California
Mia Goth files for divorce from Shia LaBeouf nearly 10 years after the actors married
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Mia Goth has filed for divorce from Shia LaBeouf nearly 10 years after the two actors were married.
The petition filed Tuesday in Los Angeles County Superior Court says the 32-year-old Goth and the 40-year-old LaBeouf have been separated since July 2025.
The two met and became a couple while filming “Nymphomaniac: Vol. II” in 2012, and married in 2016. They had previously split and said they were divorcing in 2018, but remained legally married, reunited in 2020 and had a daughter in 2022.
Goth is seeking primary legal and physical custody of the 4-year-old, with visitation rights for LaBeouf. She also asked the court to deny either party spousal support. It was the first marriage for both.
As with most U.S. divorces, irreconcilable differences were cited as the reason for the split.
Representatives for Goth and LaBeouf did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.
The actor, born Mia Gypsy Mello da Silva Goth in London, most recently appeared as the unfaithful servant Melantho in this summer’s “The Odyssey,” and had a dual role in last year’s “Frankenstein.” She previously starred in the horror trilogy “X,” “Pearl” and “MaXXXine.”
LaBeouf was a child star on the Disney Channel’s “Even Stevens” and in the 2003 film “Holes.” He later starred in “Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull” and director Michael Bay’s first three “Transformers” films.
The day before Goth filed for divorce, LaBeouf, for the second time, settled a lawsuit with singer, songwriter and actor FKA Twigs, whom he dated when he was split from Goth.
FKA Twigs, whose legal name is Tahliah Barnett, had alleged in a suit filed in 2020 that LaBeouf emotionally and physically abused her during their relationship that began when she had a supporting role in the semi-autobiographical film “Honey Boy,” which he wrote and starred in.
The two settled the lawsuit and had it dismissed last year, but she sued him again in March, saying nondisclosure provisions in the settlement illegally silenced her under California law.
On Monday, she moved to dismiss the second lawsuit, saying in court documents that LaBeouf had agreed to void those provisions.
In June, LaBeouf was sentenced to probation after pleading guilty to punching three people outside a New Orleans bar during Mardi Gras.
London
Judge says search warrants used to seize property from former Prince Andrew were unlawful
LONDON (AP) — Police who searched the properties of the former Prince Andrew and seized his property in the investigation into his links to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein have agreed the search warrants were unlawful, a London judge said Thursday.
Justice Nicholas Hilliard said that the Thames Valley Police had made a significant error in applying for the warrant when they searched the properties of the former prince now known as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back for updates. AP’s earlier story follows below.
A London judge will hold a hearing Thursday in former Prince Andrew’s challenge to searches at his residences by police investigating his links to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Justice Nicholas Hilliard will hear a request from the department that carried out the searches to restrict access to court documents in the case. The hearing will begin behind closed doors, with any decision announced in open court.
Thames Valley Police officers arrested the former prince, now known as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, on Feb. 19, on suspicion of misconduct in public office and searched two of his homes. His lawyers are now asking the High Court to quash the warrants under which those searches were conducted.
If the court rules in Mountbatten-Windsor’s favor, it could prevent authorities from using evidence discovered during the searches in any prosecution of the former prince, attorney Mark Stephens said.
Stephens, of the Howard Kennedy firm in London, described the hearing as a preliminary skirmish in the broader legal battle.
“It’s the first step of Prince Andrew and his lawyers saying, ‘Actually, this is tainted evidence. It was obtained inappropriately,’’’ Stephens said. “Therefore it should be excluded from any criminal trial.”
King Charles III stripped Mountbatten-Windsor of his princely title last year as he sought to shield the rest of the royal family from the continuing fallout from his younger brother’s links to Epstein.
While Mountbatten-Windsor, 66, continues to receive a stipend from the king’s private funds, Buckingham Palace has made it clear that those funds may not be used to fund his effort to challenge the search warrants.
The police investigation initially focused on allegations that Mountbatten-Windsor shared sensitive information with Epstein when the former prince was a U.K. trade envoy, but police later said they could also consider other matters.
Police questioned Mountbatten-Windsor for 11 hours before releasing him under investigation, meaning he was neither charged nor exonerated.
It was the first time in nearly four centuries that a senior British royal was placed under arrest, underscoring how deference to the monarchy has eroded in recent years.
Thames Valley Police said Monday that its investigation was continuing and confirmed that the department was involved in legal proceedings about the search warrants. A department spokesperson declined further comment while those proceedings are underway.
The allegations against Mountbatten-Windsor came to light when the U.S. Justice Department released millions of pages of documents from its investigation into sex trafficking by Epstein and his connections to a network of wealthy, powerful men around the world.
Mountbatten-Windsor’s ties to Epstein have been a source of embarrassment to the royal family for more than a decade.
Lawmakers questioned the relationship as far back as 2011, when the then-prince was forced to give up his globetrotting role as the U.K.’s special trade envoy. Eight years later, he failed to explain his continuing ties to Epstein in a disastrous interview with the BBC, ending his career as a working member of the royal family.
The Hague
International Criminal Court judges say Philippine ex-President Rodrigo Duterte fit to stand trial
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — Judges at the International Criminal Court have ruled that former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte is fit to stand trial on charges of crimes against humanity linked to the so-called war on drugs he waged while in office, the court announced Thursday.
Duterte, 81, denies the charges. His trial is scheduled to open on Nov. 30. The ex-leader is accused of murder and attempted murder for his alleged involvement in dozens of killings as part of the war on drugs. He faces a maximum sentence of life imprisonment if convicted.
The court’s Sept. 28 ruling that he is fit to face justice came after an independent panel of experts said that Duterte “has the capacity to understand the charges” and follow the proceedings including the implications of entering a plea — which he will be asked to do when the trial opens, the court said in a statement.
He also is mentally fit to understand evidence and discuss his defense with his lawyers, the panel of experts said. His legal team had previously attempted to get the case thrown out on medical grounds, but judges rejected it and denied a request for him to be released from custody.
Duterte was arrested in the Philippines in March 2025 and sent to the ICC’s headquarters in The Hague following a lengthy ICC investigation into mass killings in crackdowns overseen by Duterte, first when he served as mayor of the southern Philippine city of Davao and later as president.
Duterte, who was among the most feared leaders in Asia while in power, became the first ex-leader from the region to be arrested by the global court.
Estimates of the death toll in the crackdown on drugs during Duterte’s presidential term vary, from the more than 6,000 reported by the national police to up to 30,000 claimed by human rights groups.
Prosecutors say that police and government hit squads carried out dozens of killings at Duterte’s orders, motivated by the promise of money or to avoid becoming targets themselves.
At the time of Duterte’s arrest, relatives of victims hailed the move.
“We hope that top police officials and the hundreds of police officers who were involved in the illegal killings should also be placed in custody and punished,” said Randy delos Santos, whose teenage nephew was gunned down by police in a dark riverside alley during an anti-drug operation in suburban Caloocan city in August 2017.
Georgia
Appeals court says Atlanta family cannot take the government to trial for a mistaken FBI raid
ATLANTA (AP) — An Atlanta family cannot take the federal government to trial for a mistaken FBI raid on their home in 2017, but they can seek to hold the agent who led the SWAT team liable, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.
FBI agents broke down the front door of Trina Martin’s Atlanta home before dawn on Oct. 18, 2017, stormed into her bedroom and pointed guns at her and her then-boyfriend as her 7-year-old son screamed for his mom from another room.
The agents quickly realized they had the wrong house and left, but Martin and her boyfriend at the time, Toi Cliatt, said they were left traumatized, and they sued the government and the agent. The U.S. Supreme Court revived their lawsuit last year.
A three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Wednesday the government was shielded from liability under an exception to a federal law that allows lawsuits over wrong-house raids. But the panel reversed a decision that gave the agent immunity.
“Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, a reasonable jury could fairly conclude” that the agent had “failed to engage in reasonable efforts to avoid error, and therefore, violated the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights,” the judges said.
Jenna Sellitto, a spokeswoman for the FBI’s Atlanta office, said the agency does not comment on personnel matters.
The FBI team quickly apologized after the raid and left for the right place, with the team leader later saying that his personal GPS device had led him to the wrong address. The FBI was looking for a suspected gang member a few houses away.
Martin and Cliatt’s lawsuit accused the agents of assault and battery, false arrest and other violations.
Their attorney, Patrick Jaicomo, said in a phone interview his clients felt good about Wednesday’s ruling.
The decision on immunity for the agent was a clear win, but there was also reason to be hopeful about the ruling in favor of the government, he said.
That decision was based on 11th Circuit precedent, and the judges wrote separately to encourage the full appeals court to revisit those earlier decisions. Jaicomo, senior attorney with the nonprofit Institute for Justice in Arlington, Virginia, said he plans to seek that review, opening up the possibility that his clients could eventually be allowed to take the government to trial as well.
Mia Goth files for divorce from Shia LaBeouf nearly 10 years after the actors married
LOS ANGELES (AP) — Mia Goth has filed for divorce from Shia LaBeouf nearly 10 years after the two actors were married.
The petition filed Tuesday in Los Angeles County Superior Court says the 32-year-old Goth and the 40-year-old LaBeouf have been separated since July 2025.
The two met and became a couple while filming “Nymphomaniac: Vol. II” in 2012, and married in 2016. They had previously split and said they were divorcing in 2018, but remained legally married, reunited in 2020 and had a daughter in 2022.
Goth is seeking primary legal and physical custody of the 4-year-old, with visitation rights for LaBeouf. She also asked the court to deny either party spousal support. It was the first marriage for both.
As with most U.S. divorces, irreconcilable differences were cited as the reason for the split.
Representatives for Goth and LaBeouf did not immediately respond to messages seeking comment.
The actor, born Mia Gypsy Mello da Silva Goth in London, most recently appeared as the unfaithful servant Melantho in this summer’s “The Odyssey,” and had a dual role in last year’s “Frankenstein.” She previously starred in the horror trilogy “X,” “Pearl” and “MaXXXine.”
LaBeouf was a child star on the Disney Channel’s “Even Stevens” and in the 2003 film “Holes.” He later starred in “Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull” and director Michael Bay’s first three “Transformers” films.
The day before Goth filed for divorce, LaBeouf, for the second time, settled a lawsuit with singer, songwriter and actor FKA Twigs, whom he dated when he was split from Goth.
FKA Twigs, whose legal name is Tahliah Barnett, had alleged in a suit filed in 2020 that LaBeouf emotionally and physically abused her during their relationship that began when she had a supporting role in the semi-autobiographical film “Honey Boy,” which he wrote and starred in.
The two settled the lawsuit and had it dismissed last year, but she sued him again in March, saying nondisclosure provisions in the settlement illegally silenced her under California law.
On Monday, she moved to dismiss the second lawsuit, saying in court documents that LaBeouf had agreed to void those provisions.
In June, LaBeouf was sentenced to probation after pleading guilty to punching three people outside a New Orleans bar during Mardi Gras.
London
Judge says search warrants used to seize property from former Prince Andrew were unlawful
LONDON (AP) — Police who searched the properties of the former Prince Andrew and seized his property in the investigation into his links to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein have agreed the search warrants were unlawful, a London judge said Thursday.
Justice Nicholas Hilliard said that the Thames Valley Police had made a significant error in applying for the warrant when they searched the properties of the former prince now known as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor.
THIS IS A BREAKING NEWS UPDATE. Check back for updates. AP’s earlier story follows below.
A London judge will hold a hearing Thursday in former Prince Andrew’s challenge to searches at his residences by police investigating his links to the late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein.
Justice Nicholas Hilliard will hear a request from the department that carried out the searches to restrict access to court documents in the case. The hearing will begin behind closed doors, with any decision announced in open court.
Thames Valley Police officers arrested the former prince, now known as Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor, on Feb. 19, on suspicion of misconduct in public office and searched two of his homes. His lawyers are now asking the High Court to quash the warrants under which those searches were conducted.
If the court rules in Mountbatten-Windsor’s favor, it could prevent authorities from using evidence discovered during the searches in any prosecution of the former prince, attorney Mark Stephens said.
Stephens, of the Howard Kennedy firm in London, described the hearing as a preliminary skirmish in the broader legal battle.
“It’s the first step of Prince Andrew and his lawyers saying, ‘Actually, this is tainted evidence. It was obtained inappropriately,’’’ Stephens said. “Therefore it should be excluded from any criminal trial.”
King Charles III stripped Mountbatten-Windsor of his princely title last year as he sought to shield the rest of the royal family from the continuing fallout from his younger brother’s links to Epstein.
While Mountbatten-Windsor, 66, continues to receive a stipend from the king’s private funds, Buckingham Palace has made it clear that those funds may not be used to fund his effort to challenge the search warrants.
The police investigation initially focused on allegations that Mountbatten-Windsor shared sensitive information with Epstein when the former prince was a U.K. trade envoy, but police later said they could also consider other matters.
Police questioned Mountbatten-Windsor for 11 hours before releasing him under investigation, meaning he was neither charged nor exonerated.
It was the first time in nearly four centuries that a senior British royal was placed under arrest, underscoring how deference to the monarchy has eroded in recent years.
Thames Valley Police said Monday that its investigation was continuing and confirmed that the department was involved in legal proceedings about the search warrants. A department spokesperson declined further comment while those proceedings are underway.
The allegations against Mountbatten-Windsor came to light when the U.S. Justice Department released millions of pages of documents from its investigation into sex trafficking by Epstein and his connections to a network of wealthy, powerful men around the world.
Mountbatten-Windsor’s ties to Epstein have been a source of embarrassment to the royal family for more than a decade.
Lawmakers questioned the relationship as far back as 2011, when the then-prince was forced to give up his globetrotting role as the U.K.’s special trade envoy. Eight years later, he failed to explain his continuing ties to Epstein in a disastrous interview with the BBC, ending his career as a working member of the royal family.
The Hague
International Criminal Court judges say Philippine ex-President Rodrigo Duterte fit to stand trial
THE HAGUE, Netherlands (AP) — Judges at the International Criminal Court have ruled that former Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte is fit to stand trial on charges of crimes against humanity linked to the so-called war on drugs he waged while in office, the court announced Thursday.
Duterte, 81, denies the charges. His trial is scheduled to open on Nov. 30. The ex-leader is accused of murder and attempted murder for his alleged involvement in dozens of killings as part of the war on drugs. He faces a maximum sentence of life imprisonment if convicted.
The court’s Sept. 28 ruling that he is fit to face justice came after an independent panel of experts said that Duterte “has the capacity to understand the charges” and follow the proceedings including the implications of entering a plea — which he will be asked to do when the trial opens, the court said in a statement.
He also is mentally fit to understand evidence and discuss his defense with his lawyers, the panel of experts said. His legal team had previously attempted to get the case thrown out on medical grounds, but judges rejected it and denied a request for him to be released from custody.
Duterte was arrested in the Philippines in March 2025 and sent to the ICC’s headquarters in The Hague following a lengthy ICC investigation into mass killings in crackdowns overseen by Duterte, first when he served as mayor of the southern Philippine city of Davao and later as president.
Duterte, who was among the most feared leaders in Asia while in power, became the first ex-leader from the region to be arrested by the global court.
Estimates of the death toll in the crackdown on drugs during Duterte’s presidential term vary, from the more than 6,000 reported by the national police to up to 30,000 claimed by human rights groups.
Prosecutors say that police and government hit squads carried out dozens of killings at Duterte’s orders, motivated by the promise of money or to avoid becoming targets themselves.
At the time of Duterte’s arrest, relatives of victims hailed the move.
“We hope that top police officials and the hundreds of police officers who were involved in the illegal killings should also be placed in custody and punished,” said Randy delos Santos, whose teenage nephew was gunned down by police in a dark riverside alley during an anti-drug operation in suburban Caloocan city in August 2017.
Georgia
Appeals court says Atlanta family cannot take the government to trial for a mistaken FBI raid
ATLANTA (AP) — An Atlanta family cannot take the federal government to trial for a mistaken FBI raid on their home in 2017, but they can seek to hold the agent who led the SWAT team liable, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.
FBI agents broke down the front door of Trina Martin’s Atlanta home before dawn on Oct. 18, 2017, stormed into her bedroom and pointed guns at her and her then-boyfriend as her 7-year-old son screamed for his mom from another room.
The agents quickly realized they had the wrong house and left, but Martin and her boyfriend at the time, Toi Cliatt, said they were left traumatized, and they sued the government and the agent. The U.S. Supreme Court revived their lawsuit last year.
A three-judge panel of the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Wednesday the government was shielded from liability under an exception to a federal law that allows lawsuits over wrong-house raids. But the panel reversed a decision that gave the agent immunity.
“Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the plaintiffs, a reasonable jury could fairly conclude” that the agent had “failed to engage in reasonable efforts to avoid error, and therefore, violated the plaintiffs’ constitutional rights,” the judges said.
Jenna Sellitto, a spokeswoman for the FBI’s Atlanta office, said the agency does not comment on personnel matters.
The FBI team quickly apologized after the raid and left for the right place, with the team leader later saying that his personal GPS device had led him to the wrong address. The FBI was looking for a suspected gang member a few houses away.
Martin and Cliatt’s lawsuit accused the agents of assault and battery, false arrest and other violations.
Their attorney, Patrick Jaicomo, said in a phone interview his clients felt good about Wednesday’s ruling.
The decision on immunity for the agent was a clear win, but there was also reason to be hopeful about the ruling in favor of the government, he said.
That decision was based on 11th Circuit precedent, and the judges wrote separately to encourage the full appeals court to revisit those earlier decisions. Jaicomo, senior attorney with the nonprofit Institute for Justice in Arlington, Virginia, said he plans to seek that review, opening up the possibility that his clients could eventually be allowed to take the government to trial as well.
