‘Design of pool' led to Brit friends drowning in Algarve as cop who attended scene rubbishes claims they were drinking
King Edonmi, 29 and his pal Mo Lisau, 27, were tragically discovered lifeless by another friend at the bottom of a hotel swimming pool in Albufeira on Tuesday.
7
7
7
Earlier local reports had pinned the holiday nightmare on the pair being heavily intoxicated.
But a police source has told Portuguese daily Correio da Manha that it was the design of the pool combined with the fact they couldn't swim that had likely led to their death.
Speaking on condition of anonymity and without knowing the results of the autopsy, the source said: 'It's not a case of excess alcohol or drugs."
'Everything is pointing to this being a terrible accident with two people who didn't know how to swim.'
The source explained: 'it is a very weird swimming pool.
'It has shallow water in most of the pool but a very deep approximately three-metre pit in the middle.
'The two men were seen talking with some girls by the pool and then went to the pool and got into difficulties in that deep middle part.
'They weren't able to swim. It's not a case of excess, but an unfortunate accident in a bizarre swimming pool.'
The pair tragically drowned less than 24 hours after arriving in the holiday hotspot.
Tributes have now been left to the pair near A-Listers bar on Ipswich Waterfront, according to the Ipswich Star.
Brit, 20, breaks her back after fall from hotel balcony on Greek island… docs say it'll be 2 MONTHS before she can move
One dedication to Mo said: "In loving memory of a bro whose kindness, laughter and warmth will never be forgotten."
Another to King said: "Gone too soon but never forgotten - your spirit lives on in every shared memory and quiet moment."
Friend Awande Luthuli, describing them as 'loving, joyful and respectful, truly good souls, without any trace of evil', told the paper overnight: 'They were not typical party tourists.
'They had travelled as part of a group and met up with friends who lived in Portugal.
7
7
'They both lived by strong principles and values, including the choice of not drinking.'
A GoFundMe page has now raised more than £17,000 to repatriate the pair.
The cash is for the piles of paperwork and "overwhelming costs" involved in repatriating the bodies of the two men.
Friends wrote: "We are asking from the bottom of our hearts for your help.
"Every donation, no matter how big or small, will go directly to their families to help cover the cost of bringing Mo and King home and to support them during this time of unimaginable grief.
"Please give what you can, share this with others and keep their families in your prayers.
"Mo and King, you were loved more than words can say.
"Your light will never fade. Rest peacefully."
A spokesperson for the Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office told the BBC: "We are supporting the families of two British men who have died in Portugal and are in contact with the local authorities."
7
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
BBC News
28 minutes ago
- BBC News
Budapest mayor questioned over organising banned pride march
Budapest's mayor has been questioned by police as a suspect in helping to organise a banned LGBTQ march in the event took place on June 28 despite warnings of potential legal repercussions by Hungary's nationalist Prime Minister Viktor Orban, whose government passed a law earlier this year banning the say that despite threats of fines, a record 200,000 people took part in the rally, which swiftly descended into an anti-government a rainbow T-shirt featuring the capitals coat of arms, Mayor Gergely Karacsony, who appeared at Hungary's National Bureau of Investigation on Friday, told supporters: "Neither freedom nor love can be banned in Budapest". If charged and convicted, Karacsony could face up to a year in prison for organising and encouraging participation in a banned march."They described the accusation. I said that I considered this to be unfounded and that I will lodge a complaint against it," Karacsony told a crowd of some 200 supporters and journalists who had gathered outside the building where he was questioned for more than an hour."Neither freedom nor love can be banned in Budapest," said the mayor, who added: "If it cannot be banned, it cannot be punished."Accompanied by his lawyer, Karacsony did not answer any questions posed by investigators but instead presented them with a statement of his annual pride march had been in doubt since the government passed a law in March restricting gatherings if they break child protection laws on the public promotion on was the latest measure from Orban's government targeting Hungary's LGBTQ+ 2020, Hungary abolished its legal recognition of transgender people, and in 2021, the government passed a law banning the depiction of homosexuality to the ban, the mayor stood in defiance, vowing: "Budapest city hall will organise the Budapest Pride march as a local event on 28 June," and argued that police could not legally ban a municipal month, police announced they would not take action against attendees who could have faced fines of up to €500 (£427; $586) for attending the Pride Hungary's National Bureau of Investigation, which is tasked with investigating serious and complex crimes, said it had launched a probe against an "unknown perpetrator" accused of organising the rally.
The Sun
an hour ago
- The Sun
Labour's taken state spying of social media to whole new level – leaked emails read like their from dictatorship not UK
THE Chinese-owned social media platform TikTok has often aroused fears that personal data collected on its users could end up in the hands of the Chinese Communist Party. What fewer people imagined was that our own Government would try to use TikTok in order to police speech in Britain. Yet that is exactly what has happened. 7 7 7 Leaked emails show that a shady branch of government known as the National Security Online Information Team has been leaning on TikTok to suppress content that is critical of official migration and criminal justice policy. On several occasions during the riots which followed the Southport murders a year ago, the unit approached TikTok requesting that it 'assess' some posts made by its users — effectively a crude instruction to suppress what they were saying. Legitimate debate Britain, like every other country, operates security services that spy on terrorists who are plotting atrocities as well as organisations involved in propagating serious public disorder. Were a government organisation to prevent a bomb attack which could have killed dozens of people, no one would be too bothered about how it had obtained the vital information. But the emails show activity which goes far beyond the demands of national security. In one case, officials drew TikTok's attention to a post that suggested a large number of migrants were 'undocumented fighting age males'. Another suggested that TikTok take a look at users who spread 'concerning narratives about the police and a two-tier system [of justice] '. I am sure the police and courts will defend themselves robustly against a charge of operating two-tier justice, but whether or not you think they are doing this, it is a perfectly legitimate area for public debate, just as is the question of whether ethnic minorities suffer disadvantage in the workplace, schools, hospitals and so on. Those who made online accusations of a disproportionate response by the police towards protesters, and who dubbed our Prime Minister 'two-tier Keir', had good reason for raising their concerns. Ten days before the Southport murders, the Harehills area of Leeds erupted into rioting after children from a Roma family were taken into care. Protesters descend on Canary Wharf migrant hotel as police surround building amid fears over 'summer of riots' Days later there was a machete fight on Southend seafront. Keir Starmer had little to say about those grim developments, yet went into overdrive when protesters took to the streets following the Southport riots. True, there were plenty of thugs among them, but to insinuate that all protesters were driven by nothing more than 'far-right hatred' was outrageous. I am not going to defend Lucy Connolly, who was jailed for 31 months for remarks she made in the wake of the Southport killings — her words read like a pretty clear incitement to violence even if she did not intend them to. But it is perfectly reasonable to question whether her punishment was consistent with the treatment handed out to extreme Islamist preachers and Irish Republican sympathisers. Take the Prevent programme, which was set up by the Blair government specifically to deal with the threat of Islamist terrorism in the wake of the 2005 Tube bombings. 7 7 7 Over time it seems to have become more concerned with the far right. Nineteen per cent of those reported to the programme in the year ending March 2024 were recorded as supporting a far right ideology, against only 13 per cent with Islamist ideology — in spite of the latter being responsible for far more terror attacks and killings than the former over the past two decades. For Government officials to try to stop us discussing these matters is something you might associate more with a dictatorship than with British democracy. We have a human rights lawyer as PM, but where is he when it comes to defending our long-held right to free expression? Labour, however, has taken state surveillance of social media to a new level To be fair to Starmer, it is not just his government that has been trying to silence its critics. The National Security Online Information Team was derived from a body set up during Covid to try to gag critics of vaccines and lockdown. The Online Safety Act, which places obligations on social media companies to police content — and which the Government has used to put pressure on TikTok and other companies — was the brainchild of the last Conservative government. Deep concerns Labour, however, has taken state surveillance of social media to a new level. Particularly disgraceful was Technology Secretary Peter Kyle's attempt this week to claim that Nigel Farage was on the side of Jimmy Savile for daring to criticise the Online Safety Act. To listen to Kyle you would think the act was about nothing other than age verification for users of online pornography (not that Savile used the internet to abuse his victims). There are many people, myself included, who support the age verification measures but who have deep concerns about the act's other provisions, in particular its demand that technologies companies act against anything that could fall under the vague definition of being 'harmful to children'. Even the day's news could be deemed harmful to children if it upsets their immature sensibilities. The trouble is that the Online Safety Act was pushed through on the back of emotional propaganda, with few people realising the dark and disturbing ways in which it could be used to silence any of us. We are belatedly realising that now. 7
Reuters
an hour ago
- Reuters
Sig Sauer must face ICE officer's lawsuit over accidental gun firing
Aug 1 (Reuters) - A U.S. appeals court on Friday revived a lawsuit seeking to hold firearms maker Sig Sauer liable to an Immigration and Customs Enforcement officer who was injured when his P320 gun went off accidentally during a training drill. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Philadelphia said a trial judge erred by dismissing Keith Slatowski's lawsuit after excluding testimony from two experts about whether the gun's design could cause injury. Sig Sauer and its lawyer did not immediately respond to requests for comment. The company has faced several lawsuits over alleged unintentional P320 firings. Slatowski's gun discharged from within its holster after his hand hit the grip in September 2020 at a New Castle, Delaware firing range. A bullet went through his upper right hip and out his thigh. While unsure whether debris or the holster itself caused the trigger to depress, the former Marine said the lack of an external safety to prevent unexpected firings made his gun unsafe. Slatowski sought $10 million in damages. Writing for a three-judge appeals court panel, Circuit Judge Stephanos Bibas said the trial judge properly excluded testimony from the two experts about whether Slatowski's gun caused his injury, because they hadn't done testing. But the appeals court said testimony about possible design flaws should have been admitted. It returned the case to U.S. District Judge R. Barclay Surrick in Philadelphia for a possible trial. "The P320's design is technical and probably needs explaining," Bibas wrote. "From there, ... Slatowski must rely on his lay eyewitness testimony. It may not prove persuasive. But that is up to the jury, not the judge." Slatowski's wife is also a plaintiff. Their lawyer Robert Zimmerman said in an email: "Our clients are thankful for the opportunity to present their case to a jury." The case is Slatowski et al v Sig Sauer Inc, 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, No. 24-1639.
