Greece detains 1,200 migrants in three days as arrivals from Libya surge
The coast guard said multiple boats were intercepted off Crete's southern coast from Saturday through Monday, prompting regional officials to request additional government assistance.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
11 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Explained: How much is the government paying to house asylum seekers in hotels?
Anti-immigration protests have surged in recent weeks, with some targeting hotels used to house asylum seekers, sparking violence and prompting multiple arrests. Amid the demonstrations, misleading claims about the cost of accommodating migrants have been spreading widely online. But what does it actually cost to house asylum seekers in hotels — and how are false figures shaping public anger? Misleading figures spread online One focal point has been the Britannia Hotel in Canary Wharf, East London, which has witnessed clashes between anti-immigration protesters and anti-racism demonstrators, leading to the arrest of two people on 8 August. Social media posts and viral messages have claimed that housing asylum seekers in hotels costs the government between £200 and £500 per night. However, there is no evidence to support these figures. One expert claims these kinds of falsehoods are 'most likely spread with a strategic purpose in mind'. The real cost The Home Office told The Independent that the Britannia Hotel costs £81 per night to house asylum seekers. In March 2025, the average cost per night for a hotel room used to accommodate asylum seekers was £118.87 — down from £162.16 in March 2023. Across all hotels, this equates to around £5.77m per day, down from £8.3m per day the previous year. Stephan Lewandowsky, Professor of Cognitive Science at the University of Bristol, told The Independent that false information spreads because divisive posts attract more attention from readers. He said: 'Social media algorithms favour information that is outrage-evoking because it generates more audience engagement – hence making more money for the platforms – and in consequence disinformation often has an advantage over factual content and spreads faster and further. On top of that, the goal is, of course, to incite hatred and what better way to do that than to spread outrageous falsehoods.' These misleading claims are not just a matter of numbers. Experts warn they could amplify public anger and stoke already high tensions. 'There is now very clear and strong evidence that online misinformation can cause real-world harms. For example, last year's riots in the UK targeted mosques based on the false rumour that the perpetrator of a heinous crime was a Muslim refugee – he was not, he was a native-born British citizen,' Mr Lewandowsky said. Court ruling piles pressure on Starmer Pressure is mounting on Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer after Epping Forest District Council secured an interim High Court injunction to ban migrants from being housed at The Bell Hotel after weeks of protests at the site. The council argued the site had become a 'feeding ground for unrest' following a spate of violent protests that left several police officers injured. On 4 August, Starmer condemned the violence as 'far-right thuggery' and warned that those responsible would face the 'full force of the law.' For now, one of many challenges for ministers will be to ensure the facts about the costs of asylum hotels are reaching the public.
USA Today
an hour ago
- USA Today
Epstein grand jury records to remain sealed, but judge says government can release info
A judge denied the Justice Department's bid to unseal records from the grand jury that indicted the late financier Jeffrey Epstein on sex trafficking charges, saying the material paled in comparison to the trove of records the government has about the case but is not releasing. Manhattan-based U.S. District Judge Richard Berman's Aug. 20 decision came as President Donald Trump has sought to quell discontent from his conservative base of supporters over his administration's decision not to release files of the case. The judge wrote that it would be more logical for the government to directly release the vast amount of information it has collected from its investigation into Epstein than to petition the court to release the more limited grand jury materials, whose secrecy is protected by law. "The Government's 100,000 pages of Epstein files and materials dwarf the 70 odd pages of Epstein grand jury materials," Berman wrote. "The grand jury testimony is merely a hearsay snippet of Jeffrey Epstein's alleged conduct." The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Trump, a Republican, had campaigned for a second term in 2024 with promises to make public Epstein-related files, and accused Democrats of covering up the truth. But in July, the Justice Department declined to release any more material from its investigation of the case and said a previously touted Epstein client list did not exist, angering Trump's supporters. Evidence seen and heard by grand juries, which operate behind closed doors to prevent interference in criminal investigations, cannot be released without a judge's approval. In July, Trump instructed Attorney General Pam Bondi to seek court approval for the release of grand jury material from Epstein's case. The grand jury that indicted Epstein heard from just one witness, an agent with the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Justice Department said in a court filing in July. Epstein died by suicide in 2019 while awaiting trial on sex-trafficking charges. He had pleaded not guilty. His death in jail and his friendships with the wealthy and powerful sparked conspiracy theories that other prominent people were involved in his alleged crimes and that he was murdered. The New York City chief medical examiner determined that Epstein's death was a suicide by hanging. On Aug. 11, a different Manhattan-based judge, Paul Engelmayer, denied a similar request by the Justice Department to unseal grand jury testimony and exhibits from the case of Ghislaine Maxwell, Epstein's longtime girlfriend. Maxwell is serving a 20-year prison sentence following her 2021 conviction for recruiting underage girls for Epstein to abuse. Engelmayer wrote that the public would not learn anything new from the release of materials from Maxwell's grand jury because much of the evidence was made public at her monthlong trial four years ago. The grand jury testimony contained no evidence of others besides Epstein and Maxwell who had sexual contact with minors, Engelmayer wrote. Maxwell had pleaded not guilty. After losing an appeal, she has asked the U.S. Supreme Court to review her case. In July, a Florida judge rejected the administration's request to unseal grand jury records from federal investigations there into Epstein in 2005 and 2007. Epstein served a 13-month sentence after pleading guilty in 2008 to a state-level prostitution charge as part of a deal now widely regarded as too lenient. (Reporting by Luc Cohen in New York; Editing by Noeleen Walder, Daniel Wallis and David Gregorio)
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
Another judge denies the DOJ's effort to unseal Epstein-related grand jury transcripts
A federal judge on Wednesday denied the Trump Justice Department's motion to unseal grand jury transcripts in Jeffrey Epstein's New York sex trafficking case, dealing the DOJ its latest loss on the subject, in a ruling that spotlights the government's bumbling legal effort and lack of transparency in the Epstein scandal. The ruling from U.S. District Judge Richard Berman follows an Aug. 11 decision from another judge in New York that rejected the DOJ's motion to unseal transcripts in the case of convicted Epstein associate Ghislaine Maxwell, as well as a July ruling from a judge in Florida rejecting DOJ's Epstein-related unsealing effort in that state. Ruling against the DOJ in the Maxwell case, U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer wrote that '[a] member of the public, appreciating that the Maxwell grand jury materials do not contribute anything to public knowledge, might conclude that the Government's motion for their unsealing was aimed not at 'transparency' but at diversion — aimed not at full disclosure but at the illusion of such.' Similarly rejecting the effort in Epstein's case specifically, Berman wrote Wednesday that the unsealing motion appeared to be a diversion from the full scope of Epstein-related files in the government's possession. He wrote that the grand jury testimony is just a 'hearsay snippet' of Epstein's alleged conduct, and that the information in the Epstein grand jury transcripts 'pales in comparison' with the information in the DOJ's hands. He also criticized the government for not properly notifying victims before filing the motion. Epstein died in 2019 while being held on trafficking charges in New York, with the medical examiner deeming his death a suicide. Maxwell was subsequently convicted and is appealing while simultaneously seeking a pardon from President Donald Trump. After she met with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, Trump's former personal defense lawyer, the government moved Maxwell to a minimum-security facility. That raised speculation about what benefits the administration might grant her as the White House faces political backlash from its refusal to release all the Epstein-related information in its possession, as promised. This is a developing story. Check back for updates. Subscribe to the Deadline: Legal Newsletter for expert analysis on the top legal stories of the week, including updates from the Supreme Court and developments in the Trump administration's legal cases. This article was originally published on
