Huntley, 52, was taken to hospital after being found in a pool of blood following an alleged attack by an unknown inmate, Sky News understands. He was convicted of the murders of 10-year-olds Holly Wells and Jessica Chapman in Soham, Cambridgeshire, in 2002 and is serving a life sentence with a minimum of 40 years at HMP Frankland in County Durham. A spokesman for Durham Constabulary said: "Police were alerted to an assault which had taken place within HMP Frankland in Durham this morning. "A male prisoner suffered serious injuries during the incident and was transported to hospital. "A police investigation is now under way into the circumstances of the incident and detectives are liaising with staff at the prison." A North East Ambulance Service spokesperson said: "We received a call at 9.23am on Thursday 26 February 2026 to reports of an incident at HM Prison Frankland in County Durham. "We dispatched two ambulance crews to the scene and requested support from the Great North Air Ambulance Service (GNAAS). One patient was transported to hospital by road." In a statement, a Prison Service spokesperson said: "A prisoner is receiving treatment after an incident at HMP Frankland on Thursday morning. It would be inappropriate to comment further while police investigate." Read more from Sky News:Jersey votes to allow assisted dyingOcado to cut 1,000 jobs under restructuring plan It is not the first time Huntley has been attacked at HMP Frankland. In 2011, an inmate who slashed Huntley's throat with a makeshift knife was jailed for life. Damien Fowkes was sentenced to a minimum of 20 years for the attempted murder of Huntley in March 2010 and the manslaughter of child killer Colin Hatch. Fowkes inflicted a wound seven inches long on the Soham murderer's neck and the court was told it was only "good fortune" that the weapon missed anything vital. Huntley captured the attention of the nation in 2002 with the murders of the two 10-year-old schoolgirls. He killed them in August of that year after they left a family barbecue to buy sweets, and then dumped their bodies in a ditch. Huntley was their school caretaker and put himself forward as a volunteer to help search for them after they went missing - and was interviewed by reporters on camera. The efforts to locate the girls in the 13 days after they disappeared have been described as one of the most intense and extensive in British criminal history. Huntley was convicted of the murder of both girls on 17 December 2003 and sentenced to two terms of life imprisonment. His girlfriend, Maxine Carr - the girls' teaching assistant - had knowingly provided Huntley with a false alibi. She received a three-and-a-half year prison sentence for conspiring with Huntley to pervert the course of justice.

John Davidson, who suffers from the neurological condition, yelled out as the first award of the night was presented at London's Royal Festival Hall by Sinners stars Michael B Jordan and Delroy Lindo. The BAFTAs programme was edited down from the three-hour live show filmed two hours earlier that evening, and went out on BBC1 at 7pm. Viewers were able to see the offending moment on BBC iPlayer for more than 12 hours before the programme was pulled to be edited. After this, they saw the message: "This episode will be available soon." A BBC spokesperson said: "The BBC has been reviewing what happened at BAFTA on Sunday evening. "This was a serious mistake and the director-general has instructed the Executive Complaints Unit (ECU) to complete a fast-tracked investigation and provide a full response to complainants." Later on Wednesday, Culture Secretary Lisa Nandy said she shared the "serious concerns raised by so many people" following the broadcast and had spoken to outgoing BBC director-general Tim Davie about the issue. "Broadcasting a racial slur is completely unacceptable and harmful," she said. "The BBC must ensure that this never happens again." The BBC apologised earlier this week and said the slur had been missed and "aired in error". During the BAFTAs broadcast, the ceremony's presenter Alan Cumming apologised for the language viewers may have heard. Both Lindo and Jordan appeared to pause after the insult was heard, then continued their presentation. Davidson, who was attending the ceremony as the inspiration behind the film I Swear, which dramatises his life, said he is "deeply mortified" his involuntary tics caused him to blurt out the offensive language. The backlash to the incident overshadowed the film's success at the ceremony, with relative newcomer Robert Aramayo, who plays Davidson, taking home the best actor award over the likes of Oscar favourite Timothee Chalamet and Hollywood royalty Leonardo DiCaprio. Have lessons been learned? The BBC's investigation announcement on Wednesday came as the Culture, Media and Sport Committee (CMS) wrote to outgoing director-general Tim Davie "seeking an explanation" for how the racial slur ended up in the broadcast "in spite of a two-hour time delay". Chairwoman Dame Caroline Dinenage referenced the broadcaster's coverage of last year's Glastonbury festival, when punk-rap duo Bob Vylan's set went out on live stream. "This latest incident raises questions about the extent to which lessons have been learned and about the controls and systems you have in place to prevent such incidents," Dame Caroline said. She asked the BBC what "specific systems" it had in place to prevent broadcasting of offensive language, and why they "failed" this time. BAFTA's apology BAFTA apologised "unreservedly" to Jordan and Lindo, as well as "all those impacted". "During the ceremony, John chose to leave the auditorium and watch the rest of the ceremony from a screen, and we would like to thank him for his dignity and consideration of others on what should have been a night of celebration for him," the organisation said in a statement. "We take full responsibility for putting our guests in a very difficult situation and we apologise to all. We will learn from this and keep inclusion at the core of all we do, maintaining our belief in film and storytelling as a critical conduit for compassion and empathy." Read more:On the trail of Putin's 'shadow fleet'The Mexican villa where drug lord spent final hours In an interview with US entertainment outlet Variety, Davidson said the BBC should have "worked harder" to ensure his slur was not broadcast. "BAFTA had made us all aware that any swearing would be edited out of the broadcast," he said. "I have made four documentaries with the BBC in the past and feel that they should have been aware of what to expect from Tourette's, and worked harder to prevent anything that I said - which, after all, was some 40 rows back from the stage - from being included in the broadcast." On Tuesday, Labour MP Dawn Butler wrote to the BBC and said the broadcast was "painful and unforgivable". Meanwhile, filmmaker Jonte Richardson said he was stepping down as a BAFTA emerging talent judge over the organisation's handling of the incident.

The Labour chief whip in the Lords, Roy Kennedy, said this week that the government would not give the Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill more time before the May deadline, when all legislation must have passed or automatically falls. The team behind the bill also confirmed they now expected the legislation in its current form to fail. There are six remaining sitting days left before May, when the King's Speech happens, and the government is not repeating what it did in December by giving more time. Politics latest - follow live Advocates for the bill did not blame the government, which it said had been helpful to date, and instead aimed their fire on a minority of peers who have been asking thousands of questions about the details of the bill. Broadcaster and campaigner Esther Rantzen told Sky News: "This is absolute blatant sabotage. This is a handful of peers putting down 1,200 amendments not to scrutinise the bill, which is their job, but to block it. "A few peers for their own reasons have decided that they're going to stop this going through parliament, and the only way to stop them would be to invoke the Parliament Act, which has happened before, or get rid of the House of Lords - they're clearly not fit for purpose." She said she was still hopeful the change would come, as there is a rising cry for reform all around the world. She paid tribute to Sir Keir Starmer, who favours a change in the law, and said he had done everything he promised her before the election. Many members of the public and even MPs were unaware that the bill was likely to fail. Earlier this week, the Welsh Parliament approved a "legislative consent order", endorsing in theory the legislation that it expected to come out of Parliament. The debate will now focus on what happens after May, with proponents of a change in the law saying the public polling and the repeated backing of MPs means that this legislation should be given a second chance. However, the government is likely to continue keeping the issue at arms length, since there is no single cabinet position on the issue and members of the cabinet like Wes Streeting and Shabana Mahmood are implacably hostile to the change. This makes a change in the law much more tricky. Some MPs who backed the bill in its Commons stages have told Sky News the process was so torturous that they would not want a repeat of it. Supporters have suggested that you would not have to go through the entire process - avoiding committee stage if the same bill was resurrected - and the Commons stages could in theory be done in one day, and the Parliament Act then deployed to override the objections in the Lords. However, the more turbulent political context for the government, the bandwidth that even this would occupy in government, and the fact the reforms would not be complete before a general election, mean that this would be a significantly bigger challenge second time around.

The announcement follows Benn's industry-shaking decision to sever ties with Eddie Hearn's Matchroom Boxing and join Zuffa, the new promotion run by UFC boss Dana White. Benn's first fight under the new arrangement will see him return to the scene of his victory over Chris Eubank Jr to take on two-time super-lightweight world champion Prograis, 30-3 (24). Conor Benn makes big career switch for 'legacy fights'Fury to train himself for comeback: 'I might retire again after this!'Not got Sky? Get Sky Sports or stream with no contract on NOW Benn said: "April 11 can't come soon enough, returning to Tottenham Hotspur Stadium again, where I made history against Eubank Jr means everything to me. "My last fight there showed the world exactly who I am and what I'm about. Fighting on the biggest stages, in the biggest shows, I fear no one! I'm fully locked in and ready to deliver another statement performance." Two of Prograis' three losses as a professional have come on English soil in world title fights against Josh Taylor in 2019 and Jack Catterall in 2024. Prograis added: "Last time I fought in London, Conor Benn was on my undercard, so this is a full-circle moment for me. "But this circle will close with me teaching him a lesson on April 11. He's not fighting some weight-drained super-middleweight. I am in shape and will bring home this victory." Another surprise? Sky Sports boxing journalist John Dennen says... It's been a busy news week for Conor Benn, and it's still only Thursday. It was a shock to the industry when he made a promotional switch from Matchroom Boxing to new American entity Zuffa. It's also a surprise to see him boxing on an undercard. With Tyson Fury vs Aslanbek Makhmudov the main event on April 11, Benn will be providing the chief support at Tottenham Hotspur Stadium. It's a familiar setting for Benn, in his last two fights he headlined at that stadium against Chris Eubank Jr. But playing a supporting role on the bill will be a step down for him. Not necessarily a 'tune up' bout as such - Prograis has a track record of real success - but it will be viewed as a contest to prepare him for a bigger fight later in the year, with Ryan Garcia a particular target for the Ilford fighter. Benn is working his way back down to welter after two consecutive fights at middleweight and he will be the favourite against Prograis. The American was in a sensational fight with Josh Taylor when he lost their super-lightweight world title unification at the O2 Arena. He's only lost to top class opposition, Devin Haney and Jack Catterall as well as Taylor. But Prograis is a former two-time world champion and if he's sharp, he will be dangerous. At 37 though the question is whether he will be. This fight will give us more insights about Benn. Can he make it back to welterweight in good shape, and just how solid a contender will he be there? Benn will start answering those questions against Prograis.

Some families said that baby deaths were being misclassified to prevent further investigation. Baroness Amos, who is leading a national investigation into maternity care, said: "Maternity and neonatal services in England are failing too many women, babies, families, and staff." Investigators spoke to hundreds of harmed families and staff across 12 NHS trusts in England, many of whom shared shocking accounts of their experiences. Have you been affected by poor maternity care? Email maternitystories@sky.uk Some families alleged in the report that their babies were designated stillborn instead of dying after birth. "They felt the system incentivised the recording of deaths as stillbirths as this prevents the case from being investigated by a coroner," the report said. Jack and Sarah Hawkins, whose daughter Harriet was stillborn, were not part of the Amos investigation, but have fought to get a separate inquiry launched for bereaved and harmed families in Nottingham. Jack said: "We have met a number of people and heard reports from a number of people whose babies they say were born alive and who the hospital say were born dead. "And that is a horrific position, a horrific thing to say, and yet of course we believe the victims, not the NHS, who have shown themselves to be sparing with the truth around some of these issues." Neither supported Baroness Amos' inquiry. Sarah said it "isn't going to change anything". 'There needs to be a public inquiry' "Families just want accountability and this report is not going to bring accountability," she said. "There needs to be a statutory public inquiry and some form of justice. Because if your child died in any other circumstance in life, you would get justice. People would be held to account. "Yet in maternity services, it doesn't happen like that and that is so unfair." Read more on Sky News:Trust fined over baby deathsBirth stories - mothers ignored and neglected The National Maternity and Neonatal Investigation (NMNI) in England was set up by Health Secretary Wes Streeting in June after he met families harmed by poor maternity care. In her initial report released in December, Ms Amos said "nothing prepared her" for the amount of "unacceptable care" families currently receive. Investigators have met more than 400 family members and heard from over 8,000 people, including NHS staff. NHS England has been contacted for comment.

The entertainment conglomerate behind film production company Paramount Pictures and TV network CBS, announced a revised, best and final offer of $31 per WBD share and additional fees - an improvement on its initial $30 tender. Such a share bid has led WBD to say it could beat the existing Netflix offer, hotting up the fight for control of WBD, which counts comic book filmmakers DC Studios, TV network HBO and news channel CNN among its brands. A statement from WBD said the upped Paramount Skydance offer "could reasonably be expected to lead to a company superior proposal". Money blog: 'Sporadic shortages' of items on shelves as supply hit Competing to acquire the film and TV production as well as the streaming components of WBD, is streaming giant Netflix. While Netflix has consistently been the preferred bidder and has signed an agreement with WBD, it boosted its offer to $27.75 (£20.63) cash per WBD share. The competition, however, is for slightly different things. Paramount Skydance wants to acquire the entirety of WBD, not just a production and streaming spin-off. The best and final offer from Paramount Skydance comes at the end of a week extension granted by the WBD board, with the permission of Netflix. Netflix now has four days to submit a revised proposal or quit its quest to acquire part of WBD. Paramount Skydance, headed by the son of billionaire Trump supporter Larry Ellison, launched a hostile takeover attempt, ramped up in recent weeks by legal threats. The bidder directly approached WBD's shareholders and subsequently announced the launch of legal action to force the release of financial data. It has also threatened to nominate directors at WBD's annual meeting in an effort to get board approval for its takeover. Read more: First UK baby born from dead donor womb transplantMexican drug lord killed after visit from 'romantic partner' Why does it matter? A merger of WBD and either Paramount Skydance or Netflix would be one of the biggest media deals in history, with significant impacts on TV, filmmaking and the possible future of the cinema. Netflix has expressed scepticism over the future of cinema theatres, with the films it produces tending to be released directly to streaming without a cinema showing. Its increased ownership of film production companies could mean fewer or shorter duration theatre runs for films. If Paramount Skydance is successful in its takeover attempt, it would own CNN, as well as CBS News, sparking concern about concentrating news services within a small number of companies.

The Act has been used for landmark, non-government legislation, including the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 2000 and the Hunting Act 2004. Supporters of assisted dying are planning to use the Parliament Act to override the House of Lords if it continues to block the bill. It follows Sky News' deputy political editor Sam Coates reporting that the bill is now expected to fall, with the government not expected to give peers more time than they currently have to debate the proposed legislation. So how could using the Parliament Act work - and do its backers have the power to do that? What is the Parliament Act? The House of Lords used to have a complete veto on the Commons. That changed after a row over the blocking of the then chancellor David Lloyd George's budget in 1909. It sparked a general election, with Lords reform on the ballot. The re-elected Liberal government passed the Parliament Act 1911, stripping that veto power in almost all circumstances, though it does allow delay. In 1949, that delaying power was reduced to a year. If a bill is passed by the Commons but delayed for longer by the Lords, it can be reintroduced in the following session and passed without the consent of the Lords. It is different from the Salisbury convention, a practice that means the Lords do not vote down a bill in the government's manifesto. When has this been used before? It's extremely rare and often relates to deeply contentious issues of the era. Just seven bills have become acts under this procedure. Most recently, it was used in 2000 for a bill that equalised the age of consent for homosexual acts to 16 and in the Hunting Act of 2004, which banned fox hunting. Supporters of the private members' bill to legalise assisted dying are exploring using this if the bill does not pass the Lords in this current session. Can it be used for a private members' bill? This is unprecedented - and very complicated. But supporters of Kim Leadbeater's private member's bill say if the bill has been delayed for more than a year despite passing the Commons, and fails to pass the Lords, there are ways the Parliament Act can apply. Read more:What does assisted dying look like?Assisted dying poses 'substantial task' for NHS The bill will automatically fail if it does not pass the Lords by the end of the parliamentary session - expected in May. Given the slow progress and peers adding more than 1,000 amendments, this is now expected to happen - especially as the government chief whip in the Lords, Roy Kennedy, has said peers will be given no further additional time to debate these. That would normally be the end of it, but there are two possible routes for supporters. The first is if a supporter of the bill brings it back in the next ballot of the private members' bill. The second is if the government allocates time to the bill in the next session. It would not have to adopt the bill, and could claim it was still remaining neutral, though opponents would dispute this. What would be the conditions on the bill? For the Parliament Act to apply, the bill must be exactly as it was passed by the Commons, though some experts believe there may be some limited and complicated circumstances where amendments are still possible. It would mean second and third reading votes again in the Commons, but no amendments. If it passes, peers would still be able to try to stop the bill, but then the Parliament Act to bypass the Lords and enact the bill could be applied. How likely is it that it will come up again in the ballot? Pure chance - though the Labour MP John McDonnell did once come top of the ballot twice. For any private member's bill to have a chance of passing, Ms Leadbeater or one of her backers would need to come in one of the top five slots - and hundreds of MPs enter the ballot. How likely is it the government will give it time? The government has tried to remain strictly neutral on the bill, though Sir Keir Starmer is a supporter of assisted dying. Ms Leadbeater could put it forward using something called a presentation bill. These are usually largely pointless, as they are not granted any time for debate. But the government - especially if MPs applied significant pressure - could grant the time for a debate and vote on the basis that it is undemocratic for the Lords to have blocked the bill. Such action is likely to cause an almighty row, including from Labour backbenchers who oppose the bill. And it might turn some supporters into opponents. What happens if neither of these options work? If there is no success in the ballot and the government refuses to play ball, supporters have run out of road.

Although United's men's team are without European football this season, they generated an operating profit of £32.6million in the first six months of the fiscal year, compared with a £3.9m loss for the same period last year. The operating profit for the most recent quarter was £19.6m, compared to £3.1m in the same period last year. Transfer Centre LIVE! | Man Utd news & transfers🔴Man Utd fixtures & scores | FREE Man Utd PL highlights▶️Got Sky? Watch Man Utd games LIVE on your phone📱Not got Sky? Get Sky Sports or stream with no contract on NOW📺Choose the Sky Sports push notifications you want! 🔔 Those numbers come after minority owner Sir Jim Ratcliffe oversaw a wide-scale redundancy programme and restructuring of the club, and in announcing their latest figures, United said they were seeing "the positive impact of operating cost and headcount reduction programmes implemented in the prior year". United's total revenues for the second quarter of the financial year were £190.3m, down from £198.7m for the equivalent period the previous year, with commercial revenue dropping from £85.1m to £78.5m and matchday revenues down from £52m to £49.5m but that has been without the financial benefit of Champions League football this season. The onus then falls to Man Utd to ensure a spot in Europe's elite competition next season to continue their financial gains under Ratcliffe's tenure. English clubs have each made between £73m and £86m from playing in the league phase of the Champions League this season. The club still has $650m worth of debt from the Glazer era while short-term borrowing is up to £295.7m. But with a revived United up to fourth in the Premier League under Michael Carrick, and Marc Skinner's side second in the Women's Super League and through to the quarter-finals of the Women's Champions League, United believe they are well placed for a further rise in profits going forward. "We are now seeing the positive financial impact of our off-pitch transformation materialise both in our costs and profitability," Berrada said. "We continue to take a football-first approach and invest in both our men's and women's first teams. "On the pitch our men's team sits fourth in the Premier League and our women's team are second in the Women's Super League, as well as reaching the League Cup final and the quarter-final of the UEFA Women's Champions League. "Today's results demonstrate the underlying strength of our business as we continue to push for the best football results possible for our men's and women's teams." United say they remain on track to record revenues of between £640m and £660m for the full fiscal year. Analysis: Return to Champions League remains crucial for Man Utd Sky Sports News' Kaveh Solhekol: "Manchester United's latest accounts show how important it is for the club to get back into Europe. "If you want to make Manchester United great again, they need to be playing in the Champions League again as soon as possible. "The new expanded format of the competition means English clubs have each made between £73m and £86m from just playing in the league phase this season. "United are improving on and off the pitch, although it is too early to start celebrating about the latest figures they posted in New York this morning. "Not being in Europe would be a financial disaster for most clubs, but United's finances are just about holding up - despite overall debt rising to £1.29 billion with no new stadium for that vast borrowing. "The long-term Glazer debt is still $650m, the short-term borrowing is up to £295.7m and more than £500m is owed on transfers. "As expected, being out of Europe means United revenues for the six months to the end of last December fell from £341.8m to £330.7m. "Matchday income was down £2.8m to £75.7m because United played five fewer games at Old Trafford than in the final six months of the previous year. "Increased ticket prices mean United are making more per game and United still make more money on matchdays than any other club in England. "The departure of several high-profile players means United's wage bill for the final three months of last year fell by 9 per cent to £75.1m. "There is no mention of how much compensation Ruben Amorim was paid as he was sacked on 5 January - just after the period covered in these accounts."