Terror attacker failed in custody, lawyer claims
A lawyer acting on behalf of the New Lynn terror attacker’s family says the failure to supply religious support caused anger and frustration that may have contributed to his radicalisation.
Ahamed Aathill Mohamed Samsudeen came to New Zealand in 2011 seeking a new life free from attack and torture as a Tamil Muslim in Sri Lanka.
Ten years later, he stabbed five people and injured two others in an Isis-inspired terror attack at an Auckland supermarket. He was shot dead by police, bringing an end to months of constant surveillance and years of growing concern over his extremist views. This week, Coroner Marcus Elliott will hear from survivors, police, Immigration, Corrections and Samsudeen’s family.
In 2022, a co-ordinated review found there was “significant deficiencies” in the actions of police and Corrections in the leadup to Samsudeen’s attack. The
review also found there were
multiple missed opportunities for Samsudeen to be directed away from violent extremism.
‘Real opportunity for intervention’
Max Harris, a lawyer acting on behalf of Samsudeen’s family, said there were further questions about his time in custody that could be answered and an inquest and public hearing was necessary.
It took 967 days for Samsudeen to see an Iman while he was in custody, despite voicing he was desperate for religious support, Harris said.
The previous review had not considered whether the lack of religious support contributed to his radicalisation and then his death. Samsudeen’s mental health was also neglected while in custody.
Harris highlighted the failure to provide community support and reintegration for Samsudeen and this was important to prevent future deaths.
“Community integration could have made a meaningful difference to his radicalisation, attack and death. A proper approach could have prevented this,” Harris said.
Early intervention in 2016, when Samsudeen first began posting objectionable material on Facebook, was more capable of diverting Samsudeen away from his beliefs, Harris said.
“This could have made a difference to the ultimate outcome,” Harris said.
When Samsudeen was finally released from prison in 2021, he had no hope of being disengaged and his prospects of rehabilitation had been written off, Harris said. This was a time that he was most vulnerable.
In making his final and “hardest” submission, Harris said in no way was he seeking to retraumatise the survivors nor was he diminishing the “extraordinary bravery” of the first responders.
Samsudeen’s family seek to understand whether there were alternative tactical options available at the time – such as the use of a taser or fewer shots – that could have prevented his death and prevented future deaths in similar circumstances.
Bonded by trauma
Counsel assisting the coroner, Anna Adams, made submissions on behalf of the group of 12 survivors, six women and six men, who were physically harmed, intervened or witnessed the attack and have bonded from the traumatic experience.
Adams said the survivors don’t wish the coroner to duplicate the previous investigations, but rather to ensure the tragic events never happen again.
The questions the survivors have include why Samsudeen was not initially followed into the supermarket by the police officers who were watching him that day and if this could have prevented or reduced the harm caused.
This questions comes after the IPCA report found in the weeks before the attack, police received intelligence he wanted to commit an attack in a crowded place with a vehicle/ knife and Friday was his preferred day.
A month before the attack, Samsudeen had also been captured on CCTV browsing knives at the same Countdown.
Another question the survivors have is his oversight in the community.
The last question the survivors have is they do not yet understand how Samsudeen was even in New Zealand given his support for terrorist ideologies and organisations.