The two Conservative leadership candidates have accused police and the government of withholding information about the Southport attack suspect amid claims of a cover-up.
Downing Street denied the allegations after Robert Jenrick demanded an explanation as to why “facts may have been withheld from the public”, after Axel Rudakubana, 18, was charged with producing the poison ricin and a terrorism offence.
Kemi Badenoch echoed Jenrick’s remarks, saying that it was “quite clear that there are serious questions to be asked of the police, the CPS [Crown Prosecution Service] and also of Keir Starmer’s response to the whole situation”.
On Tuesday, Merseyside police announced that Rudakubana, who is accused of killing three girls at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in July, had been charged with two additional but separate offences.
Government sources said the comments made by Jenrick and Badenoch were “despicable” and accused the pair of peddling conspiracy theories and undermining trust in the police.
A Whitehall source said: “What these comments show is that — whichever candidate wins the Tory leadership — a party which used to stand for law and order, and respect for the police, is headed for a future built on conspiracy theories and the undermining of public faith in our institutions and public servants. In the best of circumstances, that lurch into the politics of division and distrust would be hugely depressing, but to do it on the back of the heartbreaking losses in Southport is simply despicable.”
Merseyside police announced that searches of Rudakubana’s home in the village of Banks, Lancashire, in the days after the attack on July 29 uncovered the presence of the biological toxin and an analysis of an al-Qaeda terrorist training manual, titled “Military Studies in the Jihad Against the Tyrants: The Al-Qaeda Training Manual”.
However, the national counterterrorism and policing unit has not designated the attack as a terrorist incident.
For an incident to be formally declared as a terrorist incident it must meet a series of legal tests, including the threat of serious violence, serious damage to property or an act that is designed to influence the government, intimidate the public and be done with the intention of promoting a political, religious, racial or ideological cause.
Home Office sources said significant contingency plans had been put in place by police forces, community groups and government officials to ensure that the announcement of extra charges against Rudakubana did not trigger a repeat of the riots that followed July’s attack after false claims about the suspect were spread online.
Both Tory leadership contenders questioned whether there had been a cover-up after the announcement of the new charges, which came exactly three months after the attack.
Jenrick said he was concerned facts may have been withheld from the public and said Sir Keir Starmer must explain what he knew. He said: “Of course, the legal process needs to be respected but I am seriously concerned that facts may have been withheld from the public here.
“This atrocity was of immense public concern. Any suggestion of a cover-up will permanently damage public trust.
“Keir Starmer must urgently explain to the country what he knew about the Southport attack and when he learnt it.”
Badenoch, the frontrunner in the Tory leadership contest, wrote on X: “After the Southport murders and the ensuing protests and riots, some people asked me why I wasn’t commenting. This is why.
“Too many on all sides rush to conclusions before all the facts are clear. As more information emerges, it is quite clear that there are serious questions to be asked of the police, the CPS and also of Keir Starmer’s response to the whole situation.
“Parliament is the right place for this to happen. While we must abide by the rules of contempt of court and not prejudice this case.”
A Downing Street spokeswoman said it was “not correct” to claim the government had withheld facts from the public. When asked whether there was any government involvement in decisions on the timing of the extra charges, the spokeswoman said: “No, charging decisions and when those are made are for the CPS.”
Nazir Afzal, former chief crown prosecutor for northwest England, said suggestions of a cover-up were more than distasteful. He told The Times: “It’s offensive to those involved in investigating and prosecuting what in this case was a serious and horrific crime.
“People have undoubtedly been traumatised by what happened and it’s offensive to them to suggest that somehow they were part of some kind of conspiracy. The natural course of an investigation of this type of complexity often leads to new alleged evidence and new potential charges. That’s not new and never been new.”
He added: “This is no different to 10,000 other cases that I’ve dealt with. During the course of any investigation, material comes to light, even post-charge, where the police will then work with prosecutors to identify whether or not it’s relevant and admissible to a case and if it is, whether or not any further charges can result.”
• Who is Axel Rudakubana? What we know about Southport stabbing suspect
Yvette Cooper, the home secretary, said: “These additional charges will undoubtedly be distressing for people in Southport. The most important thing is to get justice for Bebe, Alice and Elsie and their heartbroken families, and all those affected by the attack and nobody should put that at risk.
“The police and prosecutors have an important job to do in their investigation, pursuing every avenue and taking the action they need to ahead of the trial. We must support them and ensure that everything possible is done to deliver justice.”
Rudakubana will appear before Westminster magistrates by video on Wednesday to face the two additional charges for production of a biological toxin under the Biological Weapons Act 1974 and possessing information of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism under Section 58 of the Terrorism Act 2000.
He already faces three separate charges of murder for the killings of Alice da Silva Aguiar, nine, Bebe King, six, and Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, as well as ten separate charges of attempted murder and one of possessing a kitchen knife with a curved blade. His trial has been scheduled for January.
Announcing the extra charges on Tuesday, Chief Constable Serena Kennedy of Merseyside police said: “At this time Counter Terrorism Policing has not declared the events of July 29 a terrorist incident.
“I recognise that these new charges may lead to speculation. The matter for which Axel Rudakubana has been charged under the Terrorism Act doesn’t require motive to be established. For a matter to be declared a terrorist incident, motivation would need to be established.”
She added: “We would strongly advise caution against anyone speculating as to motivation in this case. The criminal proceedings against Axel Rudakubana are live and he has a right to a fair trial. It is extremely important that there is no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings.”
No traces of ricin were found at the site of the attack, a dance studio in Hart Street, Southport. Renu Bindra, a senior medical adviser at the UK Health Security Agency, said “there was no evidence that any victims, responders or members of the public were exposed to ricin either as part of the incident or afterwards. Our detailed initial risk assessment judged that the risk to the community and to the wider public was low.”
The PDF found at Rudakubana’s home that led him to being charged with a terror-related offence was a military study of a 180-page “al-Qaeda Training Manual”, which is also known as the “Manchester manual”. The file was found by police on a computer in a flat in Cheetham Hill in Manchester in May 2000, more than a year before 9/11.
An academic analysis of the manual, which quotes it at length, was published by the US Air Force Counterproliferation Center in 2004, written by a former CIA officer.
The document, originally in Arabic, was translated into English by the FBI and parts were released by the US Department of Justice. It offers advice on urban warfare and terrorism along with instructions to operatives on how to establish cells and what to say if they are arrested.
To prove terrorist intent, an individual must have been acting for a “political, religious, racial or ideological cause, which prosecutors call “mindset” evidence that seeks to prove that there is an ideology behind the attack.
The academic analysis of the al-Qaeda Training Manual is at the lower end of terrorist charges. It is still available online through the US Air Force Air Education and Training Command.
However, documents available on the internet can still be illegal to possess if they provide instructions “likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism” and there is no “reasonable excuse” for their possession.