Southport inquiry hears ‘red flags ignored’ before attack

The parents of children murdered in the Southport attack have said “warnings were missed” and “red flags ignored”.

The inquiry into the killings heard from the parents of murdered Bebe King, six, that there had been a “chain of failures, across systems, across services, across safeguarding.”

The hearing at Liverpool Town Hall also heard questions raised about whether the parents of killer Axel Rudakubana had been neglectful in allowing him to buy knives prior to the killings, on 29 July 2024.

A statement from his brother, Dion, heard Rudakubana had become “progressively more isolated from his friends and family” after being expelled from school in 2019.

A statement from the parents of Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, said: “When a parent knows their child is dangerous, allows them to possess weapons and authorities have already visited the home, how is that not neglect?

“If a child were malnourished or unwashed, social services would act immediately. But when a child is surrounded by weapons, involved in violent behaviour and known to be a threat, the system does nothing.

“That is a failure. No action was taken. Why?

“Our daughter paid the price for that failure.

“When does a parent become complicit in a crime committed by their child?”

Nicholas Bowen KC said Rudakubana had walked through “unlocked doors” to murder and maim children using an £8.39 kitchen knife he had bought from Amazon.

He said responsibility fell not only on public bodies failing to protect public safety but also on the killer’s family, who knew but ignored the risk he posed.

Mr Bowen told the hearing but for multiple failures, the families of Bebe, Elsie Dot Stancombe, and nine-year-old Alice Aguiar believed the killer “could have and should have been stopped.”

The hearing was told no one state agency, either in police, schools, health or social services had the “full picture”, but none had “joined the dots”.

Mr Bowen cited the incident two years before the attack when the teenager, who was referred to anti-terror government intervention programme Prevent three times, was reported missing by his family and found by police on a bus, carrying a knife.

He said it likely if a full assessment had taken place, then authorities would have discovered the increasing risk he posed, his purchase of knives and weapons online and the aggression he was displaying at the family home he shared with his parents, in Banks, near Southport.

The killer’s brother, Dion, was said to have had “limited interaction” with his younger sibling in the years running up to the attack.

But he was said to have been aware that police and other services were involved with him.

He “wishes the inquiry to explore whether more could have been done by those agencies” to prevent or minimise the risk of the attacks, a statement read to the inquiry said.

Mr Bowen reminded the inquiry about evidence that the killer had repeatedly taken a knife into his school, saying he wanted to kill another pupil he alleged had bullied him and attacked another child with a hockey stick.

Asked by one teacher why he took a knife to school, the killer replied, emotionlessly and without eye contact: “to use it”, he said.

The teacher was said to have remarked that there “was something so cold” in his response, the inquiry heard.

But despite the involvement of various child health and safeguarding professionals, Rudakubana “fell below the radar” Mr Bowen added.

David Temkin KC, representing 18 families whose children were present during the attack, said: “These families have anonymity by necessity but they ask this inquiry doesn’t remember the face of evil, but rather their brave daughters.”

He said there were many ways the inquiry might consider the killer had fallen “between the cracks” and highlighted missed opportunities related to the killer’s propensity for serious violence, his educational needs and his family environment.

Mr Temkin said there was evidence that during a meeting between Rudakubana’s school, social services and health workers in January 2020 a representative from the child and adolescent mental health services offered a £5 bet for anyone who could predict what happened next.

He said the families were “extremely concerned” about an evidential picture which indicated a “series of system failings, complacency, a lack of curiosity and inadequacy”.

The inquiry also heard the adult survivors of the attack, Leanne Lucas, Heidi Liddle and Jonathan Haynes, had suffered “vile abuse” on social media in the aftermath.

Their legal representative Pete Weatherby KC said Ms Lucas, who suffered life-threatening injuries, had insisted children were treated before her and was the first person to call 999, despite her injuries.

He added Ms Liddle “almost certainly” saved the life of a child she barricaded herself into the toilets with.

Mr Hayes, who also suffered serious injuries, confronted the attacker and, although unable to overpower him, distracted him from attacking others for “vital seconds”, he said.

Mr Weatherby added: “I have set out that summary in the way in which I have because each of the three have been subject to misinformed criticism, some of which, on social media, has been vile abuse.

“None of them want the detail of their actions to obscure the loss and trauma suffered by so many children and their parents and families.

“But it is important to this process, which starts with establishing a true record of what did and did not happen, and to all those affected, that the definitive account records what is materially correct.”

He said the three adults joined others in “urging the inquiry to rigorously look at what should and could have been done differently, and in particular what multi-agency interventions there were or should have been”.

The hearing continues.

• Additional reporting by the Press Association