Southport victim Bebe King's family slam new plans to share suspects' ethnicity
Southport victim Bebe King's family have urged the government to shelve new police guidance encouraging forces to publish the ethnicity and immigration status of high-profile suspects.
Little Bebe was the youngest of the three little girls killed in the horrific knife attack last year. The six-year-old was murdered alongside Elsie Dot Stancombe, seven, and Alice da Silva Aguiar, nine.
In the aftermath of the tragedy, Bebe's grandfather, Michael Weston King, said they had been failed by the "despicable" far-right who "tried to make a political gain" from their loss. Mr Weston King urged ministers to reconsider their support for the new official guidance, slamming it as "completely irrelevant" information about suspects.
He also hit out at Nigel Farage's "despicable" Reform UK, whose party has been calling for the guidance to be an enforced policy. Mr Weston King told the Guardian: "This apparent kowtowing to the likes of Farage and Reform, who surely want such a policy in place, is extremely disappointing, though perhaps not surprising.
'I not only speak for myself but for all of the King family when I say that the ethnicity of any perpetrator, or indeed their immigration status, is completely irrelevant. Mental health issues, and the propensity to commit crime, happens in any ethnicity, nationality or race.
'The boy who took Bebe had been failed by various organisations, who were aware of his behaviour, and by the previous government's lack of investment in [the official anti-extremism strategy] Prevent . As a result, we were also failed by this.'
He added that the family 'were failed further, by the likes of Reform and the right wing, as they tried to make political gain from our tragedy, only causing further misery to us and others, which was despicable'.
Teen killer, Axel Rudakubana, was jailed for a minimum of a 52 years for his attack on the Taylor Swift themed dance class full of children in July last year. In the days that followed, fascist thugs used the tragedy to incite riots across the UK. They spread false information that Rudakubana, a black Brit born in Wales to a Christian family, was in fact a Muslim asylum seeker.
The unrest saw scores of police officers injured, mosques and asylum hotels targeted and people of colour lynched indiscriminately in the streets. Home secretary, Yvette Cooper, welcomed new police guidelines released on Wednesday, despite criticism from anti-racism campaigners and women's groups.
It follows claims of police 'cover up' that two men charged in connection with the alleged rape of a 12-year-old girl in Nuneaton, Warwickshire, were asylum seekers. The far-right then staged an anti-immigration protest, where some worw Nazi imagery on their clothes and told a crowd the 'far right must unite'.
A judge defied court guidance to publicly name underage Rudakubana, who was 17 at the time of the attack, in a bid to stop the riots. But the violence only stopped once hundreds of thugs involved began receiving prison sentences.
Mr Weston King said: 'Though we are not interested in retribution or revenge, we were glad to see that the rioters, along with those who spread lies and hatred online, received prison sentences. I very much hope that the mood and opinion of the nation is in keeping with ours, and that this plan does not go ahead.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
an hour ago
- Leader Live
Tories and Reform decry two-tier justice as suspended Labour councillor cleared
Ricky Jones, 58, faced trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court accused of the offence after he described demonstrators as 'disgusting Nazi fascists' at an anti-racism rally in the wake of the Southport murders. He was cleared on Friday. Nigel Farage and shadow home secretary Chris Philp both pointed to the idea of 'two-tier justice' in relation to the case. This is another outrageous example of two-tier justice. — Nigel Farage MP (@Nigel_Farage) August 15, 2025 Mr Philp compared the case to that of Lucy Connolly, who was jailed after she posted a tweet calling for 'mass deportation' and 'set fire to all the f****** hotels' on the day of the Southport attacks last year. In a post on X, Mr Philp said: 'The development of two tier justice is becoming increasingly alarming.' Ex-Reform chairman Zia Yusuf also referred to Connolly's case, and said that 'two tier justice in this country is out of control'. Connolly pleaded guilty last year to a charge of inciting racial hatred by publishing and distributing 'threatening or abusive' written material on X, which meant she did not face a trial. In Jones' case, a jury deliberated for just over half an hour before they found him not guilty. A video showing Jones addressing crowds on Hoe Street in Walthamstow, east London, on August 7 last year went viral on social media after the protest, which had been organised in response to plans for a far-right march outside Waltham Forest Immigration Bureau. It is astonishing that Labour councillor Ricky Jones, who was caught on video calling for throats to be slit, is let off scot free – whereas Lucy Connolly got 31 months prison for posting something no worse. The development of two tier justice is becoming increasingly alarming.… — Chris Philp MP (@CPhilpOfficial) August 15, 2025 The suspended councillor said in the clip: 'They are disgusting Nazi fascists. We need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all.' He also drew his finger across his throat as he spoke to the crowd. Jurors deliberated for just over 30 minutes before finding him not guilty. Jones, who wore a navy blue suit with a white shirt and pale pink tie in the dock, was seen mouthing 'thank-you' at the jurors. Family and supporters hugged each other before Jones, who declined to comment, was driven out of the court grounds in a car. The 58-year-old, who at the time was also employed as a full-time official for the Transport Salaried Staffs' Association union, was arrested on August 8 last year and interviewed at Brixton police station that night. Jones, who has been a borough councillor in Dartford, Kent, since 2019, was suspended by Labour the day after the incident. It is understood a party investigation continues and its outcome will decide what happens to his membership. A spokesperson for the party said at the time his behaviour 'was completely unacceptable and it will not be tolerated'. Giving evidence in his trial, Jones said his comment did not refer to far-right protesters involved in the riots at the time, but to those who had reportedly left National Front stickers on a train with razor blades hidden behind them. Before he made the comment, jurors were shown video where he said to crowds: 'You've got women and children using these trains during the summer holidays.' Lawyers said the case cannot be compared to that of Connolly, as they faced different charges and she pleaded guilty while Jones did not. Peter Stringfellow, a solicitor at Brett Wilson, said in Connolly's case, racially aggravated discourse on social media translated into real-life violence across the country, whereas Mr Jones' comments at a rally did not cause violent disorder. Ernest Aduwa, partner at Stokoe Partnership Solicitors, said: 'We need to be honest about what is going on here. The verdict in the Ricky Jones case was not political, it was legal. 'A jury listened to the evidence, tested it and decided unanimously he was not guilty. That is not bias or 'two-tier justice', it is the justice system doing what it is supposed to do, separating facts from noise.' Laura Allen, head of the protest and public order team at Hodge, Jones and Allen lawyers, said it was 'frankly offensive' to the ordinary members of the public who sat on the jury to suggest they had not acted appropriately. She said: 'They are 12 members of the jury, picked at random, who have done their civic duty, have listened to the evidence in the case and concluded they could not be sure that Ricky Jones was guilty. 'Due to the way our jury system works they are not required, and certainly are not permitted, to explain the reasons for their decision.'
Leader Live
an hour ago
- Leader Live
Ricky Jones case should not be compared to Lucy Connolly
Ricky Jones, 58, faced trial at Snaresbrook Crown Court after he described far-right activists as 'disgusting Nazi fascists' in a speech at an anti-racism rally last year, in the wake of the Southport murders. The now-suspended councillor, surrounded by cheering supporters in Walthamstow, east London, on August 7 2024, was filmed stating: 'They are disgusting Nazi fascists. We need to cut all their throats and get rid of them all.' Jurors deliberated for just over half-an-hour and found him not guilty on Friday. This caused Conservative and Reform politicians to brand the decision 'two-tier justice' – with shadow home secretary Chris Philp comparing the case to that of Mrs Connolly, who was jailed for 31 months after she posted a tweet calling for 'mass deportation' of asylum seekers and to 'set fire to all the f****** hotels' on the day of the Southport attacks. Former home secretary and Tory leadership candidate Sir James Cleverly also called the jury's decision to clear Ricky Jones 'perverse' in an X post, adding: 'Perverse decisions like this are adding to the anger that people feel and amplifying the belief that there isn't a dispassionate criminal justice system.' Lawyers have said the cases should not be conflated as Connolly and Jones faced allegations of a different nature – and Jones faced trial where Connolly, having pleaded guilty, did not. Peter Stringfellow, a solicitor at Brett Wilson, told the PA news agency: 'Both (Jones and Connolly) said pretty unpleasant things. 'However, I'm afraid the conflation of the two after that is a problem. It comes from people who've got some sort of political agenda, in my view. 'They were facing completely different allegations and a massive part of those different allegations is the racial element. 'If you look at the Connolly case … her intention is of a racial nature.' Connolly pleaded guilty last year to a charge of inciting racial hatred by publishing and distributing 'threatening or abusive' written material on X. On July 29 last year, she posted: 'Mass deportation now, set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the bastards for all I care … if that makes me racist so be it.' 'She directs everybody to the fact that this was a racial comment,' Mr Stringfellow said. 'She pleads guilty to that intention … she accepted that she had intended to stir racial hatred. 'The Jones case is different because one, he's facing a completely different allegation: he's facing encouraging violent disorder. 'And the difference with him is he's saying: 'That's not what I was intended to do'.' Mr Stringfellow added that, in the case of Connolly, racially aggravated discourse on social media did translate into real-life violence across the country – whereas Mr Jones' comments at a rally did not cause a violent disorder. 'What she (Connolly) did, what followed her comments about threatening to burn people in hotels, is that that's precisely what then happened – and people were attempting to burn people in hotels.' Ernest Aduwa, partner at Stokoe Partnership Solicitors, said comparisons between Jones' and Connolly's cases were 'misplaced'. 'We need to be honest about what is going on here. The verdict in the Ricky Jones case was not political, it was legal,' he said. 'A jury listened to the evidence, tested it and decided unanimously he was not guilty. 'That is not bias or 'two-tier justice' – it is the justice system doing what it is supposed to do: separating facts from noise. 'Comparisons with the Lucy Connolly case are misplaced. 'Lucy Connolly pleaded guilty. There was no trial, no cross-examination, no jury. She admitted the specific offence: stirring up racial hatred online. 'Ricky Jones faced a different charge … with a high burden of proof. 'The jury decided the Crown had not met it. 'That does not mean the protest was not passionate or loud – it means there was not enough evidence to prove intent to incite violence. That distinction matters. 'I understand why emotions run high. But flattening two different situations into one misleading narrative does no favours to justice. 'The fact that a black man at a protest can receive a fair trial and be acquitted should be seen not as an injustice, but as proof the system can still get it right.' He added: 'The law is not perfect, but it must rest on evidence – not opinion, pressure, or politics.' Laura Allen, head of the protest and public order team at Hodge, Jones and Allen lawyers, said the two cases involved different decisions that need to be put in their legal context and it is 'frankly offensive' to the ordinary members of the public who sat on the jury to suggest they had not acted appropriately. If there is anything close to a two-tier system in the British justice sector it is one that historically 'has not favoured ethnic minorities', although work has been done to try to repair that situation, according to Ms Allen. A judge made a ruling on Connolly's sentence after she had said she was guilty, while a jury listened to the evidence during the trial and found him not guilty. Ms Allen said they are 'just two very different things and it is not possible to compare them in the way that Nigel Farage is choosing to do as part of his political grandstanding'. She said: 'He (Farage) is suggesting that these 12 people, about whom I assume he knows nothing, have not made their decision on the evidence but on some other ulterior motive. 'They are 12 members of the jury, picked at random, who have done their civic duty, have listened to the evidence in the case and concluded they could not be sure that Ricky Jones was guilty. 'Due to the way our jury system works they are not required, and certainly are not permitted, to explain the reasons for their decision.' She added: 'All we know is that the jury found Ricky Jones not guilty. We don't know why. We also don't know the political background of any of these people. We don't know their views on immigration or on race. 'We don't know any of that stuff and that is the whole point.'
The Sun
6 hours ago
- The Sun
Rigging row erupts after Nigel Farage's demand for Reform peers in House of Lords is rebuffed
A RIGGING row has erupted after Labour rebuffed Nigel Farage's demand for Reform representation in the House of Lords. The Brexiteer has no peers in the upper chamber and asked Sir Keir Starmer to grant some. He sent a letter to the PM — who has ultimate say over appointments — arguing the 'seismic shifts' in British politics merits some Reform seats. Although they have just four MPs, Mr Farage's party is leading national opinion polls. He has in the past called for the Lords to be replaced with an elected chamber akin to that in the US. Mr Farage said: 'Whilst Reform UK believes in a reformed House of Lords, the time has come to address the democratic disparity there.' But Defence Secretary John Healey told LBC: 'This is the same Nigel Farage that called for the abolition of the House of Lords and now wants to fill it with his cronies. 'I'm not sure Parliament is going to benefit from more Putin apologists like Farage.' While PMs technically have the final say on House of Lords appointments, they grant opposition parties some peers. When Sir Keir nominated 30 Labour lords in December, he allowed six Tories to be elevated to the upper legislature. Hitting back at Mr Healey's remarks, Reform deputy Richard Tice last night accused Labour of not playing fair. Denying they were 'Putin apologists', he told The Sun: 'It's a democratic outrage and another old-fashioned establishment stitch-up. They are essentially rigging the system against the new party, changing the rules of the game.' Reform party leader Nigel Farage discusses immigration at Westminster press conference In his letter, Mr Farage noted Lib Dems have 76 peers but received 600,000 fewer votes than Reform last year. Sir Keir previously pledged to abolish the Lords but he is not expected to carry out plans before the next election. 1
