Finding Rejects Terror Label

A Queensland coroner on Friday, 21 November 2025, ruled that the 2022 killing of two police officers and a civilian was not an act of terrorism, but the result of a shared delusional disorder among the three perpetrators. State Coroner Terry Ryan concluded that Gareth, Stacey, and Nathaniel Train were "psychotically unwell and driven by their persecutory beliefs" when they ambushed and murdered police constables Rachel McCrow, 29, and Matthew Arnold, 26, along with their neighbour Alan Dare, 58. The finding directly contradicts the initial assessment by Queensland Police, who had labelled the ambush a "religiously motivated terrorist attack" linked to Christian fundamentalist premillennialism.

Details of the Wieambilla Ambush

The tragic events unfolded on 12 December 2022, at a remote property in Wieambilla, approximately 270 kilometres west of Brisbane. Four police officers attended the residence to conduct a welfare check on Nathaniel Train, a former school principal who had been reported missing. Upon their arrival, they were met with a hail of gunfire from the heavily armed Train family, who had set up camouflaged positions. Constables McCrow and Arnold were killed, while a third officer was wounded and a fourth, Constable Keely Brough, escaped into nearby bushland as the Trains set it alight to flush her out. Mr. Dare was shot and killed when he went to investigate the fire and gunfire at his neighbours' property. The siege ended hours later when all three members of the Train family were killed in a shootout with specialist police.

A Descent into Shared Delusion

The coronial inquest, which held hearings over five weeks, delved into the family's motives. Evidence presented by forensic psychiatrist Dr. Andrew Aboud indicated the trio suffered from a rare condition known as "folie à trois," or a shared psychotic disorder. Gareth Train was identified as the primary individual with a paranoid delusional disorder, which his wife Stacey and brother Nathaniel came to share. Their beliefs were a mix of conspiracy theories, including anti-government and anti-vaccine narratives, and the conviction that police were "monsters and demons" who needed to be fought to bring about the second coming of Jesus. This deep-seated paranoia, rather than a coherent political or ideological goal to intimidate the public, was central to the coroner's finding that the act did not meet the definition of terrorism.

Global Context: Conspiracy Theories and Violence

The Wieambilla case is a stark illustration of a growing global security concern: violence fuelled by online misinformation and conspiracy theories. Extremist ideologies are no longer confined to organised groups but are increasingly nurtured in online echo chambers, radicalising individuals and small, autonomous cells. Research has shown that belief in conspiracy theories can create a sense of urgency and demonise perceived enemies, making violence more likely. This trend presents a complex challenge for law enforcement agencies worldwide, blurring the lines between mental illness, extremist ideology, and terrorism.

Implications for Kenya and East Africa

While the events in Wieambilla are geographically distant, the underlying drivers hold significant relevance for Kenya. The country's primary legislation, the Prevention of Terrorism Act (POTA) of 2012, provides a broad definition of a "terrorist act". This includes acts involving violence, endangering life, or serious damage to property intended to intimidate the public or coerce the government. The law was designed primarily to combat threats from organised groups like Al-Shabaab. However, the Australian coroner's meticulous distinction between ideologically motivated terrorism and violence driven by delusion raises important questions for Kenyan security frameworks. The rapid proliferation of misinformation on social media platforms within Kenya creates fertile ground for radicalisation outside of traditional terror structures. The Wieambilla ruling underscores the critical need for security and judicial systems to develop the capacity to differentiate between organised terrorism and acts of violence committed by individuals influenced by online conspiracy theories and suffering from potential mental health crises. Critics have already raised concerns that Kenya's anti-terror laws are sometimes used to suppress dissent, highlighting the importance of precise legal and psychiatric definitions. The Australian case serves as a crucial reminder that not all extreme violence fits neatly into the category of terrorism, demanding a more nuanced approach to prevention, investigation, and prosecution.