Latest news with #CapitalHotel
Times
21-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Times
Tom Brown restaurant review: ‘To my relief, I enjoyed this hugely'
I was looking forward to this place immensely. I loved Tom Brown's cooking at Cornerstone in Hackney Wick — I remember oysters pickled briefly in gherkin vinegar back in 2018 when it opened, cured monkfish slivers with lime pickle and coconut, potted shrimps on a warm crumpet (years before the full-scale crumpet invasion of top-flight dining) and cider-braised cuttlefish on lentils — and reckoned it would be the perfect match for the bouji dining room at the Capital, the famous old Knightsbridge hotel. Especially as Tom was so good with fish. The Capital was fishy, I recalled. I went with Andrew Lloyd Webber back in 2012, when Nathan Outlaw was at the stove, or at least over the door. They were calling it Outlaw's
Telegraph
15-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Telegraph
William Sitwell reviews Tom Brown at The Capital: ‘A monument to the dull and misconceived'
It all sounds glorious. On paper. The prodigal son returns. Tom Brown, a chef from Cornwall, had his big break at The Capital Hotel when fellow West Country stove-meister Nathan Outlaw hired him to lead the kitchens. Then Brown went east, that essential pilgrimage for chefs who must head for London's E postcodes, where they collect checked shirts, beards and tattoos. And for Brown that meant Cornerstone, a celebrated establishment of seafood and tasting menus, where he showed his mastery of fish cookery with refined plates against a backdrop of industrial modernity. And he's back, now the main man at the Knightsbridge hotel, a chic vestige of spenny grandeur on Basil Street, round the corner from Harrods and opposite a block containing some of the world's most expensive doctors and shrinks. It's in a room of some 26 covers, a small area – more private dining space than restaurant – with fantasy forest splodges on the walls and carpets, and what look like giant sea urchins lit up in gold hanging from the ceiling. With its cluster of obliging staff at the entrance, a sweet little bar, and besuited and elegant service, the restaurant strikes one as a discreet place for elicit rendezvous. In which case one wouldn't want that wrecked by having it firmly put on the map by a big-name chef. So relax, because it won't be. The Capital's lush confines don't do the food, when it's firing, any favours. Because Brown's occasional culinary brilliance, amid this upscale drawing room vibe, just melts into oblivion. The Capital has tried out a vast number of cheffy names in this place; the last time I ate here was some 20 years ago when Frenchman Éric Chavot had a go – and his cheeky, jolly, bouncing and jocular self also clashed with the room. So having pottered along nicely in recent years as a decent brasserie keeping its hotel guests happy, it gives the big-name gambit another go and in comes Brown. We went for the six-course lunch menu, with the staff kindly letting us mix in the odd dish from the three- and eight-course ones, starting with raw oyster taken from the shell and laid on some apparently hot – but not – seaweed cream on a fried little wedge of bread. It was a fresh taste of the sea with some crunch but came surrounded by decorative, undressed salad leaves that were a waste of the toil of cultivation and a spot on God's earth. Then came a plate of 'charcuterie': horrid cod mortadella; equally rank bresaola of salmon – it might be a way to age beef, but it simply tired this fish; and their salami – three slices of orange fishy mush which looked like squashed goldfish and smelt like the stuff you feed them with. Roast chicken abutting bass in a green wrap of leek was a clever combo, but the undercooked white asparagus looked like a dead man's protuberance and it wouldn't suit a morgue let alone this dining room. My mango pud was an artistic delight covered in sugar spun as a scallop shell. But my pal Monty's chocolate and caper number in a large swirl of olive oil was just that – a flavour combo so offensive it should be banned under the Geneva Convention. Half-starved and fresh out of captivity, I would still swerve this monument to the dull and misconceived.
The Citizen
06-05-2025
- Politics
- The Citizen
No forensic evidence Mbenenge sent pic of private to junior clerk
Mbenenge's future hangs in the balance as the Judicial Conduct Tribunal continued looking into allegations of sexual harassment. The Judicial Conduct Tribunal looking into allegations of sexual harassment against Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge heard there is no forensic evidence that he sent a picture of his penis to a junior clerk. Mbenenge's future hangs in the balance as the tribunal continues looking into the allegations. On Monday, damning testimony from a digital forensic expert confirmed phone-based communication between the judge and his accuser judges' secretary Andiswa Mengo. Accusations Mbenenge is accused of sexually harassing Mengo after he sent her a series of WhatsApp messages of a sexual nature, accompanied by unsolicited 'crude pictures,' some of which depicted people having sex, which she said he later deleted. The Tribunal recommenced from 5 May and will continue until 16 May 2025 at the Capital Hotel, Empire, Sandton, Johannesburg, where proceedings were first held in January, when Mengo underwent eight days of cross-examination. After hearing all the evidence, the tribunal will decide whether to recommend to the Judicial Service Commission (JSC) that Mbenenge is guilty of gross misconduct, a finding that could lead to his impeachment. WATCH: Francois Moller testifying about the messages A digital forensic expert told the Judicial Conduct Tribunal continued looking into allegations of sexual harassment against Eastern Cape Judge President Selby Mbenenge there is no forensic evidence that he sent a picture of his penis to a junior clerk. @TheCitizen_News — 𝙵𝚊𝚒𝚣𝚎𝚕 𝙿𝚊𝚝𝚎𝚕 ⚡️ (@FaizelPatel143) May 6, 2025 ALSO READ: Mbenenge allegedly propositioned secretary for sex, sent explicit picture [VIDEO] Phone analysis During Monday's proceedings, digital forensic analyst Francois Moller was called to testify by evidence leader Salome Scheepers. Moller said he had been given two devices to analyse, one belonging to Mbengene and the other to Mengo. He testified that Mbenegene's phone appeared to have been wiped clean of all messages, but hundreds remained on Mengo's phone. Penis picture Moller said there is no evidence that Mbenenge sent a picture of his penis to a junior clerk. The screengrab appeared to be 'cropped' in that it did not contain a date or any other information, just the time of 9:05 am. Moller explained that even deleted WhatsApp messages and those that had been 'deleted for all' can remain on a device, but this was dependent on data capacity, and eventually they would be 'overwritten'. 'When one deletes an entry in a database file, that entry basically still stays there. It is not as if it is disappearing from the device because it gets deleted. The easiest way to explain that is that entries are marked with little flags. So when you enter the information into the phone, a name and a telephone number, let's take an example, a green flag will appear. 'So once you start to save new data, the possibility of the new data overwriting that deleted information is there, and the moment that that line gets overwritten, then only the information disappears from the device itself,' Moller said. ALSO READ: Mbenenge sent secretary private part picture and asked for 'BJ' [VIDEO] Screengrab Mengo had previously provided a 'screengrab' of the photo of a penis, allegedly sent to her by Mbenenge. She said that she had received it on 20 June 2021, before Mbenenge deleted it. Mengo claimed she responded to the advances by sending a Bible verse, Psalm 1, Verse 1, in the Xhosa Bible, which begins with the word 'hai' (no). She quoted from the verse in messages four times. However, 30 minutes after the messages, Mengo testified, he sent her sexually explicit emojis – a guava and a banana – and a picture of a penis and asked for 'yours please' with a 'wide-eyes' emoji. Messages Under cross-examination, Griffiths Madonsela, the advocate acting for Mbenenge, said that while the screengrab showed no date, it did show the time, GroundUp reported. Griffiths asked Moller to use his software to determine if any message was exchanged between Mbenenge and Mengo on any date at 9:05 am. After doing the search, Moller said there were no matches. 'At the time of my investigation, it was not there anymore,' he said. While Mbenenge has admitted to 'consensual' conversations with Mengo, he has vehemently denied sending sexually explicit pictures to her. ALSO READ: WATCH: Woman found EC Judge President Selby Mbenenge's requests for pictures 'annoying'
Yahoo
24-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Citizens deserve answers from congressmen, even when questions make them uncomfortable
Part of the crowd that gathered for a town hall at First United Methodist Church in downtown Little Rock on Tuesday, March 18, 2025. (Photo by Rich Shumate/Arkansas Advocate) Little Rock witnessed a tale of two events last week that says a lot about the troubled state of American politics. At the first event, voters incensed by two months of chaos in Washington gathered at the First United Methodist Church on Center Street downtown, filling every pew in the 750-seat sanctuary, as well as the balcony and the choir seats behind the pulpit. Those who couldn't find a seat stood around the edge of the sanctuary and at the back of the church; more than 100 people were turned away. The energy, and the anger, at this town hall meeting were palpable, as speaker after speaker talked about the impact President Donald Trump and adviser Elon Musk and their minions are having on Arkansans from all walks of life — veterans, children with disabilities, Medicaid patients, farmers, immigrants and scientific researchers. Meanwhile, eight blocks away at the Capital Hotel, U.S. Sens. Tom Cotton and John Boozman, who were both invited to the town hall, were instead rubbing elbows with donors at a high-dollar fundraiser for Cotton's reelection campaign that featured Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders and a smattering of Stephenses and Dillards, with a Rockefeller thrown in. It cost $1,000 to mingle, $7,000 to dine, and $10,000 to be on the host committee. To thwart would-be protesters, the location of the fundraiser was only disclosed to ticket holders, although details started to leak on social media in the hours before the event. Given that Cotton, Boozman and Hill's own in-person town halls have become as rare as a duck-billed platypus, organizers of the Second Congressional District town hall had little expectation that any of them would accept their invitation. (Hill's scheduler said he was 'not available to participate'; Boozman and Cotton didn't respond.) Organizers left empty chairs for all three just in case. 'You are here because they won't do their job,' said Chris Jones, the 2022 Democratic candidate for governor, who moderated the event. 'It ain't that hard. There are only a few things you need to do. One of them is to provide a check on the madness that is coming from the executive branch.' There is, of course, nothing that requires French, Cotton or Boozman to meet in a public setting with their constituents, except perhaps a sense of duty that should go with the elected offices that they hold. Had they attended last week's event, they would no doubt have gotten a rough reception. People are ticked off. But that's part of the job. If you seek public office, you shouldn't be able to hide away from the public you represent because they make you uncomfortable. And you should represent, and be answerable to, all of your constituents, not just the ones who voted for you or agreeably nod their heads at everything you do. Alas, Arkansas' congressional delegation has little political incentive to engage with voters in an uncontrolled public setting. Hill is relatively safe in a racially gerrymandered district; Cotton and Boozman have little to fear in a very red state. They seem to believe they can disregard angry voters with impunity. Perhaps they're right about that, although it was notable at the town hall that the crowd gave one of its most vigorous ovations to Marcus Jones, the retired Army officer who ran against Hill last year, after he pushed back against Musk's targeting of veterans' programs, which is increasingly becoming an albatross around Republicans' necks. 'Our veterans swore an oath, and when we did, we wrote a check. And that check could be up to the cost of our own life,' Jones said. 'And part of that bargain is the government would take care of us. And the Trump administration is causing our nation to turn its back on that promise.' In addition to a lack of incentive to endure public scrutiny, Arkansas' congressmen may have a more pressing reason to avoid voter engagement, rooted in their political timidity in the face of the MAGA takeover of the Republican Party. For instance, Hill, to his credit, has been an outspoken supporter of Ukraine and President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Imagine, then, if someone at the town hall had asked him whether he supported Trump's attempt to humiliate Zelenskyy, cut off support for Ukrainian freedom fighters and align U.S. policy with the Kremlin. He could not answer that question honestly without generating headlines that would anger the MAGA base. So it's easier just to avoid getting the question. Likewise, Boozman is a member of the Senate Veterans Affairs Committee and has made supporting veterans a key part of his legislative career. But if someone asked him if he supports plans by Musk's DOGE operation to cut 80,000 positions from the Veterans Administration, which will compromise services to veterans, he'd have to choose between honesty, sycophancy or evasion. Easier, then, to play hide-and-seek. The list of difficult questions for our congressional representatives goes on and on. Do they support staff cuts at the National Park Service that will affect services at the Buffalo River and Hot Springs National Park? Representing a tornado-prone state, do they support firings at the National Weather Service, which helps keep us safe? Or at FEMA, which helps us recover after disaster hits? What is their view on kneecapping life-saving research at UAMS, the University of Arkansas and Arkansas Children's Hospital through cuts to National Institutes of Health and National Science Foundation funding? On eliminating the Department of Education that insures educational access for disabled students? Or stripping the Little Rock-based aid group WinRock International (established by Republican Gov. Winthrop Rockefeller) of funding by dismembering USAID? How do they plan to protect Arkansas farmers from the damage caused by Trump's tariffs? Or the jobs of folks at Lockheed Martin's plant in Camden who make missiles being sent to Ukraine? If our congressmen expressed any doubt about Dear Leader and his unelected billionaire sidekick, there would be hell to pay. It would also raise another thorny question that they wouldn't want to answer — if you oppose these actions that are harming Arkansans, then why aren't you doing more to stop Trump and Musk? On the other hand, if members of our delegation actually support chaos, mindless budget cuts and indiscriminate firings, shouldn't they be willing to defend them in public? Where is the courage of their convictions? The essence of representative government is that the people we elect should represent us, engage with us, and listen to us. When they refuse to do so in service of their own political survival, it has a corrosive effect on democracy, as voters who don't feel listened to, or represented, grow increasingly frustrated and angry. Our congressional delegation has shown no sign that they give a hoot about that frustration and anger. We should not expect them to turn up anytime soon to answer questions in an environment where they can't control the narrative. But that doesn't mean voters shouldn't continue to ask their questions more urgently and forcefully — even when they're only talking to empty chairs. That's what democracy looks like, to the degree that we still have democracy left.
