mandelson, this is the end." Read more:Key findings from the latest Epstein filesClear Epstein welcomed into Andrew's family foldEpstein sent thousands to Mandelson's husband Phillips finished: "The question now is whether the price of his misjudgement is to be paid only by the man himself, or whether those who trusted him and elevated him to the peerage, and to one of the highest diplomatic posts available, should also share in his ignominy." Asked to comment on Lord Mandelson and Epstein, Sir Keir said: "Obviously he was removed as ambassador in relation to the further information that came to light in September of last year and I've nothing more to say in relation to Peter Mandelson." 👉 Click here to listen to Electoral Dysfunction on your podcast app 👈 Lord Mandelson has previously offered an unequivocal apology to Epstein's victims. Being pictured or mentioned in the Epstein files is not an indicator of any wrongdoing. Andrew paid millions to Virginia Giuffre, a woman he has claimed never to have met, to settle a civil sexual assault claim in 2022. In a statement issued on 17 October 2025, the former prince reiterated that he "vigorously" denies the accusations against him.

Brooks awarded United a first-half penalty at Old Trafford after Matheus Cunha went down in the area under a sliding tackle from Jorge Cuenca, but replays showed the Fulham centre-back had won the ball. VAR James Bell overturned the decision and awarded a free-kick instead for a shirt pull on Cunha by Cuenca, with Casemiro heading in the opener from Bruno Fernandes' cross at the resulting set-piece. The Premier League Match Centre said Cuenca's holding offence had ended before entering the box, which is why the decision was overturned, but Silva says he was told Brooks awarded the penalty for the tackle. Man Utd 3-2 Fulham - report & highlightsAs it happened | Teams | StatsLive Premier League table | Watch FREE PL highlightsGot Sky? Watch Premier League games LIVE on your phone📱Not got Sky? Get Sky Sports or stream with no contract on NOW📺 "The communication I had on the touchline was that the penalty was given for the tackle," Silva told Sky Sports. Silva, who was booked for his protests against the decision, added: "The game started with a horrendous, terrible decision from John Brooks with the penalty he gave. A big, big mistake. "It was the first time we have seen in the Premier League that the referee gave a penalty from a tackle, and the VAR came back with a free-kick [for a different foul]. "Because the decision was so bad, they found a different foul, like the pull. "I know why the penalty was given. The VAR went in a completely different direction to find something and be able to give a free-kick." Sky Sports has contacted the PGMO for comment. 'Small margins' go against Fulham Fulham also had a second-half goal ruled out for offside on Samuel Chukwueze after a nearly four-minute VAR check. Silva added: "The main thing from VAR is to correct things and make it right. Definitely not to over-referee the game or go in a different direction. They are there to help the referees make good decisions. "The offside goal is by a [small] margin. It happened with us already this season, where goals were disallowed by [small] margins. The idea of automated offside is to be quicker than it was, but sometimes it's not easy. We have to accept it. We cannot control it. "The first one is much more difficult to accept because of the feedback we got. All of the people in the stadium felt the penalty was given because of the tackle."

Several more were wounded in the attack on the bus, which was carrying mineworkers in the southeastern city of Dnipro. Ukraine's emergency service said a fire broke out after the strike but was extinguished by firefighters. It comes as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy confirmed trilateral talks between Ukraine, US and Russia would go ahead on Wednesday in Abu Dhabi. Mr Zelenskyy said: "There is already an agreement on a meeting - a trilateral meeting - at the appropriate level. This meeting will take place next week, as planned, on Wednesday and Thursday in the Emirates, like last time." Energy company DTEK said Russian forces had carried out a "massive terrorist attack" on a company mine in the region and all the dead and wounded were its employees returning from a shift. "Today, the enemy carried out a cynical and targeted attack on energy sector workers ‍in the Dnipropetrovsk region," energy minister Denys Shmyhal said. The company and energy minister initially said 15 were killed in the strike. Mr Zelenskyy said on Telegram: "Today's Russian strike on a bus in the Dnipropetrovsk region is a crime, a demonstrative crime, which once again shows that it is Russia that is responsible for the escalation. Evil must be stopped." It comes after Russia launched 90 attack drones overnight, with 14 striking nine locations, according to Ukraine's air force. A woman and a man were also killed in an overnight strike in Dnipro, Dnipropetrovsk regional governor Oleksandr Hanzha said earlier. Russian shelling also hit central Kherson in southern Ukraine, seriously wounding a 59-year-old woman, according to a Facebook post by the municipal military administration. A drone also hit a maternity hospital in the southern city of Zaporizhzhia, the Ukrainian emergency service said, injuring three women and sparking a fire in the gynaecology reception area that was later extinguished. Regional administration head Ivan Fedorov later said the number of wounded had risen to six. Russia's defence ministry said its forces had used operational-tactical aviation, attack drones, missile forces and artillery to strike transport infrastructure used by Ukrainian forces. It also said Russian air defences had shot down 21 Ukrainian drones flying over southwestern and western Russia, and did not mention any casualties or damage. Read more from Sky News:Pressure grows on Mandelson to testify over EpsteinWoman stabbed to death in 'busy' area of London Earlier on Sunday, Mr Zelenskyy announced the next round of peace talks between Moscow and Kyiv would take place on Wednesday and Thursday. Envoys from Russia, Ukraine and the US had been expected to meet in Abu Dhabi next week to continue negotiations aimed at ending Russian President Vladimir Putin's invasion. In another Telegram post on Sunday, Mr Zelenskyy said: "We have just had a report from our negotiating team. The dates for the next trilateral meetings have been set: Feb 4 and 5 in Abu Dhabi. "Ukraine is ready for substantive talks, and we are interested in an outcome that will bring us closer to a real and dignified end to the war." Later he added: "I have scheduled a meeting for tomorrow to agree on the framework of the conversation and prepare everything. On Monday evening, the team will be on its way to the negotiations." Although Ukrainian and Russian officials have agreed in principle with US President Donald Trump's calls for a compromise, Moscow and Kyiv are at odds over what an actual agreement should look like. One key issue is whether Russia should keep or withdraw from areas of Ukraine its forces have occupied, especially Ukraine's eastern industrial heartland, the Donbas, and whether it should be given land there it has not yet captured.

For Ahmed, "a musical chairs of... studio execs leaving" meant it's taken 13 years to bring his modern interpretation of Shakespeare's Hamlet to the screen. While the wait has clearly been frustrating for the Oscar-winning actor, he says he's come to realise "this is the time for this story". "Hamlet is feeling the way a lot of us are, you know, he's feeling the world's an unfair place," he tells Sky News. "He's powerless about it. He's being gaslit about it. He's complicit in it... and a lot of people feel that way." Ahmed says he became "obsessed" with the story as a teenager. "I had an amazing English teacher who gave me the play to look at because he saw that I was feeling out of place." Filmed as an action thriller reimagined in modern London, the actor says he'd love the movie to be shown to students instead of the "very-old filmed plays" which have traditionally been shown in schools. Deploying a shaky first-person camera technique, stylistically the adaptation certainly feels edgy and original with Hamlet's iconic "To be or not to be" speech delivered at high speed in a car. "Really, my biggest hope is that they show this to students, that this very visceral version is the one that people have in their minds when they think of a filmed version." It sees Ahmed reunited with his creative collaborator, director Aneil Karia. In 2022 the pair won an Oscar for their short film, The Long Goodbye. Ahmed jokes: "I thought, 'if it wins, I'll take [Hamlet] to him, if it doesn't, I'll delete his number' - and so it turned out alright!" 'Destroyed' from lack of sleep In the past, the actor has admitted being an "obsessive perfectionist" when it comes to the projects he works on. When asked if becoming a dad might have seen a shift in Ahmed's focus and made him a little less intense to work with, the pair crack up laughing. As Karia diplomatically explains: "The creative process is like a long, winding one, right? In the shoot, Riz operates almost entirely on bodily emotional instinct… there is something raw and kind of beautiful about how it goes into that." "It's the edit!" Ahmed chips in, laughing. Ahmed says becoming a new dad while, at the same time, Karia was a father to young kids going through sleep regressions certainly made the shoot feel "a bit more raw". Read more from Sky News:Queen won't tour in US because it's 'a dangerous place'Chris Brown appears in London court over alleged bottle attack "We basically both were completely destroyed with lack of sleep. You know, parents get to that kind of breaking point, they hit that wall. We were going through that during the making of this thing." But, Ahmed says, he leaned into that. "This is a story about fatherhood, so we should have to experience some of that," he explains. "A lot of that intense, irritable unravelling which you'll see on screen - that was just the truth of it. You know, sometimes when you're that exhausted, you bypass the brain. You have to go from instinct, so I think weirdly having families forced us to not be as precious." Hamlet opens in cinemas in the UK on 6 February.

Speaking to the Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips show, Michelle O'Neill said it was an opportunity for the people of Northern Ireland to "take control of our own fortunes". Ms O'Neill was asked if she could imagine a so-called border poll during her time as first minister, and replied: "Yes, I absolutely can." She said: "I think my party's view is that we should have this by 2030. I think that's only a short way away. "So now is the time for the plan and the preparation." The first minister added: "I don't want done to the people here what was done in relation to Brexit. "Brexit was an economic self-harm, a massive act of economic self-harm. "It was done against the wishes of the people." She said: "We have an ability to take control of our own fortunes. I encourage all political leaders to reach for that together." Her remarks appear to contradict what Ireland's premier Micheal Martin has said about the referendum. In September, the Irish prime minister (taoiseach) said "there won't be a border poll before 2030". Northern Ireland's deputy first minister also appeared on Sunday Morning With Trevor Phillips and said the nationalist and republican movements in Northern Ireland have not increased their vote share since Westminster devolved power to Northern Ireland in 1998. Emma Little Pengelly said: "I'm a unionist, we have a Sinn Fein first minister. But I think it's important to say that in Northern Ireland nationalism and republicanism haven't increased their vote from 1998. "Despite democratic change, they're sitting on and around the same percentage that they had in 1998. I think those who want to see the breakup of the union do try to constantly get this momentum. "I have no doubt that you will hear that again because of course to serve their purpose is to try to get that sense of momentum towards that. That doesn't exist in Northern Ireland."

Abraham thought he had marked his Villa return with the equaliser against Brentford in a game that Unai Emery's side went on to lose 1-0. But a lengthy VAR followed, eventually determining Leon Bailey had carried the ball out of play 19 seconds before the goal was scored. Referee Tim Robinson said the ball was "factually out of play" but was there conclusive footage to confirm it had crossed the line completely? Aston Villa 0-1 Brentford - Match report & highlightsAs it happened | Teams | StatsLive Premier League table | Watch FREE PL highlightsGot Sky? Watch Premier League games LIVE on your phone📱Not got Sky? Get Sky Sports or stream with no contract on NOW📺 "I think it is not fair," Emery said after the game. "The referee is not watching it. "Maybe there are a lot of actions and circumstances that can change a goal. I accept it completely. For me it is not fair, but I accept it." Jamie Carragher the evidence shown on air was conclusive and proved the ball had gone out of play. "It goes out of play, there is no doubt about that," he said on Super Sunday. But former Villa man Ashley Young disagreed, claiming the benefit of the doubt should have gone to the attacking side given the lack of clear evidence. He added: "I think you can say it goes out but categorically are they saying they can see that? No, they can't. "It should go in favour of the forward." Were Villa denied a goal by an optical illusion? Speaking in the 2023/24 season, when Newcastle's Anthony Gordon had a goal given against Arsenal after a similar incident, Gary Neville dissected how a ball can appear to be out but actually remain in play. Positioning it near the touchline, Neville demonstrated how one angle can show the ball touching the line and another, which would be used by VAR, could appear to show it out of play. "That ball is in. The edge of the ball is touching the edge of the white line. "When you see that from here, you think it is not a debate. When you cut to the different angles that the VAR had to look at [it changes]. "We are not trying to say the ball is in or the ball is out, we are trying to say VAR cannot make a decision to overturn the on-field decision. "There is ambiguity; it is an optical illusion."