Starmer Accused of Concealing Southport Terror Link with Legal Cover

[Social Media]

Nick Timothy said Starmer had executed “a cynical masterclass in obfuscation”

 

Sir Keir Starmer has faced sharp criticism over claims that his government used contempt of court laws to obscure details of Axel Rudakubana’s terror-related past. Nick Timothy, former joint chief of staff to Theresa May and now Conservative MP for West Suffolk, accused Starmer of orchestrating a deliberate cover-up in what he described as “a cynical masterclass in obfuscation.”  

 

Timothy compared Starmer's handling of the Rudakubana case to Theresa May's transparency during incidents like the Parsons Green Tube attack in 2017. May had publicly acknowledged terror links when they were identified, while Starmer allegedly chose to withhold such details in this case. Timothy pointed to a 2017 tweet from Starmer referencing the Finsbury Park attack, where he openly extended his condolences to the victims of terrorism. He questioned why, in the Southport case, the government refrained from disclosing Rudakubana’s possession of ricin and a terror manual until much later.  

 

“The prime minister would’ve been briefed immediately when the ricin and the terror manual were discovered,” Timothy asserted. “They made the decision not to share that information with the public, and even Angela Rayner called any link to terror ‘fake news.’ I assume they were worried about a public reaction. They would have assumed he was a Muslim, but you cannot cover up details because you need to be transparent.”  

 

Timothy further criticized the government’s approach, arguing that withholding the truth fueled conspiracy theories. “The prime minister doesn’t understand that truth is the antidote to conspiracy,” he said. “Those details were released in October anyway and didn’t jeopardize the trial, whatever the prime minister says today.”  

 

Serena Kennedy, chief constable of Merseyside Police, revealed that her force had wanted to share more information about the Southport case earlier but was advised against it by prosecutors. Similarly, Matt Jukes, the head of UK counterterrorism policing, expressed a similar stance, suggesting legal guidance prevented timely disclosures.  

 

Journalists also expressed frustration over the lack of transparency. The Daily Mail’s crime and security editor noted a “worrying pattern” of law enforcement agencies being instructed to remain silent in high-profile cases.  

 

After Rudakubana pleaded guilty, reporters pressed for the full background of the case to be revealed, citing public interest in understanding the terror connections. Critics argue that the government’s reluctance to disclose key details at the appropriate time undermines trust and raises questions about the use of legal mechanisms to manage public perception.  

 

The accusations against Starmer underscore a broader debate over the balance between legal constraints and transparency in cases involving national security, with many calling for greater openness to ensure public confidence in the justice system.  

 

Based on a report by The Times 2025-01-23