In his statement yesterday after Axel Rudakubana pleaded guilty to the Southport murders and related charges, the prime minister claimed that law forbade him or anyone else from disclosing details sooner. Was that correct? rozenberg.substack.com/p/could-pm-h... - ThreadSky

joshuarozenberg.bsky.social • 38 days ago

In his statement yesterday after Axel Rudakubana pleaded guilty to the Southport murders and related charges, the prime minister claimed that law forbade him or anyone else from disclosing details sooner. Was that correct?

https://rozenberg.substack.com/p/could-pm-have-said-more

Comments

alanrew.bsky.social•34 days ago

He's a lawyer & is careful when talking about law, an old habit he hasn't given up.

pensionerdave.bsky.social•38 days ago

If past performance is anything to go by who knows.

motosunburn.bsky.social•38 days ago

Perish the thought that a former top lawyer and DPP would know the law.

rockieg95.bsky.social•38 days ago

Like even if the law was somewhat contested on this, you'd expect a former DPP to be especially sensitive to the chance of having prosecutions be detonated by third parties anyway, given that surely that'll have happened to him plenty

diverdan56.bsky.social•38 days ago

If course it's correct,the press has the same information but didn't report it ,because the law doesn't allow them too

defencebrief.bsky.social•34 days ago

I think the Q we should be asking is why people who are wholly unconnected to a crime feel they are entitled to be updated on live investigations. We should be letting police get on with it not treating them as entertainment.

ctmccartney.bsky.social•23 days ago

💯

markdavyd.bsky.social•38 days ago

Yes it was. Are there any other very simple legal questions we can help you with?

daveyg.bsky.social•38 days ago

I think I’m more likely to trust the judgement of a lawyer and former DPP on this than that of a ‘former solicitor’ trying to stir up a story rather than just report on a serious news item!

richardbarge.bsky.social•38 days ago

Yes. I know that as a legal correspondent there is a need for stories, but with a well qualified group of grown ups running the government now, you seem to be tilting at windmills.

lolwhites.bsky.social•38 days ago

The most obvious defence against any accusations of a cover up is that as soon as Rudakubana pleaded guilty, ministers disclosed what they knew.

lornathomas.bsky.social•32 days ago

Why does everyone believe in conspiracies. Too much TV

hommeshanti.bsky.social•38 days ago

I believe KS acted correctly. He knew there would be an outcry from the ill informed. To jeopardise a prosecution and ignore advice from police and CPS would have been extremely foolish.

f1n0.bsky.social•38 days ago

You're questioning the former DPP's ability to interpret and understand laws?

He may be a bad politician but he's already demonstrated he's a lawyer.

mikedugdale.bsky.social•34 days ago

Can't wait for the sequel where the former head of the DPP goes on telly to criticise a TV presenter's presentation! 🙄

wirralexpat.bsky.social•38 days ago

“other attacks were immediately described by the police as terrorist incidents without jeopardising subsequent trials”

This is all about detail which Farage/Tice never engage on

How were police able to make an immediate terrorism call on other cases? What was the evidence base?

timinbath.bsky.social•38 days ago

Yes it was correct. Cautious perhaps but it was absolutely correct to be cautious if it reduces the risk of a dangerous criminal escaping justice.

tomhunter23.bsky.social•37 days ago

How was he going to 'escape justice'? He murdered 3 girls in broad daylight with multiple witnesses. Come on man. That is a total bullshit take.

garycarter.bsky.social•34 days ago

Because if his defence can prove that any jury would be biased because of details of the case being all over the media there is a possibility the case would be dismissed.

timinbath.bsky.social•33 days ago

For the conviction to be secure, the jury must reach their verdict based ONLY on the evidence presented in court.

autisticrvn.bsky.social•38 days ago

Thank god you’re a former solicitor if you can’t even answer basic legal questions like that for yourself. Would be scary if you were still a solicitor!

barbararich.bsky.social•23 days ago

The man is a very well regarded and long standing legal journalist. He presented a BBC programme called Law in Action for many years. He was legal correspondent of a broadsheet newspaper. He has been awarded an honorary KC. A more distinguished career than many solicitors or former solicitors

autisticrvn.bsky.social•23 days ago

That’s even worse then that he had to ask strangers on social media a very basic legal question 🤦‍♀️

vjfreeman.bsky.social•23 days ago

gabrielquotes.org.uk•23 days ago

Have you honestly never heard of a rhetorical question before?
(Hint: this is one.)

barbararich.bsky.social•23 days ago

Do you genuinely not realise that the “basic legal question” was not a literal request for an answer, but a rhetorical question designed to engage the interest of “strangers on social media” in his commentary on the subject, to which he linked in his post?

tonydowson5.bsky.social•23 days ago

1) The question was one that he was answering ... in the article he wrote himself.

2) If you read the article, it isn't necessarily a basic question.

charliehowarth.bsky.social•24 days ago

The claim that the wall of silence was normal can be debunked by pointing at more or less any other high profile case, or the police's own communications guidelines.

The decision to withhold info may well have been justified on public order grounds, but please, don't pull the wool over our eyes.

stevewelling.bsky.social•38 days ago

depends if you ask bluesky or twitter

grahamrb32.bsky.social•38 days ago

Quite simply, yes. Furthermore there was no need to feed the media with more details. Just because the likes of Farage are howling for knowledge to serve their agenda doesn’t mean we change long standing principles of law. What should happen is that social media platforms are held accountable

fieldbean.bsky.social•38 days ago

Farage didn't want knowledge. He was taking advantage of the law to cast aspersions and generate hate.

garycarter.bsky.social•34 days ago

As usual

mikedugdale.bsky.social•34 days ago

Good point. Farage only ever wants confusion where he can appear to have an easy solution.

samueljcrab.bsky.social•34 days ago

Starmer reminds me a bit of Darren Richmond from the Killing. Once elected he becomes the very thing he spent his life fighting against.

rob9194.bsky.social•38 days ago

Starmer made considered , thoughtful & correct response to failings . A total refresh on the last 8 years . Bravo sir

Comments

Posting Rules

Reply