Moment Brit pole dancers issue grovelling apology after avoiding jail over scantily-clad display at hallowed Greek site
THREE Brit pole dancers have apologised after staging a raunchy on-cam display at a Greek monument.
The Brits were accused of violating archaeological law and degrading the surrounding area after the racy shoot outside the Old Palace of St. Michael and St. George in Corfu.
5
5
The hallowed palace is a 200-year-old former royal residence and UNESCO World Heritage Site.
Two of the Brits who organised the photo shoot were found guilty of degrading the cultural landscape of Corfu.
They were handed a six-month suspended prison sentence.
But the court came to the conclusion that the five Brit women were innocent of the offence of violating Archaeological Law, therefore acquitting three of them.
This is because there was no evidence that material damage was caused to the monument.
Three of the Brits were captured walking out of the court with solemn looks on their faces before being asked by a reporter how they felt.
One Brit - who looked to have been crying - said they are "sorry to everyone we offended and let down" both "in Greece and back home".
She added, before issuing a thanks to the Judge: "We deeply regret what we [did]."
The second Brit took a large gulp before issuing her own apology "for causing any offence," stating that the women "understand how important" the monuments are to Greek people - but "didn't realise".
She concluded: "We could not be any more sorry and we're just glad that justice has been served today."
Fury as 'Brit' pole-dancers swing half-naked from Greek landmark as local says 'would they do it at Buckingham Palace?'
The third woman also said sorry "to have caused such an offence and to have caused such trouble" and that they're happy that the judge "gave us justice today".
Shocking footage shared by Greek media showed two women in raunchy red lingerie posing on a pole in front of fellow dancers.
Another clip captures a Brit in a black thong leotard being cheered on by a woman shouting: 'Yes Shelly, nice!'
The women have reportedly visited Corfu multiple times to take part in dance events.
Dozens of furious residents slammed the shoot after it went viral online, branding it 'disgraceful'.
One person fumed: ' The Corfu Palaces: they once hosted royals. Now, pole dancing.
'If Lord Byron saw pole dancing at the Palaces, he would have returned to England without a second thought.'
Another commenter raged: 'Would they do the same at Buckingham [Palace]? Of course, here we have been the inferior in Europe for years on vacation and binge. [sic]'
According to local media, a pole dancing school in the UK was behind the ordeal.
The school organises a vacation with intensive pole dancing seminars in Corfu every year in the last two weeks of May, ANT1 reported.
The Palace and site of the risky photoshoot was commissioned by British Lord High Commissioner Sir Thomas Maitland in the early 19th century.
It is one of the best-preserved examples of Regency architecture outside the UK and now houses the Museum of Asian Art.
The Directorate of the Museum reportedly had no idea the shoot was happening, according to Protothema.
5
5
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
More than a dozen ICE officers are trapped in sweltering shipping container with the migrants they deported
More than a dozen ICE officers alongside a group of eight migrants that had been placed on a deportation flight originally bound for South Sudan are now being held in a converted shipping container on a US naval base in Djibouti in the stifling heat, in horrendous conditions. The men and their guards are dealing with baking hot temperatures, smoke from nearby burn pits and the looming threat of rocket attacks, the Trump administration said. Neither the officers or migrants can leave container until the matter has been resolved by the courts, which could take weeks. Officials outlined grim conditions in court documents filed before a federal judge overseeing a lawsuit challenging Immigration and Customs Enforcement efforts to swiftly remove migrants to countries they didn't come from. Authorities landed the flight at the base in Djibouti, about 1,000 miles from South Sudan, more than two weeks ago after US District Judge Brian E. Murphy in Boston found the Trump administration had violated his order by swiftly sending eight migrants from countries including Cuba and Vietnam to the east African nation. The judge said that men, which include murderers and sexual abusers from Myanmar, Cuba, Vietnam, Laos, Mexico and South Sudan must have a real chance to raise fears about dangers they could face in South Sudan. All eight were accused of being convicted criminals by the Trump administration and deported in late May after their respective origin countries all rejected them being returned. The men's lawyers have still not been able to talk to them, said Robyn Barnard, senior director of refugee advocacy at Human Rights First, whose stated mission is to ensure the United States is a global leader on human rights. 'This Massachusetts District judge is putting the lives of our ICE law enforcement in danger by stranding them in Djibouti without proper resources, lack of medical care, and terrorists who hate Americans running rampant,' DHS spokeswoman Tricia McLaughlin said in a post on X. 'Our @ICEgov officers were only supposed to transport for removal 8 convicted criminals with final deportation orders who were so monstrous and barbaric that no other country would take them. This is reprehensible and, quite frankly, pathological.' On Friday, Barnard spoke at a hearing of Democratic members of Congress and said some family members of the men had been able to speak with them on Thursday. The migrants have been previously convicted of serious crimes in the US, and President Donald Trump's administration has said that it was unable to return them quickly to their home countries. The Justice Department has also appealed to the Supreme Court to immediately intervene and allow swift deportations to third countries to resume. The case comes amid a sweeping immigration crackdown by the Republican administration, which has pledged to deport millions of people who are living in the United States illegally. The legal fight became another flashpoint as the administration rails against judges whose rulings have slowed the president's policies. The Trump administration said the converted conference room in the shipping container is the only viable place to house the men on the base in Djibouti, where outdoor daily temperatures rise above 100F, according to the declaration from an ICE official. Nearby burn pits are used to dispose of trash and human waste, and the smog cloud makes it hard to breathe, sickening both ICE officers guarding the men and the detainees, the documents state. The stench is so bad and the air so polluted that some officers now sleep with face masks on. Officers and detainees became sick within 72 hours of landing in Djibouti. So far, thirteen ICE officials have fallen ill and are suffering from respiratory infections, together with the extreme heat and cramped living conditions. The ICE officials are experiencing 'coughing, difficulty breathing, fever, and achy joints,' the court documents state. They don't have access to all the medication they need to protect against infection, and the ICE officers were unable to complete anti-malarial treatment before landing, an ICE official said. 'It is unknown how long the medical supply will last,' Mellissa B. Harper, acting executive deputy associate director of enforcement and removal operations, said in the declaration. The group also lacks protective gear in case of a rocket attack from terrorist groups in Yemen, a risk outlined by the Department of Defense, the documents state. Along with the deportees, the ICE agents are forced to stay in the makeshift detention center with just six beds between the entire group. The detainees are also facing uncomfortable conditions only being able to shower once every other day while being subjected to 'pat-downs and searches' every time they need to use the restroom, some 40 yards away from the container in where they're being held. 'The conference room in which the aliens are housed is not equipped nor suitable for detention of any length, let alone for the detention of high-risk individuals,' Harper wrote. 'Notably, the room has none of the security apparatus necessary for the detention of criminal aliens. If an altercation were to occur, there is no other location on site available to separate the aliens, which further compromises the officers' safety.'
Daily Mail
3 hours ago
- Daily Mail
Lawyers warned to stop using ChatGPT to argue lawsuits after AI programs 'made up fictitious cases'
Lawyers in England and Wales have been warned they could face 'severe sanctions' including potential criminal prosecution if they present false material generated by AI in court. The ruling, by one of Britain's most senior judges, comes on the back of a string of cases in which which artificially intelligence software has produced fictitious legal cases and completely invented quotes. The first case saw AI fabricate 'inaccurate and fictitious' material in a lawsuit brought against two banks, The New York Times reported. Meanwhile, the second involved a lawyer for a man suing his local council who was unable to explain the origin of the nonexistent precedents in his legal argument. While large language models (LLMs) like OpenAI 's ChatGPT and Google 's Gemini are capable of producing long accurate-sounding texts, they are technically only focused on producing a 'statistically plausible' reply. The programs are also prone to what researchers call 'hallucinations' - outputs that are misleading or lack any factual basis. AI Agent and Assistance platform Vectera has monitored the accuracy of AI chatbots since 2023 and found that the top programs hallucinate between 0.7 per cent and 2.2 per cent of the time - with others dramatically higher. However, those figures become astronomically higher when the chatbots are prompted to produce longer texts from scratch, with market leader OpenAI recently acknowledging that its flagship ChatGPT system hallucinates between 51 per cent and 79 per cent of the time if asked open-ended questions. While large language models (LLMs) like OpenAI's ChatGPT and Google's Gemini are capable of producing long accurate-sounding texts, they are technically only focused on producing a 'statistically plausible' reply - which can lead to them 'hallucinating' false information Dame Victoria Sharp, president of the King's Bench Division of the High Court, and Justice Jeremy Johnson KC, authored the new ruling. In it they say: 'The referrals arise out of the actual or suspected use by lawyers of generative artificial intelligence tools to produce written legal arguments or witness statements which are not then checked, so that false information (typically a fake citation or quotation) is put before the court. 'The facts of these cases raise concerns about the competence and conduct of the individual lawyers who have been referred to this court. 'They raise broader areas of concern however as to the adequacy of the training, supervision and regulation of those who practice before the courts, and as to the practical steps taken by those with responsibilities in those areas to ensure that lawyers who conduct litigation understand and comply with their professional and ethical responsibilities and their duties to the court.' The pair argued that existing guidance around AI was 'insufficient to address the misuse of artificial intelligence'. Judge Sharp wrote: 'There are serious implications for the administration of justice and public confidence in the justice system if artificial intelligence is misused,' While acknowledging that AI remained a 'powerful technology' with legitimate use cases, she nevertheless reiterated that the technology brought 'risks as well as opportunities.' In the first case cited in the judgment, a British man sought millions in damages from two banks. The court discovered that 18 out of 45 citations included in the legal arguments featured past cases that simply did not exist. Even in instances in which the cases did exist, often the quotations were inaccurate or did not support the legal argument being presented. The second case, which dates to May 2023, involved a man who was turned down for emergency accommodation from the local authority and ultimately became homeless. His legal team cited five past cases, which the opposing lawyers discovered simply did not exist - tipped off by the fact by the US spellings and formulaic prose style. Rapid improvements in AI systems means its use is becoming a global issue in the field of law, as the judicial sector figures out how to incorporate artificial intelligence into what is frequently a very traditional, rules-bound work environment. Earlier this year a New York lawyer faced disciplinary proceedings after being caught using ChatGPT for research and citing a none-existent case in a medical malpractice lawsuit. Attorney Jae Lee was referred to the grievance panel of the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in February 2025 after she cited a fabricated case about a Queens doctor botching an abortion in an appeal to revive her client's lawsuit. The case did not exist and had been conjured up by OpenAI's ChatGPT and the case was dismissed. The court ordered Lee to submit a copy of the cited decision after it was not able to find the case. She responded that she was 'unable to furnish a copy of the decision.' Lee said she had included a case 'suggested' by ChatGPT but that there was 'no bad faith, willfulness, or prejudice towards the opposing party or the judicial system' in doing so. The conduct 'falls well below the basic obligations of counsel,' a three-judge panel for the Manhattan-based appeals court wrote. In June two New York lawyers were fined $5,000 after they relied on fake research created by ChatGPT for a submission in an injury claim against Avianca airline. Judge Kevin Castel said attorneys Steven Schwartz and Peter LoDuca acted in bad faith by using the AI bot's submissions - some of which contained 'gibberish' - even after judicial orders questioned their authenticity.
The Independent
4 hours ago
- The Independent
Supreme Court will hear Alabama appeal in bid to execute man found to be intellectually disabled
The Supreme Court will consider making it harder for convicted murderers to show their lives should be spared because they are intellectually disabled, according an order released early on Friday after an apparent technological glitch. The justices' action comes in an appeal from Alabama, which is seeking to execute Joseph Clifton Smith. He was sentenced to death for killing a man in 1997. Lower federal courts found Smith is intellectually disabled and thus can't be executed. When it's argued in the fall, the case could be the first in which the Supreme Court cuts back on its 23-year-old landmark ruling that barred the death penalty for people who are intellectually disabled. At issue is what happens in borderline cases, when scores on IQ tests are slightly above 70, which is widely accepted as a marker of intellectual disability. In 2014 and 2017, the court somewhat eased the burden of showing intellectual disability in those cases. It's the second time in about a year that an online error resulted in an early release from the high court. An opinion in an abortion case was accidently posted on its website a day early in June 2024. The court's landmark opinion overturning abortion as a constitutional right also went out early, though those circumstances were different because the case was leaked. This time, the court released a set of orders set for Monday after an 'apparent software malfunction' sent out early notifications.
