A new report has found failings in the way counter-terrorism specialists dealt with Rudakubana’s case
Axel Rudakubana’s referral to counter terrorism police should have been escalated, a new review has found. At the end of July last year, the murderer targeted a Taylor Swift-themed dance class where he killed three young girls and injured a further eight, as well as two adults.
After Rudakubana pleaded guilty to the murders and several other offences at Liverpool Crown Court in January, it was revealed that he had been reported to Prevent, a task force spearheaded by Counter Terror Policing, three times ahead of the horrific attack. The first referral to Prevent came in 2019, five years before he stabbed children in the shocking attack.
He was he was enrolled at The Acorns School in Ormskirk at the time of the referral after his exclusion from Range High School in Formby.
He was permanently removed from the school after he told Childline he was taking a knife into school for what he claimed was his own protection. He later admitted to taking a knife onto the school premises on 10 separate occasions.
During his time at the special educational needs (SEN) school in West Lancashire, he was found to have displayed violent behaviour and openly discussed guns.
In a learning review published on February 5 by the government it was revealed how he also researched shootings in an ICT lesson. He was also observed to have walked around the school punching objects, such as a laminate signs hanging from the ceiling.
During an art lesson, Rudakubana questioned why he was able to draw images of guns but not search them on the internet. He then asked “can we have a picture of a severed head then?”
The same day as the art lesson, he was overheard talking to a pupil about watching videos of people hurting themselves. The teen also made a graphic comment about a drill bit breaking and killing someone.
It was around the time of these incidents that the first report to Prevent was made. A second came when he was believed to have made posts on Instagram relating to Libya and Colonel Gaddafi. The third was a result of Rudakubana researching the 2017 London Bridge terror attack.
In an independent review following on from the learning review, published by Home Secretary Yvette Cooper and Independent Prevent Commissioner, David Anderson, one expert assessment concluded at the time the right course would have been to progress Rudakubana towards adoption by Channel after he was first referred to Prevent in December 2019.
Had this happened, he might have been offered a mentor who could have made a difference. Read the biggest stories in Wales first by signing up to our daily newsletter here
Channel is the next stage of the process after an initial Prevent referral which aims to divert individuals from being radicalised.
The report was commissioned by the Home Secretary in December last year and was handed the task of looking at Prevent and how it failed in both the Rudakubana case and Ali Harbi Ali’s assassination of Sir David Amess MP in Leigh-on-Sea in October 2021.
It also highlights how specific decision-making of individuals needs to be judged against the standards, guidance and practice of the time. It continues to say those most closely involved to the case will be heard from at the Southport Inquiry.
It urges standards, guidance and process to be improves, with the process said to be underway. The report makes a series of recommendations, including how Prevent should apply to individuals with a fascination of extreme violence or mass casualty attacks rather than limiting it to fixed ideologies.
In its conclusion, the report found that Prevent remains “controversial for sometimes contradictory reasons”, with it failing in both the Rudakubana and Harbi Ali cases. Lord Anderson stated there are promising signs as well as policy dilemmas.
David Anderson said: “The brutal and despicable murders of Sir David Amess MP and of the innocent young girls in Southport have been rightly and universally condemned. My heart goes out to the victims, to those who have lost family members or friends, and to all who have suffered injury or trauma by exposure to these terrible crimes.
“I commend the teachers who were concerned that each of these youths was on a dangerous path, years before their crimes were committed. They did the right thing by referring them to Prevent. But in neither case did Prevent do what was needed to engage with them and protect the public.
“Diverting people from a pathway that could lead to terrorism is a difficult and delicate task. Success is never guaranteed – but the process can work with the help of skilled and committed practitioners, and often does so. When Prevent is offered a chance and fails to take it, it is vital that all possible lessons are learned.
“A huge amount of effort has already gone into making Prevent a stronger programme than the one into which failed to deal in 2014 with the future killer of Sir David Amess. A blizzard of further initiatives has followed the Southport murders of last summer. Though it is too early for all of these to be fully evaluated, taken together they will reduce the chances of such failings being repeated.
“But more needs to be done. It has to be clear that people with a fascination with extreme violence can be suitable subjects for Prevent, even when they have no discernible ideology. Prevent needs to up its game in the online world, where most radicalisation now takes place.
“It needs to get better at information-sharing, and be more open with the public to gain the trust on which it depends. In the longer term, I believe that Prevent could work better as part of a comprehensive violence prevention and safeguarding strategy.”
Get daily breaking news updates on your phone by joining our WhatsApp community here. We occasionally treat members to special offers, promotions and ads from us and our partners. See our Privacy Notice
