In a tragic and shocking case from Southport, Axel Rudakubana, an 18-year-old, was sentenced to a minimum of 52 years in prison after admitting to the brutal murders of three young girls. These victims, all aged between six and nine, were attacked in a savage knife assault while attending a Taylor Swift-themed dance class in Merseyside. The horrific event unfolded last year when Rudakubana, armed with a 20cm kitchen knife, stormed into the class and killed the three children.
Dressed in a green hoodie and a surgical mask, the killer, who was just 17 at the time of the murders, traveled five miles from his home to carry out the attack. The public’s shock and outrage were palpable, especially after Sir Keir Starmer vowed that this incident would mark a turning point for the country, announcing plans for a public inquiry into the tragedy. Despite his guilty plea to 16 separate offenses, there was widespread debate about why Rudakubana was not sentenced to a whole life order, which some expected given the severity of his crime.
A whole life order is a sentence reserved for the most heinous acts of murder, ensuring that the perpetrator will never be released from prison. As of June 2023, 65 individuals in the UK were serving such sentences. High-profile criminals like Rosemary West, Levi Bellfield, and Lucy Letby, who was convicted of murdering newborns, are among those serving these lifelong sentences. This type of punishment is meant to reflect the extreme gravity of the crime committed.
However, the whole life order is distinct from a life sentence. While both sentences involve imprisonment for life, the key difference lies in the possibility of release. A life sentence can come with a minimum term that must be served before the offender can be considered for parole. For instance, in cases of murder committed with a weapon like a knife, a minimum term of 25 years is typical. If parole conditions are violated, the offender may return to prison. In contrast, a whole life order eliminates any possibility of release, regardless of the time served.
Despite the brutality of Rudakubana’s crime, he avoided a whole life order because of his age. Under current UK law, offenders under the age of 18 cannot receive a whole life order, regardless of the seriousness of their offenses. Although Rudakubana was 18 at the time of his conviction, he was only 17 when he committed the murders, and the law protects minors from receiving the most severe punishment. This legal distinction has sparked a great deal of public discussion, as many feel that his actions should warrant an exception given the horrific nature of the crime.
