New legal guidance will make it easier for police to protect people from stalkers, after critics argued that the standard of proof required to apply existing powers was too high.

Stalking protection orders (SPOs) introduced in January 2020 made it a criminal offence for perpetrators to approach or contact their victims, carrying a sentence of up to five years. But while stalking was reported to police more than 116,000 times last year, said Sky News, the total number of orders obtained was "in the low hundreds".

What is a stalking protection order?
SPOs are a civil order aimed at protecting victims, but with breaches deemed a criminal offence. They can stop a perpetrator from entering locations where the victim lives or visits, or contacting the victim in any way.

They differ from restraining orders and non-molestation orders significantly. The latter can only be used in the case of partner violence – but 50% of stalking cases are "non-domestic", said the Suzy Lamplugh Trust. 

SPOs also include "positive requirements", which means that perpetrators may have to carry out actions such as attending a stalking intervention or drug rehabilitation programme, or surrendering their laptop or phones. Police must apply for an SPO on behalf of a victim, and can tailor the requirements to each case. 

What is different about the new powers? 
Previously, police would have to meet the criminal standard of "beyond reasonable doubt" to obtain an SPO. But Safeguarding Minister Laura Farris has issued new guidance to all of the 43 police forces in England and Wales to "apply a lower standard of proof", said Sky News. Now, police will have to persuade a judge "on the balance of probabilities" that an SPO is appropriate, she said: "a kind of 50-50 test".

Will they make a difference?
Legislative reform may not be enough to convince some victims to report stalking. Voters are "losing faith in the police after a spate of scandals", said The Times, which has launched a year-long inquiry into this "devastating lack of confidence" and the future of the UK criminal justice system.

Former stalking victim Claire Waxman, now the independent victims’ commissioner for London, is calling for further reform of the "very fragmented and backlogged" system. "There's no seamless process," she said, "and victims are left to navigate the complexities with very little information and support."

Growing anger over the use of video technology in football has been kicked up a notch further by high-profile incidents in recent matches.

Since being introduced into English football in 2019, the use of the "video assistant referee" (VAR) has been a matter of much debate. Now, in the wake of what Metro called a "controversial weekend" for the tech, there are fresh calls for reform.

'Overshadowed' by disputed decisions
Following their Premier League defeat to Everton on Sunday, Nottingham Forest released a statement accusing the VAR official of their game of being a fan of their relegation rivals. Just hours later, Coventry City were denied a place in the FA Cup final after a last-minute extra-time winner was disallowed in a marginal VAR offside decision.

"Sorry to be a killjoy," said The Mirror's chief football writer John Cross, "but the offside decision was the correct one". Just because a Coventry comeback "would have been a great fairytale", we cannot suddenly give VAR the boot.

VAR has made hundreds of correct calls since its introduction, said The Guardian in an editorial last year, but they have been "overshadowed by numerous controversial decisions – especially those later accepted by referees to be wrong".

'About keeping the game an art'
VAR was introduced as a "check on only the gravest refereeing oversights, not to re-referee every decision", said The Times. But "its increasing use outside this remit risks entrenching a sense of unfairness among fans".

Despite the outcry from clubs, fans and pundits alike, data suggests VAR has improved the accuracy of decisions by 14%. The solution, then, is "not to abolish VAR," said the paper, but to use it "sparingly and increase transparency by broadcasting conferrals".

"Yes, it could be better," said John Nicholson on Football365. But a perfect level cannot be achieved, "because people are not perfect. Accept it." Acceptance may be the way forward, agreed Peter Walton, a Premier League referee from 2003-12. "It's not about making the game a science, it's about keeping it as an art and leaving it as a debate," he told The Times.

If you treat your pets like family members at home, you can do the same during getaways at these dog-friendly hotels.

Gara Rock, Salcombe, Devon
Set "atop a high, jagged peninsula" just outside Salcombe, Gara Rock has an "undeniably Soho Farmhouse vibe", said Condé Nast Traveller. Most rooms are dog-friendly – including some suites – as well as the lounge and the restaurant. And along the South West Coast Path, said Good Housekeeping, there are "wide expanses of beaches for splashing about in with abandon".

The Fife Arms, Braemar, Highlands
Run by Iwan and Manuela Wirth – "arguably the most influential contemporary art dealers in the world", said Condé Nast Traveller – this former hunting lodge (pictured above) near Balmoral Castle in Scotland is their first hotel venture. Dog-friendly rooms are on the first floor, "furnished with food and water bowls, a special Fife Arms dog bed, a welcome package of treats and a turndown gift". The setting is "a playground for dogs", said The Telegraph.

Four Seasons Hotel Hampshire, Winchfield, Hampshire
This Georgian estate is a "hidden gem", said The Telegraph, and is ideal for dogs, with "500 acres of beautiful surrounding countryside to frolic around in". Dogs are given "beds, bowls, treats, spring water and even grooming products", said Country Living, and the "doormen are ready to dispense bags for walkies or arrange dog sitting". Pets are welcome everywhere except the Wild Carrot restaurant, but "that shouldn't be a problem" as the room-service menu has a "dedicated pet section" and the library bar serves a "special doggy afternoon tea".

The Met has made mistakes – stopping Gideon Falter crossing the road is not one of them
Simon Kelner on the i news site
Some view Gideon Falter as a "modern-day Rosa Parks", says Simon Kelner, but the Jewish activist "went looking for trouble". He "deliberately provoked a headline-grabbing confrontation" with a police officer who was "trying his best to tread a very difficult line" between protecting Falter's rights and keeping the peace at the pro-Palestinian protest. "Mistakes have been made in the policing of the marches", but this "is not one of them".

My country knows what happens when you do a deal with Russia
Paula Erizanu in The New York Times
"More and more people", including Pope Francis, are asking Ukraine to "drop its defense and sit at the negotiation table with Russia", writes Moldovan journalist Paula Erizanu. My country "knows all about" the kind of bargains that can be struck with Moscow. Thirty-two years after agreeing a ceasefire deal, 1,500 Russian troops are "still stationed on internationally recognized Moldovan territory". Russia "simply cannot be trusted" and Ukraine "must not make the same mistake".

Endemic misery is pushing the UK towards a civilisational catastrophe
Sherelle Jacobs in The Telegraph
While investigating the "mysterious phenomenon of cowboys driving their trucks off the mountains in the American frontier", says Sherelle Jacobs, I discovered that many Wyomingites had "tragic stories" of "grand life expectations that had crumbled in contact with life's harsh realities". Britain, too, is "flailing in the wreckage of its own broken and stubborn dreams". If misery "springs from a disconnect between expectations and reality", then "logically it follows that either expectations must be lowered or reality must be improved".