Spanish mayor demands more police to tackle organised crime after shootings of Ross Monaghan and Eddie Lyons Jr
The mayor of Fuengirola has revealed the Spanish resort is ill-equipped to tackle serious crime after two Scottish crime figures were gunned down at the weekend.
Mayor Ana Mula wants to 'reinforce' collaboration between local and national police forces following the fatal shootings of Ross Monaghan, 43, and Eddie Lyons Jnr, 46.
The pair were gunned down in front of stunned onlookers.
In an emergency meeting, she demanded more resources and police specialised in organised crime 'to improve the response to the growing phenomenon of gang fights related to drug trafficking on the Costa del Sol '.
She said: 'We live in a world and at a time when crime knows no borders. And in places like the Costa del Sol, phenomena are occurring which, by expansion, affect us irremediably.
'That is why our determination is to tackle it without hot air, to put all possible threats on the table and to prepare ourselves to face this new context, with the means at our disposal, with the best guarantees.
'We need the involvement of the state to be much greater in this matter' to "reinforce collaboration and improve prevention and action in terms of public safety.'
The mayor pointed out that the main police unions have been calling for weeks for more material and human resources to combat criminal activity.
She announced that a plan to reinforce the Local Police is being studied in order to increase their presence and effectiveness in all their areas of competence.
These measures will form part of the special operation that the police force sets up every summer in the city for the high tourist season.
So far this year, she has written twice to the Minister of the Interior, Fernando Grande-Marlaska, urging him to build a new National Police station.
The first letter was sent on January 15, the second on March 25, 2025.
However, she said, she has not received a reply to either of them.
"Unfortunately, the facts are proving us right,' she said. 'And it is not only necessary to have facilities that are in accordance with the population level of Fuengirola, but also more police officers who are specialised in the criminal cases that occur in our area.
'I intend to be very insistent on this real demand. It is an absolute priority for our residents and our town.'
An FCDO Spokesperson said: 'We are providing support to the families of two British men who died in Fuengirola and are in contact with the local authorities.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
23 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Revealed: How Liverpool can afford to break their transfer record twice in the same window as the Reds 'eye £120m swoop for Alexander Isak'
The record-breaking sums Liverpool are spending this summer has raised questions among rival fans as the Premier League champions prepare to submit their next big-money offer. After months of quiet speculation, Tuesday brought chatter over the Reds interest in Newcastle's Alexander Isak to the light in spectacular fashion, with reports indicting that the Anfield club are preparing a £120million bid. Ignoring for a moment the Magpies' refusal to entertain a sale, a move of that size would see the Reds break the British transfer record for a second time this summer - having paid £116m to bring Florian Wirtz to Merseyside. In addition to the German, Liverpool have spent a further £65m on the acquisitions of Jeremie Frimpong, Milos Kerkez and Giorgi Mamardashvili. It's a level of spending that is unprecedented for a club that, perhaps wrongly, is regarded as one of the most frugal at the elite level. This perception, contrasted with the comparatively ordinary market behavior of their rivals in England and Europe, has raised questions over the club's financial position, particularly with respect to the Premier League's Profit and Sustainability Rules. But there is little reason to resort to conspiracy. The answer is rather straightforward: Liverpool are one of the highest revenue-generating clubs in world football, coming off a very successful season in which they spent barely anything. The club is forecasted to make a profit for the 2024-25 campaign, a season in which they signed only Federico Chiesa from Juventus. The Italian arrived for a guaranteed fee of £10m, spread over his four-year contract, resulting in an amortisation cost of £2.5m. Liverpool also returned to the Champions League during this period and pocketed more than £85m, with an impressive League Phase offsetting earnings missed out on by their early last-16 exit. Then comes the league campaign which is estimated to have earned the club around £185m, thanks to their fees from domestic and international markets, equal share payments and prize money. The Reds have also continued to be impressive sellers. Already this summer, academy graduates Jarell Quansah and Caoimhin Kelleher have been sold for £30m and £18m respectively. These sales, in addition to the fees expected for the likes of Harvey Elliot and Tyler Morton, who have also been linked with moves, represent pure profit. Liverpool also have a couple of high value assets in their squad, namely Darwin Nunez and Luis Diaz. While the Reds have been adamant that the Colombian is not for sale and have rebuffed several approaches from clubs such as Barcelona and Bayern Munich, Nunez is clearly available. The Anfield club could not agree on a fee with Napoli for the striker but reported interest from Saudi Arabia increases the likelihood that they will recoup a sizeable portion of the £85m spent to sign him in 2022. Liverpool need to secure a £31.8m fee before it can record profits, as the 26-year-old signed a six-year contract prior to the Premier League and UEFA capping amortisation at five years. Premier League clubs are permitted to incur losses of up to £105m over a three-year period, with deductions allowed for investments in infrastructure, the academy, women's team and community initiatives. From 2021-22 to 2023-24, after allowable deductions referenced by football finance expert Swiss Ramble, the Reds had a positive PSR position of £48m, which when added to the permitted amount, gave Slot's side headroom of £153m. Given that revenue for the 2024-25 season is likely to exceed £700m, and some estimates claim that the Reds could post profits as high as £50m, the club could theoretically spend another £200m in the window and still be PSR compliant. If Isak was to sign for £120m his amortised transfer fee would be £24m per year and take the total amortised costs to around £62m. Wages have continued to rise at the club as star players have aged while continuing to perform at high level. But this too raises little concern, even with the figure projected to top £400m, given their strong financial situation.
Metro
25 minutes ago
- Metro
Urgent recall of Dubai chocolate that doesn't declare it contains peanuts
A popular chocolate bar has been recalled because of a potentially deadly undeclared allergen. Customers who bought Neosis Schokolade Love of Dubai chocolate are being urged to return the product for a refund, and businesses have been told to pull it from their shelves. The Food Standards Agency issued an alert reading: 'This product contains peanut, which is not mentioned on the label, making it a possible health risk to anyone with an allergy to peanuts. 'Don't buy this product, and if you have bought it, don't eat it, especially if you have a peanut allergy. 'Dispose of the product at home and get in touch with your local Trading Standards in Great Britain or Environmental Health Officers in Northern Ireland to let them know where you purchased it,' they added. Businesses were supplied the chocolate by a company called Black Sea Trading Ltd, which the FSA said has been 'uncontactable'. Dubai chocolate, which is filled with crispy knafeh, pistachio cream and tahini spread, was launched in 2021 by Dubai-based firm, Fix Dessert Chocolatier. The dessert has become so popular in recent months that it was blamed for a worldwide pistachio shortage. Buyers eager to get their hands on the bars also flocked to supermarket stockists across the world, with at least one retailer having to set a limit on how many you could buy at a time. Giles Hacking, of nut trading firm CG Hacking, told the Financial Times the pistachio industry had become 'tapped out' due to chocolatiers making mass purchases of the kernels. Iran, which is the world's second-largest pistachio producer, exported 40% more pistachios to the UAE from September 2024 to March 2025 than it did over the full 12 months before that, the MailOnline reports. Earlier this month, a popular children's ice lolly was pulled from UK supermarkets due to a labelling error. Wall's Mini Milks have been pulled from shelves in UK supermarkets, with shoppers warned not to eat the vanilla, strawberry and chocolate packs. Allergens were incorrectly labelled in Spanish rather than English, risking anyone allergic to milk, pistachios, peanuts and soya. More Trending Hundreds of blueberry boxes were also recalled over a 'severe' listeria warning this month. Alma Pak International LLC voluntarily recalled 400 boxes, weighing 300 pounds each, of its organic blueberries on June 19 Food safety officials say the bacteria were discovered during 'routine testing' of the finished product. The recall is Class 1, the most serious category, indicating that exposure to the product will likely cause health consequences or even death. Get in touch with our news team by emailing us at webnews@ For more stories like this, check our news page. MORE: 'Phenomenal' US fast food chain brings back axed range after fans begged for return MORE: Urgent recall for mushrooms over fears they're tainted with deadly bacteria MORE: I never thought I had a sweet tooth — until I became a firefighter
The Independent
25 minutes ago
- The Independent
How an email error sparked a secret scramble to bring Afghans to Britain
British governments past and present face allegations of avoiding scrutiny and undermining democracy after the revelation that thousands of Afghans have been resettled in the U.K under a program that was hidden from the media, the public and lawmakers in Parliament. Key information was also kept from the Afghans themselves, who had assisted U.K. forces and whose personal details had been disclosed in a huge data leak. Many plan to sue the British government for putting them in danger from the Taliban. Some are left in Afghanistan as the current British government says the resettlement program will end. Here's what happened in an extraordinary chain of events. An email error with huge consequences The saga was triggered by the chaotic Western exit from Afghanistan in August 2021 as the Taliban, ousted from power 20 years earlier, swept across the country, seized Kabul and reimposed their strict version of Islamic law. Afghans who had worked with Western forces — as fixers, translators and in other roles — or who had served in the internationally backed Afghan army were at risk of retribution. Britain set up a program, known as the Afghan Relocations and Assistance Policy, or ARAP, to bring some to the U.K. In February 2022, a defense official emailed a spreadsheet containing the personal information of nearly 19,000 ARAP applicants to someone outside the Ministry of Defense. The government says the individual thought they were sending a list of about 150 names, not the whole set. The British government only became aware of the leak when a portion of the data was posted on Facebook 18 months later by someone who threatened to publish the whole list. The government sought secrecy The leak sparked alarm among British officials who feared as many as 100,000 people were in danger when family numbers of the named individuals were added. The then-Conservative government sought a court order barring publication of the list. A judge granted a sweeping order known as a super injunction, which barred anyone from revealing not only information about the leak but the existence of the injunction itself. Super injunctions are relatively rare and their use is controversial. Most of the handful of cases in which they have come to light involved celebrities trying to prevent disclosures about their private lives. This is the first known case of a super injunction being granted to the government. Former Defense Secretary Ben Wallace said Wednesday that he sought the legal order to gain 'time and space to deal with this leak, find out whether the Taliban had it' and protect those at risk. Wallace said he asked for an ordinary injunction — not a super injunction — for a period of four months. The gag order remained in place for almost two years. A secret program sparked a legal battle The government began bringing to Britain the Afghans on the leaked list who were judged to be most at risk. To date, some 4,500 people — 900 applicants and approximately 3,600 family members — have been brought to Britain under the program. About 6,900 people are expected to be relocated by the time it closes, at a cost of 850 million pounds ($1.1 billion). In all, about 36,000 Afghans have been resettled in the U.K. since 2021. Meanwhile, several news organizations had learned of the leaked list but were barred from publishing stories about it. They challenged the super injunction in court, and a judge ordered it lifted in May 2024 — but it remained in place after the government appealed. The government finally came clean Britain held an election in July 2024 that brought the center-left Labour Party to power. Prime Minister Keir Starmer and his Cabinet learned of the injunction soon after taking office and grappled with how to proceed. In January, the government ordered a review by a former senior civil servant. They found little evidence that the leaked data would expose Afghans to a greater risk of retribution from the Taliban. The review said the Taliban had other sources of information on those who had worked with the previous Afghan government and international forces and is more concerned with current threats to its authority. Given those findings, the government dropped its support for the super injunction. The injunction was lifted in court Tuesday, and minutes later Defense Secretary John Healey stood in the House of Commons to make the saga public for the first time. Many questions remain unanswered Healey said the secret settlement route was being closed, but acknowledged Wednesday that 'the story is just beginning,' and many questions remain unanswered. Immigration critics including Reform UK leader Nigel Farage are demanding to know what screening was done on the people who came under the secret program. Lawyers for Afghans on the leaked list want to know why the information was kept from them. Adnan Malik, head of data privacy at U.K. legal firm Barings Law, said he was assembling a class-action lawsuit by hundreds of former translators, soldiers and others. Lawmakers and free speech advocates say the use of a super injunction is deeply worrying. They ask how Parliament and the media can hold the government to account if there is such stringent secrecy. Judge Martin Chamberlain, who ruled that the injunction should be lifted, said Tuesday at the High Court that the super injunction 'had the effect of completely shutting down the ordinary mechanisms of accountability.' Healey acknowledged that 'you cannot have democracy with super injunctions in place,' and said the government had acted as quickly and safely as it could. 'Accountability starts now,' he told the BBC.
