A GP who cited Angelina Jolie and Jade Goody to instil fear in his patients about their health has been found guilty of sexually assaulting 23 women.
Manish Shah preyed on cancer concerns to carry out invasive intimate examinations for his own sexual gratification, the Old Bailey heard.
He convinced his victims to have unnecessary checks between May 2009 and June 2013.
He was convicted of 25 counts of sexual assault and assault by penetration.
Jurors acquitted 50-year-old Shah, of Romford, of five other charges.
They were told afterwards he had already been found guilty of similar allegations relating to 17 other women, bringing the total number of victims to 23.
He will be sentenced for all the offences on 7 February. The BBC’s health editor Hugh Pym said it was one of the biggest cases of its kind involving one doctor.
The trial heard Shah mentioned a news story to one patient about Hollywood star Jolie having a preventative mastectomy, before asking if she would like him to examine her breasts.
In another instance involving a different complainant, he mentioned TV personality Goody – who died of cervical cancer – and advised an examination was in her best interests, it was claimed.
Prosecutor Kate Bex QC told the trial: “He took advantage of his position to persuade women to have invasive vaginal examinations, breast examinations and rectal examinations when there was absolutely no medical need for them to be conducted.”
One of Shah’s patients told the BBC how she became one of the GP’s victims.
“He would say you need to have these sexual health tests, to make sure you’re safe – you never know if somebody goes with somebody else even though you might have a safe partner,” she said.
“He was just encouraging the tests along when I didn’t think anything of it, I thought if a doctor suggests it you pretty much go along with it.
“He just duped so many people. He used our weaknesses and fears and took complete advantage. But not one time did I actually think he was doing anything untoward.”
The NHS in London said it “extended sympathies” to the victims and added: “As soon as the allegations came to light, swift action was taken and we have supported the police throughout their investigation.”
The family of London Bridge attacker Usman Khan have said they are “saddened and shocked” by what happened and “totally condemn his actions”.
In a statement, they expressed their condolences to the victims’ families
Khan, who was convicted of a terrorism offence in 2012, killed Jack Merritt, 25, and Saskia Jones, 23, at a prisoner rehabilitation event on Friday.
Separately, a statement from a kitchen porter who tried to fight Khan said he was coming to terms with the incident.
Lukasz, who works at the Fishmongers’ Hall venue where Khan began his attack, said he “acted instinctively” by grabbing a pole to try to stop Khan.
“When the attack happened, I acted instinctively. I am now coming to terms with the whole traumatic incident and would like the space to do this in privacy, with the support of my family,” he said.
The statement confirmed he was stabbed in the attack and taken to hospital but has now returned home.
Two women were also injured in the attack before Khan was shot dead by armed officers on London Bridge – the women remain in a stable condition in hospital.
‘Saddened and shocked’
In a statement issued through the Metropolitan Police, Khan’s family said: “We are saddened and shocked by what Usman has done.
“We totally condemn his actions and we wish to express our condolences to the families of the victims that have died and wish a speedy recovery to all of the injured.
“We would like to request privacy for our family at this difficult time.”
Khan, 28, was arrested in December 2010 and sentenced in 2012 to indeterminate detention for “public protection” with a minimum jail term of eight years after pleading guilty to preparing terrorist acts.
He had been part of an al-Qaeda inspired group that considered attacks in the UK, including at the London Stock Exchange.
But in 2013 the Court of Appeal quashed the sentence, replacing it with a 16-year-fixed term, and ordered Khan to serve at least half this – eight years – behind bars.
Since his subsequent release in December 2018, Khan had been living in Stafford and was required to wear a GPS police tag.
He was armed with two knives and was wearing a fake suicide vest during the attack at Fishmongers’ Hall on Friday.
He was tackled by members of the public, including ex-offenders from the conference, before he was shot dead by police.
It comes as Leanne O’Brien, the girlfriend of Cambridge University Mr Merritt who was killed, paid tribute to her partner on Facebook writing: “My love, you are phenomenal and have opened so many doors for those that society turned their backs on.”
Ms O’Brien was seen breaking down in tears as she and Mr Merritt’s family gathered at a vigil in Cambridge on Monday to remember the victims.
Mr Merritt’s father, David, also wrote a piece in the Guardian dedicated to his “absorbingly intelligent” and “fiercely loyal” son.
Also killed was Ms Jones, from Stratford-upon-Avon, Warwickshire, who was a volunteer on the Learning Together programme, which was holding an anniversary event where the event took place.
She has been described as a “lovely, lovely woman” who was “fearless” by her former tutor.
Friday’s attack sparked a political row over the release of Khan and a debate over the criminal justice system.
Prime Minister Boris Johnson was accused of “trying to exploit” the attack “for political gain”.
He blamed Khan’s release on legislation introduced under “a leftie government”, and called for longer sentences and an end to automatic release.
Mr Johnson denied claims he was politicising the attack, saying he had campaigned against early release for some time, having previously raised the issue during his 2012 campaign to be mayor of London.
He said he felt “a huge amount of sympathy” for the relatives of the victims.
A senior police officer convicted of possessing a child abuse video on her phone has been told she faces “immense” career consequences.
A court heard Novlett Robyn Williams failed to report her sister for sending the “disturbing” clip last year.
While jurors at the Old Bailey accepted Williams did not view the material, they rejected her claim she was unaware of its presence on her phone.
She was ordered to carry out 200 hours’ community service.
Williams had denied the charge, saying she “zoned out” when she received the video.
The jury was told she was one of 17 people to receive the 54-second clip via WhatsApp, and prosecutors had argued there was no way she could have missed its arrival in her inbox.
They said a response sent to her older sister Jennifer Hodge, saying “please call”, was evidence that she wanted to discuss the content.
Judge Richard Marks QC, sentencing, told the Old Bailey her “grave error of judgement” was likely to have “immense” career consequences.
The court heard Williams, who was commended for her work after the Grenfell Tower disaster, had an exemplary disciplinary record, was highly regarded for her work and was awarded the Queen’s Policing Medal for distinguished service in 2003.
Judge Marks told her it was “completely tragic you found yourself in the position you now do” considering her “stellar career in the police force over 30 years”.
She was cleared of a charge of corrupt or improper exercise of police powers in failing to report the distribution of an image.
As the prosecuting barrister, Richard Wright QC, noted, this is a “sad” case for all those involved, particularly for Robyn Williams who could well lose the job she cherishes.
She was the only one to be prosecuted of the 17 people who received the child abuse video.
Two individuals reported it, but no action was taken against the other 14, raising concerns among her supporters that she’s been unfairly targeted.
Did it have to end up in a trial at the Old Bailey? Or could the superintendent have been dealt with through internal misconduct procedures, given her 36 years’ distinguished service?
There is also a wider question for all of us about our legal responsibilities when we’re sent material on social media that we haven’t asked for.
This case has demonstrated the risks of not reporting and deleting footage that contains illegal content.
Williams’ sister Jennifer Hodge, 56, of Brent, was ordered to carry out 100 hours of community service having been found guilty of distributing an indecent image of a child.
The social worker had denied sending the video, which she received from her partner and allegedly depicted a young girl performing a sex act on a man.
Her barrister Andrea Brown also told the court the conviction had “destroyed her relationship” with her police officer sister, who is her only immediate family member.
Hodge’s partner Dido Massivi, 61, was sentenced to 18 months imprisonment suspended for two years as well as 200 hours of community service.
The bus driver had denied two counts of distributing indecent photos and one count of possessing an extreme pornographic image portraying a person having sex with a horse.
Prosecutors said there was no suggestion the defendants derived any sexual gratification from the images but all three will be placed on the sex offenders’ register – Hodge and Williams for five years, and Massivi for 10.
Both Hodge and Massivi were also sacked from their jobs following their arrest, the court heard.
Scotland Yard said Williams remains on restricted duties but that would be “reviewed now criminal matters are complete”.
‘Stunned and shocked’
Met Police Deputy Assistant Commissioner Matthew Horne said: “The Independent Office for Police Conduct is carrying out an independent misconduct investigation into the actions of Supt Williams and we await the outcome.”
The National Black Police Association said it was “stunned and shocked” by the 54-year-old’s sentence, calling it “institutional racism”.
“She receives this perverse outcome despite being the only one of 17 recipients of this vile video who did not view it”, it said.
But Internet Watch Foundation, a UK charity responsible for finding and removing online child sexual abuse, described the officer’s conviction as “a salutary reminder of what people should do in these situations if they stumble across images or videos of child sexual abuse”.
The Police Superintendents’ Association said it had “supported Supt Williams throughout this process and will continue to do so as her legal team considers an appeal”.
The fate of two west London housing estates facing demolition has been reversed after a deal with the property developer.
Hammersmith and Fulham council will resume ownership of West Kensington and Gibbs Green estates which had been sold 11 years ago.
The deal between the developers and the local authority ends a long residents’ battle against “regeneration”.
Resident Sally Taylor, 58, said she was “beyond ecstatic” at the move.
Mrs Taylor, who co-chairs the West Ken Gibbs Green Residents Association, said: “People were absolutely cheering last night, it felt like New Year’s Eve.
“Even the kids were going, ‘is it true that we’re really safe?’ You don’t appreciate that the children are really affected by this even if they don’t say it.”
The leaseholder, who has lived in Fulham for 30 years, added: “Everyone’s life has been held up for 11 years.
“Basically we had one council that sold us, and this one has saved us. And I think it’s because there’s been a real change of conscience around social housing, especially after Grenfell.”
The estates along North End Road are home to more than 2,000 people in 760 flats and terraced homes.
They were bought by developers Delancey from Capital and Counties (Capco) on 15 November.
Delancey will transfer the land back to Hammersmith and Fulham Council by the end of the month.
The estates formed part of the so-called Earl’s Court Masterplan, a 77-acre piece of land that was sold to Capco in 2012 for £105 million.
Stretching from North End Road to Earl’s Court station, and the since-demolished Earl’s Court Exhibition Centre, Capco originally planned to build 7,500 homes across the Masterplan area.
Hammersmith and Fulham will pay Delancy £105m for the land; the sum it was sold for 11 years ago.
Leeds United goalkeeper Kiko Casilla been granted extra time to respond to allegations that he racially abused Charlton Athletic’s Jonathan Leko.
The Spaniard, 33, allegedly used words that “made reference to race and/or colour and/or ethnic origin”.
He had been due to respond by Tuesday, 12 November, but now has until Wednesday, 27 November.
Leeds issued a statement when Casilla was charged on 4 November saying the former Real Madrid goalkeeper “strenuously denies the allegation”.
Under rules introduced for the 2019-20 season, the minimum suspension for a player found guilty of an aggravated breach of the FA’s discrimination rules will be six matches, which can be increased depending on any additional aggravating factors.
On Saturday afternoon, the hot water went off in Alex Milsom’s shared house in west London. Discussing the problem with his housemates on WhatsApp, one person replied: “It’s because there’s a cage on the thermostat.”
“I said I would put the water back on, but obviously I couldn’t get past the new lock box,” Alex said.
His landlady had visited the property to install a clear thermostat cover over the Google Nest thermostat – which can control heating and hot water.
“We have no idea what the temperature is,” he said. “The Nest screen only lights up when you stand up close to it, but the box has stopped that from working and we can’t see the number.”
Alex, 21, has been living with six or seven others in a semi-detached house in Ealing since August. Rented from a private landlady, he pays £700 a month, and the landlady covers his utility bills.
In a multi-occupancy dwelling like Alex’s, the landlord is permitted to control the heating, with no rules against boxing off the thermostat, experts say. The same is true of a standard rental property with fewer than three tenants, if the landlord pays the bills.
But, until now, Alex and his housemates have had control over the temperature of their home and the hot water via the thermostat in the communal kitchen.
“It’s just quite funny,” he adds.
“On Sunday night I woke up in a sweat because the heating was on, but the next morning I had to shower at work because there was no hot water,” he says. The water has since returned.
Alex shared his story on Twitter on Saturday, which went viral and prompted queries over the legality of the move.
Some landlords responded to the thread by saying the move could be understandable in a situation where tenants were being careless with the heating.
So can a landlord box off a thermostat?
David Smith, policy director for the Residential Landlords Association, says there are no rules around boxing off thermostats.
But adds: “It is a matter of good tenancy management and we encourage landlords to speak first with tenants before taking such action.
“In shared homes there can often be disputes between tenants who want the thermostat set at different temperatures.”
However, the issue is not clear cut.
A tenant has a right to heating and hot water, says Daniel Fitzpatrick, a partner at Hodge Jones & Allen solicitors.
But whether a landlord can box off a thermostat depends on the terms of the tenancy agreement.
“If the tenant is just paying a basic agreement where bills are not included, that could be why the landlord installed the fitting – usually thermostats can be covered,” he says.
“Should that not be the case, then there could be various actions against the landlord.
“It’s a basic right to be able to turn on heating and hot water, and it would be a breach of health and safety if the tenant could not.”
Housing experts from Citizens Advice say the legality of a landlord-controlled thermostat is likely to rely on whether it results in hazards – excess cold or possibly extreme heat.
According to the Housing Health and Safety Rating System (HHSRS), which governs housing conditions, heating can be centrally controlled by the landlord in a house in multiple occupation.
But the guidance adds that if this causes “unreasonable extremes in temperature” then this may represent a hazard – over which the local authority can take action against the landlord.
Risks of adverse health effects arise when indoor temperature drops below 19C, with serious health risks occurring below 16C, it says.
What can a tenant do if they are still unhappy?
Under the new Homes (Fitness for Human Habitation) Act 2018, all residential tenancies after 20 March 2019 are required to be free of hazards.
If a tenant feels this is not the case they could try making a claim against the landlord.
But Citizens Advice says it is better to try to “negotiate amicably” if at all possible – “due to the limited security of tenure which private tenants tend to have” – and it warns of the risk of an escalating row.
“The tenants might consider trying to take control of the heating themselves by using electric heaters.
“There is a risk, however, that the landlord may respond negatively to a huge electricity bill, and perhaps seek to serve a section 21 notice (no fault eviction notice) to terminate the tenancy at the end of the fixed term, or seek to alter the rent or other tenancy terms as a condition of any renewal.”
Arsenal manager Unai Emery says Granit Xhaka should apologise after he was involved in an angry confrontation with home fans during Sunday’s 2-2 draw with Crystal Palace.
The Gunners captain was booed while he walked off the pitch at Emirates Stadium, prompting him to cup his ear.
Emery said: “Yes [he should apologise]. We make mistakes, we need to apologise and we suggested for him to do that.
“Really, he knows he was wrong and he feels inside very deep.”
It is not the first time Xhaka has been booed by his own fans this season, with Emery publicly defending the Switzerland midfielder after a game against Aston Villa last month.
That uneasy relationship with the Gunners fans did not stop Emery appointing Xhaka as club captain in September after the summer departure of Laurent Koscielny.
However, Emery has refused to confirm whether Xhaka will remain captain after Sunday’s incident.
“At the moment I am not speaking and I don’t want to think about that,” the Spaniard added.
“It is not easy for him and for the team. We spoke yesterday, and Sunday night also, and this morning.
“He trained normally with the group but he is devastated and sad about the situation.”
Brentford and Millwall have been charged by the Football Association following an incident late on in Saturday’s Championship game.
Brentford won 3-2, having trailed 2-0 with six minutes remaining, and in stoppage time several players from both sides were involved in a melee.
Both clubs have until 18:00 BST on Thursday, 24 October to respond.
“Brentford and Millwall have been charged for being in breach of FA Rule E20,” an FA statement said.
“It is alleged that both clubs failed to ensure that its players conducted themselves in an orderly fashion and/or refrained from provocative behaviour in the 91st minute.”
Extinction Rebellion activists are continuing protests despite a London-wide ban by police.
The group says it has taken initial steps towards a judicial review of the ban. Lawyers and politicians have also criticised the move.
Meanwhile climate change protesters targeted the Department for Transport and MI5 on Tuesday morning.
A government spokeswoman said protests “should not disrupt people’s day-to-day lives”.
Extinction Rebellion’s co-founder, Gail Bradbrook, was arrested after climbing on to the entrance of the Department for Transport on Tuesday morning. Police also cleared further protesters from outside the building.
Activists have also been arrested on Millbank outside MI5’s headquarters, where a small group had gathered. Two men briefly sat in the middle of the road before being moved by officers.
On Monday evening, the Metropolitan Police began clearing protesters from Trafalgar Square following the announcement of a ban on the protests.
Under Section 14 of the Public Order Act, the force had imposed conditions requiring activists to stop their protests in central London by 21:00 BST on 14 October or risk arrest.
The Metropolitan Police said that the ban was imposed after “continued breaches” of a condition limiting the demonstration to Trafalgar Square.
Extinction Rebellion said it had taken the “first steps” towards a judicial review of the Met’s “disproportionate and unprecedented attempt to curtail peaceful protest”.
“Our lawyers have delivered a ‘Letter before Action’ to the Met and asked for an immediate response,” a statement read.
Tobias Garnett, a human rights lawyer working for the movement, said the letter warned police to withdraw the order.
He said the campaign group had given the police a deadline of 1430 BST to respond, or it would file a claim in the High Court.
“We will be looking for an expedited hearing either today or tomorrow morning,” he added.
Speaking to the Victoria Derbyshire programme, Extinction Rebellion campaigner and former Met Police officer Paul Stephens said: “Police are being really sloppy with the law, and it won’t stand up in court.”
Mayor of London Sadiq Khan has said he is “seeking further information” about the decision to impose the ban and why it was necessary.
“I believe the right to peaceful and lawful protest must always be upheld,” he said.
A spokeswoman for the government said the UK was “already taking world-leading action to combat climate change”.
The statement added: “While we share people’s concerns about global warming, and respect the right to peaceful protest, it should not disrupt people’s day-to-day lives.”
Home Secretary Priti Patel tweeted that “supporting our [police] is vital” and accused the Labour Party of supporting “law breakers”.
‘Overreach of powers’
Meanwhile, lawyers have also questioned whether the ban by police is legal.
Anti-Brexit barrister Jo Maugham QC said the move was “a huge overreach” of police powers, while human rights lawyer Adam Wagner described it as “draconian and extremely heavy-handed”.
Mr Wagner added in a tweet: “We have a right to free speech under article 10 and to free assembly under article 11 of the (annex to the) Human Rights Act. These can only be interfered with if the interference is lawful and proportionate. I think the police may have gone too far here.”
Shadow home secretary Diane Abbott tweeted: “This ban is completely contrary to Britain’s long-held traditions of policing by consent, freedom of speech, and the right to protest.”
Allan Hogarth, of Amnesty International, issued a statement saying the ban was “an unlawful restriction on the rights to freedom of expression and peaceful assembly”.
A number of demonstrations have been staged across the capital by Extinction Rebellion, which is calling on the government to do more to tackle climate change.
The protests were due to last two weeks and have led to more than 1,400 arrests.
The Met said there had been 1,457 arrests by 08:45 BST on Tuesday, in connection with the nine days of Extinction Rebellion protests in London.
Last week, the Home Office confirmed to BBC News that it was reviewing police powers around protests in response to recent demonstrations.
What are the rules around protests?
Police have the powers to ban a protest under the Public Order Act 1986, if a senior officer has reasonable belief that it may cause “serious disruption to the life of the community”.
Police are also under a duty to balance the task of keeping the streets open with the right freedom of assembly under the Article 11 of the Human Rights Act 1998 and freedom of expression, under Article 10. These rights are not absolute – the state can curtail them.
However, the BBC’s home affairs correspondent Dominic Casciani said: “The test, if and when it gets to a court battle, is whether police action was proportionate to threat and only what was strictly necessary.”
By law, the organiser of a public march must tell the police certain information in writing six days in advance.
Police have the power to limit or change the route of the march or set other conditions.
A Section 14 notice issued under the Public Order Act allows police to impose conditions on a static protest and individuals who fail to comply with these can be arrested.
Extinction Rebellion activists have glued themselves to one government department and to the underside of a lorry outside another on a second day of protests in central London.
Police have made more than 400 arrests, and those camped out in Westminster have been ordered to move on.
The prime minister has described the activists as “unco-operative crusties”.
But campaigner and TV presenter Chris Packham said they are “the concerned people of the world.”
Extinction Rebellion activists are protesting in cities around the world, including Berlin, Amsterdam and Sydney, and are calling for urgent action on global climate and wildlife emergencies.
Protesters say they are occupying 11 sites in central London and people have travelled from across the UK to take part in the demonstrations.
The Metropolitan Police said at 13:00 BST on Tuesday there have been 404 arrests in relation to them.
Activists have attached themselves to the underside of a lorry, which is blocking the road outside the Home Office.
The vehicle is parked on Marsham Street, where hundreds of protesters set up camp overnight. One activist climbed on top of the lorry and set up a tent.
There was a large police presence in the area on Tuesday, with pictures showing officers removing activists from the lorry.
Protesters have also glued themselves to the Department for Transport building – a tactic used in similar protests in April.
Two activists have attached themselves to the doors of the building, while others demonstrate outside.
Meanwhile, a group have placed 800 potted trees outside Parliament, in Old Palace Yard, as they call on the government to plant billions of trees across the UK.
Trees have been dedicated to MPs, and protesters hope they will use them to reforest the country.
Sean Clay, 36, from Newcastle, told the BBC: “Planting trees would go a long way to restore the habitats we have lost as well as absorbing carbon emissions.”
Asked about Boris Johnson’s description of demonstrators, Packham told the BBC’s Victoria Derbyshire programme: “I was there yesterday. I met farmers, I met teachers, I met scientists, I met lawyers, I met grandparents, I met mothers and fathers, and I met children.
“These are the concerned people of the world.”
Mr Johnson had suggested while attending a book launch on Monday that the demonstrators should abandon their “hemp-smelling bivouacs” and stop blocking roads.
Protester Claudia Fisher, 57, from Brighton said campaigners would like to discuss their views with the prime minister.
Responding to his description of activists as “unco-operative crusties”, Ms Fisher said: “We are a little bit crusty, I’ll put my hands up to it, after a night sleeping out on the grounds of Whitehall, but we’re not uncooperative.
“We’re actually very cooperative. We… would really like to hear what he has to say, and we’d really like him to… hear what we have to say.”
John Curran, a 49-year-old former detective sergeant for the Metropolitan Police, was one of the protesters who camped overnight.
Mr Curran, who has a three-year-old daughter, says he was arrested while protesting with Extinction Rebellion in April, and is willing to be arrested again.
He said: “Clearly there is some frustration (for the police) that they probably have better things to be doing, and I agree, but the responsibility for that must lie with the government.
“Take action, and we won’t have to be here.”
Protesters who camped in Horseferry Road and Marsham Street, in Westminster, throughout the night were warned that they will be arrested unless they move to nearby Trafalgar Square. Police handed out section 14 notices to tents at around 07:30 BST.
Activists also camped at Smithfield Market overnight, but they say they allowed traders to operate.
‘A last resort’
By Becky Morton, BBC News
The only rush hour traffic around Parliament this morning came from cyclists, who were cheered as they passed encampments of protesters dotted around Westminster.
Roads have been blocked by tents and gazebos, with protesters from all over the country camping overnight.
Bowls of porridge were served from food trucks, while volunteers said some local businesses had donated pastries.
One of those who spent the night here is Mikaela Loach, 21, who travelled down by bus from Edinburgh with a friend.
She said taking part in this week’s action was a “last resort”.
“I’ve spoken to my local MP, I’ve taken part in protests, I just feel like I haven’t been listened to,” she said.
“I have been changing things in my lifestyle for a long time to try and be more eco-friendly, but I had a realisation a few months ago that it doesn’t matter if I go vegan or zero waste if the government doesn’t do anything.
“There need to be big structural changes.”
Further road closures are expected on Tuesday, with Parliament Street, Great Smith Street and Westminster and Lambeth bridges predicted to be heavily affected.
Extinction Rebellion claims protests in the capital will be five times bigger than similar events in April, which saw more than 1,100 people were arrested.
What is Extinction Rebellion?
2025year when the group aims for zero carbon emissions
298,000followers on Facebook
1,130people arrested over April’s London protests
2018year the group was founded
Source: BBC Research
Extinction Rebellion (XR for short) wants governments to declare a “climate and ecological emergency” and take immediate action to address climate change.
It describes itself as an international “non-violent civil disobedience activist movement”.
Extinction Rebellion was launched in 2018 and organisers say it now has groups willing to take action in dozens of countries.
In April, the group held a large demonstration in London that brought major routes in the city to a standstill.