From the Guardian, 1 August:
A 17-year-old boy accused of murdering three girls at a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in Southport can be named as Axel Rudakubana.
… He will next appear at Liverpool crown court, on 25 October, and a provisional trial date, lasting six weeks, was scheduled for 20 January.
That provisional date was later confirmed in November: it seems reasonable that a trial scheduled to last weeks should start on a Monday, and 20 January 2025 is the third Monday of the new year. The date did not attract much controversy, although inevitably there was some obstuse comment on social media that it was unfair that public disorder following the murders was being dealt with more quickly.
However, it is now being alleged online that the date was chosen deliberately because it coincides with the the US Presidential inauguration, and so will be overshadowed in the news. On Twitter/X, the two events were linked on 15 December by “Inevitable West”, an anonymous account that is sometimes promoted by Elon Musk as a guide to events in the UK. One of “Inevitable West’s” rhetorical strategies is to begin their posts with “🚨BREAKING”, despite not having any new information:
🚨BREAKING: The Southport trial will begin on 20th January – the same day as Donald Trump’s inauguration.
This is a coverup the magnitude we’ve never seen before.
Casual readers were thus given the impression that the date has only just been chosen.
The conspiracy theory then expanded when it was noted by others that two other trials are set to begin on the same Monday: those of Ricky Jones and Anthony Esan.
Jones’ trial date was announced in September; as the Evening Standard reported:
A former Labour councillor is set to stand trial next year over an allegation he encouraged violent disorder in a speech to an anti-fascist protest during the recent riots.
…”We have to set a trial date within the custody trial dates, and the earliest date we can offer is January 20 next year”, said Judge Oscar Del Fabbro.
A conspiracy theorist would have to argue either that (a) earlier dates have been excluded from “custody trial dates” due to some occult government influence; (b) the judge has incorrectly identified “the earliest date”, presumably on instruction from the government; or (c) the judge deliberately avoided the possibility of a later date, again in compliance with improper politicial instructions. None of this is warranted from the context.
Anthony Esan’s trial date, meanwhile, was reported by Kent Live in August:
The case of a man accused of attempted murder following the stabbing of an army officer has been adjourned. During a plea and trial preparation hearing at Maidstone Crown Court today (August 22), Judge Philip St John-Stevens adjourned the arraignment on Anthony Esan’s charges.
Esan’s trial was, however, fixed to start on January 20, 2025 and is expected to last three weeks. It will be heard by a High Court judge.
Nicholas Lissack seems to have been first off the mark in drawing a sinister inference from these other trial dates, a few hours after Inevitable West’s post:
It’s quite the coincidence that on 20th January—Trump’s inauguration—these events are all taking place:
– Axel Rudakubana’s trial.
– Ricky Jones’s trial.
– Anthony Esan’s trial.
– Semina Halliwell’s inquest.Strange timing, isn’t it? Almost too convenient for the authorities.
The Halliwell inquest dates are actually 13 to 21 January, and it was not included when Darren Grimes jumped on the bandwagon:
DEFLECTION:
🔘 Labour councillor accused of calling for slit throats
🔘 Man accused of stabbing Lt Col Mark Teeton near his barracks
🔘 Man accused of murdering girls in Southport
EACH trial begins January 20, the day the media’s eyes are focused on Trump’s inauguration?! 👀
Grimes’ post was then amplifed by Isabel Oakeshott, partner of Reform’s deputy leader Richard Tice, with the added commentary “This is extraordinary”. Grimes also inspired Henry Bolton to offer the view that “It’s impossible to credibly argue that the judicial system is not being influenced by political interference from the government.” Alex Phillips, meanwhile, claims that the timing is a “stitch up”, while Laurence Fox warns that “They are getting desperate now. Which is very concerning, because once the lies stop working, they will use fists”. Fox previously suggested that the media had published a photograph of the suspect as a child “to make him look like the victim”.
The Southport murders have been a repeated focus for conspiracising: previously, the suspect has been misidentified, and last month there was a false online rumour that as a lawyer Keir Starmer had represented the suspect’s father in an asylum hearing. Conspiracism is also inflamed by public figures claiming to have access to extra information: Nigel Farage recently said that “I know a hell of a lot more than the British public know” (a quote uploaded to YouTube by his interviewer Winston Marshall under the title “The Biggest Cover Up of Our Lives!”), while on 8 December Mike Graham posted an enigmatic “Watch this space #Southport”.
Graham’s post drew attention to an October edition of The Times carrying the headline “Claims of Southport ‘Cover-Up'” – this referred specifically to claims by Robert Jenrick and Kemi Badenoch that the suspect being charged with a terrorism offence and with producing ricin indicated that “facts may have been withheld from the public”, but such a headline of course has the potential to encourage broader speculation (it was amended online to “Tories Accuse Police of Southport ‘Cover-Up'”).
Filed under: Uncategorized | Leave a comment »
