inquiry

April 13 (UPI) — The official inquiry into the killings of three young girls in a knife rampage in Southport in 2024 by teen Axel Rudakubana ruled Monday that he could have been stopped but for the “catastrophic” and “irresponsible” failures of authorities and his parents.

Summing up at the end of a 9-month-long phase 1 of the public inquiry, the chair, former Appeal Court judge Sir Adrian Fulford, said the attack could have been prevented if Rudakubana’s parents had reported what they knew and law enforcement, child and mental health agencies had reacted correctly to the risk he was known to present.

Sir Adrian said it was “highly likely” that Bebe King, 6, Elsie Dot Stancombe, 7, and Alice da Silva Aguiar, 9, would still be alive if Rudakubana’s parents had spoken up about the lethal weapons being delivered to their home and agencies had taken responsibility, instead of engaging in unacceptable buck-passing.

Rudakubana, who seriously wounded eight other children and two adults in the attack at a Taylor Swift-themed dance workshop on July 28, 2024, is serving a 52-year prison sentence.

“History simply would have taken a different course,” Sir Adrian said, adding that there could have been a number of different outcomes, the most likely of which was that Rudakubana would have been taken into child protective custody or detained in a correctional or other secure facility.

In a statement, Sir Adrian called for urgent government action on the failings of state bodies at both the organizational and individual levels.

“Far too often, AR’s ‘case’ was passed from one public sector agency to another in an inappropriate merry-go-round of referrals, assessments, case-closures and ‘hand-offs,” he said.

Known to authorities since 2019, Rudakubana was referred to a counter-terrorism “deradicalization” program three times and in March 2022 told police he wanted to stab or poison someone after he was found on a bus armed with a knife. Police drove him home and did not arrest him.

There were also missed opportunities to look into Rudakubana’s “chilling” online activities, through which he fueled his obsession with violence via “degrading, violent and misogynistic” material, leading him to assemble a weapons cache, including knives, a crossbow, petrol bombs and ingredients to make ricin.

In his 760-page report, Sir Adrian called for the country’s “failing” multi-agency approach to dealing with problem young people to be scrapped and replaced with a dedicated agency exclusively tasked with handling high-risk offenders like Rudakubana.

Different agencies failed to share information and no one appeared to be clear which, if any, of the agencies was the lead body in the case.

The report also stated how Rudakubana’s actions in the preceding years leading to the Southport atrocity were wrongly attributed to autism due to “misunderstanding” of the condition, “leading to inaction and a failure to address dangerous behaviors.”

“Numerous systems that should have provided oversight, assessment and protection were ineffective or inadequately used. Some failed outright. The consequences were catastrophic,” said Sir Adrian.

Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who ordered the inquiry, vowed to “act on the recommendations” once the inquiry was complete.

In a statement, Lancashire Police Chief Constable Sacha Hatchett said she was “extremely sorry” officers had not arrested Rudakubana in the incident in March 2022 and that “we did not adequately assess the risk he posed.”

Hatchett added that Lancashire Police “fully accepted” the changes recommended by the inquiry.

Lancashire County Council acknowledged the findings and apologized.

“We are deeply sorry for the failures identified and for the part we played in the systemic shortcomings that preceded the attack in Southport. We know that no words can ease the grief of the families who lost loved ones, or the pain of those who were injured and traumatized,’ said chief executive Mark Wynn.

“Since 2019, we have made substantial changes to our safeguarding practice, and the chair’s findings will inform our continued improvement. We are committed to implementing all recommendations directed to us in full,” added Wynn.

Chris Walker, the attorney representing the dead girls’ families, said the system was “not fit for purpose and must undergo fundamental changes to reduce serious risks to society.”

.

WASHINGTON — The Department of Justice has indicated that former Atty. Gen. Pam Bondi will not appear for a scheduled deposition next week before a House committee investigating how the government handled its investigations into Jeffrey Epstein.

Jessica Collins, a spokeswoman for the House Oversight Committee, said Wednesday that the department signaled that Bondi, who was ousted by President Trump last week, will not appear for the deposition April 14 “since she is no longer attorney general and was subpoenaed in her capacity as attorney general.” The committee will contact Bondi’s personal counsel to discuss the next steps about scheduling the interview, she said.

Bondi has faced scrutiny for how the Justice Department handled what are known as the Epstein files, and the Republican-led committee subpoenaed her in a bipartisan vote last month. The department’s release of millions of case files on Epstein, the late financier who sexually abused underage girls, contained multiple errors and ran behind a deadline set by Congress.

After Trump announced Bondi’s ouster from his Cabinet on April 2, Bondi said on social media that over the next month she would be “working tirelessly to transition the office.” But Deputy Atty. Gen. Todd Blanche has been elevated to the top job, on at least an acting basis, and is performing the duties of the department’s top official. The Justice Department’s website on Wednesday still listed Bondi as attorney general.

Meanwhile, some Republicans who had joined Democrats to subpoena Bondi said they would insist on having her appear before the committee.

Rep. Nancy Mace, who initiated the motion to compel her appearance, said on social media Wednesday that “Bondi cannot escape accountability simply because she no longer holds the office of Attorney General.”

Mace (R-S.C.) added that the motion was done “by name, not by title” and that “we expect her to appear as soon as a new date is set.”

The top Democrat on the committee, Rep. Robert Garcia of California, also said he would push to enforce the subpoena and threatened to press for contempt of Congress charges if she does not appear.

In a statement, he said, “Now that Pam Bondi has been fired, she’s trying to get out of her legal obligation to testify before the Oversight Committee about the Epstein files and the White House cover-up.”

The committee’s head, Republican Rep. James Comer of Kentucky, enforced subpoenas on Bill and Hillary Clinton this year, making the former president and former secretary of State, respectively, among the highest-ranking former government officials to be subpoenaed by Congress.

Groves writes for the Associated Press.

April 5 (Asia Today) — A senior South Korean prosecutor refused to take an oath before a parliamentary inquiry, escalating tensions between the prosecution and lawmakers and raising the possibility of coordinated action within the prosecution.

Park Sang-yong, a deputy chief prosecutor leading an investigation into alleged illegal financial transfers to North Korea, declined to be sworn in as a witness during a National Assembly inquiry into allegations of politically motivated prosecutions under the previous administration.

Under South Korean law, witnesses may refuse to take an oath if their testimony could expose them to criminal liability.

Park submitted a seven-page written explanation to the committee chair and left the hearing after about 38 minutes. He later said the inquiry itself was unconstitutional and illegal, arguing that participating would amount to cooperating with an improper process.

“The law allows a refusal to take the oath if justified, yet I was prevented from following that procedure,” Park said after leaving the session.

Justice Minister Jeong Seong-ho criticized the move as “highly inappropriate,” saying it undermined accountability. The acting prosecutor general also expressed regret, calling the incident unacceptable.

The dispute stems from an investigation into alleged payments to North Korea involving a South Korean company. Park has also faced separate allegations of misconduct during the probe, which are under investigation by prosecutors.

Within the prosecution, signs of collective action have emerged. Members of the investigative team reportedly created a group chat, fueling speculation about a coordinated response to the inquiry.

Legal experts warned the standoff could weaken the effectiveness of the parliamentary probe and deepen concerns over institutional conflict between the legislature and prosecution.

Some analysts said the episode reflects broader tensions over the independence of investigative authorities and the limits of parliamentary oversight.

— Reported by Asia Today; translated by UPI

© Asia Today. Unauthorized reproduction or redistribution prohibited.

Original Korean report: https://www.asiatoday.co.kr/kn/view.php?key=20260405010001293