'Rudakubana Plea Hearing'
'Not guilty' plea entered by the judge after Rudakubana fails to speak
One week after he was first due to appear in court, Axel Rudakubana appeared at Liverpool Crown Court via video link from HMP Belmarsh to enter a plea for the Southport Stabbing. A plea of “not guilty” was entered for all sixteen charges by Mr Justice Goose after Rudakubana failed to speak.
Below is detailed report of proceedings and present an analysis of the most significant revelations, including:
Delays due to Rudakubana reportedly being unwell
Rudakubana’s face seen for the first time
“Mute of Malice”
No statement from the defence
Rudakubana possessed Al-Qaeda Training Manual up to 3 years before Southport
Delays due to Rudakubana reportedly being unwell
The day got off to a tumultuous start. The court was scheduled to convene at 10.30 AM in rooms 4-1 and 4-2. Over two dozen journalists had gathered in the public gallery to await a glimpse at the accused and his legal counsel. By 10.45, neither had appeared and the gallery emptied into the foyer. A court usher informed the expectant crowd that the hearing would have a delayed start of 11.00 due to ‘technical issues.’
Come 11.15, the public had still not been invited to return to the gallery and whispers began to circulate that Rudakubana had failed to appear and that he claimed to be feeling unwell.
A court usher reappeared to state that proceedings would not begin until 12 Noon — a time which was then swiftly revised to a tentative 2.00 PM. Members of the public present in Court 4-1 confirm the rumour Rudakubana was unwell: an officer at HMP Belmarsh had appeared via video link at 9.45 to report that Rudakubana was vomiting.
Anxiety mounted and there were fears that the preparatory hearing would be cancelled and postponed for the second time. Some journalists decide to leave. Over two dozen family members were gathered in Court 4-1 and the overflow corridor awaiting news.
Court attendees and members of the public were united in their contempt for Rudakubana in these hours. There was no sympathy. The general attitude was that, unless he was dying, Rudakubana should been given a bucket and made sit there. A number of people suspected Rudakubana of malingering, whilst others suspecting Rudakubana of poisoned himself by consuming a large quantity of salt or eating food at breakfast to which he was intolerant.
The suspicious attitude of those in the public gallery is indicative of the suspicions harboured by the broader public. From the evening of 29 July, the public were told not to believe their lying eyes. The suspect in this frenzied attack did not emerge from an immigrant background, and the crime did not bear the hallmarks of Islam. A Welsh, Christian choir boy had been detained at the scene, and if you suspect otherwise, well, you are a racist and a bigot.
Since this has, of course, proven to be a lie, there remains little faith that this case is being handled with integrity and transparency. From grand bluffs such as these to small yarns like ‘We are experiencing technical issues’, there seems within those responsible for handling the case, an intractable impulsivity toward concealment — an impulse that amounts to more than mere tact or professional discretion. As a consequence, onlookers are disinclined to believe the truth even when the truth is, perhaps, being presented to them…
Thankfully, at 2.00 PM, Rudakubana was pronounced ‘fit to plea’ and the families, Press and public were readmitted to the court. Ten minutes later the prosecution and defence counsel entered, shortly followed by the presiding judge, Mr Justice Goose.
Rudakubana’s face seen for the first time
At 2.16 PM, Axel Rudakubana appears on the video link. He wears his grey prison-issue tracksuit. For the first time since proceedings began his sweater is not pulled over his nose or mouth, and the court is able to see his face.
He is clean shaven. “His face was crystal clear. He is very, very dark skinned” recounts one reporter in the public gallery. “His face is childlike and his hair has doubled in size since his last appearance.”
He is certainly not the shy, Welsh choir boy presented by the mainstream media.
Rudakubana is asked to confirm his name but does not speak.
Early in proceedings, Rudakubana could be seen fidgeting with his hands and swaying side-to-side.
The court clerk asks prison staff to confirm that proceedings can be heard.
“Mr Rudakubana can hear you,” replies a guard, and Rudakubana is asked again to confirm his identity but remains silent.
“Not Guilty”
The judge then proceeded to read aloud the sixteen charges of which Axel Rudakubana stands accused.
For the three counts of murder — Elsie Dot Stancombe (7), Alice da Silva Aguiar (9), and Bebe KingRudakubana (6) — Rudakubana remains silent. Mr Justice Goose has entered a plea of ‘not guilty’ on Rudakubana's behalf.
For the attempted murder of eight other children, the judge lists one-by-one the name and age of each victim. (The identity of these children are subject to reporting restrictions due to their age.) At each request — “Do you plead guilty or not guilty?” — Rudakubana remains silent. Mr Justice Goose entered a plea of ‘not guilty’ for each charge on Rudakubana's behalf.
For the attempted murder of Leanne Lucas and Jonathan Hayes, Rudakubana remains silent. Mr Justice Goose entered a plea of ‘not guilty’ for each charge on Rudakubana's behalf.
For the possession of a bladed article in a public place — a kitchen knife with a curved blade — Rudakubana remained silent. Mr Justice Goose entered a plea of ‘not guilty’ on Rudakubana's behalf.
For the charges of production of a biological toxin — ricin — and the possession of document “likely to be useful to person preparing act of terrorism” — an Al-Qaeda training manual — Rudakubana remained silent. Mr Justice Goose entered a plea of ‘not guilty’ on Rudakubana's behalf.
(Note: If the accused does not enter a plea, the presumption of innocence stands and a plea of “not guilty” is automatically entered on the defendant’s behalf.)
“Mute of Malice”
After the charges were read and the pleas entered, Mr Justice Goose remarked that Rudakubana was “mute of malice.” This is the legal definition for a defendant who wilfully refuses to speak.
This is significant. With this statement, Goose announces that in his professional opinion Rudakubana maintains his right to silence not out of self-protection but out of obstinacy — disrespect and contempt. No doubt the pronouncement rolled freely off his tongue after the four hour delay caused by Rudakubana. Nevertheless, Rudakubana showed up to the trial and ceased has cover his face. It is refreshing to see a figure of authority use their authority to insist upon standards of curtesy.
The resilience of Mr Justice Goose on this day must be recognised. A great service was done towards the families when Goose decided to wait hours upon Rudakubana’s attendance. When the prison reported Rudakubana ill, Mr Justice Goose could just have easily made the decision to suspend proceedings until Rudakubana had recovered. With the Crown Court backlog, there is no doubt pressure upon judges to swiftly move onto the next case if associated figures fail to attend their allotted time slot.
This preparatory hearing had already been delayed by a week and reports of Rudakubana’s sickness left court attendees in fear that the case would be rescheduled and would not be heard again until the New Year. Such a decision would necessitate the trial itself to be rescheduled, and delay the chance of victims’ and families’ to find rest and closure.
They were speared, at least, this degradation.
No statement from the defence
Once the pleas had been entered, it came the turn of the defence to submit any statements or evidence they wish the judge consider in the mediation of the trial.
From the reading of first charges on 1 August, it became apparent that the defence counsel would likely look to make a case for “diminished responsibility”. 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, it was disclosed that Axel Rudakubana had 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 was immediate, unified, and one dare say orchestrated. The mainstream press represented Axel Rudakubana as a “very quiet” choir boy. An “introvert”. “Clingy”, recount one of his neighbours. 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?”
In light of this, it is understood the defence counsel had pursued a comprehensive psychiatric assessment of Rudakubana and a source connected to the defence counsel also reported that they were exploring the possibility of claiming that it was impossible for Rudakubana to receive a fair trial.
It was with substantial surprise, then, that none of these cases were presented to the court at Wednesday’s hearing. When the time came for the defence counsel to speak, they offered no defence statement, no psychiatric evidence, and no application for admissibility. 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" 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 for the sentencing to unvarnished. There will be no platitudes of “mental illness”, “vulnerability”, or “compassion”.
It seems that Ruduakubana is going to be subject to the full force of the law.
Rudakubana possessed Al-Qaeda Training Manual up to 3 years before Southport
Perhaps, the most damning of the revelations to have emerged from the preparatory hearing is the time frame in which Axel Rudakubana is accused of being in possession of "The Al-Qaeda Training Manual" — between 2021 and 2024. That is three years before the Southport Stabbing.
This has dramatic implications, each horrifying in their own right. Police, security, and counter terrorism services have either failed to pick up upon Rudakubana's alleged activities (despite potentially being years in the making), or, they did had been aware of the potential danger and failed to adequately intervene. In short, the savagery suffered by these young girls at a Taylor Swift dance class did not have to happen. It was not inevitable. It was not a random act of God.
It is not only true that this would not have happened had Rudakubana’s parents not been given asylum to the United Kingdom in the early 2000s. There looks to be a significant and, perhaps, repeated failure to prevent the accused from carrying out this attack.
If one were able identify a single motive for the cloak-and-dagger handling of this case, this would be a good candidate.
The preparatory hearing also revealed that “Bad character evidence” will be brought against Rudakubana on 15 January 2025, ahead of the trial. A ‘special measures’ application for staff from Axel Rudakubana’s previous school has also be submitted to the judge.
Special measures are able to be put in place to help victims and witnesses give evidence in a case. Special measures exist to help vulnerable and intimidated victims and witnesses giving evidence to feel more comfortable. This can include amending for how evidence is given at trial, such as giving evidence before the trial happens.
Vulnerable witnesses are classed as being under 18 years of age or suffering a physical or mental disability or condition that would affect their ability to give their best evidence in court.
An intimidated witness is someone who is: (i) frightened or distressed about giving evidence which is likely to affect their ability to give their best evidence in court, (ii) a victim of rape or sexual assault, (iii) victims of modern slavery, or (iv) a victim or a witness of certain offences involving guns or knives.
Whilst one must wait for the trial to commence, this application together with the prologued duration in which Rudakubana is accused of possessing the Al-Qaeda manual paints an picture of a teenage who has failed to integrate into his community, and who has terrorised those around him long before the dreadful events of 29 July.
Whilst it could amount to a contempt of court to comment further upon facts or evidence that will be heard during the trial, as could commenting further upon the defendant’s character, the disclosures which are emerging out of the court give an uncomfortable credence to the rumours which have emerged out of Southport this summer…
DISCLAIMER
The author takes only a professional interest in law. She has not studied or practised law in any official capacity. Her qualifications are a Bachelor of Arts with Honors in English from the University of Cambridge (2019-23).
You’re doing a valuable public service Charlie, thank you.
Great summary! Thank you