Why has the Southport murder suspect not been charged with terrorism?

The two additional charges Axel Rudakubana now faces raise a very puzzling question.

How can an alleged murderer be charged with possessing part of a terror manual, but not be accused of terrorism himself?

The answer is nuanced and both the police and the Home Office are clearly concerned that that nuance will be lost.

Here is their explanation.

It is an offence to possess an Al-Qaeda manual.

But it is not necessarily the case that the manual inspired the other alleged murders that Rudakubana has already been charged with.

Police have not established that his motivation was terrorism.

Others will look at the additional charge of producing the poison ricin and ask once again, what on earth was the motivation for the stabbings if not terrorism?

We may never know.

But already some commentators are claiming that the police and government quashed discussion of Rudakubana’s possible motive.

At a time when trust in policing, politics and mainstream media is low, today’s news will undoubtedly fuel conspiracy theories.

But the situation is complicated.

When charges are made, under the law, very little about a case can be discussed.

Police took the extraordinary step today of revealing what they have subsequently learned about Axel Rudakubana’s alleged behaviour after originally charging him in August.

We are now finding that out for the first time.

The full picture won’t be explained until his trial.

Police – and the government – are hoping the public has the patience not to jump to conclusions.