On July 29, 2024, a horrifying tragedy struck Southport when Axel Rudakubana, then 19, murdered three young girls and injured several others at a Taylor Swift-themed dance workshop. The aftermath of the attack has continued to reverberate through the community, not only for the brutality of the crime but also for the lingering questions about accountability, particularly regarding the actions—or inactions—of the killer’s parents, Alphonse Rudakubana and Laetitia Muzayire.
Now, more than a year later, Merseyside Police have confirmed they are re-examining the parents' conduct in light of new testimony provided at the public inquiry into the attack. According to BBC News, detectives will obtain and review full transcripts of the parents’ verbal evidence, delivered in early November 2025, to determine whether new information came to light that had previously been unknown to authorities. This move comes after the police had, in June 2025, decided that the evidence available at the time did not meet the threshold for referral to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) for potential criminal charges.
The renewed scrutiny was prompted by the parents’ own admissions during the inquiry. Alphonse Rudakubana told the inquiry panel, “I regret that I didn't tell the police because, if I did, what happened on the 29th wouldn't have happened. They would have come and checked everything in his room.” He acknowledged intercepting a package containing a machete that his son had ordered online in June 2023 and hiding it on top of a wardrobe, but failing to inform any agency—including mental health services, police, or social services—about the discovery.
Further, Mr. Rudakubana admitted to stopping his son from leaving their home by taxi on July 22, 2024, suspecting that Axel, who had been expelled from Range High School in Formby in 2019, was planning an attack on the school. “I had no authority as a father, I had no power at all left to stop him from accessing anything he wanted online,” he explained, referencing his inability to restrict his son’s internet use despite warnings from teachers about Axel viewing graphic and violent content.
According to Daily Mail, the parents’ inaction extended to a pattern of behavior. The couple, who survived the Rwandan genocide before seeking asylum in the UK, admitted they knew their son had amassed an arsenal of knives and other weapons and was planning violence. Yet, they did not report their concerns to any authorities, even after Mr. Rudakubana prevented Axel from leaving for what he suspected was a planned attack. He confessed that he was “ashamed” of allowing Axel’s violence to persist in the household and that fear—both for his son being taken into care and for his own safety—played a role in their silence. Mrs. Muzayire, for her part, told the inquiry, “There are many things that Alphonse and I wish we had done differently, anything that might have prevented the horrific event of July 29, 2024. For our failure, we are profoundly sorry. We pray every day for the children and their families, and for God’s comfort to surround them.”
The public reaction has been one of outrage and grief, especially among the bereaved families. Jenni and David Stancombe, parents of seven-year-old Elsie Dot Stancombe, declared, “They knew how dangerous he was, yet they stayed silent. They failed not only as parents but as members of our society.” Lauren and Ben King, whose daughter Bebe was just six, added, “What we're struggling to comprehend is not just [the killer's parents'] failure then, but their failure now—to acknowledge, to take responsibility, to face up to what they allowed to happen.” In written statements, the families described the parents’ evidence as “deeply disturbing and shameful,” emphasizing that “time after time, they had opportunities to intervene, to stop this, to protect others. If they had acted with any real sense of duty, Bebe, Elsie and Alice would still be here. It is that simple.”
Solicitor Chris Walker, from law firm Bond Turner and representing the families of Elsie, Bebe, and Alice da Silva Aguiar (nine), has been vocal in his support for the police’s decision to re-examine the case. Quoted by NationalWorld and Daily Mail, Walker stated, “On behalf of the three bereaved families, we wish to express our full support for any reopening or re-examination of the evidence in relation to the conduct of AR’s parents. Any further inquiry into the behaviour in question is unequivocally supported by all of our clients. We are confident that a criminal investigation will conclude that an offence has been committed.”
The legal complexities of the case are further complicated by an undertaking from the Attorney General to the inquiry, which means that evidence given by witnesses in the inquiry cannot be used in any investigation or prosecution of those witnesses, either generally or for specific offences. This legal protection could potentially limit the scope of any criminal proceedings, even if new evidence is uncovered.
Meanwhile, the Southport Inquiry itself has concluded the first phase of its oral hearings. Chaired by Sir Adrian Fulford, the inquiry has focused initially on the events of the attack and the background of Axel Rudakubana. The second phase, expected to open after Fulford’s report is published in spring 2026, will examine the broader issue of young people’s obsession with violence and strategies for managing such risks in society.
Axel Rudakubana, described as a former stage school star who once appeared in a BBC Children in Need advert, was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 52 years at Liverpool Crown Court in January 2025. The details that emerged during his trial and the subsequent inquiry painted a picture of escalating violence and missed opportunities for intervention. His parents’ admissions have only deepened the sense of loss and frustration among the victims’ families.
The Southport community, still reeling from the events of that summer day, now waits to see if the renewed police inquiry will bring any further accountability. For many, the question is not just about justice for the past, but about ensuring that such a tragedy is never repeated. As the families of the victims have made clear, the responsibility to act in the face of danger is not only a parental duty but a societal one. The coming months may finally determine whether the law agrees.
