Southport attack inquiry highlights ‘fundamental failure’ of authorities

The Southport inquiry has highlighted the “fundamental failure” of authorities to prevent the horrific 2024 murder of Bebe King, Elsie Dot Stancombe and Alice da Silva Aguiar.

The report came out on Monday 13 April. And inquiry chair Adrian Fulford began the report by describing the events of 29 July 2024 as “one of the darkest moments in recent national memory”.

The report concluded by saying that authorities could have prevented the murderer, Axel Rudakubana (whom it refers to as “AR”), from eventually killing Bebe, six; Elsie, seven; and Alice, nine at Hart Space dance studio in Southport.

The report also said AR’s parents should have done more to inform authorities of the risk.

Wholly separately, therefore, from my view that the attack would not have occurred had AR’s parents reported what they knew in late July 2024, if appropriate arrangements and reasonable resources had been in place to address the risk that AR posed to others from December 2019 onwards, it is highly likely that the tragedy of 29 July 2024 would not have occurred.

Southport inquiry: Authorities knew about the risk, but failed to intervene

The report went on to detail the woefully inadequate actions of authorities, insisting that:

There was a fundamental failure by any organisation, or multi-agency arrangement, to take ownership of the risk that AR posed.

Despite authorities having sufficient information to warrant close attention, it added, there was a “pervasive failure to act on AR’s dangerousness”. This was “significantly troubling”, it asserted.

Agencies from social services to the police and Prevent (the government’s problematic counter-terror strategy), tried on numerous occasions to explain away AR’s highly concerning behaviour as a “mental health” issue.

This reflected a poor understanding of both ASD [Autism Spectrum Disorder] itself and a misunderstanding of the ability of mental health services to ‘treat’ or address it.

It should have already been clear for all agencies from 2019 that Rudakubana “posed a high risk of harm to others”.  

In October 2019, for example, he repeatedly carried a knife to his former school with the intention to inflict serious harm.

Then, in December of that year, he took weapons with him to kill a pupil he perceived had previously bullied him, the report shared. Instead, another student was assaulted at random.

Fulford said December 2019 was a “watershed event”.

As the subsequent narrative will reveal, nothing occurred during the next five years to indicate that this level of danger had diminished. To the contrary, as time passed the authorities, with certain minor exceptions, had an
ever‑reducing understanding of AR’s preoccupations and intentions. Interaction between AR and the relevant organisations became, at best, something of a token.

The report also criticised the:

• Severe lack of attention authorities have paid to “online knife and machete marketing” and “inadequate… enforcement of the existing law”.
• “Lack of provision” at Lancashire County Council (LCC) “for violence fixated young people who have been excluded either for acting violently or for carrying knives to school”, and “the impact of combined underfunding and underperformance at LCC which saw no meaningful intervention in alternative education provision for AR for the final two years before the attack”.
• Long waiting times for expert diagnoses.
• The failure of Rudakubana’s parents to fully share information that could have sparked stronger action from authorities.

Fundamental change to fix broken systems

Elsie’s parents, the report noted, have called for “systemic changes in order to prevent similar tragedies” alongside the parents of other survivors of the attack.

They stress that the incident should not be viewed merely as an example of ‘knife crime’ but rather a failure by the authorities to prevent an individual who was intent on harming children from committing these crimes.

Southport councillor Sean Halsall added to this message. He told the Canary:

We need to make sure that everything that comes out of this inquiry is implemented properly and properly resourced, that things aren’t done half-heartedly, that it isn’t a sticking plaster but the fundamental change that makes sure we fix these broken systems.

A key reflection from the inquiry is “the amount of times that state agencies failed the family and those little girls”, he said.

[These authorities] passed the parcel until the parcel exploded, and we’re here with the aftermath of three families who will be forever grieving the loss of their daughters.

Apart from building state agencies that properly support families and individuals in need of special attention, he also insisted on paying attention to how a young person can get hold of a dangerous weapon in the first place. He insisted:

For any teenager to be able to get hold of these things, it’s incredibly worrying and tells me that we are not going anywhere near far enough at regulating these companies that profiteer off of these sales, profiteer off of putting human lives at risk.

He also highlighted that:

We can’t look past austerity and the damage to the social fabric that’s done with removing the youth centres and youth clubs and mental health support services for young people.

There are indeed many lessons to learn, as the inquiry has shown. To truly honour the memories of Bebe, Elsie, and Alice, we need to demand the government learns those lessons and acts on them quickly.

Featured image via the Canary