Questions asked of Sir Keir Starmer on Southport murders were ridiculous and fuelled conspiracy theories
Sir Keir Starmer has announced the online spread of content in an apparent breach of England’s contempt of court rules will be investigated as part of a public inquiry into the Southport stabbings.
In a Downing Street press conference, the Prime Minister defended the decision taken by authorities not to share information about the case earlier on, saying that to do so would have risked collapsing a potential jury trial.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide Ad

Some opposition MPs had alleged a “cover-up” over the attacker Axel Rudakubana’s contact with the authorities, and said more details could have been disclosed earlier on to prevent an information vacuum.
This argument saw questions from journalists at the Downing Street press conference, asking why the Prime Minister declined to tell the public terrorism was a factor in the case. These questions are ridiculous, ill-informed and encourage misinformation.
As Sir Keir argued, if the government and authorities had shared more information, it could have potentially jeopardised a trial and delayed justice. There is an argument information could have been released before Rudakubana was charged. But that's a two-day window of legal constraints.


This should not be a surprise. Training as a journalist, media law is the most important module. You are taught what you can and can’t report from legal cases.
Advertisement
Hide AdAdvertisement
Hide AdWhen I worked as a court reporter for two years, predominately at the Old Bailey, England’s highest court, I frequently would learn things I could not report until after the trial. It’s an important part of justice and ensures a fair trial.
Reform UK leader Nigel Farage has now labelled the Prime Minister “Cover-Up Keir”, missing the point entirely. Withholding information isn’t a scandal, it’s the law.
Contempt of court laws exist to prevent interference in legal proceedings and apply to everyone, from journalists to online commentators publishing information on social media. What Sir Keir and the government knew will also have been known by journalists covering the crime. They were not hiding the truth, but doing the right thing and letting the law take its natural course.
The Prime Minister has been clear about what he knew and why some information was not disclosed. His critics of this, Mr Farage and former Tory leadership contender Robert Jenrick, must now answer if they would have done the same, or ignored the rule and potentially disrupted the trial of a murderer.
Comments
Want to join the conversation? Please or to comment on this article.