The public tend not to see the stabbings as an act of terrorism
Now that Axel Rudakubana has pleaded guilty to the Southport stabbings, a wealth of information about the killer and attacks has been released. The revelations have raised questions about multiple failures by state services to intervene, the government’s definition of terrorism, and the Crown Prosecution Service’s decision to tightly restrict information around the case.
Who do Britons hold responsible for the Southport attacks?
Unsurprisingly, the vast majority of Britons feel Axel Rudakubana holds responsibility for the killings, with 87% saying he holds “a great deal” of responsibility for the killings and a further 4% saying he holds “a fair amount”. Most of the rest (8%) answer “don’t know” – a figure which is the same as the number who said in a prior question that they hadn’t heard of the incident.
Rudakubana’s parents are also widely seen as culpable, with 72% saying they hold responsibility for the attacks, although only about half of these are saying they hold “a great deal” of responsibility.
Counter-terrorism services come in for a similar level of criticism, with 70% blaming them. Rudakubana had been referred to the PREVENT counter-terrorism programme on three separate occasions, but was not considered suitable for intervention under the scheme.
A further 64% hold mental health services with some degree of responsibility for the attacks, as do 59% the police.
The public are more divided on whether Rudakubana’s school is at fault, with 43% saying so but 38% disagreeing.
While Keir Starmer has come in for criticism from some quarters for the attacks, only 28% say the current Labour government has a great deal or fair amount of responsibility. More feel that previous Conservative governments are to blame, at 43%.
Reform UK voters are particularly likely to blame the Labour government, at 63% - far ahead of the 40% of Tories and 16% of Labour voters who say the same.
Were the Southport killings a terrorist attack?
The official definition of terrorism in the UK requires that actions be motivated by a particular political, religious or ideological cause in order to be considered terrorism. Rudakubana is instead said by officials to have been motivated by an unhealthy obsession with extreme violence.
While Rudakubana was not charged with terrorism offences for the Southport stabbings themselves, he was separately charged for having possession of an Al Qaeda training manual, itself a terrorist offence.
When it comes to the public’s view, they lean towards considering the Southport attacks to have not been terrorism. More than four in ten (44%) say “the Southport killings were murder, but not a terrorist attack”, compared to 35% who say they were explicitly a terrorist attack.
More than half of Labour (51%) and Lib Dem voters (55%) see the killings as murder, while two thirds of Reform UK voters (66%) consider them to have been terrorism, and Tories are divided 42-45%.
Did the authorities release the right amount of information?
There have also been complaints that the Crown Prosecution Service was too restrictive with both the police and with journalists on the releasing of information surrounding the case, which they justified as trying to protect the expected trial.
The public are split between 35% who feel the authorities released too little information and 32% who think they released about the right amount. Only 5% think they released too much information.
Labour and Lib Dem voters tend to think the police took the right steps (41-45%), while a plurality of Tory voters (44%) and the large majority of Reform UK voters (69%) say the police were too withholding of information.
A quarter of Britons now falsely believe that Axel Rudakubana is a Muslim, an immigrant to the UK, and was motivated by religious terrorism
A separate YouGov survey, conducted on 20-21 January, shows that misperceptions of the Southport attacker have not only persisted since his arrest, but have increased.
A survey conducted in mid-August, two weeks after Rudakubana was first named, found that 11% of Britons falsely believed that he was a Muslim, and 12% thought that he was an immigrant to the UK.
Since that time, these figures have doubled, with 24% now saying he is a Muslim, and 21% an immigrant.
A quarter of Britons (23%) now also believe that Rudakubana’s motives were religious terrorism – roughly equal to the number who believe that this wasn’t his motive (22%). This also represents a large shift from August, when a mere 4% of Britons thought the motive was religious terrorism, compared to 42% who said it was not.
Rudakubana was born in Cardiff to a Christian family who had previously moved to the UK from Rwanda. While he was found in possession of an Al Qaeda training manual, there has been no suggestion from authorities that he is a Muslim himself, but rather that he has an obsession with extreme violence.
Separately, 24% of Britons believe Rudakubana has been found to be mentally ill – up marginally from the previous poll (20%). However, the number who think he has not been found to be mentally ill has also increased, up to 18% from 12%.
While it has been revealed that Rudakubana had an “autism spectrum disorder diagnosis”, no assessment has found him to be mentally ill – he was, for instance, considered fit to stand trial.
Perceptions of Axel Rudakubana by party
Breaking the results down by party shows that Reform UK voters are far more likely than others to think that the Southport killer is a Muslim. Half (50%) say so, compared to 30% of Tory voters and 17-18% of Labour and Lib Dem voters.
Similar numbers among all parties likewise think that Rudakubana was motivated by religious terrorism.
When it comes to whether or not Rudakubana was an immigrant, Reform UK voters (33%) and Tories (27%) are also more likely than their Labour (13%) and Lib Dem (17%) voting counterparts to say so. However, this is the less common view among each of the four parties, with 39-50% saying that Rudakubana was not a migrant.
See the full results here and here
What do you think about the failings surrounding the Southport stabbings, the way the government defines terrorism, and everything else? Have your say, join the YouGov panel, and get paid to share your thoughts. Sign up here.
Picture: Getty
