by men recruited to have sex at events he hosted. hello. i'm sumi somaskanda. glad you could join us. we begin with former president donald trump's first day in court in new york, for a fraud trial that could threaten his business empire. mr trump and his company are accused of committing rampant fraud, by inflating the value of his real estate empire. mrtrump, who has denied all wrongdoing, was on the defensive, even before the trial began. we have a great company, i built a great company, it's got tremendous value, it's got some of the greatest real estate assets in the world, and now i have to go before a rogue judge is a continuation of russia,

russia, russia, as a continuation of the greatest witchhunt of all time, and i don't think the people of this country are going to stand for it. the former president also attacked new york attorney general, letitia james. ahead of the trial, james responded, saying, "no one is above the law", and that she was confident that "justice will prevail." testimony in the manhattan courtroom started with opening statements, and the state's first witness, donald bender, a long—time accountant for trump's businesses. bender tesified about financial documents, including discrepancies in the price of ivanka trump's penthouse. cbs chief election and campaign correspondent robert costa was in the courtroom during the hearing. he described the scene for us. there was a tense scene inside the courthouse behind me when trump entered the room, the former president did not even look at the attorney general letitia james in the first row, then he took his seat up near then he took his seat up near thejudge sitting then he took his seat up near the judge sitting alongside his lawyers, and as the government made its case, issued its

opening statement, calling the trump organisation a fraudulent organisation you could see the former president crosses arms and shake his head in disgust, because for him this was deeply personal, according to the sources who have spoken with me today, long—time confidants of trump. they say this is not just a company to him, to something intertwined with his life, his political career, his brand, and that's why he decided to show up today. he did not need to show up. he did this voluntarily. more on the hearing with my guests tonight. sarah krissoff, former federal prosecutor in the southern district of new york, and josh gerstein, senior legal affairs report for politico. great to see you both. sarah, i want to start with you and get your thoughts on what we saw in the hearing today. it your thoughts on what we saw in the hearing today.— the hearing today. it was interesting _ the hearing today. it was interesting that - the hearing today. it was interesting that trump i the hearing today. it was - interesting that trump decided to show up. that might have been part of a strategy decision to postpone his deposition and his litigation with michael cohen, but he decided to be there today to make a statement and to sort of

tell thejudge, i'm here, this is an important case to me, and we will see how it plays out over the next few weeks and frankly whether trump continues to show up, that's unlikely but possible, i suspect. josh, what did ou possible, i suspect. josh, what did you think— possible, i suspect. josh, what did you think of— possible, i suspect. josh, what did you think of mr _ possible, i suspect. josh, what did you think of mr trump's - did you think of mr trump's demeanour and his comments? well, it struck me that this is now— well, it struck me that this is now for— well, it struck me that this is now for better or for worse for the former_ now for better or for worse for the former president. part of his presidential campaign. he came — his presidential campaign. he came up— his presidential campaign. he came up this morning before the trial even— came up this morning before the trial even started and spent 7.5 minute speaking to cameras, talking _ 7.5 minute speaking to cameras, talking about how he was the victim — talking about how he was the victim here, the crime was the case _ victim here, the crime was the case that— victim here, the crime was the case that was being brought against _ case that was being brought against him, not anything that he did~ — against him, not anything that he did. and it'sjust going to be the — he did. and it'sjust going to be the case for the next year or so— be the case for the next year or so that _ be the case for the next year or so that we are going to watch _ or so that we are going to watch this most extraordinary presidential campaign, we are going — presidential campaign, we are going to — presidential campaign, we are going to have what looks to be a major— going to have what looks to be a major party presidential candidate, probably a major party— candidate, probably a major party candidate nominee for the

white _ party candidate nominee for the white house, spending half his time _ white house, spending half his time perhaps add civil or crimmat— time perhaps add civil or criminal trials, trying to use those — criminal trials, trying to use those to— criminal trials, trying to use those to his political advantage.- those to his political advantaae. ., those to his political advantae. ., . ~ advantage. sarah, coming back to ou, advantage. sarah, coming back to you. if _ advantage. sarah, coming back to you. if we — advantage. sarah, coming back to you, if we look _ advantage. sarah, coming back to you, if we look at _ advantage. sarah, coming back to you, if we look at the - to you, if we look at the specific trial, the judge to you, if we look at the specific trial, thejudge has already decided essentially the core of this case, so do we know how it's going to end? so i know how it's going to end? sr i think we have a pretty good idea. thejudge made a decision and gave the government partial summaryjudgment on a frauds claims related to these valuations of assets, but the judge, it was a very scathing opinion by thejudge, it is very clear what he thinks of the government's evidence so far, and that i suspect it is likely to go the way of the government at the end of the day here as well.— day here as well. josh, you talked about _ day here as well. josh, you talked about the _ day here as well. josh, you talked about the number. day here as well. josh, you| talked about the number of indictments the former president is facing. how does this all affect him?— this all affect him? well, so far, it this all affect him? well, so far. it has — this all affect him? well, so far, it has helped _ this all affect him? well, so far, it has helped him - this all affect him? well, so far, it has helped him reallyj far, it has helped him really clear— far, it has helped him really clear the _ far, it has helped him really

clear the field in the republican presidential primary, but the big $25,000 question— primary, but the big $25,000 question here is what happens if former— question here is what happens if former president trump gets into a — if former president trump gets into a general election campaign? well middle—of—the—road, moderate, often _ middle—of—the—road, moderate, often independent voters who are sometimes not affiliated with— are sometimes not affiliated with either presidential of the political— with either presidential of the political parties here be willing _ political parties here be willing to take on the chance of a — willing to take on the chance of a candidate who is embroiled in this— of a candidate who is embroiled in this degree of problems, legat— in this degree of problems, legal problems, both criminal and civit _ legal problems, both criminal and civil. it is evident we now have — and civil. it is evident we now have one _ and civil. it is evident we now have one candidate former president trump who actually thinks — president trump who actually thinks at _ president trump who actually thinks at this stage in this campaign at least that this is to his — campaign at least that this is to his political benefit to harness these allegations and to paint — harness these allegations and to paint them as he had scored it repeatedly, a legal witchhunt, aimed at putting him injait_ witchhunt, aimed at putting him injait and — witchhunt, aimed at putting him injail and confiscating his in jail and confiscating his business injail and confiscating his business empire. we in jail and confiscating his business empire. we have seen the former— business empire. we have seen the former president _ business empire. we have seen the former president attacked l the former president attacked the former president attacked thejudge quite a the former president attacked

the judge quite a bit. the former president attacked thejudge quite a bit. what the former president attacked the judge quite a bit. what did you make of that?— the judge quite a bit. what did you make of that? frankly, the former president's _ you make of that? frankly, the former president's statements| former president's statements against thejudge, the attorney—general, i think there are few who could get away with that other than the former president. these are scathing comments against these parties, really unprecedented. it is not something you usually see in this type of litigation. but he's getting away with it. i know there have been other efforts to keep him quiet a bit but they have been largely unsuccessful to date. he repeats over and over again, as josh said, his mantras, his tag lines, and he sticks with them. sarah, just a follow up on that, i know you are a former federal prosecutor, but if you were to step into the shoes of trump is back legal team here with a number of trials he could be facing next year already, what do you think the defence strategy is? thea;t

already, what do you think the defence strategy is? they have a little bit _ defence strategy is? they have a little bit of — defence strategy is? they have a little bit of a _ defence strategy is? they have a little bit of a different - a little bit of a different tactic here. i think the team that's handling this case really has an uphill battle, as you alluded to at the beginning of the programme. thejudge has already found partial summary judgment, he has found there is a pattern of fraudulent documents that have been provided or to secure loans and other benefits related to these properties, so the other charges related to those cases because of action rather related to those things, or, you know, is likely to be resolved against trump as well. but i think he is handling each one of these cases a bit differently, as he shed, the stakes are different and the manner is different.- stakes are different and the manner is different. what are our manner is different. what are yourthoughts— manner is different. what are your thoughts on _ manner is different. what are your thoughts on how - manner is different. what are your thoughts on how the - manner is different. what are i your thoughts on how the trump team is handling all of this, josh? ~ , , ., ., josh? my understanding from s-ueakin josh? my understanding from speaking to — josh? my understanding from speaking to sources - josh? my understanding from speaking to sources on - josh? my understanding from speaking to sources on the i speaking to sources on the legal— speaking to sources on the legal side of the trump organisation is that they frankly— organisation is that they frankly expect to lose this trial, _ frankly expect to lose this trial, because of the judge that— trial, because of the judge that they have a because of the

attitude — that they have a because of the attitude that he has displayed towards trump during the course of this— towards trump during the course of this litigation, because of the ruling you are bothjust discussing a few days ago that the side — discussing a few days ago that the side of a case much in the favour— the side of a case much in the favour of— the side of a case much in the favour of the attorney general's office. i think they think— general's office. i think they think that their chance of prevailing here in front of this— prevailing here in front of thisjudge is next to nothing. we should make clear to viewers this is— we should make clear to viewers this is not— we should make clear to viewers this is not a _ we should make clear to viewers this is not a jury trial, this is a — this is not a jury trial, this is a judge _ this is not a jury trial, this is a judge only trial, only justice _ is a judge only trial, only justice acheron who is there overseeing the proceeding, he is the — overseeing the proceeding, he is the one _ overseeing the proceeding, he is the one who is going to make the decision. the question then will be — the decision. the question then will be what happens on appeal. we have — will be what happens on appeal. we have only seen one appeal here _ we have only seen one appeal here in— we have only seen one appeal here in the last few days by tram's _ here in the last few days by tram's legal team, and here in the last few days by tram's legalteam, and i here in the last few days by tram's legal team, and i expect if it goes— tram's legal team, and i expect if it goes as many people think it will, — if it goes as many people think it will, and they lose here in front— it will, and they lose here in front of— it will, and they lose here in front of thisjudge, it will, and they lose here in front of this judge, they are going — front of this judge, they are going to _ front of this judge, they are going to do their best to make a case — going to do their best to make a case that they can bring to an appeals case —— court, and at least — an appeals case —— court, and at least forestall any action against _ at least forestall any action against trump as mac business empire — against trump as mac business empire untilat against trump as mac business empire until at least after next _ empire until at least after next fall's presidential election.— next fall's presidential election. , ., ., ., , next fall's presidential election. , ., ., ., election. just a follow up on what we _ election. just a follow up on what we heard _ election. just a follow up on what we heard from - election. just a follow up on what we heard from josh, . election. just a follow up on - what we heard from josh, sarah, what we heard from josh, sarah, what you think the impact on

the former president to losing this trial would be?— this trialwould be? well, i think he — this trialwould be? well, i think he is— this trialwould be? well, i think he is very _ this trialwould be? well, i think he is very concerned | think he is very concerned about losing itjust because of an image perspective frankly, and i think it would hit pretty hard on his wallet. so he does seem interested in this case, focused on this case, even though it is only a civil case and the stakes are lesser than the criminal cases ahead for him. but he certainly i think is taking it seriously, as he should. �* g is taking it seriously, as he should. . g ., ., should. and josh, one more question — should. and josh, one more question for _ should. and josh, one more question for you, _ should. and josh, one more question for you, you - should. and josh, one more question for you, you wrote | question for you, you wrote that the former president is the 800 lb gorilla in the wings for the supreme court session that has started. what did you mean by that?— mean by that? well, what i meant was _ mean by that? well, what i meant was the _ mean by that? well, what i meant was the supreme i mean by that? well, what i i meant was the supreme court mean by that? well, what i - meant was the supreme court is sending — meant was the supreme court is sending a —— setting up its docket— sending a —— setting up its docket for the coming term, and at the _ docket for the coming term, and at the moment there is nothing on it— at the moment there is nothing on it that — at the moment there is nothing on it that directly pertains to the former president, but with the former president, but with the four— the former president, but with the four criminal cases that he is facing — the four criminal cases that he is facing and the sweeping claims _ is facing and the sweeping claims of immunity he is planning to bring in in many of those — planning to bring in in many of those cases, saying that as the former— those cases, saying that as the former president he shouldn't be subject to the sort of

litigation, i think it is almost _ litigation, i think it is almost certain that sometime over— almost certain that sometime over the — almost certain that sometime over the course of the next year. — over the course of the next year. we _ over the course of the next year, we are going to see his lawyers — year, we are going to see his lawyers go to the supreme court to try— lawyers go to the supreme court to try to— lawyers go to the supreme court to try to shutdown either some action— to try to shutdown either some action against him in the civil case — action against him in the civil case we _ action against him in the civil case we have been discussing here, _ case we have been discussing here, or— case we have been discussing here, or in _ case we have been discussing here, or in those four criminal cases— here, or in those four criminal cases against him. there is really— cases against him. there is really no _ cases against him. there is really no way he is going to be able _ really no way he is going to be able to— really no way he is going to be able to -- _ really no way he is going to be able to —— the supreme court is going _ able to —— the supreme court is going to — able to —— the supreme court is going to be _ able to —— the supreme court is going to be able to dodge getting into that fight, as well— getting into that fight, as well as— getting into that fight, as well as another issue of trying to take — well as another issue of trying to take trump off the ballot in many— to take trump off the ballot in many states across the country. josh, — many states across the country. josh, sarah, great have your insights tonight. thank you so much. on capitol hill here in washington, republican house speaker kevin mccarthy is facing a rebuke from within his own party, as republican representative matt gaetz of florida has filed a motion to vacate him from his leadership role. here's the moment that it happened. the gentleman will state the form of his resolutions to declaring the office of the speaker of the house of representatives be vacant. declaring that the office of the speaker of the house of representatives is hereby declared to be vacant.

speaker mccarthy then posted on x, formerly known as twitter, saying simply, "bring it on." the move tees up a showdown in the house, as representatives will now need to decide whether to oust mccarthy over the next two days. but it's currently not clear if gaetz has the crucial 218 votes needed to remove mccarthy. he may even need to lean on democrats to do it. democrats are set to meet, tuesday morning, to discuss that very dilemma. it's an escalation of a dispute, after mccarthy relied on democratic votes to pass government spending legislation, saturday. it keeps the government funded and open in the short term, but does not provide funding for ukraine. some republicans have defended mccarthy, but a vocal minority of the party are not convinced. republican representative victoria spartz was one of the 90 republicans to vote against the stop—gap funding bill that averted a shutdown. i spoke with her about mccarthy's future as speaker. congresswoman, thank you so much forjoining us on bbc news tonight. will you support matt gates �*s motion to the speaker's chair —— matt gaetz.

are very open minded, i haven't decided yet. are very open minded, i haven't decided yet-— decided yet. what considerations - decided yet. what - considerations will go into that decision for you? speaker mccarthy had _ that decision for you? speaker mccarthy had several- that decision for you? speaker mccarthy had several chances| that decision for you? speaker. mccarthy had several chances to deliver. he failed and i need to decide do i trust to give him one more chance, what i believe we can try someone else and i will have to think very hard. ~ ., ., ,, .,~ hard. what would speaker mccarthy _ hard. what would speaker mccarthy have _ hard. what would speaker mccarthy have to - hard. what would speaker mccarthy have to say - hard. what would speaker mccarthy have to say to l hard. what would speaker i mccarthy have to say to you hard. what would speaker - mccarthy have to say to you to make sure you could stand behind him?— make sure you could stand behind him? , ., , behind him? listen, i generally 'udue behind him? listen, i generally judge peeple — behind him? listen, i generally judge peeple by _ behind him? listen, i generally judge people by actions, - behind him? listen, i generally judge people by actions, not i behind him? listen, i generally judge people by actions, not by words, and unfortunately, you know, kevin would not be able to fight the fight to win. it is one thing to fight for the picture on the wall and get the leadership position, and another to fight to actually deliver for the people, another to fight to actually deliverfor the people, and deliver for the people, and it's deliverfor the people, and it's very difficult. you need to have backbone, you need to have vision and you need to be able to challenge the status quo and not be afraid of the big machine in washington, dc. we are the only lobby and we have to start delivering for

the american people, and i have a responsibility to my republicans to deliver. i want to ask where _ republicans to deliver. i want to ask where your _ republicans to deliver. i want to ask where your colleague l to ask where your colleague stand. we heard matt gaetz say that kevin mccarthy doesn't have the support of a requisite number republicans. what is yoursense number republicans. what is your sense among your colleagues?— your sense among your colleagues? your sense among your colleauues? , ., ., ., colleagues? there is a lot of frustration, _ colleagues? there is a lot of frustration, i'll— colleagues? there is a lot of frustration, i'll be _ colleagues? there is a lot of frustration, i'll be honest. i colleagues? there is a lot of frustration, i'll be honest. a| frustration, i'll be honest. a lot of issues of kevin wasn't created just by him, they have really been accumulated by years by many congresses, but we are in charge right now so we are in charge right now so we cannot blame other congresses. we have to deal with some other major issues whether it is border security, crushing debt. we have to start moving the needle, and there is a lot of frustration but in the end people will have to make a decision what they believe or what they want to do, and that is up to them. but there are a number of republicans who are frustrated right now. do number of republicans who are frustrated right now.— frustrated right now. do you think there _ frustrated right now. do you think there are _ frustrated right now. do you think there are enough i think there are enough republicans frustrated so that matt gaetz would have the number of votes he needs to make this successful? it is

number of votes he needs to make this successful?- make this successful? it is a possibility. _ make this successful? it is a possibility. it _ make this successful? it is a possibility, it depends i make this successful? it is a possibility, it depends whatl possibility, it depends what democrats do. i think a lot of democrats do. i think a lot of democrats don't dislike kevin. he gave a blank cheque during our debt ceiling dealfor president biden to spend as much as he wants, he gave actually more money this time than nancy pelosi, i6 actually more money this time than nancy pelosi, 16 billion, when it already wasn't inflated spending. so i think some democrats might actually decide, you know, to support him, unless they want to, you know, give a hard time and just play with having republicans go through another speaker election. so it is hard to say but i wouldn't be surprised if some democrats would support kevin. i5 some democrats would support kevin. , ., ., ., , , kevin. is what would happen if the democrats _ kevin. is what would happen if the democrats did _ kevin. is what would happen if the democrats did make i kevin. is what would happen if the democrats did make a i kevin. is what would happen if| the democrats did make a deal with kevin mccarthy to stay in his job? with kevin mccarthy to stay in hisjob? i with kevin mccarthy to stay in his 'ob? ., �* ~' , his job? i don't think it is about making _ his job? i don't think it is about making a - his job? i don't think it is about making a deal, i his job? i don't think it is | about making a deal, they his job? i don't think it is - about making a deal, they might be afraid, you know, kevin has been not as big a fighter to win on some of the issues as some other speakers might be so they might decide that he is actually not as bad for them, because ultimately there are some challenging issues, and we

may not be able to push senate. our power of the purses in two chambers. actually we can blame the president as much as we want but has ultimate responsibility to have the power of the purse and exercise it and deliver for the power of the purse and exercise it and deliverfor the people, and we haven't been able to push on the senate, on both parties. it is controlled by democrats but also there are plenty of republicans voices in the senate and we didn't really take in nr. the senate and we didn't really take in nr-_ take in nr. one of the big questions _ take in nr. one of the big questions about _ take in nr. one of the big questions about the i take in nr. one of the big| questions about the power take in nr. one of the big i questions about the power of the purse right now and specifically among republicans is more aid for ukraine. you are the first ukrainian born member of congress, you have been a strong supporter of aid for ukraine. do you know if there's any agreement at this point to put more aid for ukraine fourth? i have been raising this concern for years about accountability and strategy and making sure it is delivered faster so they understand the

power of weapons. there is talk but present biden did not communicate that fact to the american people or congress as to why it is in our national interest to help ukraine to deter russian aggression. now we will have to do have a discussion how congress and i hopein discussion how congress and i hope in a bipartisan basis with the senate can push on president biden to do better in ukraine but also border security. ukraine but also border security-— ukraine but also border securi . ., ., , security. the pentagon has been wantin: security. the pentagon has been wanting congressional _ security. the pentagon has been wanting congressional leaders i wanting congressional leaders that it wanting congressional leaders thatitis wanting congressional leaders that it is running low on money for ukraine and the five point $to billion could last only for another few months. what do you think of that? maybe they should do better accounting. the department of defence needs a serious question as to why they have not been able to be audited for years. i

they have not been able to be audited for years.— audited for years. i think the pentagon — audited for years. i think the pentagon has _ audited for years. i think the pentagon has a _ audited for years. i think the pentagon has a better i audited for years. i think the pentagon has a better time | audited for years. i think the l pentagon has a better time to worry about what is happening in the department of defence before they asked congress and give us numbers because strangely enough we asked for that for a long time. can you reconcile the money we are providing? much of this money we are giving to associated courses and i would like to know what companies and countries receive the money and for americans to see. if countries receive the money and for americans to see. iii for americans to see. if i could just _ for americans to see. if i could justjump - for americans to see. if i could justjump in beyond the question of accountability do you think there is an argument over whether to give more funding to ukraine or not emboldens vladimir putin? when we do not spend _ emboldens vladimir putin? when we do not spend money - emboldens vladimir putin? when we do not spend money wisely i we do not spend money wisely and not spending in the right courses, that benefits only

here because the deal is with governments with bad track records and vladimir putin knows how to take advantage and to destabilise. he is very good destabilising. do not underestimate. good strategy action and accountability will serve to the benefit of the ukrainian people but when we do not have it it only benefits him. , ., ., ., not have it it only benefits him. ., ., ., ., him. great to have you tonight on bbc. thank— him. great to have you tonight on bbc. thank you _ him. great to have you tonight on bbc. thank you very - him. great to have you tonight on bbc. thank you very much. j around the world and across the uk, this is bbc news. let's look at some other stories making news. the un security council has voted to send an international protection force to fight gang—related violence in haiti. it will be led by a large detachment of kenyan police officers. gangs have taken control of large parts of the country, waging terror on residents and killing hundreds. authorities in port—au—prince asked for internatioanl help nearly a year ago, following the assassination of presidentjovenel moise. a lightning strike has caused a huge gas explosion at a food waste recycling plant,

just outside the english city of oxford. officials said the strike caused a biogas tank at the facility to ignite. video footage shows a huge fireball lighting up the night sky. there have been no reports of casualties. the james webb space telescope has spotted jupiter—sized "planets", free—floating in space. that is, they're unconnected to any star. and they appear to be moving in pairs. the telescope observed about a0 pairs, in a detailed new survey of the famous orion nebula. they've been nicknamed jupiter mass binary objects, or "jumbos" for short. you're live with bbc news. the former chief executive of global fashion brand abercrombie & fitch and his british partner are facing allegations of exploitation from men recruited for sex events they hosted around the world. a bbc investigation found a highly organised operation running the events, with a middleman finding young adult men for mikejeffries and his partner matthew smith. eight men told the bbc

they attended these events, some of whom alleged they were exploited or abused. mrjeffries and mr smith did not respond to requests for comment. rianna croxford has the story. in the early 2000s, abercrombie & fitch became one of the hottest labels in the us and around the world. sexualised imagery and provocative billboards turned the teenery tailor which also owns hollister brand into a multibillion dollar sensation. the man behind the vision was then ceo mikejeffries. mike was tireless. he was very energetic and boisterous. he was an incredibly big personality. he would explode into a room. bbc panorama has uncovered a highly organised international operation recruiting young adult men for sex with mikejeffries over several years when he was ceo of the brand.

the experience i think broke me and it mentally messed me up. two men agreed to tell me their accounts on camera. they attended separate events hosted by mikejeffries in 2010 and 2011. both men say they were recruited and auditioned by a middleman. james jacobson, known to the man asjim. david says mrjacobson led him to believe he was pursuing a modelling opportunity. i was made to believe this is where everybody gets their start, this is where you want to get your start. it was like he was selling fame. and the price was compliance. david says compliance meant engaging in a sexual act with mrjacobson. seven more men i have spoken to say they also met with jim. the men say mrjacobson

was part of a well—oiled machine which included recruiters, drivers and other staff. mrjacobson told the bbc any encounters were fully consensual, not coercive. he said he had no recollection of making promises of modelling opportunities and that everyone who came into contact with who attended these events went in with their eyes wide open. this is the route the man would have taken on their way to the hamptons when they were going to go meet with mike jeffries. once through the audition, the men would go to an event hosted by mrjeffries and his british partner matthew smith. some were held at their home here in the exclusive new york coastal community the hamptons. barrett said he was introduced to mrjacobson by an older model who he felt indebted to. and knew there would be some kind of sexual activity.

david said he was not expecting sex to take place at the hamptons. i was taken, chaperoned over to the main house to the doors that entered into the bedroom where everything was happening. and then told to disrobe. barrett says he engaged in an intimate act with another man. david says mrjeffries had sex with him. i did not feel safe to say no or that i don't feel comfortable with this, i don't really know what would've happened. i don't feel like i had any choice. both men say they felt leaving did not seem to be an option because mrjeffries' private staff were supervising the event. including in the bedroom. they also say there asked to sign nondisclosure agreements and not given any copies to take away. felt like they were trying to scare us, that is what it felt like. it felt like intimidation. both men were paid around $2500 after the events they attended. still hoping it may lead to modelling work, david went to further events with mrjeffries and mr smith, both in the us and around the world. two us lawyers who reviewed evidence uncovered by the bbc

said prosecutors should investigate whether allegations could amount to sex trafficking. the bbc has made repeated attempts to contact mrjeffries and mrsmith. they have not responded. abercrombie and fitch told us: . its new executive leadership team has transformed the company's brand and culture, adding the company has zero tolerance for abuse, harassment or discrimination ofany kind. rianna croxford bbc news. and before we go, we have to health—related stories for you: the world health organization says a new malaria vaccine was found to be 75% effective in phase three trials. they took place in four african countries, involving nearly 5,000 children — which is the demographic that's the most vulnerable to the disease. it is the most effective jab developed against the disease so far. and that is a hopeful sign

to who's african region where 95% of all malaria cases are found. and the nobel prize in physiology or medicine has been awarded to a pair of scientists who developed the technology that led to the mrna covid vaccines. professors katalin kariko and drew weissman will share the prize. the technology was experimental before the pandemic, but has now been given to millions of people around the world. the same technology is now being researched for other diseases, including cancer. stay with us here on bbc news. hello. it's been a warm first few days of october, following on from the record breaking september. well, joint record, as you can see, for maximum temperatures that was tied with the records in 1895. now, all that heat and humidity has triggered some thunderstorms during the latter part of monday. they have continued

through the night. lots of excess rain, standing water, slow to clear away. as well as that, this weather front here as well, just lingering in southeastern parts first thing. so a bit misty and a bit grey, showers following towards the north. this is the weather system i talked about, the rain starting to ease but leaving lots of damp, misty, murky weather and then potentially some thunderstorms following in the wake of that weather front. certainly a fresh night and a cool night to end in the north but it will still be quite muggy in the south with that lingering misty, low cloud. and damp weather, perhaps a few thundery showers across southern areas first thing. in terms of dry weather improving, bright, more blue sky around but scattered showers most frequent in the north and the west for the day. and a brisk wind whisking the showers through. 14—19 our highs. it will be notably cooler feeling or fresher feeling across england and wales

because of the breeze and also we've lost the humidity. now, by wednesday we have high—pressure starting to build towards the south. further weather fronts invading northern parts, particularly scotland and then northern ireland and then that weather front might well become slow—moving across parts of southern scotland, northern england. so there are warnings out appropriately for the end of the week. to the south, mainly dry and fine but quite a bit of cloud around, showers follow to the north. look at those temperatures. still around about 14—19, just a little bit still above average actually for the time of year. we keep our weather front with us through wednesday night into thursday, probably pushing northwards once again, another pulse of rain on that weather system. there are warnings out for the rainfall in northern and western part of the uk for the latter part of the week. but for many parts further south, it is dry, it is fine and it will get warmer. in fact, we are hinting, the computer models are hinting at temperatures getting into the low to mid 20s across many parts as we go into the weekend. the warnings

are on the website.

the head of microsoft heads to a us court in an anti—trust trial, challenging the dominance of the world's most popular search engine. and we look at china stop

selling which vehicles does indonesia's first bullet train takes off from jakarta funded by chinese funding under its belt and road initiative. hello and welcome to asia business report. let's start the programme in washington, dc, where microsoft's chief executive has testified in court. he is the government's highest profile witness in its landmark monopoly case against google. the bbc�*s north america business correspondent michelle fleury reports from new york. go on apple's safari web browser, and you will find the google search engine already pops up. that is no accident, it is the result of an expensive contract between google and apple. the microsoft chief executive blamed the sort of deals for making google so dominant. appearing in person, he told a packed dc court that because of these default agreements you get up in the morning and you brush your teeth and search on google he said.