Police naming Liverpool parade suspect's ethnicity may cause future ‘challenges'
Merseyside police's decision to release details of the ethnicity of the suspect in the Liverpool parade collision could raise 'difficulties and challenges' for forces in the future, a former superintendent has said.
Merseyside police said they arrested a 53-year-old white British man from the Liverpool area about two hours after the incident that left dozens of people, including four children, injured.
Dal Babu, who was a senior Met officer, told the Guardian's First Edition that the decision was 'unprecedented', but he could envisage pressure being applied to forces in future to release details on the racial background of suspects.
'It doesn't take rocket science to predict what will happen: the far right will twist this and say, 'right, you've named [the race] because it's a white person. Why aren't you naming [the race of] the next person?' And it will present some difficulties and challenges to the police', he said.
Babu stressed the decision had been 'correct' to share the information on this occasion to combat 'racist and Islamophobic misinformation' on social media, while warning that every decision should be taken on a case by case basis.
'You could imagine a situation where the far right will say, 'Oh, you haven't named the ethnicity of this person and that's because they are a person of colour',' he said.
'It's really important that people don't see it as a precedent because every incident will be different. People may feel in a future incident that they're entitled to know the ethnicity and race, and it may not be appropriate to release it,' he said.
A senior legal source said there could be circumstances where naming the ethnicity of a suspect could cause riots rather than quell them.
'What will a force do if they arrest someone in similar circumstances who is recently arrived on a small boat or who has a clearly Muslim name? They will now be under huge pressure to name them,' the source said.
Far-right extremists used social media within minutes of the Liverpool tragedy to exploit the scenes of horror, the Guardian has been told.
One account claimed the incident was a terrorist attack.
Another account also made false claims including that the man arrested by police at the scene was really a Muslim, despite what police had said.
Merseyside police were criticised after the Southport murders last summer for not releasing more information after false rumours were started online that the killer was a Muslim asylum seeker.
For Merseyside police, Monday night's decision to release details about the suspect's race and nationality was not a precedent.
'They believe in this case it was right, with detectives convinced the suspect detained was the only person they were looking for. It might not be right in a case where the identity of a suspect was unclear and where identity could be an issue at trial,' a source said.
In March, chief constable Serena Kennedy told MPs she wanted to dispel disinformation in the immediate aftermath of the Southport murders by releasing information about attacker Axel Rudakubana's religion, because he came from a Christian family, but was told not to by local crown prosecutors.
Police did disclose that the suspect was a 17-year-old male from Banks in Lancashire, who was born in Cardiff.
Widespread rioting followed the murders, with some disorder targeting mosques and hotels housing asylum seekers.
Jonathan Hall KC, the government's official reviewer of terrorism legislation, told the Guardian that Merseyside's decision on Monday evening should set a precedent for future incidents.
'The authorities seemed to have learned the lessons of Southport.
'It should be a precedent, while recognising there will be the odd case where you need to say little or nothing. Transparency is the right precedent.'
Hall said if a suspect in a high-profile case was a Muslim asylum seeker: 'You have to do that as well.'
Nick Lowles, of Hope Not Hate, a leading group monitoring the far right, said: 'Police have learned lessons after Southport. What they did this time was to fill the void, putting information out as soon as possible.
'If it had been a terrorist attack, I'm not sure anything would have calmed tensions down.'
The decision to release details was an operational matter and therefore separate from government, Whitehall sources said.
Asked if he would like to see similar details released in the future in similar cases, the prime minister, Keir Starmer, said: 'That is a matter for the police and the investigation is ongoing so I think we need to leave that to them.
'I think today is a day really for thinking about all those impacted by this and being absolutely clear that we stand with them.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
20 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Ukraine and Russia head for peace talks after drone strike on Moscow's bombers
Ukraine's audacious strike on Russia's air force over the weekend has been met with a barrage of drone attacks from Moscow just hours before the sides are due to sit down for peace talks. A Ukrainian spokesperson said their delegation had arrived in Istanbul for talks with Russian officials and their meeting is planned for Monday afternoon. This is the second round of discussion to be held in Istanbul in recent weeks after they were initially suggested by Russia but then rebuked by the Ukrainians when Vladimir Putin did not turn up and Moscow only sent a low level delegation. The chance of a breakthrough on Monday seems slim following Ukraine's drone attack on Russia's air force over the weekend, dubbed "Operation Spiderweb." Ukraine struck numerous airbases across Russia, stretching as far as their border with Mongolia, and Kyiv claims to have destroyed or damaged 40 long range bombers. They say this is roughly 30% of the total number of long range bombers Moscow controlled, with many of the destroyed aircraft no longer in production and were irreplaceable. Ukraine said over the course of 18 months they smuggled the 117 drones into Russia and planned the coordinated strike, with each drone having its own pilot. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said it was a "brilliant result" and was "achieved soley by Ukraine." In response, Russia launched the biggest number of drones on Ukraine since the full-scale invasion in February 2022, Ukraine's air force said. The strike killed at least 12 soldiers and wounded 60 others at the 239th training ground, prompting the head of Ukraine's land forces to take responsibility and resign, the Guardian reported. Russia has intensified its drone strikes on Ukraine in recent weeks, with numerous barrages setting records for the number of missiles launched. Russian and Ukrainian officials will meet Monday in Istanbul to exchange their plans for how to end the three-year war, Europe's largest conflict since World War II, after Kyiv says it struck dozens of strategic bombers parked at airbases deep in Russia. Urged on by US President Donald Trump, Moscow and Kyiv have opened direct negotiations for the first time since the early weeks of Russia's invasion but have yet to make significant progress towards an elusive agreement. Reads the full story from France24 Life in the villages of deepest Siberia or Russia's Arctic north felt a world away from the front lines of their country's war with Ukraine. Yet suddenly, as they went about the Sunday business, the war unmistakably and dramatically arrived at their doorsteps. From the roof panels of nondescript container lorries parked in quiet rural lay-bys, drone after buzzing drone rose nonchalantly into the sky before hurling itself at nearby airbases housing some of Russia's most prized military assets. Read the full story from The Telegraph This operation has demonstrated that Ukraine is very much still in the fight, whatever dour statements emerge from the White House. Mr Trump, easily distracted and unfocused on his best days, has told big and small lies about the war since the beginning of his second term, all damaging to the reality and perception that Ukraine is holding its own. Read the full piece from the Telegraph An audacious Ukrainian drone attack against multiple airbases across Russia is a humiliating security breach for Vladimir Putin that will doubtless trigger a furious response. Pro-Kremlin bloggers have described the drone assault - which Ukrainian security sources said hit more than 40 Russian warplanes - as "Russia's Pearl Harbor" in reference to the Japanese attack against the US in 1941 that prompted Washington to enter the Second World War. Read the full article from Sky News Donald Trump was not given a heads-up about Ukraine's unprecedented drone strikes that took out a huge fleet of Russian planes on Sunday, according to reports. Ukraine's 'large-scale' drone attack launched deep into Russian territory wiped out 40 military bombers and targeted five bases, Ukrainian security sources told CBS News. The attack took over a year and a half to plan and was personally supervised by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, the sources added. Read the full article from the Independent
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
UK to build 12 nuclear submarines in preparation for potential war with Russia
The United Kingdom has announced plans to build 12 new nuclear submarines in preparation for potential armed aggression from Russia. Source: The Sunday Times Details: According to The Sunday Times, the UK is planning to construct 12 new nuclear attack submarines to replace the seven existing Astute-class submarines equipped with conventional weapons and to complement the four Trident nuclear missile strategic submarines that form the sea-based component of the UK's nuclear deterrent. The new submarines are expected to enter service by the late 2030s. They will be part of the AUKUS trilateral security pact signed between the UK, the US and Australia in 2021. The alliance provides for the sharing of military technology and intelligence and the joint development of submarines. The total number of submarines ordered under AUKUS will reach 20. UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer will also promise to invest £15 billion (around US$20 billion) in a nuclear warhead development programme. The Sunday Times noted that this is the first time the UK has revealed both the number of nuclear attack submarines to replace the Astute class and the scale of investment in warhead development programmes. Details about the rearmament of the British forces are expected to be outlined in the UK government's strategic defence review, which will be published on Monday 2 June. Defence Secretary John Healey said that the UK must be ready for armed attack from Russia and that the review will send a "message to Moscow" about the country's readiness for combat. The 130-page document will also recommend putting the UK armed forces on a state of combat readiness in response to the "immediate and pressing" threat from Russia. Background: Prior to that, The Sunday Times reported that the UK government is negotiating with the Pentagon to purchase US F-35A Lightning stealth fighters capable of launching tactical nuclear weapons. Support Ukrainska Pravda on Patreon!
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
How Britain's biggest companies are preparing for a Third World War
The year is 2027 and a major global conflict has erupted. Perhaps China has launched an attempted invasion of Taiwan, or Russian forces have crossed into the territory of an eastern European Nato country. Whatever the case, Justin Crump's job is to advise big companies on how to respond. And with tensions rising, a growing number of chief executives have got him on speed dial. The former Army tank commander, who now runs intelligence and security consultancy Sibylline, says his clients range from a top British supermarket chain to Silicon Valley technology giants. They are all drawing up plans to keep running during wartime, and Crump is surprisingly blunt about their reasoning: a global conflict may be just two years away. 'We're in a world which is more dangerous, more volatile than anything we've seen since the Second World War,' he explains. There are lots of crises that can happen, that are ready to go. 'Chief executives want to test against the war scenario, because they think it's credible. They want to make sure their business can get through that environment.' He rattles off a series of smouldering international issues – any one of which could ignite the global tinderbox – from Iran's nuclear ambitions, to China's threats to Taiwan, to Vladimir Putin's designs on a Russian sphere of influence in Ukraine and beyond, as well as Donald Trump's disdain for the post-1940s 'rules-based international order'. Against this backdrop, planning for war is not alarmist but sensible, Crump contends. With all these issues building, 2027 is viewed as the moment of maximum danger. 'The worst case scenario is that all these crises all overlap in 2027,' he explains. 'You've got the US midterms, which will have taken place just at the start of that year, and whatever happens there will be lots of upset people. It's also the time when a lot of the economic disruption that's happening now will have really washed through the system, so we'll be feeling the effects of that. And it's also too early for the change in defence posture to have really meant anything in Europe.' Putin and Xi Jinping, the president of China, are acutely aware of all this, he says, and may conclude that they should act before the US and Europe are more fully rearmed in 2030. 'In their minds now, the clock is ticking,' he adds. He also points to major British and Nato military exercises scheduled to take place in 2027, with American forces working to a 2027 readiness target as well. 'There's a reason they're doing it that year – because they think we have to be ready by then,' Crump says. 'So why shouldn't businesses also work off the same thinking and plan for the same thing?' He is not alone in arguing that society needs to start expecting the unexpected. In 2020, the Government established the National Preparedness Commission to ensure the UK was 'significantly better prepared' for the likes of floods, power outages, cyber attacks or wars. It has urged households to keep at least three days' worth of food and water stockpiled, along with other essential items such as a wind-up torch, portable power bank, a portable radio, spare batteries, hand sanitiser and a first aid kit. 'In recent years a series of high-impact events have demonstrated how easily our established way of life can be disrupted by major events,' the commission's website says – pointing to the coronavirus pandemic, recent African coups, Russia's invasion of Ukraine and turmoil in the Middle East. Britain is also secretly preparing for a direct military attack by Russia amid fears that it is not ready for war. Officials have been asked to update 20-year-old contingency plans that would put the country on a war footing after threats of attack by the Kremlin. All of this has led major businesses to conclude that perma crisis is the new normal, Crump says. In the case of Ukraine, Western sanctions on Russia forced companies to choose between continuing to operate heavily-constrained operations in Russia, selling up, or walking away entirely. Crump recalls speaking to several clients including a major energy company in the run-up to Russia's invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. He and his colleagues urged the business to evacuate their staff, at a point when it was still received wisdom that Putin wouldn't dare follow through with his threats. 'I had almighty arguments with some people in the run-up, because I was very firmly of the view, based on our data and insights, that the Russians were not only invading, but they were going for the whole country. But other people in our sector were saying, 'No, it's all a bluff'. 'Their team came to me afterwards and said: 'After that call, we were convinced, and we got our people out'. They got a lot of grief for that at the time, from people who were saying it was all nonsense. 'But then on the day of the invasion, they told me they got so many calls actually saying 'thank you for getting us out'.' Yet even in Ukraine, much of which remains an active war zone, life must go on – along with business. 'I've been to plenty of war zones,' says Crump. 'And people are still getting on with their lives, there's still stuff in supermarkets, and things are being made in factories – but that certainly all gets a lot more difficult.' In the case of a major British supermarket, how might executives plan for, say, a Chinese invasion of Taiwan? The first question is how involved the UK expects to be, says Crump. But if Britain, as might be expected, sides with the US at least in diplomatic terms, 'we're not buying anything from China'. That immediately has implications for a company's supply chains – are there any parts of the supply chain that would be crippled without Chinese products? But as the recent cyber attack on Marks & Spencer has demonstrated, attacks on critical digital infrastructure are also a major risk to supermarkets in the event of a war with China or Russia. 'If you look at a retailer, the vulnerability is not necessarily whether or not they can transport stuff to the shop, even in a war zone,' says Crump. 'The problem becomes when you can't operate your systems. 'If you can't take money at the point of sale, or if you have no idea where your stock is because your computer system has been taken down, you've got major problems and you can't operate your business.' In a scenario where Britain becomes involved in a war itself, Crump says employers may also suddenly find themselves with gaps in their workforces. He believes things would need to get 'very bad indeed' for the Government to impose conscription, which applied to men aged 18-41 during the Second World War. But he points out that the calling up of British armed forces reservists would be very likely, along with the potential mobilisation of what is known as the 'strategic reserve' – those among the country's 1.8 million veterans who are still fit to serve. There are around 32,000 volunteer reservists and an undisclosed number of regular reserves, former regular members of the armed forces who are still liable to be called up. 'There's a big pool of people we don't tap at the moment who are already trained,' explains Crump. 'But there would be consequences if the entire reserve was called forward, which would have to happen if we entered a reasonably sized conflict. It would certainly cause disruptions. 'The medical services are hugely integrated with the NHS, for example, and we saw the effects of them being called forward with Iraq and Afghanistan.' The sort of supermarket chaos that erupted during the Covid-19 pandemic would also return with a vengeance if a significant conflict broke out. During that crisis, grocers had to limit how many packs of loo rolls and cans of chopped tomatoes shoppers were allowed to take home, among other items, because of supply chain problems. 'If we're in a conflict, that sort of supply chain activity would increase,' notes Crump. 'So you don't necessarily have rationing imposed, but there might be issues with food production, delivery, payment and getting things to the right place. 'In a world where we don't have our own independent supply chains, we're reliant on a lot of very interconnected moving parts that have been enabled by this period of peace. 'We've never been in a conflict during a time where we've had 'just in time' systems.' Crump brings up the recent blackouts in Spain and Portugal. British grocers initially thought their food supplies would be completely unaffected because truck loads of tomatoes had already made their way out of the country when the problem struck. But the vehicles were electronically locked, to prevent illegal migrants attempting to clamber inside when they cross the English Channel and could only be unlocked from Spain – where the power cuts had taken down computer systems and telecoms. 'People in Spain couldn't get online, so we had locked trucks full of tomatoes sitting here that we couldn't open because of technology,' Crump says. 'No one had ever thought, 'But what happens if all of Spain goes off the grid?' And I'm sure the answer would have been, 'That'll never happen' anyway.' This tendency towards 'normalcy bias' is what Crump tries to steer his clients away from. While it isn't inevitable that war will break out, or that there will be another pandemic, humans tend to assume that things will revert to whatever the status quo has been in their lifetimes, he says. This can mean we fail to take the threat of unlikely scenarios seriously enough, or use outdated ways of thinking to solve new problems. 'We've had this long period of peace and prosperity. And, of course, business leaders have grown up in that. Military leaders have grown up in it. Politicians have grown up in it. And so it's very hard when that starts to change. 'People have grown up in a world of rules. And I think people are still trying to find ways in which the game is still being played by those old rules.' Unsurprisingly, given his line of work, Crump believes businesses must get more comfortable contemplating the unthinkable. 'Go back a decade and most executives did not want to have a crisis because a crisis is bad for your career, so they didn't want to do a test exercise – because you might fail,' Crump adds. 'But the whole point is that you can fail in an exercise, because it's not real life.' At least, not yet. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.
