that didn't work out. so what success have you had in persuading companies to reveal theirfailures and hand over exhibits some of their failed products to you? zero. what does that make you think? it really drives home the point how sensitive of an issue failure is, and how, to what extent we're willing to go to sort of hide it. as for my favourite exhibit here — that was easy. now, incredibly, this was marketed as a beauty mask, and as you can see inside there's a whole load of electrodes with gel on them. if you put them on your face, you get electric shocks, which apparently make you more beautiful, but i can tell you, it is very unpleasant! cheering and applause. but the hope is that with the opening of this museum, failure will be seen in a very different light. richard galpin, bbc news in helsingborg. i think ironically the museum of failure might be a success! we'll wait and see. let's get the weather, with darren bett. hello there. a glimmer of sunshine today but also a fair bit of rain around. showers running in behind the main area of rain that is continuing to work its way northwards through northern ireland up northwards through northern ireland up into scotland, coming to rest in the north—west of scotland. clear spells developing overnight, a few showers in western parts of england and wales. itch and not get too cold, no more than 12 degrees. —— it should not get too cold. rain petering out in the west of scotland tomorrow, most places dry. showers running eastwards across england and wales and a much drier date than today across northern ireland. pleasa nt today across northern ireland. pleasant in the sunshine, temperatures average for the time of year. around 22 or 23 in the south—east. it may stay dry on saturday, otherwise a spell of rain moving in across the uk, lingering for a while in scotland and northern england, parts of the midlands, wales and the south—west. if you are underneath the rain it's not too pleasant, quite muggy in the south—east. hello, this is bbc news. i'm ben brown. the headlines... james comey, america's sacked fbi director, accuses donald trump's white house of lying when it said the bureau was in disarray and poorly led. the administration then chose to defame me, and, more importantly, the fbi. those were lies, plain and simple. and i am so sorry that the fbi workforce had to hear them. and i'm so sorry that the american people were told them. president trump's response — accusing mr comey of not telling the truth — came tonight from his attorney. here, millions across the uk cast their vote in the 2017 general election. the polls are due to close at 10pm. new video emerges of the three london terrorists, filmed outside a gym and days before the attack. it comes as three more arrests are made. let's return to the london terror attack. james comey has accused donald trump's white house staff of flying. mr trump's personal lawyer has rejected those allegations. we can speak now to our correspondent in washington. you were there actually in the room as james comey was giving his testimony. six to an historic testimony. what was the atmosphere like? firstly i should say that of course people have been watching this all over the world. but of course in washington this was described as a blockbuster moment. there were queues through the corridors of the senate building from as early as 5am as people lined up from as early as 5am as people lined up to try and get one of those public seats in the hearing room. people were queueing up. there were vip seats in the rows in front of the press area that i was with. interestingly enough a lot of those we re interestingly enough a lot of those were actually empty. several congressmen and women and senators who were assigned those seats did not actually turn up. i was about four rows behind james comey and i was struck by how composed and relaxed he seemed to be when he was delivering his statement, and actually answering those questions. he didn't seem to hesitate when he was asked questions by all of those different senators in the room. most strikingly, there were no notes on the table in front of him. he didn't really look down that much whilst he was talking to the senators. even though he had to once questions for a couple of hours, he barely sipped on the two glasses of water on the desk in front of him. in terms of what he actually said, does it amount, do you think, do a smoking gun that could potentially cause donald trump really seriously cool problems? 0r donald trump really seriously cool problems? or is it damaging not devastating —— really serious legal problems. it is the latter, damaging in the sense that james problems. it is the latter, damaging in the sense thatjames comey, problems. it is the latter, damaging in the sense that james comey, the former director of the fbi, says he believes he was fired by president trump because he was heading up the investigation into whether the russians hacked the us elections. and indeed whether or not there were ties between the trump campaign and the russian government. it is damning as well because it was an assessment of what james comey thought of donald trump's character. he is basically saying that the president so mike and his administration tried to defame the fbi -- the administration tried to defame the fbi —— the president and his administration. he wanted to take notes of every one of their private meetings because, and i quote, he was concerned about the nature of the person, and he was concerned that he might lie about the nature of the meeting. that is in all intents and purposes james comey implying that donald trump, the president of the united states, might have lied about the account of the meeting. it is also damning because james comey was absolutely unequivocal in his belief that the russians did interfere with the us election last year, something that the trump administration has denied and says is not a direct link at the moment. so it is damning in many ways. is it legally damaging? it is unclear whether there would be a case for an obstruction ofjustice. i think it is highly unlikely. the area they are saying could be of concern is whether or not donald trump tried to stop an investigation into his former national security adviser michael flynn. he said, i hope you can let it go. many people say that does not amount to an obstruction of justice, say that does not amount to an obstruction ofjustice, even though democrats i have been speaking to say that this testimony today in bold is their case. thank you. -- emboldens their case. back to the london terror attack. and the latest news on that. one of the attackers who drove a vehicle into pedestrians before stabbing others near london bridge had viewed the videos of a radical american preacher. that's what one of the suspect‘s friends told the bbc. that radical preacher is from the town of dearborn in michigan, where our correspondent aleem maqbool tried to track him down. to please the enemies of allah and the enemies of mankind. ahmad musa jibril, an american, and one of the most popular online voices among brits who go to fight with so—called islamic state. i'm telling you facts. he calls forjihad, and preaches separation of muslims from non—muslims, or kafir. hours ago, masses of the ummah, ourummah, were joining with the kafir in the new year celebration. a former friend of london attacker khuram butt says it wasjibril‘s videos that helped to radicalise him. the preacher himself is a free man, living in michigan. well, we have been trying to speak with jibril about his preaching, but for now, at least, he's a pretty hard man to track down. his neighbours, though, have told us they thought he was nice and friendly, and said they had no idea he produced such videos. but the fbi did know. it tried for years to put away jibril, but never managed to find he had actually broken the law. he's very smart, as many of these folks are. they know there is a line they can go up to and not to cross that line. but talking generally about killing people, making jews orphans, that is not enough? unfortunately, in this country, it's not. ahmad musajibril has been a nuisance to muslims in this area as well. he will come and say things to imams sometimes, that you are out, separated from your vision, this is not the way, that you are just bluffing. even imams in the area say they have called for action against him. freedom of speech stops at speech, but when you have someone act upon that, this is crossing the line. that should not be. do you think there are others, even in this community, coming close to that line? yes. there are many of them, many of them. the internet is full of them. here, stopping those who are not quite caught crossing from preaching hate to actively supporting militants is tough. even if they potentially inspire violent acts. but that's notjust a problem for this community, and certainly notjust an issue for the us. the parents of a terminally ill baby are said to be "devastated" after losing a legal battle in the supreme court to take their son to the united states for treatment. chris gard and connie yates want ten—month—old charlie gard, who suffers from a rare genetic condition and has brain damage, to undergo experimental therapy. our medical correspondent, fergus walsh, was in court and explained the decision. the supreme court has said doctors should continue life support for charlie until 5pm tomorrow night, to give time for the european court of human rights in strasbourg to decide if it wants to hear the case. now, if it doesn't, doctors at great 0rmond street hospital will be free, after that point, to switch off the mechanical ventilator that keeps him alive. now, thejudges said they had the utmost sympathy for charlie's parents, who left the court distraught, but they said it was charlie's best interests that were paramount. they said that prolonging his life may simply prolong his suffering, the treatment being proposed was futile, and that is why he should be allowed to die with dignity. fergus walsh, our medical correspondent, reporting. the scottish episcopal church has narrowly voted to allow same—sex couples to marry in church. the decision means it's the only anglican church in the uk to allow gay couples to marry. the vote to remove the stipulation that marriage is between a man and a woman was carried by the synod in edinburgh. 0ur correspondent catriona renton sent this. well, you join us at the general synod of the scottish episcopal church. now, earlier here today, people voted in favour of allowing same—sex marriage in church. now, this is the first of the anglican communion in the whole of the british isles to allow this to happen. and i'm joined by the most reverend david chillingworth, the primus of the scottish episcopal church. now, tell us first of all — the debate here was very dignified, although everybody got their point across? it was very dignified. we're a very small church. and therefore we all know each other. we're not speaking sort of to people we don't know. we all know about each other's feelings. so, yes, it was dignified, it was measured. people were saying what was really important to them. you could hear the hurt in some of the voices that were expressing it. and i think, probably because we're a small church, it is possible for us to make this kind of decision. and the vote was very close. 0bviously, each section of the synod — bishops, clergy and lay people — had to vote by a two—thirds majority. if one clergy member had voted the other way than the whole motion woulsd have fallen. yes, we were aware that it was not to be taken for granted that it would pass. i think if you wanted a two—thirds majority, which is the standard requirement for anglican churches for this kind of change, well, then, it's always going to be close. and how do you think this will be received by the wider anglican communion? i think initially it will be received with considerable concern. the anglican communion, as you probably know, is quite stressed in its unity. and the issue around which it is stressed is this issue of human sexuality and same—sex marriage. so it's not going to be easy in that relationship for the time being. now, scotland, the scottish episcopal church being the first in the uk to approve this, do you expect people to come from all over the uk to get married in scottish episcopal churches? well, we are always welcoming, but we would i suppose hope that we might not become a kind of modern gretna green. we are here to serve the community here in scotland, and we would be particularly concerned if for example clergy from other churches where same—sex marriage isn't possible came here, because that would complicate the relationship in their own church. but we would not be able as it were to turn them away, nor would we want to. most reverend david chillingworth, the primus of the scottish episcopal church, thank you very much indeed for talking to us. and of course, the scottish episcopal church has only got 3a,000 members, so it's a relatively small organisation. but its ripples of the results of today's vote are likely to be felt through out the wider anglican communion. the headlines on bbc news: the sacked fbi directorjames comey has accused donald trump's white house of lying when it said the bureau was in disarray. mr trump in turn accused him of not telling the truth. voting is taking place across the uk in the 2017 general election. the polls are due to close at 10pm tonight. video emerges of the three london terrorists filmed outside a gym days before the attack. three more arrests have been made. an update on the market numbers for you. here's how london and frankfurt ended the day. and in the united states, this is how the dow and the nasdaq are getting on. the growing resistance of bacteria to antibiotics is one of the most pressing challenges facing modern medicine. the problem has been made worse by the extensive use of antibiotics on farm animals. now researchers at leicester university are developing an alternative way of treating diseases in pigs. as our science correspondent pallab ghosh reports, it's hoped the findings will have benefits for humans, too. nearly half the antibiotics used in britain are given to livestock to keep them healthy. simon watchorn rears his pigs outdoors, so he doesn't use a great deal. but indoor intensive farms do, so if their animals become infected with drug—resista nt superbugs, then the infection could be passed on to people if the meat isn't properly cooked. there was a suggestion that resistant bacteria in animals might be passed to humans, and if we've got another tool in our tool box where we can deal with resistant bacteria — whether it be in the animal population or the human population — that's got to be a gain. researchers at leicester university may have come up with just the tool farmers are asking for — a virus called a phage that kills infections just like antibiotics. the phage attaches itself to a salmonella bug. the virus then injects it with its dna and makes the salmonella harmless. and if it stops superbugs developing in animals, it will reduce the risk to people. it can be completely transformative for human health. there are many bacteria that we just can't treat now with antibiotics because they have become resistant to all the antibiotics we know. so using this natural enemy of the bacteria for specific diseases could really change the way that we treat infection in the future. so far, they've shown that it works in the lab and they have freeze—dried the phage into a white powder. the next stage is to feed the phage to pigs to see if it works in practice. if it does, then it could begin to replace antibiotics, and that could greatly reduce the risk of superbugs developing on farms. trials are due to begin later this year. if they are successful, doctors can then see if the phage virus can be used to treat people. pallab ghosh, bbc news, leicester. now we are going to go from pigs to dogs... it's election day, and dogs have joined their owners in turning out in force at polling stations across the uk. and, predictably, the hashtag #dogsatpollingstations is trending on social media. let's show you a little flavour. this is phoebe in manchester, waiting patiently outside her polling station. richard walker tweeted this pic with the caption, "someone's taking voting very seriously!" roo goodwin says, "decisons are made by those that show (p)up. sprocket says vote!" jane martinson says, "there's a queue to vote, but the dog has started to blend in". mads the dog says: "had to let big human and little human vote for me. i went in and helped them decide". jodie doubleday says he and his dog we're up early and casting their vote in canterbury. there you go, doggy democracy inaction! —— in action. now it's time for meet the author. ukraine and the winter of 1941, jews being herded up and taken away, families pulled apart, and among the invading germans, a strain of horror and guilty understanding among some of the men who've been given the awful task. rachel seiffert‘s new novel ‘a boy in winter‘ stretches over only three days, through which you encounter all the emotions of the time, horror and instinct for survival, family loyalty, and above all perhaps, bravery. welcome. what made you decide to go back to territory that you've explored as a novelist before, namely the events in the holocaust? well, my first novel covered that territory. and to be honest, it's quite personal. i'm of german heritage. and although i thought it was very important to write about, i wasn't in a hurry to return to it. however, the times being what they are, i have felt myself finding parallels with the 1930s in current events for too often. and just by coincidence, i was writing another novel entirely, in fact, and by coincidence, i ended up reading a case study of a man who was a german engineer, and who did not hold with the nazis. he regarded the nazis' rise to power with dismay. in fact, he did all he could to avoid the draft. the way he avoided the draft was to use his engineering qualifications to get himself stationed with the construction corps. that's really the mainspring of the story. and of course, the germans, more than one, get caught up in this position and find themselves as participants, agents of oppression, of a kind that presumably they had grown up never expecting to confront. absolutely. and i thought that was the character and the situation, both lending themselves so well to my preoccu pations. what would you do, if you were a person like that, who had done all they could to avoid involvement in what you considered to be a crime, only to find yourself in an even worse crime, unfolding behind the lines? it takes great courage not to just go along. absolutely. although not all of my characters show courage. indeed, they don't. i suppose it's fair to say that you find it easier to get into the mind of someone who's facing extinction, the need for preservation, than it is to get inside the mind of someone who decides that they have got to go along with this horrendous policy, which they're charged with executing? yes, and this is definitely a novel which i could not have written as a younger woman. it's an accumulation of reading and research, and thinking. it is almost 20 years since my first novel, which was about the holocaust, and this is really the culmination of a lot of thought since then, and a lot of reading. what have you discovered in writing it? i don't mean factually and historically, but in yourself. my goodness, what a question. i think what i really... i knew this before, but i really see it now, is that it wasn't evil that made the holocaust, it was people. humans with all their blind spots, and they're creatures of their time, are capable through thoughtlessness, through lack of perspective, and through cowardice, of doing great, great harm. you say you've found parallels with the 30s of all kinds with what's happening around us today, what kind of parallels, apart from the obvious one, there's a lot of violence in it? the first thing that happened to germanjews was that they had the protection of the law removed from them. and i see, although we have not done this in such aggressive terms in this country, we have over a period of years removed protection of the law from various people who live here. and as soon as the tenet of the times is less benign, those people are at risk. i'm a child of foreigners, neither of my parents ever took british citizenship. my mother was german, my father was australian. i, just by dint of being born here, am a brit. i have a british passport. children of my children's generation, children who were born on the same street as my children, to parents who are both foreign, do not have that any longer. and as soon as, now brexit‘s been triggered, and as soon as anything shifts any further to the right, i worry for those people. this book is a book about a tragedy, and it shows people behaving very badly, but it shows people who find reserves of courage. and in a way, it's a very hopeful story. yes. from the perspective of the young people. of the children. and also there is 0tto pohl — he's a middle—aged man, who finds great questions asked of him. and he does his best, not always the right thing, but he does his best. and i do think i do find hope in humanity as well as fear. what are the advantages of writing a story which is so compressed in terms of time? everything happens in three days. as a writer, what does that give you? well, plot and character have to work together seamlessly. so it is a great balancing act, but it's exhilarating. and i also think it's grist to my narrative mill, in that i'm most interested in the individual, and most interested at the point that push comes to shove. that's when humans reveal themselves in all their glory and horror. so those three days, they were very important to me. that compressed timescale, and the fact that history is rolling over all of these people. from a reader's perspective, i suppose what it does is it reminds you how much can happen in three days. that little span of time can be fantastically important. absolutely. and all of the groundwork laid by the nazis in the months preceding, and the years, in fact, they divided and ruled very effectively. and at points, when they come in with the ss, and execute what they wanted to execute all along, the groundwork has been laid, and people have been pitted against one another very effectively. and people say, this is what it was all about. this is what it was all about, now i know, and now, my goodness, i've got to step up or run away. and it may be too late. do you think you'll go back to this territory yet again? i wouldn't discount it, but i feel like i've written the book that is pertinent to now. pertinent to now, and also a very personal book. you must feel very deeply about some of these things. i do. and the writing of it is not so difficult, actually, as the talking about it afterwards. this is what i found with ‘the dark room', my first novel, writing is a process of coming to an understanding, coming to love your characters, coming to empathise with them and to write what feels true. and then talking about it afterwards is a whole other process. why do you find that difficult? because it's often not a conversation that is easy, and it's often not a conversation. you're often asked for your opinion, rather than it being an exchange, and that can be very disquieting. because it's not an opinion you're putting down on the page, it's explanation of feelings, i suppose, explosion of character. it's the explanation of humans, absolutely, rather than me, rachel seiffert, what do i think of a political situation. you are not fighting a political tract. —— you're not writing a political tract. no. but you hope it might have at least as much power as one. yes, i do, i hope that it chimes with people. i hope people read it and reflect on what it says about today in particular. rachel seiffert, author of ‘a boy in winter', thank you very much. thank you. hello there. a glimmer of sunshine perhaps today but a fair bit of rain around too. showers running in behind the main area of rain, continuing to work its way northwards through northern ireland up northwards through northern ireland up into scotland, coming to rest in the north—west of scotland. clear spells developing overnight, a few showers continuing towards the west. it should not get too cold, 11 or 12 degrees. tomorrow we will see the rain petering out in the north—west of scotland. sunshine developing elsewhere. for a good part of the day it will be dry. showers running eastwards a cross day it will be dry. showers running eastwards across england and wales, a much drier day in northern ireland. pleasant in the sunshine, temperatures average for the time of year, around 22 or 23 in the south—east. it may well stay dry on saturday in the south—east, otherwise we have a spell of rain moving across the uk, soon clearing northern ireland, lingering in scotland, northern england, parts of the midlands. underneath the rain it is not too pleasant. quite muggy in the south—east. hello, i'm ros atkins, this is 0utside source. a month ago, the director of the fbi was fired by donald trump. today, he gave his side of the story. james comey gave an extraordinary account of his dealings with the president in the weeks ahead of his sacking. and he pulled no punches. it is my judgment it is myjudgment that i was fired because of the russian investigation, i was fired in some way to change, or the endeavour was to change the way the russian investigation was being conducted. and james comey used a word some shy away from when talking about mr trump. the administration then chose to defame me and, more importantly, the fbi. those were lies plain and simple, and i am so sorry that the fbi workforce had to hear them, and i'm so sorry that the american people were told them. the white house has been quick to respond.