The detective who led the investigation into the Southport atrocity said he would have been “happy” for it to be declared as terrorism as it would have given officers more time to investigate the killings.
However, DCI Jason Pye said there was “no ideology” behind Axel Rudakubana’s attack, although it was “assessed on an almost daily basis”.
Speaking after the 18-year-old was jailed for 52 years on Thursday, Pye said his investigators would have had longer to question the attacker and compile evidence if it had been declared a terror attack.
He said: “We’ve told the families this when it’s like … are we hiding it? Why would you not want to call it a terrorist attack? All day long I’d have been happy for someone to say it’s a terrorist attack … It was assessed on an almost daily basis: is this terrorism?”
But he added that there was nothing in the more-than 160,000 documents seized from Rudakabana’s devices that suggested he had any coherent religious, political or ideological motive.
The mass stabbing at a dance class, which was one of the worst attacks on children in recent UK history, was not declared as terror-related because detectives have found no evidence it was motivated by terrorist ideology.
Keir Starmer has ordered a review of terrorism laws to address “extreme violence carried out by loners, misfits, young men in their bedrooms” amid plans to potentially broaden the definition of what constitutes a terrorism attack.
Pye described Rudakubana as one of “the world’s most evil” killers after the sentencing at Liverpool crown court.
He said most of the 26 young girls who attended the sold-out Taylor Swift-themed event on 29 July “didn’t even know there’s any evil in the world.
“That day was evil and good coming together. The world’s most evil with some of the good in the world.”
Pye said he was told that officers had found a version of an al-Qaida training manual on one of Rudakubana’s devices six days after the stabbings. He said he immediately asked: “Is this not now terrorism? Is this not now terrorism? Is this not now terrorism?”
Under UK law, a terrorist attack must be carried out for the purpose of advancing a religious, political or ideological cause – even if the suspect has been found to possess terrorist material.
Asked whether it would have been easier to charge Rudakubana with terrorism under a wider definition of “no fixed ideology”, Pye replied: “I’ll leave that question for the home secretary.”
He said that for police there was “absolutely no benefit” in the stabbings not being declared a terrorist attack because it meant officers had a maximum of 72 hours to question Rudakubana instead of a week, which is the time limit for terror suspects.
It also meant officers had to compile medical evidence from all 13 victims in just 72 hours when “in any other normal investigation it probably would have took months to get that”.
Investigators had just 39 days to submit a full file of evidence to the Crown Prosecution Service for a decision on whether to charge Rudakubana because he was 17 years old at the time and treated as a youth under UK law.
