Read my latest essay on grooming gangs and child sexual abuse in the The European Conservative

Every thirty-two minutes a child in the UK is raped. That’s forty-five children a day or over 16,512 children each year. That’s 15 children per major town across the UK.

Concern for the safety of children has re-emerged in public discourse following the publication earlier this year of new statistics about the ‘grooming gangs’—or ‘child rape gangs’—scandal. But this scandal is being weaponised for political advantage by pundits, politicians and the public on the Left and Right of politics.

It is necessary to talk about these scandals. And most individuals who talk migrant rape and pornography are well-intentioned. But in the flurry of hideous statistics the impact upon individual lives fades into obscurity — as do children who will become victims in the future.

Read essay now

This is the first time this class of crime has attracted serious public attention since the Catholic Church confessed to their child sex abuse scandal in 2021. In both instances, however, the abuse and sexual exploitation of these children had been known by authorities since the 1980s.

The public often feels powerless to stop and prevent childhood sexual abuse when authorities are reticent about confronting the issue. This reticence is something I explored in earlier essays for The European Conservative: ‘Eyes Wide Shut’ and ‘Altar of Multiculturalism’.

“ A tactical choice is being made as to who pays the price for multiculturalism. It is not that Western nations are incapable of seeing that men raping adolescent girls is bad. Across the West, child marriage in other parts of the world is recognised as an abomination for a number of reasons: the girl cannot consent, the age difference is a perversion, the girl is not prepared to engage in the sex acts that will be demanded of her, her body is too small, her mind is not yet mature.

But this innocence and inability to consent is not ascribed to the white working class child:

The middle-class child is considered to be autonomous in their successes there are a victim in their failures and exploitation. In contrast, the working-class child may receive praise for their successes or their success may be attributed to general success of a ‘system.’ But when something goes wrong in the rearing of a working-class child—he or she breaks the law, suffers abuse, or falls in with a gang—it is generally accepted that the child is (at least in part) responsible for what happened.”

This is to say, grooming gang victims are considered ‘complicit’ in their sexual abuse to the extent that it is not ‘abuse’ at all.

Subscribe now

Being able to talking about child sexual abuse is a way to de-stigmatise the issue and a way for people to feel less powerless. Posting on X or Facebook “We need to do something about this” often creates the illusion of change. But, in the material world, no legislation has been achieved or child saved. It is not that social media is useless in generating desired change. It is that politicians will hear and nod and say "This is unacceptable" and people rest thinking something has been achieved – but nothing significant is changed to protect victims or prevent this abuse from happening again.

“It is one thing to recognise there is a problem—as the Right has—and another to recognise that behind every statistic is a delicate young life that was savaged by an older life for the sake of a few minutes of carnal enjoyment. Being unable to imagine this atrocity is not a virtue—it’s a moral failure of which almost everyone is guilty…”

Read in 'The European Conservative'

Read my latest essay on migrant crime in the The European Conservative

For the last two weeks, there has been at least one daily headline that reads, “Child raped by hotel migrant.” The response of the British public has been divided between those who call for “Mass deportation now!” and those who rebut by saying, “What about the white rapists?”

The statement “What about the white rapists?” can mean several thing. It can mean “I think you are putting an undue focus on immigrants committing these crimes” or “Let us deal with all the rapists at the same time!” In practice, however, this statement is intended as an insult and reads closer to something like, “Until you deal with your white rapists, white people, you have no right to talk about black and brown rapists.”

The existence of white rapists seems to preclude the ability of the progressives to address the issue of rapists who are black or brown. Somehow the existence of white rapists is supposed to mean letting infinity migrants of undetermined identity into the country and letting them commit crime until ‘white crime’ is eradicated.

Those that insist on the gates being flung open in order to stop innocent and talented people being excluded from Western society insist Britain play ‘the migrant rape lottery.’

Well, I am here to tell you, we do not have to play this game…

Read more in The European Conservative

You might also want to read…

Subscribe now

“Charlie, do you think that we are likely to see another summer of civil unrest?”

This is the question Harrison Pitt put to me in our latest episode of Deprogrammed. This is the third time I have sat down for a table talk at the New Culture Forum and this time, Pitt, Connor Tomlinson and I discussed the significance of the public protests outside the migrant hotels in Epping and Canary Wharf, and the impact of the Southport riots in changing the public discourse around immigration and civil unrest.

This question of civil unrest is one to which I wish I could provide a clear-cut answer. Something definitive, and rousing, and hopeful. The fervid English heart encourages vibrant and unlawful answers. But since these answers are prone to flaws and would be ineffectual anyway they does not warrant excessive consideration. Instead, I am required to give a considered and less inspiring answer.

“To protest, or not to protest”: it is a two-sided coin and it falls upon a different side in my conscience each day.

Some people are resistant to civil unrest and with reasonable cause. Some placards and a bit of shouting can turn nasty without that nastiness achieving anything for the cause. Worse: a movement can be set back in terms of its public image when things decent into indiscriminate violence or looting and any suffering or nastiness that comes with protest and civil unrest becomes unprofitable.

This is why I resisted Tommy Robinson’s suggestion that he visit and bring more protesters Epping. In this instance, no group co-ordinated action was needed to bring national attention to the issue. The people of Epping managed to attract the press on their own; and this natural ground swell is far more impactful upon the media and far more disconcerting for the government than one big group that tours the country with banners and slogans. To his credit, Robinson later conceded this and stayed away.

Share

Some people find themselves willing on the decline. Each failed attempt at a protest only spurs on their desire to see more unrest. Their rationale – as Konstantin Kisin sympathised with recently – that things will get better when they get much worse. People only take action when all options of complacency are firmly off the table.

The British have a tendency to be closeted about the things they are most passionate. To complain is human, but grumble like a Briton is divine. Lamenting the decline of good weather or the empire is second nature to a great number of the English but being forthright about things which matter is considered uncouth and a uncivilised. There is a reticence to above giving impassioned speeches. Even if we enjoy such speeches, they are to be admired in private; for cheering and jeering is a little too American.

Britons do not ‘kick up a fuss’ without being pushed to the point of outrage and violence. Since the opportunity for effective and dignified civil unrest lies within a narrow window, what can the native population do to make the government see they are unwilling to take any more immigrants into their midst?

Watch full episode on YouTube

If you are passionate about British culture and the impact of mass immigration on Europe, take some time to read my in-depth analysis of migrant crime statistics and why Reform UK will not provide the solution to Britain’s problems…

Subscribe now

Today marks the one-year anniversary of the Southport Massacre.

It has been one year since those three perfect little girls were robbed of their lives, and the world was robbed of their love. Their names are Elise Dot Stancombe, Bebe King, and Alice Da Silvia Aguiar. Elsie loved cheerleading and dancing and made everybody smile. Bebe was a spirited girl who made her family laugh by doing impressions. Alice lived to dance and share her passion with others. It has been one year since three families lost their bright, happy, and courageous daughters.

It has also been one year since eight other children and two adults were robbed of their confidence and joy by the life-altering injuries made to their bodies. Many of these children continue to endure pain, embarrassment, and anxiety as a result of what was done to them.

Those survivors who made it out of the dance class without physical injury nevertheless wrestle daily with ‘serious psychological injuries.’ It is thought that every survivor – 26 people in total – is struggling with PTSD, anxiety or depression. The figures do not include the families of victims or the emergency workers who attended the scene at the time of the attack. This figure also fails include locals living on the street, and the investigation team, and the legal teams challenged with bringing the Southport Killer to court.

Extended families, onlookers, other children in the community have also been overlooked. There was a significant lack of mental health and social support for those who were not at the crime scene at the time of the attack but who supported the victims, including extended family members like grandparents. A great number of families, for example, were expected to return to work within two weeks of the attack.

Members of the public are still able to support these lesser-known victims by donating to the ‘Southport Stronger Together Appeal’

It is impossible, therefore, to offer a simple account of what happened that evil day in Southport. Any attempt to ‘summarise’ will inevitably leave out details or persons which are significant to someone and has caused someone – many people – significant grief. Whilst I have committed a detailed account of the attack and victim impact statements to paper for the sake of the public record, every account of that day will be insufficient in capturing the ongoing pain, trauma, grief and fear that is being experienced by victims and their families today.

This being said, there are two ways to tell the story of ‘Southport’: one that focuses on the attacker and what went wrong and one that focuses on the victims – on their strength, character, and vitality. For one day, today, I choose to remember the victims.

This is not an act of weakness. Believe me, there is time and anger enough to get the answers the people of this nation deserve. There is time and anger enough to seek more appropriate punishments for the perpetrator and the people who kept overlooking the danger he posed. ‘Southport’ will not disappear because the killer, and immigration, and online extremism is removed from the spotlight for a few hours; because choosing to remember the victims is not the same as choosing “not looking back in anger” – it is about letting families have the space to recover whilst ‘backstage’ the nation works hard on their behalf to bring about justice and prevent such attacks from ever happening again.

Victims and their families have a right to leave the Southport Massacre in the past. Some will want this gone from their lives as quick as possible. Others will not. Some victims will seek to ‘move on’ and turn their thoughts to the future as best they can, and some will only be able to find peace by seek answers. Others – perhaps many others – will continue to be paralysed for sometime and not know what to do. It is not I or anyone else it pass judgement as to how these families should or should not cope with their grief and move through the world in pain.

This does not mean a nation “forgets.” This does not mean the killer “gets away with it.” This does not mean we ignore the broader issues of immigration or online radicalisation or institutional negligence and corruption. It means we take the batten from the families who wish to pass it on.

Much remains to be said and done – and the one year anniversary is the time to start pushing rather than to take our collective foot off the pedal and wait for some new tragedy to come along. The Southport Inquiry is one of the tools by which this can be achieved. Public pressure is another.

But I want to use today and this platform to share what Elsie, Bebe, and Alice’s families want the public to remember about their little girls.

Elsie Dot Stancombe – a “truly unforgettable” girl

Elsie lived every day with "determination, persistence, love and kindness.” From an early age, she showed remarkable warmth. “She had the ability to light up any room that she entered.”

Elsie embraced every moment of life with enthusiasm and persistence. At her young age, she had already competed in a 3 km run and a 10 km charity walk for her local hospice. Her teachers remember her as caring, generous, and empathetic. She never got upset if things didn’t go her way. “Her heart was too kind. It was too kind for anger and for upset.” She excelled in school and engaged in a wide range of extracurricular activities. She was loved by everyone around her – "She made everybody smile just by being her".

She was “absolutely the sweetest child you could ever wish to meet” said her great aunt.

Elise was seven years old when she was laid to rest on 23 August 2024.

Her funeral was held at the same church at which she was baptised. It was “Elsie’s Special Day” – colourful celebration of her life. She was surrounded by her friends and family who dressed in bright pink and pastel colours and floral patterns. Elsie’s cheerleading squad forming a guard of honour whilst balloons and bubbles carried their thoughts of her into the sky. Her dog Bobby waiting outside the church for her.

In the church, Elsie’s parents said that Elsie’s proudest moment was becoming a big sister to her little sister Rosie.

A choir sang favourite songs including Love Story by Taylor Swift and Wind Beneath My Wings.

Today, Elise would have been eight years old. But as her family said, "Her story does not end here…Her story will be told every single day by those who loved her.”

Bebe King – a “shimmering star”

Bebe was “full of joy, light, and love, and she will always remain in our hearts as the sweet, kind, and spirited girl we adore.”

Her family remember Bebe’s captivating “spark” and “innate kindness”. She had a remarkable ability to connect with others. They remember Bebe’s playful personality and humorous impressions — singing songs together in the car, from Frozen to Beyoncé. Bebe’s was a life filled with life‑affirming moments.

Bebe was six-years-old when her family and friends – dressed in bright colours – laid her to rest on the 17 August 2024. Her funeral was a “special and private opportunity for those who knew Bebe best to honour her life”.

Instead of flowers, the family requested donations be made to the Snowdrop Bereavement Team at Alder Hey Children’s Hospital who had given them “such amazing support in this difficult time.”

Bebe’s mother and father “want to acknowledge our older daughter, Genie, who witnessed the attack and managed to escape. She has shown such incredible strength and courage, and we are so proud of her. Her resilience is a testament to the love and bond she shared with her little sister.”

Bebe would have been seven-years-old today.
She will aways be her parent’s “precious daughter”.

Alice Da Silvia Aguiar– “our dream girl”

Alice’s great passion was dance. Even as a baby she’d gravitated towards ballet. By age 4, she had joined Southport Dance Academy, and later took up all sorts of activities which have her the chance to share her skills and make people smile – street dance, cheerleading at the YMCA, the school choir.

“Your to-do list was extensive, and we were sure that you would achieve it if only you had the time,” said her father.

Alice was girl driven by empathy and imagination. “A good girl, with strong values and a kind nature.” In the school playground, she was “a peacemaker.” She was “A lover of animals and an environmentalist in the making,” her family shared. She is remembered for her countless qualities and virtues: “Confidence, empathy, playful, energetic, friendly, and always respectful.”

She endures in the hearts of those who knew her.

A ‘celebration-of-life’ Mass was held for Alice on 6 August before her funeral on 11 August 2024. She was only nine-years-old when her family and friends put on white or pastel clothes to walk her to the church. Pink ribbons and balloons adorned lampposts along the route along with hundreds of local people who wished to pay tribute to “a wonderfully happy girl”.

Mourners remember “her natural, radiant smile”; her “politeness, curiosity, fairness among friends, zest for life, ability to support others, and strong family values. “It doesn’t matter who your family are,” Alice once said, “as long as they love each other.”

Alice would have been ten-years-old today; but neither distance or time will change the fact that “Mummy and daddy will always, always love you.”

It feels impossible to say that anything ‘good’ could come of such an attack. No amount of ‘good’ can compensate for the loss of three children, nor the ruining of dozens of young lives. Yet, against colossal odds, victims and their families have made a decision to walk firmly in the footsteps of hope rather than despair.

As a community, a great number of positive projects have been commissioned to commemorate victims, support survivors, and restore confidence to children across the town. Projects include a new playground for Alice and Bebe’s school and a community garden.

Elsie, Bebe, and Alice have each have a charity founded in their name. Elsie and Alice’s fathers both ran the London Marathon 2025 to support these new charities.

Elsie’s Story

Creating smiles to fill every page of Elsie’s Story.

“At the heart of Elsie’s Story is a deep commitment to bringing joy, support, and hope to children facing life’s toughest challenges. Inspired by Elsie’s journey, this charity was founded with a clear mission: to ensure that every child, regardless of their circumstances, has the opportunity to create precious memories with their loved ones.

Life can be unpredictable, and for some families, time is incredibly pr

ecious. We believe that even in the face of adversity, moments of joy can shine through. Whether it’s organising special experiences, funding vital support, or simply offering comfort during difficult times, Elsie’s Story is dedicated to making a difference.”

Elsie’s mum write: “Elsie’s Story allows us to turn heartbreak into hope, bringing joy to other children. Our charity was founded to make grants in Elsie’s name, supporting young people and helping children in the community. This includes funding local projects, providing medical care and support to families and individuals, and contributing to causes that bring people together through joy- filled activities.”

Donate to Elsie's Story

Bebe’s Hive

Building a safe space where grieving little hearts heal

“Bebe’s Hive is a grief-informed, creative support project for children and families, built in memory of our beautiful six-year-old Bebe.

After losing her, we saw how deeply grief affects children. We also saw what was missing: a safe, child-led space for healing. So we’re creating one — rooted in love, creativity, and connection.

Bebe’s Hive will offer free sessions using art, music, play, and storytelling to help children explore grief safely and gently. Led by a team of educators, creatives, and wellbeing practitioners - all who knew and loved Bebe. It will be a space full of care and hope.”

Thank you for helping Bebe’s light shine on. 💛

Donate to Bebe's Hive

Alice’s Wonderdance

Giving every child the opportunity to dance

“Every child should have the opportunity to dance, express joy, and learn through the power of movement.”

“Dance Foundation ✨🩰Dance through life with wonder! ✨Bringing joy to little dancers. 🎀Inspired by Alice's magic🪄and her love with dance. 🩰✨🎀🪄”

Donate to Alice's Wonderdance

Until this point I have been restrained in my reporting upon Dion Rudakubana. I researched into his life at the time of the attack, of course, like everyone else in the Rudakubana household. Unlike his younger brother, however, Dion Rudakubana appears to have a universal track record for politeness and diligent study.

At the time of the Southport Massacre, he was studying mathematics at Warwick. He seems to make friends easily – posting pictures online of he and his friends at restaurants, pubs, and social clubs – playing in the university’s brass band and participating other extracurricular activities. Not much more than a child himself, and finding no negative anecdotes about him from neighbours, students, or friends, it seemed cruel to drag him into the limelight for a crime in which he seemed to play no part.

Unlike his parents, Dion Rudakubana would appear to have comparatively little agency in constraining his brother. Only two years older, confined to a wheelchair, and living away from the family home, Dion seems for the most part, to be a victim of circumstance. Which is to say, his crime in the Southport massacre is having been unfortunate enough to have been born to the same household as a relentless psychopath. Having siblings myself, I would not want their lives turned upside down as a result of something I did, however innocuous. (And vice versa.)

Since the attack, however, Dion Rudkubana has elected to involve himself in the public inquiry into his brother’s crimes and he therefore opens himself to public scrutiny like everyone else.

Axel Rudakubana’s brother and parents currently lives in a ‘secret location’ provided by Police ‘for their protection.’ Protection from whom? For now, let it be assumed it is the general public that presents the threat to the Rudakubana family.

As far as it can be ascertained, this house is being funded by the British taxpayer, and would include the tax contributors of the victims and their families. It is understood that beyond initial police interviews, that the family were not involved in the case brought against Axel – their son and brother – and were never seen in court. (They may have been given remote access via a live stream but this seems unlikely due to information that follows.)

Victims and their families participating in the Southport Inquiry have “expressed considerable concern” and “anxieties” over the killer’s brother being included in the independent inquiry. The chairman of the inquiry – Sir Adrian Fulford – reports:

"A number of the parents of the child victims and at least one of the adult victims have expressed considerable concern over the possibility that DR [Dion Rudakubana] will be able to listen, either by being in court or via a live link, to the impact statements and commemorative portraits as delivered by members of the families.”

The committee acknowledged the concern at the possibility of Dion Rudakubana being provided with “the highly sensitive materials relating to the narrative of the attack, its effect on the victims and their families and the evidence concerning the events that occurred thereafter.”

It is the view of Chairman Fulford that Dion Rudakubana’s presence would “create a major obstacle to the participation” for many of the victims.

"These anxieties have been expressed in the strongest terms, and I am unreservedly persuaded that it would create a major obstacle to the participation of many of the victims and the families of the victims in the Inquiry if they apprehended that the brother of the perpetrator was watching, either by being in court or via a live link…”

Share

However, concerns have also been raised that Dion Rudakubana’s presence could also pose a safety risk to victims. Sir Adrian tells the inquiry, "As an additional and persuasive factor, concern has been expressed that DR, by having access to this material, may come to learn at least some of their identities and highly sensitive and distressing information about the injuries sustained and medical treatment."

This is a disconcerting statement, to say the least. It is understandable that seeing or engaging with a member of the Rudakubana family could cause victims alarm, distress, and additional trauma. This should be avoided at all costs. But what possible risk could Dion Rudakubana cause victims and their families unless there was reasonable suspicion that Dion is a compromised individual, either at risk of contacting the families himself or communication information to his imprisoned brother.

It is known that Axel Rudakubana is permitted social phone calls to family members despite his ‘locked down’ status within the prison, and that he is being sent money by his family to purchase ‘treats’ from the prison canteen – like chocolate and crisps.

Is Dion Rudakubana someone with whom Axel has regular contact?

If so, it is impossible to see how can he be permitted to contribute to an independent public inquiry without capitulating to some familial impulse to protect or justify his brother, even after everything he has done? If it is not Dion talking to Axel but their parents, are there concerns that the parents would seek to contact grieving families or – inadvertently or otherwise – pass on details to their incarcerated son or a third party who would seek to harm victims further?

The emphasis on not disclosing details about victims’ injuries and medical treatments in relation to their identities, for me, is the most sinister aspect of this statement. It is as if some lurid pleasure might still be gained by Rudakubana in discovering these details, and further inflate his sense of achievement and public infamy.

An unofficial source within Belmarsh prison – the high security prison in which Axel Rudakubana is detained – reports that Rudakubana continues to threaten staff there, adding, “He is completely unrepentant and as far from being rehabilitated as you can get.”

This being the case, all effort should be exerted to ensure Rudakubana gets as little opportunity for fame and gratification as possible, including the exclusion of the family from the independent inquiry.

Indeed, it is unclear why Dion Rudakubana is contributing to the inquiry at all, and why any original statement given by the family to the police at the time of the attack are not sufficient for the evidence files given to the inquiry committee.

Dion’s involvement might be as innocuous as providing an account of his brother’s violence. He might give an account of the physical abuse the brothers are reported (by neighbours) to suffered at the hands of their parents. He might give an account his parent’s tales of the Rwandan genocide and how these horror stories impacted the state of mind of he and Axel. He may even tell a story of coercion in which his mother and father demanded Dion exaggerate the severity of his physical disability to enable them to commit benefit fraud. I make this suggestion on account of two separate disclosures made to me by professional individuals who worked directly with Dion as a teenager.

However, such disclosures, if they are even partly true, would take courage. Dion Rudakubana might spend his time in the witness stand attempting to excusing his brother’s deadly actions or defend his parent’s neglect of their responsibilities, in which case, the young man would be better of saving his breath.

Taking each of these factors into account, Sir Adrian has resolved that:

“Dion Rudakubana and his legal team will not receive disclosure of any material that covers the narrative of what occurred from the moment Axel Rudakubana got into the taxi on his way to carry out his attack on July 29 and they will not receive disclosure of the materials concerning the aftermath - including the injuries inflicted and the various responses by others to what had occurred.”

(Reported by Dan Haygarth and Liam Thorp in the Liverpool Echo)

Dion Rudakubana and his legal team will not receive advanced disclosure of the impact evidence or commemorative portraits that will be heard at the inquiry.

In a subsequent statement, Fulford says his decision to restrict Rudakubana’s access to evidence and witness statements should not be seen as a criticism of Dion Rudakubana and added that no "adverse inference" should be drawn.

I remain, then, open minded. This, however, continues to be difficult in a case where there has been excessive duplicity around the transmission of facts – led by both there State and the media. Significant questions still remain unanswered, such as; “Why were the Rudakubanas were granted asylum to the UK?”, “Why was the UK chosen by them in the first place, given their apparent lack of connection here?”, “Who authorised their application and on what grounds?”, and “What role did they play creating a murderer?”

No small part of me suspects that these are questions to which the public will never have answers…

Share

A new poll by Portland Communications – a public consultancy firm established by a former advisor to Tony Blair – projects that 40 per cent of voters who currently back Reform UK would vote for the Labour Party in the next general election if the Prime Minster got a grip on illegal immigration.

It is strange that anyone would commission a poll into an impossible scenario. In the first instance, the majority of Reform supporters and voters have come the Conservative Party. The five constitutes gained by Reform in 2024 were taken from Conservative strong-holds. The regions which switched from blue to red did so not as a result of substantial gains in the vote share for the Labour Party but a a mass exodus of voters from the Conservative Party and from the democratic process itself.

The General Election 2024 also saw one of the lowest voter turn-outs in modern political history with only sixty per cent of the voting-population turning up at the ballot box. The Labour Party boasted of the “landslide victory” and their “strong mandate” from the British people but Keir Starmer’s government, in fact, secured the smallest vote share of any winning party in British political history – 33.7 per cent.

If these Reform voters were to defect elsewhere it would be for other right-wing parties and candidates.

In the second instance, every ‘deportation’ policy established by Labour seems to result in more rather than less immigration into the UK. His latest ‘solution’ has been to cajole Emmanuel Macron into accepting back some of the migrants that originated from France – the sum total of fifty a week. A great number of these are migrants have been escort to the English border by France – sometimes hundreds each day. As a part of this deal, Britain has also establish a 1-in1-out policy in which France accepts illegal immigrant for processing and Britain houses “vetted” migrant in return.

One-in-one-out does nothing to reduce the strain being placed upon Britain’s economy and infrastructure which would require the rapid mass deportation of newly-arrived migrants and their dependants. Given France operates under the same ECHR laws as the UK, few of these migrants will be denied entry, effectively making it a 1-in-0 out policy. The French know that these migrants will not be their problem if they are granted asylums Britain. Britain, therefore, cannot expect her neighbour to act in her best interest: the UK Government have already given France 771 million GBP to “control the boarder” and have only aided and abetted migrants across the channel.

In any other time in history, a king might have regarded this action as a declaration of war…

Read more

A message has been circulated in locals schools in Southport by the 'Southport Recovery Team' forewarning parents about a Channel 4 'Southport' documentary airing on Thursday 24 July 2025.

The documentary, rather than focusing upon the systemic failures that led to the Southport murderer being free to roam the streets with weapons, looks at the anti-immigration protests and rioting that broke out after the attacked.

The production company, Amos Pictures, have made it "abundantly clear that the rioting was totally disconnected" from Rudakubana's attack on the Taylor-Swift dance class in Hart Street last July, and it is understood that they have recruited the lobby groups 'HopeNotHate' and 'Stand-up to Racism' into giving an account of events.

The Southport Recovery team write: "They have interviewed eyewitnesses, participants, and victims of the disorder that followed across five as yet unidentified [undisclosed] towns and cities in the UK."

Rather than taking local authorities to task, quizzing police officials, and challenging the national government on their inaction towards the extremely violent teenager, the filmmakers have decided to channel their resources into propagating a debunked fallacy – that these "race riots" were unfounded and that professional agitator, motivated by racism were looking to exploit a grieving community.

The notion that the majority of protesters and rioters were "bused" into Southport to carry out violences is not born out in the arrest records. The majority of protesters came from Southport and neighbouring suburbs with only a handful coming from Manchester and Liverpool.

I don't deny, the one could probably pull out 10 or 20 "instigators" who care less about the cause than having a good time. I have no time for such instigator for they enable the establishment – like Keir Starmer and Channel 4 – to dismiss a genuine cry for help as "far-right". Even if such people can nominally claim to have the same concerns about immigration, they sabotage the legitimacy of the immigration debate.

It will be upon this small minority, however, that the documentary will attempt to found their narrative of mob violence, racism, and Islamophobia.

A spokesman from the production company says that, "They condemn the rioting and reject the politicisation of the murders” but have involved at least one political campaign group in the documentary.

Share

The documentary features Weyman Bennett, Secretary of 'Stand Up To Racism' and a 'veteran' of three decades of anti-fascist street protests. In relation to the 'Southport riots' he tells the documentary team, “People are rightfully angry but they're blaming the wrong people. Immigration is used as an explanation for everything.”

The documentary makes a point of asking what they call "a wider question":

"Was the 10 days of mob violence last summer merely the product of a cocktail of beer, high temperatures and bored thugs spoiling for a fight, or was it a symptom of something bigger - a simmering revolt by what Tommy Robinson calls “working class dissidents”?

Tommy Robinson is one individual who was blamed for the disorder. Merseyside Police stated they believed supporters of the English Defence League (EDL) were behind the disturbances until members of the public pointed out the EDL had disbanded in 2013 and has been defunct since 2017.

In truth, whilst the working class have perhaps born the brunt of the negative impacts of mass migration, the Southport Massacre outraged a nation – people of all ages, walks of life, and political backgrounds.

Communities across the UK are having their lives turned upside down by disproportionate levels crime and violence being committed at by foreign born individuals and their dependants living in their communities.

The democratic mandate has failed them for decades with politicians and police alike turning their back upon crime and crimes statistics which were inconvenient to their narrative of multiculturalism and the bottomless virtues of "diversity".

The "grooming gang" or "Pakistani-Muslim rape-gang" scandals were fresh in the public's mind at the time of the Southport attack. Child-victims were mocked, abused and ignored by officials who did not want to admit or break up the gangs in name of preserving "community relations". In reporting of violent crimes committed by people with an immigrant status, the phrase “a man” is often used in place of a description of the perpetuator and has come to be a by-word for “immigrants” in some online circles and a general feeling of contempt for the lack of public transparency about crimes committed by immigrants and their descendants.

The Southport murderer had initially been described by Police and the Press as ‘Cardiff-born teenager’. This gave the public the erroneous impression that a native British white boy had been responsible for the knife rampage against the group of primary-school-age girls. To say the least, this sounded unlikely.

Whilst it is all too common for young men — particularly and disproportionately among black youths in cities — to stab each other in Britain, these attacks and homicides most often occur in instances of gang warfare between adolescents, or one-on-one assaults. It is not a mass attack against a group of girls, especially not girls of primary school age, defenceless, and enjoying a Taylor Swift-themed dance class.

Attacks against this demographic — young girls and women in Western nations — are committed by young-to-middle-aged men with an immigrant status, originating from Arab countries, often motivated by Islam.

The prospect, then, that the suspected perpetrator behind the Southport Stabbing was a white, Welsh, ‘Christian’ boy was both shocking and implausible. Young men from white, devout Christian backgrounds do perpetrate heinous attacks against large groups of young children — namely in school shootings as seen in the United States of America — but such attacks are unheard of in the United Kingdom, and, if true, the attack in Southport presented a terrifying new style of violence rupturing onto Britain’s streets.

British public were condemned by Prime Minister Keir Starmer as wrongheaded and “far right” for suspecting the perpetrator of the Southport attack would be an immigrant, or of immigrant descent, and potentially inspired by radical Islam.

It was, then, with some public anger, that the ‘Cardiff-born karate-loving teen’ — the “quiet choir boy” was named as “Axel Muganwa Rudakubana” — and was:

1. revealed to be a second-generation immigrant — the son of two Rwandan immigrants

2. charged with producing the biological toxin, ricin

3. charged under the Terrorism Act 2000 for being in possession of “a pdf file entitled ‘Military Studies in the Jihad Against the Tyrants: The Al-Qaeda Training Manual’ of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism.”

It is not possible to underestimate the extent to which this gaslighting and slight-of-hand word play fuelled – or even caused – the public outrage.

It is a fact: had Axel Rudakubana's parents had not been given 'refugee status' – eight years after the Rwandan genocide had ended – the Southport Massacre would not have happened. This is true of great number of assaults, murders, rapes and thefts going on in Britain today and the British public – the native population above all – are allowed to be upset about their homeland and people are being exploited and then treated like fools.

It is not for me to say how victims of the Southport attack nor people of Southport how they should or should not feel about the documentary. I respect the experience and opinion of all who found themselves at the centre of this national tragedy; and I understand feelings about what happened both on the day and in the aftermath will evolve for years to come.

I can only speak for myself about the documentary, and it is my opinion is that if the British establishment want to continue to kick the ordinary people of this country when they are down, and go-on construing them as villains in their own oppression, they should not expect a favourable response.

Share

We are six months on from the court case that condemned Rudakubana to a minimum of 52 years in incarceration. This week an independent public inquiry into “what went wrong” has finally begun.

The UK Home Secretary, Yvette Cooper MP, states the ambition of this independent public inquiry is to understand how the killer “came to be so dangerous” and why Prevent – the UK’s anti-extremism scheme – “failed to identify the terrible risk” posed by Rudakubana.

To this end, a public inquiry feels arbitrary. In the moments after the trial, when the evidence of the attack had been laid bare for the public to see, there was a moment of almost collective recognition – that Axel Rudakubana did not fail to come to the attention of security authorities but had routinely, perhaps even deliberately, dismissed by them.

Thankfully, the chairman of the inquiry, Sir Adrian Fulford – a retired barrister, High Court Judge, and Lord Justice of Appeal – seems sensitive to the ongoing distress of the those impacted by the attack and the growing incredulity of the public towards “yet another inquiry”:

“I am deeply conscious that this is yet another public inquiry. The perpetrator’s responsibility is clear…There are grave questions about how this network of agencies failed to identify and act on the risks…This Inquiry is therefore expected to act as a real engine for change given the unparalleled nature of what occurred. I am determined it will not turn into an exercise of papering over the cracks.

— opening remarks of Sir Adrian Fulford, the ‘Southport Inquiry’

Adding to the Home Secretary’s remarks, Fulford states his ambition is to “analyse decisions that were or were not taken” in the lead up to the Southport Massacre.

Share

Phase One – “What went wrong?”

The Southport Inquiry is to have two phases.

The first phase, due to conclude in November of this year, intends to analyse the personal history of Axel Rudakubana, including his personal relationships and his dealings with the agencies charges with his maintenance and monitoring. Axel Rudakubana’s elder brother – Dion Rudakubana – is reported to be taking part in the inquiry which has cause a great deal of distress and concern on the part of victims, their families, and the wider community. His presence is expected to impact victims feeling safe to speak out about their experiences. (More on this to follow.)

Questions will also be asked of local child welfare, mental health services, Police, and the Government’s ‘Prevent’ scheme. Particular attention will be devoted to how information about Rudakubana was shared between agencies and how risks were assessed and addressed.

This, of course, relies upon the supposition that information about the perpetrator was shared between agencies, that risks were identified, and that measures were put in place to mitigate these risks. But the ‘red flags’ are almost too numerous for anyone to believe Yvette Cooper’s declaration that Rudakubana had “fall[en] through so many gaps”.

To name just a few of these red flags:

• A conviction in a children’s court for possession of a knife

• A referral to the youth offending team after his conviction

• Concerns passed on to the local authority by Childline after Rudakubana made several calls to them, one in which he disclosed he planned to take a knife to school

• Attacking other students and staff whilst in school – including with a hockey stick in a corridor.

• His exclusion and non-attendance at school – expelled from one school once and another one twice for violent offences.

• Repeat visits by Police to Rudakubana’s home between October 2019 and May 2022 – Lancashire Constabulary officers responded to calls from Rudakubana's home address no less than five times. All calls related to his behaviour.

• Repeat referrals were made to safeguarding services, children's social care and adolescent mental health services

Let us not forget, he was apprehended in the attempt to commit a mass attack on his old school – Range High – one week before he carried out the Southport Massacre.

Parents of the children who attended the same schools as Rudakubana confirmed the teenager was “well-known” in the community. As reported by Sky News, the daughter of local man, Dylan Pemberton, was three school years above Rudakubana but was still “very aware of him”:

Mr Pemberton: "I asked her, ‘Did you know the kid?’

"And she was like 'Yeah, he was well known'.

"He had tried to attack someone with a hockey stick outside my maths class.

"It was known to her and her peer group that he had a kill list."

Phase Two – the rise of ‘extreme violence’

Phase two of the two-part inquiry will address how young people more broadly are drawn into extremism.

Unlike most senior politicians, Sir Adrian Fulford, seems to hint at some level of responsibility on the part of Rudakubana’s parents – a topic wholly neglected by the mainstream press. He asks how it was that Rudakubana could “order knives online at a young age and then leave home unsupervised.” However, Fulford also asserts that he is concerned with the “wider phenomenon of children and young people who are being drawn into extreme violence and what should be done to reverse the “troubling trend.”

It has been stated that there is a new kind of extremism emerging – young boys being radicalised towards ‘extreme acts of violence’ by content being found on the internet. In light of the Southport Massacre, the Government have changed the definition of ‘extremism’ to included those who are obsessed with extreme violence but who demonstrate no particular allegiance to proscribed ideologies – like ‘radical Islam’ or ‘neo-Nazism’.

I am not yet convinced of the existence of this ‘trend’ – at least, not of the theory as it is presently stands.

There are signs that a new problem may exist.

Hospital admissions for serious knife injuries in 10–17‑year‑olds rose by 47 per cent between 2013 and 2023 – but the total figures remain comparatively small compared to the general population of children this age – 318 cases increasing to 467 cases a year. This means that means approximate one in twelve thousand young people experience a knife injury significant enough for hospital treatment, but the numbers do not make a clear distinction between accidents, self-inflicted knife injuries, and violent assault.

The number of 16–24‑year‑olds killed in homocides involving knives has also increased by 82 percent between 2013 and 2023 – 87 cases rising to 99 cases.

Blame has been laid in different directions, including: cuts to public resources, drill rap music, absent fathers particularly in Afro-Carribean communities, and poverty. But a greater analysis as to the complexity of each of these issues would be needed before any definitive statement could be made upon the matter.

However, this is almost immaterial to this debate since I have reservations about Rudukubana being classed as one of these ‘vulnerable’ types of young men. Which is to say, I do not know how enlightening Rudakubana will be as a test-case: the model of an ‘adolescence drawn into extreme violence’ should not be modelled on him.

Axel Rudakubana is not Jamie from ‘Adolescence’

In the aftermath of attack in Southport, Axel Rudakubana has been liken to Jamie in the Netflix series ‘Adolescence’ — a thirteen year-old-boy who murders his classmate after being radicalised into a hatred of women by the online ‘manosphere’. Prime Minster Keir Starmer — who spent only 11 seconds at the memorial in Southport — so moved by this story of teenage extremism that he did a deal with Netflix to show TV drama in every state-school in the UK: a warning about the national rise of violent young men.

Despite what fiction writers or our Prime Minister might have us believe, Axel Rudakubana was born in circumstance utterly unfamiliar to the (all be it shrinking) majority of children living in England today.

Rudakubana was born to parents who claim to have fled to the UK from Rwanda in 2002 after the genocide of 1994. Rudakubana’s mother – Laetitia Muzayire – indicates on Facebook that she grieves for the loss of family and friends in the genocide, whilst Rudakubana’s father – Alphonse Rudakubana – is thought to have served in the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF) which established the current government led by Paul Kagame.

Both parents lived isolated lives in the UK with few friends and an inconsistant employment record. The Rudakubana’s are thought to have spoken to their two sons about the genocide in graphic detail – discussions which, in turn, are thought to have been a catalyst in Axel Rudakubana’s "unhealthy obsession with extreme violence."

In my discussions with neighbours, I discovered the Rudakubana household was dysfunctional in more ways than one. Beyond the clutter and the mould on the curtains, colleagues of the parents report them as being unstable people — the mother in particular. Some neighbours think it is likely that the parents beat both of their sons, with one reporting that this tended to take place in the morning before before school and whilst playing ‘loud religious music.’

Police inquires have also concluded that Rudakubana seemed to have acted alone.

Contrary to consuming drill-wrap and ‘manosphere’ content, Rudakubana had collated thousands of academic papers upon despotic leaders, warfare, and genocides. In addition to the unabridged study of Al-Qaeda training manual, these papers covered the history of Nazi Germany, violence around Buddhism in Sri Lanka, clan cleansing in Somalia, Rwandan genocide, Iraq and Balkans conflict, victims of torture, tales of beheadings and cartoons depicting violence.

Titles in his possession included:

• ‘A place under heaven - Amerindian Torture and Cultural Violence’

• ‘The Mau Mau War: British Counterinsurgency in Colonial Kenya’

• ‘Death and survival during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda’

• ‘Examination of punishments dealt to slave rebels in two 18th Century British Plantation Societies’

As I covered in January 2025, that these titles focus on of the oppression of black and 'indigenous' people by white, colonial Europeans, and the then-teenager espoused his desire for a "white genocide" and his belief that "Britain needs a genocide like Rwanda.” This is uncomfortable for the Establishment who proclaim that any immigrant born on British soil is equal, moral, and loyal by default, and, as a result, this dimension of his character has gone unexamined – at least in the Press.

I am not challenging the Police’s conclusion on Rudakubana’s motive, foremost because they have never settled on a conclusion. Whilst the fictional Jamie is characterised as being motivated by misogyny, it remains unclear to Police what motivated his attack on children at the Taylor Swift-themed dance class. Whilst some politicians and activist have asserted that the Southport Massacre was a misogynistic attack, this is mainly conjecture, and it is this filling of the vacuum with narratives which are convenience to one political cause or another to which I object.

The Police remain in the dark about how Rudakubana selected his target. Whilst, through my own research, I discovered Rudakubana had been particularly ‘beastly’ to the female residents and members staff at both of the secure children’s homes in which he had lived for a time – ignoring and physically intimidating them – his history of physical assaults have been against males and females and Rudakubana’s original target had been his school which is a mixed-sex school.

On the day in which he carried out the Southport Massacre, Rudakubana did not appear to know where he was going, leading investigators to conclude that Rudakubana had done little research on the target before he had set out to attack the dance class on Hart Street. The working theory of police investigators remains that Rudakubana had most likely been scrolling through Instagram looking for local events when an advert for the dance class came across his timeline.

This, in some manner, is more frightening for some than Rudakubana being motivated by any particular political ideology, for it introduces ‘randomness’ and ‘chance’ to which everyone is vulnerable. And so whilst understand the impulse to explain Rudakubana, and I whilst I give every support to the Southport Inquiry, I caution the panel presiding over this case to fit their theories to the facts of this crime and not the facts to their theories.

It is certain: the United Kingdom will see horrors of this magnitude again. Understanding why Axel Rudakubana was dismissed again and again and again by the people charged with protecting the nation from such criminals is crucial if it they are to prevent other would-be extremist from enjoying the same freedom Rudakubana enjoyed ahead of his attack. But I would ward the panelists, politicians, and policymakers away from using Axel Rudakubana as the model for new ‘anti-extremism’ measures. His circumstances which gave birth to him – in which he curated himself – are unique enough to be almost unrepeatable in nature.

We should not doom ourself – nor debase ourselves – to forever search the world for Axel-shaped holes when evil takes a million form.

Share

His appointment has garnered both condemnation and admiration. Those who applauded the decision to reward Khan do not give an account of the innumerable — that is to say non-existent — virtues he has cultivated over the course of his life but list the accidents of his birth. He is a Muslim, the descendant of immigrants, and has brown skin in a white country. This means, by dint of being alive, he is a courageous, selfless, and noble person. Those who critique the decision to honour Khan are, therefore, suffering from a racism — or at least an indelible phobia. In the minds of those who move through the world with ‘critical race theory’ tinted glasses, this is only rationale explanation for his rejection. Anyone who might object to Khan’s appointment on account of his less than enviable performance as Mayor of London can only be using his shortcomings as a disguise though which they are able exercise their racist instincts.

Khan has been Mayor of London for eight years and in that time it is difficult to characterise his work as generating anything but paralysis. The city’s roads have ground to a halt, street corners piled high with 50,000 abandoned e-bikes. TFL debt has rocked from 1.5 billion to 15 billion. Phone-snatching has become a second economy with over 115,000 phone thefts in 2023 — a theft rate is 19 times worse than Birmingham’s.

Violent crime has also shot skywards. In April 2018, London’s murder rate overtook New York’s. Over 250,000 violent crimes take place in the capital every year with knife crime increasing 54 per cent since Khan’s tenure. Since neither Ken Livingstone or Boris Johnson received Royal honours for their contributions to the city — which includes the introduction of the Oyster Card system and presiding the London 2012 Olympics — it is a struggle to divine why Khan is being rewarded.

To an extent, the outrage at Sir Sadiq’s appointment is outrage toward the ongoing abuse of the honour system itself. Whilst it would be naive to think that the process of ‘ennoblement’ has ever been pure, the recognition — the very definition — of ‘excellence’ feels increasingly corrupted by modern politics.

What is the purpose of the ‘Honours system’?

The instinct of the Honours system (at least in principle) is to reward those who devote their lives to the protection of Britain, and the advancement of her excellence, both at home and abroad.

It recognises those who are considered to be exemplary examples of an ‘upstanding public person’ — people who embody a great number of virtues in their daily life: selflessness, diligence, charity, fairness, humility. These virtues are Christian in origin but are melded with qualities which garner the unique respect of the native British: courage, bravery, fortitude but also wit, daring, and imagination. The one aspect of the British monarchy which might be described as ‘humble’ is its ability to bring together a world of people under one moral framework. This is why hostility towards the Honours system — and, indeed, the monarchy itself — often comes from anarchists and ‘critical theorists’ who reject the moral framework exemplified, rewarded, and sustained by the British monarchy.

Read more

It is true, one-in-ten foreign nationals are claiming benefits in the UK. It is also true, as Nick Timothy MP revealed last November, that 72 per cent of Somalis in the UK live in social housing, compared to 16 per cent of the total UK population; and the housing of illegal migrants in ‘asylum hotels’ costs the tax payer 4 MILLION pounds per day. Whilst the economic impact of mass immigration cannot be ignored, its effects must —surely? — come second to that of the safety of the nation’s women and girls.

And yet the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Safeguarding and Violence Against Women and Girls refuses to launch a national inquiry in to the systematic cover-up of the UK’s rape gang scandal. The much-repeated statement that ‘The inquiry has been had’ is a lie. The ‘inquiry’ in question — Independent Inquiry into Child Sexual Abuse, IICSA, 2022 — did not mention ‘grooming gangs’ or ‘rape gangs’ and named only one of the infamous towns plagued by this scourge. It has fallen to the initiative of Rupert Lowe MP to fundraise public money to launch a private inquiry with the cross-party support of a small number of individual MPs.

If the question, ‘Why did no-one do anything for these girls at the time?’ felt impossible to explain, the question, ‘Why is everyone still reluctant to put a stop to this?’ seems all the more untenable.

In the spring edition of The European Conservative, however, I attempted to explain to the general public ‘Why working class girls don’t matter’ to elites. Whilst, ‘Cultural cohesion’ and ‘Not wanting to lose seats in diverse parliamentary constituencies’ go some way to explaining the psychopathy on display, it does not satisfy the broader question of complicity in social worker and police officers, and the mainstream media’s ongoing campaign to brand victims and whistleblowers as overdramatic, liars, and racists.

The following is an extract from a longer essay — The Altar of Multiculturalism —which can be read in The European Conservative Magazine:

“It is sensed, if not discussed, that had the majority of the victims been middle or upper class girls, this horror would have been brought to an end a long time ago. Why is it, then, that white, working class girls are expendable? Or, to be more brutal, why do the British not value their white, working class girls?

It is not that Western nations are incapable of seeing that men raping adolescent girls is bad. Across the West, child marriage in other parts of the world is recognised as an abomination for a number of reasons: the girl cannot consent, the age difference is a perversion, the girl is not prepared to engage in the sex acts that will be demanded of her, her body is too small, her mind is not yet mature.

Yet, the same is not said of white, working class girls in Europe. To an extent, it is a question of perceived autonomy. Immigrants from the developing world are seen as adults in their motherlands but conceived of as child-like—a romanticized, ‘noble savage’—in the West. If a thirty-something year old man takes a child as a wife in Niger or Bangladesh, there is a palpable injustice in the act. But if a thirty-something year old man from Pakistan takes a 12-year-old ‘girlfriend’ in Bradford? ‘Well,’ the relativists say, ‘it’s a grey area, isn’t it? She’s mature for her age and he is like a child. It is much like a 16-year- old boy dating a 15-year-old girl. Of course the law recognises the need for some vigilance, but mostly it is fine. After all, these 12-year-old girls are almost women.’

But, as has argued, it is our own fault. The deconstruction of the meaning of childhood has left young women more vulnerable than liberated. Progressives champion children being cast in the role of “rational, choosing autonomous subject” but their vision of liberation “leaves little space for partial, coerced, ill-informed or pseudo-‘consent.’” These adolescents—not quite ‘girls,’ not quite ‘women’—‘consent’ to painful and degrading sexual acts because they crave love and affection.

But does this perception of ‘consent’ account for the apathy seen in the police officers and social workers who should have been protecting these girls? What about the girls who went to the police station bruised, bloody, and crying for help? Greater steps are taken in the country to protect dogs from abuse than some children. Is this because a dog is considered to be more human than a working-class girl? I don’t think so—but somehow the dog is seen as more worthy of help or more able to feel suffering.

This order of sympathy also applies across classes. Much like the third-world migrant, there is an innocence ascribed to the middle-class child that the working-class child seemingly lacks. The middle-class child is considered to be autonomous in their successes and a victim in their failures and exploitation. In contrast, the working-class child may receive praise for their successes or their success may be attributed to general success of a ‘system.’ When something goes wrong in the rearing of a working-class child—he or she breaks the law, suffers abuse, or falls in with a gang—it is generally accepted that the child is (at least in part) responsible for what happened…

Read full essay

Explaining why the working class — even their children — are regarded as being of a different, a lower, order of sentience is the question that continues plagues me. To an extent, a failure to see the working class as sufficiently real — as something more than worker ants or ‘Non-player characters’ — is a failure of imagination.

One study in Nature indicated that the compassion felt by ‘conservative’ minded people tended to be expressed towards their family, friends, nation, and humans more broadly, whilst those of a more ‘liberal’ mindset tend to direct their compassion towards more abstract entities, like the global population, animals, plants, trees and inanimate things like rocks.

It could be that the perceived ‘stupidity’ of the working class — ‘mindless’ as Keir Starmer branded those who protested against mass immigration after the Southport Massacre — is correlated with perceived sentience. Animals are a prime example of where a perceived lack of ‘consciousness’ is synonymized with ‘diminished sentience.’ Consciousness, which might be understood as the ability, not only to observe, but, to reason and come to correct conclusions about what had been observed: to perceive. There is a volatility and uncontrollability which (correctly or incorrectly) has long been attributed to the working classes. This volatility tends to be interpreted by onlookers as ‘not thinking’ rather than a lack of concern for middle class social conventions, for example, and such people are condemned as ‘stupid’ rather than ‘different’.

This broad condemnation of the working classes as ‘stupid’ or ‘mindless’ has, at least by my reckoning, lead to the overall depreciation in the perceived ‘sentience’ of the working class. This enables the political class to ask themselves, if only within the privacy of their own heads, ‘Why, after all, would a girl go back to hanging out and living with her rapist unless she was ‘a bit thick? She cannot be suffering that much.’

It is true: whilst some girls were threatened into compliance by their rapists, ‘elected’ to view these men as ‘boyfriends’. These girls often came from foster care or were already being abused at home. Whilst it may not make sense to outward observers — to move from one abusive home to another — for many of these girls, they will have had some of their essential needs met by their new abusers that were not being met by the people who were supposed to care for them. Emotional needs; like companionship, compliments, and a listening ear. Physical needs; like food, a hot shower, or freedom — even if it was freedom to leave the bedroom or go to the local shop. They will have struggled to differentiate between abuse and love because they have never known one without the other.

It is easy to judge when one is unable to imagine oneself in the mind of another, and the further that mind is from one’s own in age and nature and experience, the easier it is to dismiss that mind as a rational, tangible feeling thing of its own: the easier it is for their testimonies to be written-off as ‘inconsequential’ in the grand theatre of politics and the world…

Share

This image is a romanticised hang-over from the Second World War when people from all corners of the globe travelled to Europe to fight and to rebuild. This is a vision of a communitarian world in which the forces of evil and despair are vanquished by collaboration and charity. Whilst this spirit of friendship can be found in individuals the world over, a fatal mistake has been made in ascribing such generosity to ‘groups’ — be it people grouped by race, sex, religion or ‘refugee status’.

As Britain and Europe has been discovering, not all immigrants are benevolent, and the cry of ‘mass deportation’ is growing louder. The sum total of our immigrant population is no longer good-humoured Rastafarians, self-motivated Nigerian doctors, or quiet, patriotic Indian families. Perhaps, this pageant of generosity has only ever been the figment of the English imagination. Whilst, at an interpersonal level, people must continue to be judged as individuals, cultures are not equal in their ability to produce ‘good’ people. And whilst all philosophies and religions are vulnerable to decay and corruption, it remains the case that, across time, some cultures prove themselves to be better than others at producing peaceful, principled, and prosperous people.

Whether one admits to knowing this or not, everyone operates under the suspicion that this is true: they plan their movements knowing that some areas of the city, country, and the world are safer to travel to than others for reasons of crime, conflict, political and religious persecution, medical resources, and sanitation.

If it were impossible to draw distinctions between the quality of nations, cultures, and peoples, one would unable to draw maps, such as these travel indexes, that indicate the relative safety of each country.

Whilst is perhaps impossible to characterise any individual by the ‘safety’ risk of their country — you can find a sinner in Iceland and a saint in Haiti — you can at least predict the likelihood of encountering saint or sinner from these indexes.

Iceland is one the safest countries in the world whilst Haiti one of the most dangerous, particularly in terms of their homicide rate. The nordic country has a homicide rate of 1.1 per hundred thousand people and sees 3-4 murders a year. Iceland has known only one mass-murderer in its history — Axlar-Björn (c. 1555–1596) who killed between 9-18 people of the course of his life. Singapore’s homicide rate is even lower than Iceland’s, with only 0.07 deaths per 100,000 people. This equates to an average of 4 murders a year.

Haiti, by comparison, sees between 4000-5000 murders each year; and whilst the country has a much larger population than Iceland and Singapore, the current homicide rate is 41.1 per hundred thousand people. It is only beaten in deadliness by Ecuador (45.7 per hundred thousand) and Jamaica (49.3 per hundred thousand).

Share

Are European nations becoming increasingly unsafe?

It certainly feels like the streets of United Kingdom and Europe are, in broad strokes, ‘less safe’ than back in the 1990s — before mass surveillance, before mass migration into Europe, and 9/11 our relationship with changed international borders and travel. But is Europe really becoming increasingly unsafe? Is it ‘divisive anti-immigrant rhetoric’ as Right-wing commentators are often accused of perpetuating, or, could it be that Europe is as safe as it ever has been but the type of threat has changed?

In recent years, many European counties have had their ‘threat level’ upgraded from ‘negligible risk’ to ‘low risk’. A threat level predicts the likelihood of an individual falling victim to crime, injury, or serious illness whilst going about their daily life in a particular country or region. Some have attributed the increased threat in Europe to the Russia-Ukraine War. Others have attributed it to the increasing political instability — the purported rise of ‘far-right’ extremism — and the threat of terrorism. I would engage in less handwringing and make a somewhat educated guess that the rapid demographic shift in these countries plays a significant role in the increased disruption, danger and fear being experienced by those living in Europe.

Sweden provides perhaps the best case study in Europe as to the impact of mass immigration upon a small population in a short amount of time. In the early 2010s, Sweden was considered one of the safest countries in the world, ranking 13th out of 144 countries on the Global Peace Index. At this time, the Swedish population had been 9.5 million with 85-90 per cent of people being Swedish by descent. The immigrant population was constituted of Fins from the neighbouring country of Finland, along with settled refugees from the former Yugoslavia and economic migrants from Poland.

Their global peace score began to decrease, however, after 2015 and in 2024 Sweden had ranked 39th in the word for safety, being beating by Qatar, Kuwait, and Oman:

2015 — 14th

2016 — 16th

2017 — 22nd

2018 — 22nd

2019 — 20th

2020 — 22nd

2021 — 25th

2022 — 31st

2023 — 34th

2024 — 39th

In this time, the total population of Sweden has increased by 1.1 million people. The natural population of Sweden has grown by 7,000-10,000 year-on-year as a result of births out pacing-deaths. This means that of the 1.1 million person increase, Sweden’s received between 950,000-995,00 legal migrants in the last fifteen years.

The foreign-born population has also doubled from 10 per cent to 20 per cent with the largest constituency immigrating from Syria, Iraq, Finland, Iran, Somalia, Turkey, Afghanistan and Eritrea. The Polish population in Sweden has grown by 10,000 people over the last 15 years, from whilst the Syrian population has grown from 15,000 to almost 200,000. There are twice as many Syrians in Sweden now as Polish.

As I recently covered in The Critic Magazine, Sweden has since seen a experienced a dramatic spike in the number of drive-by shootings, bombings, and grenade attacks as a result of blood feuds between rival drug gangs from foreign countries.

READ NOW

But Sweden is not the only country to suffer a decline in general safety. Other countries in Europe have seen a similar decline in their global safety ranking over the past two decades, including Hungry which has dropped from 8th place to 14th, Poland which has dropped from 23rd to 32nd, and France which has dropped from 46th to to a staggering 87th — Senegal, Morocco, Bahrain, Jordan and Sierra Leone are all regarded safer to visit than France in 2024.

Read more

I review not one but two books in this month’s print edition of The Critic Magazine. Both books claim to examine the impacts of mass migration upon Europe and yet both writers fail to answer the pivotal question; the question that actually matters ordinary people living amongst the rubble of our ‘multicultural’ societies: “How does Europe regain control?”

Read full review

The first book comes from former Home Office Press Officer, Nicola Kelly. It is called, Anywhere But Here. The title inspired by graffiti Kelly sprayed on the wall inside a migrant camp in the north of France. For immigrants waiting to be smuggled across the English Channel, they claim they would rather be ‘anywhere but here’ in the make-shift waiting camps. For the recipients of these illegal migrants — rural communities up and down the United Kingdom — they want these unvetted individuals housed, ‘Anywhere but here’.

Kelly proposes her work will examine, ‘How Britain’s broken asylums system fails us all’ and yet she cannot help herself in her heartless ridicule of the working class.

She construes those who express fears about immigrants being “rapists” and “terrorists” as either hysterical or stupid, as if crime statistics from the Crown Prosecution Service do not do justice to widespread concerns. MI5 reported last year that 75 per of counter-terrorism efforts in the UK are focused on Islamist extremism. Given that 6.5 per cent of people living in Britain are Muslims, one could say that this demographic is a touch over-represented.

The casual criminality and antisocial behaviour demonstrated by new arrivals palpitates from in book. From bed-matts being stolen and hourly fights to legal documents and phones being dispensed into the English Channel, and women suffering rape and harassment. Kelly, however, has a superhuman ability turn a blind eye to this and find only those migrants who are dispossessed, talented and truly aspirational.

Her suicidal-empathy is endemic to Britain’s socialite establishment class; and their monopoly over the ‘tone window’ of the great migration debate only serves to ‘kick the can down the road’; and, in the meantime, more people are hurt, uprooted and impoverished.

Investigative journalist Diamant Salihu attempts to show what happens when the negative impacts of mass immigration are swept under the carpet in his latest book, When Nobody’s Listening.

Sweden, like Britain, has discovered that not all immigrants are grateful or benevolent. This polite, unassuming Scandinavian country has long been one of the safest nations not only in Europe but the entire world. Yet, over the last decade Sweden has slipped down the world rankings, registering lower for safety on the Global Peace Index than Oman, Qatar and Kuwait.

With more “shooting deaths” per capita than any other country in Europe, what is the reason behind Sweden’s plummeting levels of safety?

Islamic drug gangs.

Since 2015, Sweden has accepted almost a million legal migrants. A majority of these immigrants come from the Middle East and East Africa. They arrive as “refugees” from Syria, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, purportedly fleeing conflict. And yet, since 2015, Sweden has also experienced a mass influx of gang warfare.

This “ultra-violence” is fuelled by a flourishing drug economy which results in almost daily drive-by shootings and bombings on the streets of cities like Malmö, Stockholm and Gothenburg.

This week alone, three people were shot dead in a hair salon in Uppsala, and a mother and her five-year-old girl have been left in critical condition after a gang threw a grenade ‘through the wrong window’.

Bombings are also a regular occurrence in Sweden. In January 2025, there was a gang-related bombing every single day; and a high-profile anti-Islam activist — Iraqi and Islam-apostate, Salwan Momika — was murdered in Södertälje. At present, the only ‘peaceful’ country to experience more bomb and grenade attacks than Sweden is Mexico.

Think about that.

But is not only first and second generation immigrants involved in gang warfare.

Children as young as 12 — Swedish boys from disadvantaged neighbourhoods — are groomed by rival gangs via Signal chats to exact the blood feuds between drug “kings” who avoid prosecution by living in luxury in Spain, Turkey and Dubai.

Salihu examines how efforts by InterPol and Sweden’s law enforcement to crackdown on the multi-billion dollar drug trade are being thwarted by pen-pushers and policy-makers across Europe who are reluctant to name the issue and tackle the violence at its source.

READ FULL REVIEW

In short, ‘We multiculturalism and then we die.’

Anyone who attempts to explode the lie of multiculturalism’s virtues and expose the rates of violent crime among immigrant communities will be excommunicated from liberal and tolerant society and accused of the original sin of racism. Crime statistics are met with knee-jerk ‘whataboutisms’ which are supposed to advance the argument that rape, gang rape, people trafficking, and paedophilia are moral offences which cannot be seen as the unique purview of members of any one particular race or religion.

And yet, figures from the Crown Prosecution Service reveal that prosecutions for rape in 2022-2023 could be expressed in a ratio of 1:1—which is to say that the number of prosecutions for rape between white and non-white ethnicities were near equal. At present, Britain’s non-white population is around 19%, and yet this demographic is prosecuted for half of the rape cases.

In the Spring 2025 edition of the European Conservative , I ask why white, working class girls in particular are viewed as reasonable collateral in the project of multicultural-maxxing by the liberal elite.

BUY NOW

Not only is this my first feature essay in print for The European Conservative, this edition’s striking cover was inspired by my essay. It has been a real milestone and a great honour to inspire action in this way.

As a publisher, The European Conservative invest great time and faith in me, both as a thinker and a writer. Their ambition to make the forgotten voices of Europe heard is unique, and their investment in the next generation of conservative philosophers and poets may be the legacy that survives us all.

If you care about securing the future flourishing of great European art and literature, there is perhaps nothing better you can do than read, and subscription to The European Conservative print magazine.

Learn more about subscription

I explain to Andrew Gold why the Southport triple murderer — Axel Rudakubana — will never be ‘Welsh’ and make the case that Rudakubana cannot even be understood as ‘British’ despite being born in the UK.

Ethnicity is not a costume one can don for political convenience. It is as fundamental as biological sex and perhaps as immutable. But the influence of ethnicity in our relationships, and the importance of the motherland in the formation of our character has been underplayed in order to make multiculturalism palatable and integration possible.

The identities of new arrivals into Britain and Europe — particularly those arriving from the developing world — have been elevated and celebrated to the obscurity of the cultures, traditions, and religions of Europe. As Douglas Murray directed our attention to last month at the Alliance of Responsible Citizenship, Europe believes it has to pretend to have no culture — no flavour — in order to attract immigrants. But this dynamic of surrender and invitation transcends economy…

The supplanting of European cultures, values, ideals by third world ‘indigenous’ peoples and their ‘culture’ is intended to repair the divide between the white populations of the world, and, well, everyone else. In volunteering their cultural and moral achievements for criticism, deconstruction and erasure (quite literally when one observes in the smashing of statues and the removing of literary classics from the state school curriculum), the peoples of Europe can demonstrate contrition for their historic “judginess” — their forthright assertion of moral superiority — during the age of colonialism.

The upshot of this surrender is the disintegration of the European conception of ‘place’ itself. Denied the legal recognition of ‘natives’, the ancient populations of Europe are no more entitled to the fruits of their civilisation than Muhammad from Syria who arrived by dingy yesterday. As politicians distribute bread, bricks, and iPhones to the ‘new world’, the starving masses in Europe look on with vengeance in their eyes…

WATCH NOW

Author’s note — Twitter/X account hacked

Please note that my Twitter account is still hacked. I have been locked out and have not tweeted since Monday 27th January 2025. The only thing to be deleted was my Southport coverage which is…something. I have been cut off from most of my contacts in Southport, along with much of my evidence from the final days, which is why my Southport reporting has been stymied.

Twitter has also refused to give me my account back, first claiming that there is no issue, then claiming they cannot prove who I am. I am working various people to get this investigated and get my platform back. In the hiatus, though, I have not been idle! There are plethora of interviews and essays landing this month and the coming weeks which I am excited to share with you.

Stay tuned!

Liverpool Crown Court judge shows no mercy as he hands down a 52 year sentence to Axel Rudakubana — the Rwandan teenager who pled “guilty” to the Southport massacre which harrowed the nation on 29 July 2024

The following report is only a snap shot of what took place over the course of those six hours inside the court room. Readers are advised that the details of what took place that are vivid and harrowing and should not be read without caution.

Rudakubana thrown out of court TWICE

The day began with disruption and tumult. Axel Rudakubana was escorted to Liverpool Crown Court by substantial security team. They arrived on time but it took 45 minutes to force Axel Rudakubana into the courtroom after he refused to enter the dock. A rumour then began to circulate that Rudakubana had been ill the early hours of the morning.

When Rudakubana did finally arrived in the dock, he sat with his head in his lap. He wore his prison-issue, grey tracksuit, and again could be seen wearing a blue surgical mask over the lower half of his face as he had done earlier in the week.

He did not respond when asked to confirm his name and did not stand when directed.

Proceedings then began and ran for thirty minutes before Rudakubana turned to a dock officer and said: “I’m not fine, I feel ill.” Rudakubana has been silent at every court appearance. Deanna Heer KC — the prosecution — had been reading an account of Rudakubana's crimes when Rudakubana started to shout. “I need to speak to a paramedic, I feel ill,” he said, over and over again. He then got to his feet and addressed the judge. “You’re not giving me any support judge, I feel ill.”

Rudakubana continued to shout for a paramedic as the judge tried to conduct proceedings. The judge then ordered Rudakubana to be removed from court. He shouted: “I can’t remain quiet. I haven’t eaten for 10 days. I feel ill. I’m not going to remain quiet.”

A family member of one of the victims shouted 'coward' as Rudakubana was ejected from the room.

Other relatives shook their heads as he left and Rudakubana had shouted back, “It’s not my fault, I feel ill” and addressed the judge, “Don’t continue!”

Stanley Reiz KC, Rudakubana’s defence barrister, said: “He [Rudakubana] has not eaten for a number of days. He has drunk very little over that period of time. There was concern about his ability to be in a high pressure situation.”

Earlier that morning, The Times reported the 18-year-old had been seen by doctors but was told his issues were not serious enough to delay the sentencing.
Mr Justice Goose had been reassured that Rudakubana was fit to attend and the court would not be suspended in his absence.

After his outburst, Rudakubana was also seen by court room medics who reported that there was nothing wrong with him but were seeking a second opinion.

“Medical staff have seen Rudakubana. They are happy with his state of fitness but would like a second opinion from a doctor.”

After lunch, Rudakubana had been permitted to return to the dock. The defence counsel had reassured the judge that Rudakubana would cooperate moving forward but it took only fifteen minutes for Rudakubana to become disruptive again.

After sitting quietly for a short period with his head lowered he then shouted: “Judge! I feel really ill, I need to be seen by a paramedic.”

When there was no response, Rudakubana shouted: “Judge! Judge! Judge! I need to be seen by a paramedic.” Mr Justice Goose asked dock officers to remove Rudakubana. The judge said: “He has been seen by two teams of paramedics, both of whom agreed he is fit.”

Rudakubana did not return for the rest of proceedings and had not been forced to bear witness to the impact statements of his victims or be in attendance at own sentencing. During sentencing, Mr Justice Goose said, “Axel Rudakubana was determined to disrupt the proceedings so he would not have to face the victims of his crimes and face justice.”

The public are right to feel aggrieved at the injustice of this decision by the judge. A murderer should not be able to escape the hollow gaze of his grief stricken victims. This case demonstrates the human rights of criminals have come to be valued above and beyond the rights of victims. Some families felt further robbed of justice by this decision. It is easy to make the argument that a change in the law is due to force criminals into the dock.

But it not for the public to judge those for whom Rudakubana’s absence is a relief. These parents have already had to bear witness to how this horror has changed their child for the worse. It must produce a similar agony to bear witness to the changes that take place within themselves when they look upon the face of the creature who had maimed or killed their innocent child.

With such a look, anyone could, surely, be isolated from their humanity forever.

Share

What happened the day of the attack?

CCTV footage from the day gives minute-by-minute detail of the attack that took place on Hart Street.

At 11:45 AM on the 29 July 2024, a taxi pull up at an industrial unit. The unit is set behind a residential street in Southport in the north of England. The Hart Space — a small yoga and dance studio — is located beside a mechanics’ garage.

In the rear left hand seat of the car is 17-year-old Axel Rudakubana. He is wearing a green hoodie and a blue medical face mask over the lower half of his face. He looks at the building outside the car window asks the driver, “Is that 34a?”

The driver points in the direction of the building. ‘That’s 34a, yeah.” He asks Rudakubana if he is paying, “Cash or card, mate?”

Rudakubana says nothing. He seems to check his pocket with his left hand and then he gets out of the vehicle, and gives the door a determined slam.

“Oi!” shouts the driver as Rudakubana walks away from the vehicle. “You paying or what?”

The taxi drives alongside Rudakubana with the driver asking: “Are you paying?” He threatened to call the police.

From the taxi’s dash camera. Rudakubana can be seen trying the door of the business beside the Hart Space and then knocking upon the window. He then looks to his right, at a second open doorway, and goes up a stairwell.

In a dance studio, not much larger than a living room. Inside, there are 26 girls — aged somewhere between 6 and 14. They are spread out on the floor and around tables making friendship bracelets. They are singing along to their favourite Taylor Swift songs.

Leanne Lucas — one of the yoga teachers — is by the window. It is hot, and she is letting in a breeze. She spots Rudakubana in the car park below but thinks nothing of it.

Another one of the teachers — Heidi Liddle — is sitting on the floor helping the children to make bracelets when she hears screaming. She looks up.

Rudakubana enters the doorway of the studio — hood-up over his head, the blue, paper face-mask over his mouth. He is lunging forward through a group of children and swoops his knife towards one of them.

The girl thinks Rudakubana is a cleaner and that this is prank until she is staring down in bewilderment at the sight of her own blood pouring out of her.

Leanne Lucas envelops two of the children and feels the knife plunge into her back. She begins to scream. "Run away! Run away!"

Liddle leaps to Lucas’ aid pulling her towards the door but she then switches to pushing the children towards the exit. Behind her, Rudakubana swiping at the children as they scatter across the room. He grapples with one of the girls as she tries to escape. “I don’t want to play!” she tells him.

He stabs her multiple times.

On the landing, one of the girls flee into the toilet. Liddle followed her inside, locks the door and braces her foot against it. She tells the girl to remain very quiet, to not make a sound but they both can hear the screaming coming from the corridor and the studio. Liddle realises with horror that not all of the children had managed to escape.

In the studio another girl is frozen to the spot as she watches Rudakubana stab one of her new friends, and as he turns his eyes on her. He stabs her in the arm and when she turns to protect herself, he stabs her in the back. She does not feel it. She runs towards the stairs screaming for the other children to get out, and when she reached a group of them on the landing she begins to shove them down towards the street.

In this time, Elsie, Alice and Bebe were all inflicted with the injuries that would later kill them. Elsie by the window. Alice by the tables. Bebe at the top of the stairs.

Inside the bathroom, Liddle and the child can hear the girls screaming in the hallway. Rudakubana has followed several of the fleeing children who cry for Rudakubana to “stop.” The toilet door rattles.

A local businessman working in the same building — John Hayes — hears the commotion and opens his office door directly onto Rudakubana. He tries to grapple with Rudakubana but is stabbed multiple times in the leg.

CCTV footages shows children running outside.

A handful of parents who had been lingering in the street outside waiting to pick up their children start and look towards the building. They spring to the children’s aid. One mother manages to grab her daughter and get her into the car. Three other children are also bundled into the vehicle. One is bleed from an injury to her chest.

Window cleaners — Marcin Tyjon and Joel Verite — are driving along Hart Street when they see a group of children running across the road. They are followed by a stumbling woman who is covered in blood — Leanne Lucas. She was screaming “Someone’s stabbing the kids!” They could see that she was injured and that there was a child lying on the ground further along the road.

One mother sees several children running down the street towards her, including her own daughter. She had blood on her legs which the mother mistakes for make-up until her daughter cried, “I can’t breath. I don’t want to die.”

On CCTV footage, in the car park outside, a girl can be seen trying to escape the building. But Rudakubana appears behind her — he’s followed one of the injured girls down stairs as she fled. He drags her back inside.

Moments pass and the girl re-emerge into street. She collapses onto the floor. She has 32 stab wounds.

Rudakubana returns upstairs where he continues to stab the numerous children who already lay dead and dying.

Police have arrived and are running towards the industrial unit. A member of the public tells them: “You need a fucking gun, mate. He’s got a knife.”

Bodycam footage showed officers enter the building and going up the stairs. The white walls that close-in the stairwell are smeared with blood.

The reach the landing, and Rudakubana can be seen standing over the body of Bebe King, clutching the large kitchen knife.

Police tell him to drop the knife. They tackle him to the floor, constraining him, pinning him down as they arrest him for attempted murder.

Joel Verite, one of the window cleaners, had followed the police into the building. As police wrestled with Rudakubana, he picked up Bebe King and carried her out of the building, screaming for help.

Ahead of the kneeling officers there stretches a lake of blood. On the edge of that lake, inside the door of the studio lay Elsie Dot Stancombe. A police sergeant finds her laying on back with what would later be counted as 85 stab wounds to her small body. “It was very obvious she was dead.”

Another police officer find Liddle and the child she had saved locked inside the bathroom. He calls out, “Listen, listen, listen, you’re safe!”

Outside, in the street beyond, girls are barefoot. Some on their hands and knees, with wounds in their backs. Some are laid out across the road and footpath.

More parents are arriving to pick their children up. They are running up the road screaming. Each is looking for their wounded child.

One mother stops as someone calls out to her. The door to one of the houses is open. A woman stands in the doorway. Behind her, several of the girls to whom she has given shelter.

Ambulance crews are arriving — parked haphazardly across the road. In their green summer shirts, they clutch bags of supplies and sprint towards the scene.

One of the girls they attend is Alice Da Silvia Aguiar. She had managed to get out of the building alive but she collapsed beside a vehicle where her heart stopped.

Rescue efforts went on for hours as police began to cordon off the street. The severity of Bebe King’s injuries prevented her from being transported to a hospital. She was treated on the roadside but by 1PM she was pronounced dead. Dozens of girls — including Alice Da Silvia Aguiar — were transported to hospitals across the region but, twelve hours later, Alice had also been robbed of her life.

Rudakubana was driven to the Police station where he was placed in a cell. He was assessed by psychiatrists in the cells who found him fit to be detained and interviewed.

Rudakubana remained silent when he was interviewed but remarked when unsolicited, “I’m so glad those kids are dead.”

Share

Injuries

Over the course of several gruelling hours the prosecution laid bare to the courtroom, the injuries that were suffered by each of Rudakubana’s victims in the 14 minutes that the attack took place. Three girls were murdered. Several others were only rescued from death by the devoted response of the ambulance crews and local hospitals whilst other children were treated for wounds which will impact their health and their confidence for life.

Elsie Stancombe suffered 'at least 85 sharp force injuries'

Elsie Dot Stancombe was pronounced dead at the scene, with the cause of her death cited as multiple stab wounds.

A postmortem examination found that Elsie had suffered “at least 85 sharp force injuries” — stab wounds. “At least.” The proximity of her wounds had been dense enough as to render it difficult to distinguish one wound from another.

The prosecutor went through the many injuries Elsie sustained, including injuries to her arms as she tried to protect herself. “In the opinion of the pathologist, her injuries were untreatable, however quickly help would have arrived.”

She was seven-years old.

Bebe King suffered ‘at least 122 sharp force injuries’

Bebe King was pronounced dead at the scene just after 1pm. She suffered ‘at least 122 shape force injuries’.

She had been found by a member of the public at the top of the stairs, outside the studio door, but forensic evidence suggested she was injured within the studio before she made it out onto the landing. It was then that Rudakubana attacked her again as she lay on the floor.

She was six-years-old.

Alice Da Silva Aguiar died of ‘injuries that were inflicted with severe force’

Alice Da Silvia Aguiar had managed to get out of the building alive despite suffering numerous stab wounds inside the dance studio and suffering a further attack as she fled down the stairs.

By the time paramedics arrived, she had suffered a cardiac arrest. She was taken to hospital where doctors were able to re-establish a pulse but they could not control her bleeding and she had been pronounced dead at 01:20 the following morning.

The post-mortem examination had found a severe head injury which was likely to have caused some bleeding within the brain but the cause of death has been given as “multiple stab wounds.”

She was nine-years old.

It is a miracle any of the children who were attacked that day survived the horrifying ordeal. Each girl that survived a direct attack suffered life-altering injuries.

One survivor had been stabbed 32 times. The little girl who had been seen on CCTV being pulled back into the building by Rudakubana. The prosecution said she was taken to hospital in a life-threatening condition and underwent surgery. She suffered stab wounds to multiple internal organs.

Another survivor had been airlifted to Manchester in a life-threatening condition. She had to have one of her organs removed which will have a life-long effect of her health.

Another survivor required an urgent transfusion due to major blood loss from two stab wounds.

Another survivor suffered eight stab wounds, including a defensive wound to her left forearm.

Another survivor received multiple stab wounds which required immediate hospital treatment to her back and chest. She also suffered two fractures to her back.

Rudakubana also attacked two other young victims, including a girl who having suffered a single stab wound to the back of her chest and another girl who had a gouge to her face and arm which required surgery.

The ages of the victims ranged between 6-13 years-old.

Leanne Lucas, one of the yoga teachers who had shield two of the children with her body had been taken to the Aintree University Hospital in a life threatening condition. She required an urgent transfusion “due to major blood loss”. She was found to have suffered five stab wounds, internal injuries and various fractures from Rudakubana’s attack.

John Hayes, the local businessman who also tried to intervene, needed surgery after suffering stab wounds to his left leg. He required crutches to move after being left immobile at home for a number of weeks. He described feeling lucky that stab wounds he suffered missed arteries.

This is a sanitised account of Rudakubana’s attack and neglects the enduring psychological injuries that are suffered by victims, their families, the other girls who witnessed the attack, the attending emergency crews, and the wider community who knew and loved these children.

This is also to exclude the repercussive fear instilled in families up and down the nation; families who are now forced to choose between constraining their children at home where they can live in relative safety or whether to let into the world to learn and grow but risk the innumerable harms they could suffer in the streets of ‘multicultural’ Britain.

Share

Victim Impact Statements

Over the course of two hours, some of the victims read statements to the court about the impact Rudakubana’s savagery and cowardice has had on their lives. This includes the testimony of two of the girls who had survived being stabbed by Rudakubana.

A selfless 14-year-old survivor reads her statement to the court via video link:

“The beginning of my nightmare started when I saw you. I thought you were playing a joke. I saw you in your green hoody and face mask. The thing I remember most about you is your eyes. You didn’t look human, you looked possessed.

“I watched you stab someone and then I saw you coming for me. It was like slow motion. You stabbed me in the arm and instinctively I turned and that’s when you continued to stab me in the back although I didn’t feel it at the time. All I could hear was the screams.

“I was so scared of what you were doing and I was in a blind panic. I ran out onto the landing and there was a group of girls huddled and I began just screaming for the girls to get down the stairs.

“I remember I was physically pushing them down the stairs to get them out of the building and get away from you. I knew I was running for my life. I needed to try to get everyone out and to safety – that was my first thought.”

Describing the aftermath of the attack, the girl became emotional as she said: “Physically I’ve healed but my scars remain as a reminder of what you did to me, to us all.

“No sane person could do that. It’s sickening what you did, going in there knowing you’re going into a room full of defenceless children.

“Give me a reason for what you did. Arming yourself with a weapon and stabbing children. I hope you spend the rest of your like knowing we think you’re a coward.”

Father “unable to recognise his daughter” because of her injuries speaks out:

“She woke up in the hospital still trying to grab onto her best friend. Still trying to escape him. Still trying to run…She thought Rudakubana was playing a prank and told him she “didn’t want to play” but he attacked her.

“Our daughter has not only experienced the most violent, frenzied attack on her body, but she’s witnessed so much horror too…Her entire childhood has been destroyed by what she experienced and although she survived, she now has to carry that with her for the rest of her life.”

The first child to be attacked recounts how Rudakubana stabbed her

“I first thought that the man who stabbed me was a cleaner and when I saw him and what was happening I thought it was a prank.

“I realised it wasn’t a prank when I saw blood coming out of me. I remember everything being fuzzy and everything that was going through my mind was about my family and friends.

“When I was outside of the building I was thinking what am I going to do as my phone was inside … I had so much blood coming out of me and I was trying to scream, but I was struggling to scream.

“I was thinking, ‘I don’t want to die, I have got to get out of here.”

Heidi Liddle — one of the yoga teachers —“felt completely helpless”

Heidi had locked herself in a bathroom stall with a girl who had fled in their for safety. She had jammed her foot against the door . She recounts hearing the screaming in the hallway beyond and realising the children had not got out.

“I replayed the incident over and over in my mind, changing the sequence of events so that myself and the little girl I was with in the toilet, were stabbed and killed.

“The only time I left the house in the coming weeks was to go and see Leanne and the girls at hospital or to attend the funerals of the three girls, which was heartbreaking.

“I struggled with everyday things, like letting the dogs out, doing any activity that involved me being hunched over, such as hoovering, drying my hair and putting my daughter to bed in her cot, as I envisioned him coming behind me and stabbing me in the back.”

The mother of two girls who survived the attack said the day “changed our lives as a family forever”

“This was meant to be a fun summer event and the girls couldn’t wait to take part…It was a normal day, like any other, it didn’t cross our minds that we should be worried about anything happening to them…It was the worst day of our lives. Both our daughters suffered horrendous injuries at the hands of this one person.”

One of her daughters now has “a complete lack of confidence” and has become “severely self-conscious of her scars”.

“She tries her best to wear her scars with pride, however I have caught her crying about the way she looks and she asks me why this has happened to her,”

They are unable to be left alone for even a matter of minutes…The girls are worried that this man will walk the streets again. This is something they constantly speak about and it petrifies them.…As parents, we feel helpless, we feel guilty.

Leanne Lucas — the injured yoga teacher — also spoke:

“As a 36-year-old woman I cannot give myself compassion or accept praise, as how can I live knowing I survived when children died…You never think this is going to happen to you, I never thought this was going to happen to me and now my mindset has been altered to it could happen to you and it will probably happen to you. I feel that I have lost the ability to accept people now as they are.

“For Alice, Elsie, Bebe and the surviving girls, I’m surviving for you.”

A father read out the statement of a heroic nine-year old victim:

“It has been very hard to deal with what happened to me at Hart Space. I struggle with my emotions and I have scars that I know will be with me forever, but I want to look forward.

“When people in school asked me ‘Do you wish you weren’t there that day?’ I said that, in some ways, I wish I wasn’t, but also, if I wasn’t there, someone else would have been stabbed and they could have died, so I’m glad I might have stopped someone else getting hurt’.”

Her father told the court: “Our daughter is strong…Our daughter loves and is loved. Our daughter sees the best in everyone…Our daughter is everything that Axel Rudakabana is not."

Elsie’s mother “refuses to give Rudakubana the satisfaction” of hearing of Elsie’s life and pain:

“We are not going to stand here and list everything you have taken away from us, because we refuse to give you the satisfaction of hearing it…We will not let you know anything about her [Elsie] because you don’t deserve to know the extraordinary person she was.

“You know what you have done and we hope the weight of that knowledge haunts you every day…This was not an act of impulse, it was premeditated. You chose that place, that time and those circumstances, knowing that when we arrived all we would see was the aftermath of the devastation caused.

“We were robbed of the opportunity to protect our girls. If we had been there, this would never have happened…Though you have stolen our daughter from us, you will not take away our determination to honour her memory, we will carry her love, positivity and her legacy forward, no matter how much pain you have caused."

Alice's parents describe how their “souls have been shattered”

“We were so lucky and privileged to have her…Every day felt like a gift.

“Alice was a beautiful girl, perfect in every way – she loved her school, her friends, music, dance, colourful pens and friendship bracelets…Alice woke up on the day she died excited about the dance workshop and a "perfect plan for a perfect day" playing at a friend’s in the pool later.

“In a matter of minutes our worlds were shattered and turned upside down by the devastating attack on our Alice…A pin drop that changed our lives forever…We kept our hopes up every second during Alice’s 14-hour fight. But, once she had lost her fight, we lost our lives…Our life went with her. He took us too. Six months of continuous pain and a lifetime sentence. That’s what we got then and the life we live now.

“Our dream girl has been taken away in such a horrible, undeserving way that it shattered our souls.”

Rudakubana abused his power” says parents of another injured girl

“This has always been about power and control. This person has abused his power as an adult in the most extreme of ways – to exert planned, sustained and unimaginable horror over the most powerless in our society, our children.

“He will not win, though. He will not gain the notoriety he so desperately craves. He will not be remembered…When we think of Southport, we will think of the girls. Their bravery. Their strength.”

Each of the Victim Impact Statement can be read in full in the sentencing report, and I will post each statement on this Substack in due course.

READ NOW

Members of the public are able to support the victims and families of the Southport attack by donating to the official ‘Southport Stronger Together Appeal’

DONATE

”I’m glad they’re dead”

Rudakubana had been arrested on the scene, standing over one of the victims with the murder-weapon. He had been wrestled to the floor where he is reported to have ‘whined like a little girl’ as attending officers restrained him.

The prosecutor said Rudakubana made no reply to the caution when he was arrested, first, on suspicion of attempted murder, then, soon after, on suspicion of murder.

He was assessed by psychiatrists in the police cells who found him fit to be detained and interviewed but Rudakubana remained silent when he was interviewed.

When he was held in police custody, the killer made number of “unsolicited comments” which were recorded on CCTV footage or noted down at the time.

One of them included Rudakubana saying “I’m so glad those kids are dead, it makes me happy”.

“I don’t care, I’m feeling neutral.” He’s said after murdering Elsie, Bebe, and Alice. But he was almost gleeful. “Literally, such a good thing those kids are dead.”

He is reported to have asked, “How old was the youngest?” in relation to the children he’d injured and killed. The answer was 6 year-old Bebe.

“I’m so glad the children are dead, so glad,” he said. “So happy, six-years-old. It’s a good thing they are dead, yeah.”

Share

No defence

Ahead of the trial, it transpires that Axel Rudakubana’s defence counsel were not going to offer a defence for Rudakubana’s crimes but leave it to the prosecution to prove his guilt.

Rudakubana’s autism spectrum diagnosis had been raised as a point of order in the reading of the first charges and gave an initial indication as to the direction the case would be taken.

To emphasise the impressionability of young men is a defence strategy Stan Reiz KC has routinely employed in the past with clients either being acquitted or having their charges of murder reduced to manslaughter.

The inclusion of Carmel Wilde among the defence counsel indicated that an emphasis would be placed upon Axel Rudakubana youth and character. Wilde has been known to argue diminish culpability as a result of a client’s upbringing or impressionability.

The defence counsel ordered an extensive range of cognitive tests and mental health assessments in the hope (rather than expectation) that Rudakubana might be deemed irresponsible for his actions and unfit to stand trial.

Whilst a high profile case, the murder of children by young violent men is one of the crimes upon which Reiz has built his legal reputation, and yet, come the sentencing hearing, Stan Reiz KC took to the stand and confessed, “For offences of such wickedness, the mitigation...is limited'

Reiz is obliged to say evidence for mitigation is ‘limited’ even when nothing could atone for his client’s actions. Anyone accused of committing a crime in the United Kingdom, however strong the evidence against them, has a right to a defence counsel. Whatever the barrister’s own personal judgement or feelings in the matter, it is his job to prove his client did not commit the crime of which he is accused, and, if the client has already confessed — as Rudakubana did, come the end — the defence counsel must prove that his client is either contrite or irresponsible for his actions.

Rudakubana has never been contrite. He remains pleased with himself.

Reiz also had to concede that, “There is no psychiatric evidence before the court that could suggest that a mental disorder contributed to the defendant’s actions.”

His one line of mitigation, in the end, had been that Rudakubana had made “a transition from a normal, well-disciplined child to someone who was capable of committing acts of such shocking and senseless violence.”

No evidence had been offered as to what caused this ‘transition’ and it remains a mystery upon which the public and the Press have been left to speculate, and the UK government wish to leverage to impose further constraints upon online discourse, internet-based shopping, and freedom of speech in the UK.

Sentencing

Around 4.30PM, eighteen-year old Axel Rudakubana was sentenced to 52 years in jail after receiving 13 life sentences.

Delivering the sentencing in Rudakubana's absence, Mr Justice Goose said it was unlikely Rudakubana would ever be released from prison. For the murders of Bebe, Alice and Elsie, the judge announced, “the sentence must be custody for life.”

The judge pronounced the attack on the Taylor-Swift themed dance class "a mass killing":

“He saw the publicity for a children’s party and decided to kill as many as he could, targeting young children…In time, he was highly likely to use the ricin he had produced…It is equivalent in seriousness to terrorist murders…What he did has caused such shock and revulsion to the whole nation that it must be viewed as the extreme level of crime.”

He continues:

"He wanted to try and carry out mass murder of innocent happy and young girls…I believe he would have killed all 26 children if he could, and any adult who got in his way.”

Mr Justice Goose then concluded by stating, "The minimum term before parole is 27 years.”

Rudakubana can be issued with a life-sentence in name but not in practise. Youth offenders — Rudakubana had been 17-years-old at the time he carried out his attack — cannot be issued with full-life sentences which necessitates the issuing of a time frame in which the offender can expect to apply for parole.

This law is compassionate and judicious when dealing with delinquent teenagers who deal drugs, steal, or carry weapons — young people who, in more favourable educational circumstances and a stable home, might not have committed these crimes. Such young people often come to regret their earlier choices when given the support they lacked and have role models to whom they can aspire. In cases like Axel Rudakubana, however, a teen on the cusp of manhood who acted with meticulous rationality, pride, and force, a law that demand forgiveness can only be interpreted as weak and foolish.

There had once been legislation in the UK — Criminal Justice Act 2003 — which empowered judges to issue a “whole-life order” (WLO) in extreme offences committed by young people. This decision had be revoked in a Court of Appeal ruling in 2019 because imposing a WLO on offenders under the age of 21 was considered incompatible the treaties of the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR).

Axel Rudakubana’s heinous and sadistic mass murder in Southport has not only reinitiated debate over whether offenders under-21 should be subject to whole life orders, but whether the death penalty should be re-introduced in the United Kingdom for extraordinary crimes of depravity and cruelty.

The re-introduction of the death penalty would signal a zero-tolerance approach for offences against the morals of the nation, and would spare the victims and their families the indignity of having their tax money used to feed, house and entertain the sadists who would hurt them, their children, and their community.

Mr Justice Goose did, however, reassure the public that, “it is likely he [Rudakubana'] will never be released” and should he qualify for parole, he will “remain on licence [under supervision] for the rest of his life."

Share

What happened that day in Southport cannot be summed up in the six hours it took for Rudakubana to be sentenced. Each of these girls will be impacted — body, mind and soul — for the rest of their lives by what was done to them in that fateful fifteen minutes. Nothing will restore Alice or Bebe or Elsie to their families. A community of children have been robbed of their confidence, their beloved classmates, and their peace of mind.

Taylor Swift songs will no longer inspire these children to be courageous, bold, and creative — they will hear these songs on the radio and they will become paralysed with fear. They may forever shrink, and look over their shoulder, when walking along a street or entering confined space, not only because one man decided to abuse their innocence for his own pleasure, but because a whole network of government failed to protect them from a beast they knew lived among them.

I will to continue to cover this story to the very end.

It is not for the Press or the politicians to decide when this ordeal is over — it is for the public to decide. For the families, it will never be over. As long as the they have questions which remain unanswered, this must go on. Until action is taken on policing, on terrorism, on immigration, as the public demands, the memories and experiences of these heroic little girls must be carried by all of us. There peace is our peace, and as long as they are frightened, we have a job to do.

Axel Rudakubana declares himself “guilty” of the Southport massacre in a bombshell change to his original plea — his four week trial has been cancelled

Monday 20 January 2025 was supposed to be the first day of the trial of Axel Rudakubana — the teenager accused of murdering three young girls and maiming ten other people at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in Southport on 29 July 2024.

The day was expected to be uneventful with the schedule being dominated by the jury selection process but within minutes of his arrival at court, Axel Rudakubana left the Press in shock as his defence announced they would be changing Rudakubana’s original “not guilty” plea to “guilty of all charges.”

gets my immediate reaction out of the courtroom in this special episode of Dan Wootton Outspoken.

In this hour-long episode, Dan walks me through what happened in this shocking first day of proceedings, including:

• Rudakubana declares himself a triple-murderer

• Rudakubana’s face is seen by the public for the first time

• The first gut-churning details of this massacre emerge in the press

• Reporters are reveal for the first time that Rudakubana had been reffered to Prevent — the UK’s counter-extremism service no less than THREE times before the events in Southport.

I reject the claim that “mistakes were made” and “opportunities were missed” to apprehend Rudakubana before he killed. Leaving your house unlocked and getting robbed is a mistake. The word “mistakes” do not begin to touch the failures in judgement that lead to the deaths of three girls and the maiming of eight other children.

I assert that Axel Rudakubana had not been “missed” by security and support services but that he had been routinely dismissed and underestimated by those charged with monitoring him and containing his violent imagination.

This dismissal forms a substantial part of what had been ‘covered-up’ by the Establishment.

WATCH NOW

Author’s note

Members of the public can support the victims of the Southport massacre by donating to the ‘Southport Strong Together’ appeal.

Axel Rudakubana — the teenager charged with the executing the Southport Massacre — changed his plea to “guilty” of all charges, including the murder of three young girls. There will no-longer be a trial and he will face sentencing at Liverpool Crown Court on Thursday 23 January at 11 o’clock.

Axel Rudakubana originally plead “not guilty” to the sixteen charges laid against him in Liverpool Crown Court; which is to say a “not guilty” had been entered in on his behalf by the Judge — Mr Justice Goose — after Rudakubana failed to speak at his own plea hearing on 18 December last year.

The charges included the murder of Bebe King, Alice Dasilva Aguiar, and Elsie Dot Stancombe, the attempted murder of eight other children and two adults — a dance teacher and a local business man who put themselves in harms way to protect children that day.

Journalists arrived at Liverpool Crown Court expecting a long and gruelling trial. Proceedings had been projected to take 4-6 weeks before the defence counsel indicated they would not be presenting a defence. This curtailed expectations with the trial due to last 2-4 weeks.

The first day, Monday 20 January was expected to be uneventful as the schedule would be dominated by the jury selection process. In high profile and emotive cases it can take hours or even days to form a jury which is sufficiently ignorant of the facts of the crime and the accused — in the Lucy Letby trial it took two days.

Rudakubana was expected to appear in-person at Liverpool Crown Court which had been the main fascination for the Press.

For those following the case in detail, the 'bad character evidence' is why they had attended court. Teachers from Rudakubana’s old school — Range High School — had been granted anonymity to give accounts as to how Rudakubana had been violent and disruptive as a pupil. This would have been the first official glimpse into the teenager’s temperament and would have shattered the pretence of his being a “quiet choir-boy”.

Share

The opening session on Monday morning began 60 minutes late. The public gallery overflowed with Press who were either seated or hovering in a crush in the corridor outside Court 51.

When Rudakubana finally entered the room, he was flanked by four police of officers. He wore his grey prison-issue tracksuit, as before, but this time he covered his mouth with a blue, paper face mask — the kind worn during the COVID years.

His demeanour is far more sedated than his previous fidgety and distracted appearances.

Rudakubana is asked to stand but he does not stand.
He is asked to give his name but he remains silent.
Rudakubana is asked to give his name again but he does not speak.

The defence confirmed the man in the dock is Axel Rudakubana — “beyond dispute.” The judge then asked if Rudakubana is choosing not to speak. The defence confirms this is the case.

To this point, Rudakubana had never made a sound, even when it put him at risk of contempt of court.

The defence then opened proceedings by asking the incitements (i.e. charges) to be read to court again. Onlookers assumed he wanted to remind the court of the matter at hand before making a statement about the approach the defence council intended to take in substantiating Rudakubana’s “not guilty” plea.

The court clerk then asks for the first charge, “Guilty or not guilty?”

A gasp goes up from the gallery.

He had muttered but, yes! Rudakubana had spoken for the first time and he had said “Guilty.”

The clerk then began reading each of the 16 counts of the indictment, with the defendant replying with the single word each time — guilty — and the clerk repeating back: "You wish to change your plea to guilty."

The defence declares this is their new position and the Judge pronounces that Rudakubana is to be sentence on Thursday 23 January at 11 o’clock.

The defence counsel is then asked if there is any other material the defence wishes to place before the court. Rudakubana’s representative replies that says he does not have a psychiatrists report — which attests to Rudakubana’s mental health in the present and at the time of the attack — but wished to submit Rudakubana's "considerable" mental health record which predates the events in Southport on 29 July.

The Judge then asked, "Are there previous incidents that may be relevant?"
The defence says "Yes, my lord."

At this point, Rudakubana had hunched over in the dock and was unable to be seen by those in the gallery. The Judge addresses Rudakubana and says, "You will understand it's inevitable that a life sentence will be imposed upon you." Rudakubana makes no response and he is dismissed and escorted out of the dock to the cells.

What does this guilty plea mean for the trial?

There will be no trial.

Axel Rudakubana has plead guilty to all charges which means he no longer has to be judged by a court of his peers.

The hammer has come down upon this plea and he is to be convicted. It is for the Judge — Mr Justice Goose — to now decide what sentence Rudakubana should be given for his crimes.

The Judge will be in possession of the full facts of the case, and has heard the argument of both the defence and the prosecution. He will take into account the mental health file and his “previous incidents” before deciding Rudakubana’s sentenced.

Rudakubana is expected to be given a ‘child’s’ sentence. He had committed this series of crimes less the two weeks until his eighteenth birthday and, although the judge has handled the case as an adult trial, and Rudakubana has been housed in an adult’s prison, the judge will be forced to hand down a child’s sentence.

There are different sentencing limits for those under the age of eighteen and under the age of twenty-one in the United Kingdom which prohibit a ‘life sentence’ from being issued. It is as yet unclear whether an exception will be made to ensure Rudakubana will never be free to walk the streets again.

The maximum prison sentence the families can expect is thirty-five years and ‘concessions’ could be made, reducing the sentence, if the judge rules in that Rudakubana’s past mental instability contributed to his future mentality and actions upon the day of the attack.

Following the sentencing, Rudakubana is expected to be returned to Belmarsh Prison, where he has been incarcerated since carrying out the Southport attack.

Live coverage on X @astor_charlie

What does this guilty plea mean for the truth?

The Contempt of Court laws constrain what can be said before a jury is formed and before a judgement is passed down to the defendant. A guilty plea means there is no jury to protect from potential bias and the Press, therefore, are now free to report upon the attack and commentate upon the defendant.

A great number of families will be relieved that they do not have to relive the trauma of those days in midsummer: they will not have to take to the stand to give witness statements, nor will they have to endure listening to the screams of their children on Police body-camera footage or revisit those open wounds on their children’s backs, arms, and faces in photographs.

But those same families may be frustrated.

They will not hear the full extent of the evidence against Axel Rudakubana.
They will not know the details of how and why it is was their girls who were targeted. They may not be able to built up a distinct image in their mind of the course of events — and be that much closer to understanding and reconnecting with their traumatised children. They will not get to watch as Rudakubana is himself forced to relive his attack.

The absence of a trial is an issue for the public as well. That which is not mentioned in court before a jury will often fail to be mentioned after the fact. There is no hard and fast rule about the public having a right to this knowledge. Rather, the Police are reluctant to share information, and the news cycle moves onto the next sensation, and, as a result, important facts about the case go unsaid.

It is hard to ignore the fact that this “guilty” plea is convenient for the Government as well as Rudakubana. UK officials, including the Prime Minister, have been accused of mobilising a “cover-up” in the aftermath of the attack. To describe the Southport stabber as a “Welsh choir boy” felt like an intentional deflection from his Rwandan background and violent nature. When riots broke out up and down the country of the murders, accusations of corruption only intensified as Keir Starmer took to a national staged and denounced the public as “far-right” for harbouring concern about the influence of terrorism in the attack — an influence he insisted did not exist.

Without a trial there are no indisputable facts which the public might use to challenge politicians on their previous speeches about Axel Rudakubana and the Southport stabbing. Without the evidence, the public will never have a definitive explanation as to why this attack took the shape that it did.

This is to say that proving a cover-up has taken place and holding any guilty parties to account has become that much harder.

EXCLUSIVE: Axel Rudakubana’s Defence Lawyers Are Offering No Defence for the Southport Stabbing

In the seaside town of Southport, at 11:45 AM on 29 July 2024, a taxi pulls up on a residential street beside an alleyway that leads to a community centre. The occupant of the taxi gets out without paying. A few minutes later, two children — girls of primary school age — are dead. Nine others suffer severe injuries, and some lie dying, their bodies strewn on the road in the street beyond.

By midday, the police have detained a teenage boy — the number one suspect in the attack. His name is Axel Rudakubana, born in Wales to Rwandan immigrants, and he stands accused of executing one of the most horrifying massacres the United Kingdom has seen in a generation. Among the victims are nine-year-old Alice da Silva Aguiar, six-year-old Bebe King, and seven-year-old Elsie Dot Stancombe, along with eight other surviving girls, a dance teacher, and a local businessman.

Whether Axel Rudakubana is guilty of the murder and attempted murder of these unsuspecting children will be decided at Liverpool Crown Court starting tomorrow.

Axel Rudakubana’s defence team offering no defence

It has taken six months for the case to come to court. A second set of (as yet) unconnected charges — the production of the bioweapon ricin and the possession of a version of an Al-Qaeda training manual — were presented to the court, which has delayed proceedings.

The plea hearing had also been delayed by a week, with the defence asking for more time to prepare. On the eve of the trial, I can reveal to the public that:

Axel Rudakubana’s defence lawyers intend to offer no defence against the sixteen crimes of which he has been accused.

The defence barrister revealed at the plea hearing that:

• Axel Rudakubana is not going to provide a defence case statement.

• He says he can offer no positive case on his behalf.

• He is not offering evidence as a defence.

• The prosecution must prove the allegations against Axel Rudakubana.

There will, however, be an application regarding the admissibility of evidence — meaning some items of evidence submitted by the prosecution are being contested by the defence.

An application to admit ‘bad character evidence’ was also entered and will be heard on Monday, 20th January 2025, before the jury is formed .

As a result, the trial is expected to take 2-4 weeks, rather than the projected 4-6 weeks. However, it could take some time for a jury to be formed.

Share

What are the sixteen charges Axel Rudakubana is facing?

Since the attack first took place almost 6 months ago, I will recap the total number of charges which are being brought against Axel Rudakubana in this coming trial:

1. Murder of Elsie Dot Stancombe

2. Murder of Bebe King

3. Murder of Alice da Silva Aguiar

4. Attempted murder of Child (X)

5. Attempted murder of Child (X)

6. Attempted murder of Child (X)

7. Attempted murder of Child (X)

8. Attempted murder of Child (X)

9. Attempted murder of Child (X)

10. Attempted murder of Child (X)

11. Attempted murder of Child (X)

12. Attempted murder of Leanne Lucas

13. Attempted murder of Jonathan Hayes

14. Possession of a bladed article — kitchen knife

15. Production of a biological toxin — namely ricin, contrary to Section 1 of the Biological Weapons Act 1974.

16. Possessing information, namely a pdf file entitled “Military Studies in the Jihad Against the Tyrants: The Al-Qaeda Training Manual” of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism —contrary to Section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000.

NOTE: The surviving children from the attack have their identities protected under ‘Children and Young Persons Act 1933, Section 49’

Share

What does it mean when the defence offers no defence?

In the UK Crown Court, the defence counsel does not provide a defence for their client if they believe it is the best path forward. However, such a tactic is recognised as a risky approach for a defence team. Failure to provide a defence does not result in an automatic conviction — Axel Rudakubana will not be found guilty simply because his legal team offers no defence. Instead, it falls to the prosecution to prove beyond all reasonable doubt that the defendant is guilty of the charges with which he has been accused. The judge will instruct the jury to come to a verdict based on the evidence presented. The jury will still be required to deliberate and decide whether the prosecution has proven the defendant’s guilt beyond all reasonable doubt.

However, failure to present any case on behalf of the defendant could be seen as undermining the defendant’s right to a fair trial. In such cases, the judge might intervene to ensure fairness. The judge can remind the court of the defendant’s right to remain silent, and that his right not to self-incriminate is respected.

What are the benefits of this approach?

There are a few key benefits in allowing a defence counsel not to present a formal or substantive defence in certain circumstances:

• Increasing the burden of proof — As the prosecution bears the burden of proving the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not providing material to the prosecution in the form of ‘no defence’ can sometimes work in the defendant’s favour.

• Not helping the prosecution — The defence is not obligated to disprove the allegations. As well as not offering any ‘counter evidence’ — such as an alibi for the time in which the offence is said to have taken place — the defence counsel can decide not to challenge the evidence. By not confirming or denying the evidence, it makes the burden of proof higher for the prosecution, as they do not have the opportunity to ‘poke holes’ in the defence’s ‘challenges.’

• The facts of a defence would undermine the defence — As the defendant has the option to remain silent and not testify, the defence counsel may decide not to put the defendant at risk by allowing them to take the stand, especially if there is a chance that cross-examination could undermine their case. In this sense, not presenting a defence could be part of a strategy to avoid further incriminating the defendant. If the prosecution's case is already strong, the defence may not see the benefit of making unnecessary arguments or presenting a defence that might only serve to complicate matters. In some instances, it may be in the defendant’s best interest to focus on procedural issues, such as challenging the lawfulness of evidence, rather than attempting to refute every point in the prosecution’s case.

• The prosecution’s case is weak — In some cases, defence counsel may decide that the prosecution's case is weak enough that it does not need to be countered. The absence of a defence can be a way to underscore weaknesses in the prosecution’s argument. The evidence presented by the prosecution may not be sufficient to establish guilt, and a defence may not be necessary to highlight flaws in their case. While there might have been enough evidence to bring charges against someone and bring the matter to trial, the evidence, without a defence, may not be enough to prove guilt beyond all reasonable doubt. In such instances, a jury is unlikely to find in favour of a conviction. This is often the approach in cases of rape, but would, in this case, be unlikely to yield fruitful results.

• Saving court time — More likely, if the defence counsel has assessed the evidence and determined that it is unlikely to result in a successful defence, they may choose to avoid an exhaustive trial process, helping to avoid wasting the court's time and resources.

• Mistrial — In extreme cases, if the defence fails to provide a meaningful defence and it appears that the defendant is not receiving a fair trial, the judge may stop the trial and declare a mistrial. This would be a disaster for the families, and a career-damaging outcome for the defence lawyers themselves. However, such a result could work in the defendant’s favour long-term by further complicating proceedings.

What are the side effects of this approach?

Every defendant, no matter what they are accused of, has the right to present a defence. This includes legal representation. The defence counsel has a professional duty to provide effective representation to their client. This includes giving advice, challenging the prosecution’s case (where pertinent), and presenting a defence strategy. If a barrister fails to do this, it could be considered inadequate representation, which might give rise to an appeal on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel.

If the defence counsel chooses not to present a defence, the defendant may still choose to give evidence or make submissions. For the defendant to choose to speak without a structure provided by his counsel can have a severe impact upon the impression left by a “rogue” client. This particular eventuality is improbable — Axel Rudakubana has, up until this point, failed to speak when requested to even confirm his identity.

Share

What are the possible outcomes of providing no defence?

• Conviction — If no effective defence is presented, the jury may convict the defendant if they believe the prosecution has proven the case beyond a reasonable doubt.

• Acquittal — If the prosecution fails to convince the jury of the accused's guilt beyond all reasonable doubt, the jury can deliver a “not guilty” verdict.

• Hung jury — If the prosecution convinces some members of the jury and not others, and they reject the judge’s recommendation, a ‘hung jury’ could be declared and the trial recommenced.

• Appeal — If a defendant is convicted, they may appeal on the grounds that they did not receive a fair trial due to the failure of their counsel to provide a defence.

In the interest of maintaining a fair trial, I shall not adjudicate or declare which of the outcomes I consider to be the more likely.

DISCLAIMER

The author takes only a professional interest in law. Whilst doing her due diligence, she has not studied or practised law in any official capacity. Her qualifications are a Bachelor of Arts with Honours in English from the University of Cambridge (2019-23).

There will be no platitudes of “mental illness”, “vulnerability”, or “compassion” —Ruduakubana is going to be subject to the full force of the law.

The justice system in 21st century Britain appears to deal out more mercy to the offender than it does the victim. Every week, it seems, newspaper headlines disclose horrifying accounts of rape and murder which are excused on grounds of mental illness and want of understanding. Public feeling that these verdicts are, in some cases, being handed down without due cause and that the jury are overly generous in their interpretation of the accused actions. Someone accused of committing a crime can hardly be said to be “living their best life.”

In the case of Axel Rudakubana — the teenage accused of exacting the Southport massacre — public concern has been raised about Rudakubana avoiding trial or being spared a prison sentence (should a jury find him guilty) with a plea of mental illness. This is a concern shared by some of the families of the victims.

From the reading of first charges on 1 August, it became apparent that Axel Rudakubana’s defence counsel would be looking to make a case that Rudakubana is unfit to plead or bears “diminished responsibility.” for his actions.

Under the ‘Coroners and Justice Act 2009’ — Section 52.1 — a person who kills cannot be be convicted of murder if they were suffering from an abnormality of mental functioning.

At this reading of the charges, it was disclosed to the judge that Axel Rudakubana has an Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) diagnosis. He had been “unwilling to leave the house and communicate with family for a period of time”, relayed the prosecution.

The reaction in the mainstream press was immediate, unified, and one dare say orchestrated. Axel Rudakubana is portrayed as a “very quiet” choir boy. An “introvert”. “Clingy,”recount one of his neighbours to The Mirror. Photos of him as a young schoolboy — several years out of date — were circulated and featured beside image of three girls killed — Elsie Dot Stancombe, Alice da Silva Aguiar, and Bebe King.

The inference had been unmistakable and unforgivable. The press were asking the public, “Should we not be viewing the accused as a victim, also?”

Share

What is “fitness to plead”?

Before a trial, it is for the judge to determine if the defendant — the person being accused of committing a crime(s) — is fit to plead and to stand trial. This is determined on the balance of probabilities with medical evidence, if the defendant raises the issue.

Where the issue of unfitness to plead arises, the court does not consider the accused’s guilt but rather their capacity to understand proceedings. The defendant must be demonstrated to be “under a disability” which renders it inappropriate for him or her to be tried. This can be due to a disability caused by a physical impairment or a mental disorder.

“Fitness to plea” is distinct from a “plea of insanity”. “Fitness to plead” relates to the ability of the defendant to understand court proceedings whilst “Insanity” claims that, at the time of committing the act, the suspect was labouring under such a “defect of reason”.

For a plea of insanity to be upheld by the court, it must be demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant did not to know the nature and quality of the act being done, or, that the suspect did not know what was being done was wrong.

When determining whether or not a defendant is fit to plead, six key questions are asked:

1. Can the defendant fully understand the charge(s) they face?

2. Do significant literacy and/or mental health problems impinge upon the defendant’s capability to interpret the key points of a trial?

3. Can the defendant provide what's considered a coherent explanation of events to their legal team?

4. Is the defendant suitably equipped to understand the course of proceedings?

5. Does the defendant understand the legal advice they will receive?

6. Will a defendant understand what the function of key figures are at a criminal hearing — judge, jury, prosecution etc.?

If the judge finds the defendant to be unfit to plead, then a jury will determine whether or not the defendant did the act of which they are accused, without considering the defendant’s mens rea — lack of intent, diminished responsibility. This is known as a “hearing” and not a trial.

If the defendant does not demonstrate significant impediment in understanding, they will be deemed “fit to plead” and the charges will be carried forward into a trial.

Share

Is Axel Rudakubana “fit to plead”?

It is understood the defence counsel had pursued a rigorous psychiatric assessment of Rudakubana.

Following media emphasis and Rudakubana’s enduring silence, it had been accepted in the public square that Rudakubana is suffering from intense mental illness and struggles to relate to the world as a result of his learning disabilities.

It had been with some surprise, then, that none such cases were presented to the court at Rudakubana’s plea hearing. When the time came for the defence counsel to speak, they offered no defence statement, no psychiatric evidence, and no application for admissibility. In brief, they found him no significant impairment or illness as relates to the “fit to plead” criteria.

It is for the prosecution prove all allegation. This is to say that the prosecution are free to pursuit all sixteen charges.

This is offers a glimmer of hope to the victims and their families. Whilst the pleas of "not guilty" entered on Rudakubana’s behalf will force the families through the gruelling indignity of a courtroom trial, they will not be subject to a watered down justice at the end of it. Should the accused be handed down a guilt verdict, one can — for the moment at least — expect the sentencing to unvarnished by platitudes of “vulnerability” and “compassion.”

Unless events take a dramatic turn, Axel Ruduakubana is going to be subject to the full force of the law.

Why are the media determined to find Rudakubana innocent?

Whilst a great concerns have voiced about prejudicing the trial in the direction of Rudakubana’s guilt, there has been a subtle absence of concern about the trial being prejudiced in the direction of Rudakubana’s innocence. National newspapers have been free to assert that Southport Stabbings are the result of an unmanaged mental health condition, regardless of evidence, or the impact such unconfirmed narratives could have upon shaping the impressions of a jury member before the trial.

Should Axel Rudakubana have been pronounced unfit to plea, there would be wide spread acceptance of this ruling because, well, it makes a great number of uncomfortable questions disappear. The story of a vulnerable and fragile choir boy turned rogue. It is a tragic story, the seed of which was planted in the nation’s mind in the height of summer. Come the winter, a great number of people are ready and willing to believe it, and repeat it, and let the matter pass over into forgotten memory if it makes the event disappear from their social media timeline.

Why?

One must understand, that the story of failed integration and incompatible cultures flies directly in the face of such tenets as, “Diversity is our strength” or “Islam is a religion of peace.”

As soon as a heinous attack has been perpetuated and the suspect is revealed to be an immigrant in background or heritage, it becomes necessary for the Establishment to convince the public — to assert regardless of evidence — that this individual has killed, raped, or maimed because he or she is suffering a mental illness.

Immigrants who perpetrate evil in a foreign land must be absolved of wilful wrong doing, lest their heinous behaviour become a reflection of the place from which they originate or a commentary upon multiculturalism and a challenge the success of mass migration itself.

“Forgive them, they know not what they do,” is, however, a towering request from secular society.

Of course, this framework by which the nation are to interpret new arrivals is not my own but has been handed down to me. As a child, I might have noticed a classmate had different coloured skin as I noticed another had freckles or ginger hair, which is to say, these outward characteristics held no moral content. I understood these features to be superficial to the soul of a person. By the time I became a teenager, however, I had been coached that such ambivalence towards a person’s ethnic heritage was racist: not only should I take into account their background in my everyday interactions with them, I should priorities the recognition of features and understand them as conferring a wisdom and a virtue which I did not, by the nature of my birth, possess.

These claims suited “anti-racist” activists until it emerged that patterns of crime and anti-social behaviour, as well as talents and physical attributes, correlated with race. It was then that conflicting demand was then made of the public — that all virtues a black or brown person possesses (insulting a these totalising labels are) are a direct result of their racial heritage and “ethnic” or “indigenous” background whilst all vices are a direct result of a misunderstanding of that race or culture or religion; or, better still, originate from a force that is independent of their race, such as a mental health condition or a spirit of evil — a psychopathic tendency which is universal to all deprived human beings.

If absolution cannot be secured then compassion is to be laden upon the offender — a public declaration of him having been wronged by society. By this declaration they pronounce, “We understand you” and “We recognise our own culpability in your wayward nature.” But as Adam Smith recounted in The Theory of Moral Sentiments, “Mercy to the guilty is cruelty to the innocent.”

Share

I want no other verdict for Axel Rudakubana than the right verdict.

Instinct is a neglected faculty in the discerning of guilt from innocence. This collective intuition for what is, and what is just, is, afterall, the foundation of British Common Law. But sentiment must be mediated with logic. Justice also exists to protect the accused from the mob instinct — that is until is guilty has been assiduously demonstrated (where guilt exists). It is not to be determined by the shape of a skull or the colour of one’s skin but by blood and fingerprints and the evidence of one’s own eyes.

Each man and each woman has their own opinion as to the right and proper outcome of this case. But it is incumbent upon all of us to have faith, if only for a time, the British judicial system remains capable of delivering judgements as our forebears intended.

Author’s note

Members of the public can support the victims of the Southport massacre by donating to the ‘Southport Strong Together’ appeal.

The vast majority of the victims are white, working class girls whilst the vast majority of perpetuators are Pakistani-Muslim men. This racial element has caused the ritual abuse of these girls to be ignored and covered-up by those charged with their protection — the Police, child welfare services, and political authorities.

This atrocity has been going on for decades and yet the Labour Government voted AGAINST launching an investigation into this historic abuse of our nation's children.

This week in The European Conservative I ask, ‘Why has the grooming gang scourge endured despite the widespread awareness of the horror?’

Read essay