discipline

NFL won’t discipline Ravens’ Lamar Jackson for shoving Bills fans

Lamar Jackson will not be disciplined by the NFL for shoving a Buffalo Bills fan who slapped the helmets of the Baltimore Ravens quarterback and teammate DeAndre Hopkins during a game Sunday night in Orchard Park, N.Y.

“The matter has been addressed by the club and there is no further action from the league,” NFL spokesperson Brian McCarthy said in a statement emailed to The Times on Thursday.

A Ravens spokesperson said in a statement emailed to The Times on Thursday that the situation had been handled internally.

“Our players’ safety is of the utmost importance,” the team spokesperson said. “We have spoken to Lamar, who understands the impact of the situation, about the incident.

“While we will keep internal matters private, we have implemented additional security protocols — both at home and on the road — to better protect our players and handle negative fan interactions moving forward.”

Jackson and Hopkins were celebrating with teammates after they hooked up for a 29-yard touchdown reception late in the third quarter to give the Ravens a 34-19 lead. The players exited the back of the end zone and ended up near stands, where a male fan reached out and slapped Hopkins and Jackson on their helmets.

Jackson gave the fan a hard shove with both hands. While the fan was ejected from the game, and later indefinitely banned from all NFL stadiums, Jackson was not disciplined during the game.

The two-time league MVP later expressed regret for his actions.

“I seen him slap D-Hop … and he slapped me and he talking, so you know I just forgot where I was for a little bit,” Jackson told reporters after the Ravens’ 41-40 loss to the Bills. “But you got to think in those situations. You have security out there. Let security handle it. But I just let my emotions get the best of me. Hopefully, it don’t happen again. I learned from that.”

Addressing reporters the next day, Ravens coach John Harbaugh expressed support for his quarterback.

“Lamar’s down there celebrating a touchdown with his teammates just like you’re supposed to do,” Harbaugh said. “You talk about celebration and we want our guys to celebrate with one another. That’s the whole idea. I guess I didn’t know you’re not allowed to go close to the stands to do that without being attacked by a fan. …

“It’s unfortunate that you should even be in that situation. I don’t know how any of us would respond in that moment. I think it would be something where we probably would be thinking about protecting ourselves. I do think that. We have to understand that. You can always say, ‘Hey, I’d like to handle that a little better.’ But that’s a surprise when that happens in that moment, I think, for anybody.”

Source link

Starmer suspends Labour MPs over discipline breaches

Henry Zeffman

Chief political correspondent

Joshua Nevett

Political reporter

BBC 'Breaking' graphicBBC

Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer has suspended three Labour MPs over breaching party discipline.

The BBC understands Neil Duncan-Jordan, Brian Leishman and Chris Hinchliff have had the party whip removed, meaning the MPs will sit as independents in the House of Commons.

Senior Labour sources have not ruled out further MPs, including from earlier parliamentary intakes, being suspended later today.

Duncan-Jordan, Leishman and Hinchliff were all elected as Labour MPs for the first time last year. The BBC has asked the three suspended MPs for comment.

The move comes after 47 Labour MPs rebelled against the government’s proposed cuts to welfare and forced ministers to water down their plans.

All three of the suspended MPs voted against the government’s welfare reform bill earlier this month.

The rebellion undermined Sir Keir’s authority, which was weakened after a series of policy reversals, such as restoring the winter fuel allowance to millions of pensioners.

This breaking news story is being updated and more details will be published shortly. Please refresh the page for the fullest version.

You can receive Breaking News on a smartphone or tablet via the BBC News App. You can also follow @BBCBreaking on X to get the latest alerts.

Source link

Jafar Panahi’s ‘It Was Just an Accident’ wins Palme d’Or at Cannes

Marking an extraordinary reversal of fortune, including stints in prison and house arrest during years of clandestine work when he was forbidden by authorities from directing, Iran’s Jafar Panahi triumphed at the Cannes Film Festival on Saturday, winning the event’s top award, the Palme d’Or, for “It Was Just an Accident.”

Appearing to bask in the vindication, Panahi clasped his hands behind his head and leaned back seated in sunglasses, savoring the moment while those around him stood in an ovation.

“It Was Just an Accident,” a tense drama of retribution about a torturer’s abduction by his victims, will be released in 2025 on an as-yet-unannounced date by Neon, the distributor that can now claim an unprecedented six-Palme winning streak, after 2019’s “Parasite,” 2021’s “Titane,” 2022’s “Triangle of Sadness,” 2023’s “Anatomy of a Fall” and 2024’s “Anora” all prevailed. (There was no festival held in 2020 due to the COVID-19 pandemic.)

Through a translator, Panahi accepted his award humbly and spoke to the universal impulse to make art. “We don’t know why we do it,” he said. “It’s something I watch my small children do. They sing and dance before they can speak. But it’s another language. It could be a language of unification.”

This year’s Cannes jury was chaired by the veteran French star Juliette Binoche, who deliberated with a group sourced from several countries and disciplines. Jury members included the American actors Halle Berry and Jeremy Strong, India’s Payal Kapadia (director of “All We Imagine as Light”) and Korean filmmaker Hong Sang-soo.

Cannes’ runner-up award, the Grand Prix, went to “Sentimental Value,” a domestic drama about a family of artists directed by Norway’s Joachim Trier, who broke through in 2021 with “The Worst Person in the World,” which earned two Oscar nominations.

The festival’s Jury Prize — essentially third place — was shared by two movies: Oliver Laxe’s “Sirât” and Mascha Schilinski’s “Sound of Falling.” Ties are not unusual in this category; they’ve occurred as recently as 2022 and as far back as 1957, when Cannes honored both Ingmar Berman’s “The Seventh Seal” and Andrzej Wajda’s “Kanał.”

Taking both the directing prize and the award for best actor was Kleber Mendonça Filho’s “The Secret Agent,” a Brazilian crime thriller set in 1977 starring Wagner Maura (“Civil War”). In the hotly contested category of best actress, where on-the-ground predictions varied between Jennifer Lawrence (“Die, My Love), Elle Fanning (“Sentimental Value”) and Zoey Deutch (“Nouvelle Vague”), Nadia Melliti pulled off an upset for her turn in “The Little Sister,” about a French Algerian teen living in Paris and coming out to her Muslim family.

Source link

WGA trial chair blasts discipline process as ‘flawed’ and ‘improper’

A chair of a trial committee of the Writers Guild of America West has called out the union’s handling of disciplinary proceedings against one member accused of flouting the union’s rules during the 2023 strike.

In a four-page letter , Jill Goldsmith, a former public defender from Cook County,
conveyed profound concerns over the process behind the board’s decision to expel one writer, saying it was not “fair and proper,” according to a copy of the letter reviewed by The Times.

“I agreed to serve my Guild as a Trial Committee member, when I was assured of fairness in the process,” Goldsmith wrote, adding that “If we are to impose the most extreme punishment of expulsion, the process cannot be the flawed one that occurred.”

In her Feb. 24 letter to the WGAW board, Goldsmith said that the board had repudiated the unanimous findings of the trial committee, and questioned whether the committee’s impartial legal counsel unfairly influenced the proceeding’s outcome. As such, she wrote that she “must respectfully withdraw, because “I believe something happened during the process that was improper.”

Goldsmith’s name was redacted from a copy of the letter viewed by the Times. However, a person with knowledge of the proceedings who was not authorized to comment publicly confirmed that it was written by the trial committee chair who was identified in documents as Goldsmith, a guild member and who is credited with having written for such shows as “Boston Legal” and “Ally McBeal.”

Goldsmith declined to comment on the letter.

The Writers Guild of America West also declined to comment on the specific claims of the letter, but in a statement the union said that four members have appealed their discipline to the membership, who will vote on the matter this week.

“This is an internal union matter and WGAW members can view relevant documents on the members-only section of the Guild’s website,” the statement said. “The Board of Directors is the only body involved in the process that is elected by the membership and the WGAW Constitution gives it the responsibility for determining the level of discipline when a member is found guilty by a trial committee.”

Goldsmith oversaw the trial of Roma Roth, an executive producer on the CW series “Sullivan’s Crossing” and “Virgin River” on Netflix, according to proceeding documents. The board expelled Roth for allegedly writing during the strike for a non-signatory company.

In her letter to the board, Goldsmith said that while she agreed that Roth had “crossed the line from producing to writing,” a violation of the guild’s strike rules, she objected to the process that led to the recommendation for her expulsion, after the committee had originally proposed Roth be given a five year suspension.

According to her letter, prior to their deliberations, the committee asked the committee’s legal advisor for “clarity” on the the possible punishments that could be meted out. Specifically, the committee asked to be provided with a slate of those punishments given to writers in the past — anonymously — in order to “assess proportionality and fairness in how punishments were addressed,” only to be told the committee was “not allowed to know that information,” she wrote.

According to her appeal statement to the WGAW, a copy of which was viewed by The Times, Roth said she was found was “not guilty” of violating strike rules and “did not work for a struck company,” adding that “Sullivan’s Crossing” was an independently financed Canadian series.

She called her expulsion “excessive and disproportionate.”

“The Board found me guilty of violating Article X of the Constitution, Working Rule 8 (“WR8”), i.e. working without a waiver. A violation that according to the Working Rules should be subject to a fine, NOT expulsion,” wrote Roth, a member of the WGA and the Writers Guild of Canada.

In her appeal documents, Roth called her disciplinary hearing “unfair” and “improper,” and outlined numerous instances that she says demonstrate violations of due process.

Roth cast doubt on the materials the guild submitted, including a partially obscured photo of the writer’s room that was provided as “evidence” that she was violating the rules about working during a strike. She said the room included her identical twin sister who was one of several Writers Guild Canada writers enlisted to work on the show.

Goldsmith’s letter echoed some of the assertions made by other disciplined writers, whose punishments range from public censure to suspensions to prohibitions from acting as volunteer captains; with the most drastic being expulsion. They have appealed the decisions.

Julie Bush, a consulting producer on AppleTV+’s “Manhunt,” is among those seeking to overturn her disciplinary action. The board suspended Bush from the guild until 2026 and she was barred from holding “non-elected guild office” after being found guilty of violating Working Rule 8 and writing for a non-signatory company during the strike. The trial committee had recommended that she be prohibited from serving as a guild captain for three years and censured privately.

Bush, who said she is a staunch union supporter, called the proceedings a “kangaroo court,” particularly as the information she said that was used against her was based on information she provided a guild attorney while seeking assistance.

“If this were a real court, it would be like if your defense lawyer takes off their defense lawyer hat and puts on his prosecutor hat and says ‘surprise, we got you’ with all this confidential information that you just turned over,” Bush told The Times.

“My particular case is a nuanced matter of contract law,” she added. “It should never have been brought to trial, much less, this big humiliation in the press. I cannot believe that we’ve gotten to this point.”

Source link