Murder of Henry Nowak

[nw1]

It's a world where

is not incitement to violence.

https://www.reuters.com/world/uk/uk-councillor-acquitted-over-cut-all-their-throats-speech-2025-08-15/

Whataboutery. To me it's obvious that "pure cold rage" could be interpreted by some as incitement to violence, even if not intended. As a party leader with a hopefully small chance of being PM, he's much more dangerous than some obscure councillor.

Every single one of the idiots who indulged in violence against the police and set bins on fire need at least a short jail sentence. We don't need these people in our communities. Wouldn't surprise me if many of them are not even from the St Denys area but have travelled there to cause trouble. To be quite frank, they should go back home.

This is a case of a bad act performed by a specific police officer, yet it seems that it's being blown up into some kind of "white people are victims" BS.

And the murderer has got life imprisonment; what do people want? The death sentence? Perhaps there are cases where the death sentence would be appropriate (let's say serial killers) but I'm not sure that a single, isolated murder is one.

 

[SuspectUsual]

what do people want? The death sentence?

As an aside, Rupert Lowe is now saying Restore's policy is a referendum on the restoration of the death penalty, and if you read the replies to his tweet on this subject the replies are terrifying.

 

[AlterEgo]

This is a case of a bad act performed by a specific police officer, yet it seems that it's being blown up into some kind of "white people are victims" BS.

Well, the official police guidance on how to differentially treat white people and non-white people has fed into what some may see as a culture of two tier or graded policing. That is quite difficult to take the heat out of, and this sort of thing is exactly what people who opposed it warned of when it was introduced. This is basically an importation from America after the George Floyd murder based on American policing norms, rather than it being a ground-up appraisal of the situation in our country.

The police didn't believe Novak because they thought he was a racist, an allegation which was unfounded and which the court did not accept as true. They probably thought he claimed to have been stabbed as some sort of attention seeking stunt rather than keeping an open mind about who was the victim. Police officers are human and respond to and absorb their work culture. It may well be the police officer committed misconduct, but it's also possible that the misconduct is encouraged or informed by the wider policing culture. See also all the racist coppers who got the boot for misconduct in the 80s and 90s - yes, those officers committed misconduct, but the Met Police were also institutionally racist which led to disproportionate outcomes for black people.

And the murderer has got life imprisonment; what do people want? The death sentence?

I think the murderer should probably have his sentence reviewed as the minimum term was just 21 years. That is not especially long given the defendant used a religious exemption to carry a deadly weapon around in public specifically to intimidate people, and eventually to use as a deadly weapon. (The Sikh community has taken pains to emphasise a kirpan is usually a small and ceremonial knife carried discreetly - which the murderer did wear - but he also chose to carry a second, much larger, knife). I think this is a gross betrayal of public consent for his religious minority to carry around deadly weapons and the Sikh community realise this and have tried hard to rebuild confidence. The start point for someone who brings a knife with intent to use it is 25 years, for example. I think it is reasonably clear his intent in carrying the second, much larger, deadly knife was to use it at some point.

He had also been arrested before for allegedly stealing £1000 worth of knives from a gurdwara a few years ago. A really rotten piece of work.

it is possible to hold all these things to be true, or at least to keep an open mind about them, without being one of Lucy Connolly's wretched reply guys on Twitter or one of Farage's ilk.

 

[nw1]

In the end he's self serving. He just wants whatever will benefit him, i.e. to win the next election. So far as I can see he doesn't care what collateral damage arises as a result.

However, I suspect that inciting violent protest, even unintentionally, will just turn those who are not true believers away and remind those of a right-wing persuasion that if you want a relatively sensible right-wing party, you vote Tory.

There are plenty of people, I suspect, who might want to "Stop The Boats" (TM) but do not want our communities blighted by far-right disorder. To me, the Conservative Party is the natural home for such people.

 

[35B]

I think the murderer should probably have his sentence reviewed as the minimum term was just 21 years. That is not especially long given the defendant used a religious exemption to carry a deadly weapon around in public specifically to intimidate people, and eventually to use as a deadly weapon. (The Sikh community has taken pains to emphasise a kirpan is usually a small and ceremonial knife carried discreetly - which the murderer did wear - but he also chose to carry a second, much larger, knife). I think this is a gross betrayal of public consent for his religious minority to carry around deadly weapons and the Sikh community realise this and have tried hard to rebuild confidence. The start point for someone who brings a knife with intent to use it is 25 years, for example. I think it is reasonably clear his intent in carrying the second, much larger, deadly knife was to use it at some point.

I'm reluctant to draw that conclusion given the judge's sentencing comments and logic.

On the other hand, I absolutely support the idea that the law should be clarified so that the religious exemption for such large knives ceases to be a reasonable question.

 

[Yew]

On the other hand, I absolutely support the idea that the law should be clarified so that the religious exemption for such large knives ceases to be a reasonable question.

My understanding is that the large knife used for the murder was not a Kirpan, which has a religious exemption, but another knife not covered by such an exemption.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My understanding is that the large knife used for the murder was not a Kirpan, which has a religious exemption, but another knife not covered by such an exemption.

There seem to be mixed reports on this. More recent ones seem to state it was a second, larger Kirpan.

 

[35B]

My understanding is that the large knife used for the murder was not a Kirpan, which has a religious exemption, but another knife not covered by such an exemption.

That is mine. My point is that there was room for doubt, and that it is possible for Sikhs to claim the kirpan exemption for purposes that go beyond the kirpan - the murderer and his family appear to belong to a Sikh sect that has quite an expansive view of what kind of knife is necessary for religious observance.

This discussion reinforces my discomfort at the lack of fact in the discussion, and especially the way that assertions are being made about what was or wasn't determined at the trial.

 

[AlterEgo]

My understanding is that the large knife used for the murder was not a Kirpan, which has a religious exemption, but another knife not covered by such an exemption.

The sentencing remarks by the judge indicate he accepts it was a Kirpan and being lawfully carried under a religious exemption. From his remarks:

The privilege extended to practising Sikhs of being allowed to be in public with a bladed article and, particularly in respect of the large dagger, a highly dangerous weapon, easily accessible to the wearer, brings with it huge responsibility.

The large dagger here being the second, larger, lethal weapon used in the assault.

It is a strict requirement of the Sikh faith to have a knife, called a kirpan, at all times. Generally, this will be a small knife, hidden from view, often on a length of cord and worn around the neck. You had that but, in addition, the large dagger in a sheath.

https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Digwa-Final-Sentencing-Remarks.pdf

Some of the reporting has conflated the bearing of the Kirpan with the unlawful possession of other, non-religious weapons which he and his brother and father were charged with. From BBC:

The 23-year-old, who has already been sentenced for the murder of Henry Nowak, appeared at Southampton Magistrates' Court to face six counts of possessing an offensive weapon in a private place.

The alleged weapons are a flick knife, an extendable baton, knuckledusters, a machete, swords and kusaris.

 

[Yew]

There seem to be mixed reports on this. More recent ones seem to state it was a second, larger Kirpan.

Yes, looking at the legislation I can't see any particular definition of a Kirpan, which is odd, as typically a lot of knife law revolves around specific lengths and characteristics. I was imagining something like "a knife with an overall length of up to six inches and a blade of up to three inches of with some specific shape", but so far I've not been able to find anything.

 

[AlterEgo]

Yes, looking at the legislation I can't see any particular definition of a Kirpan, which is odd, as typically a lot of knife law revolves around specific lengths and characteristics. I was imagining something like "a knife with an overall length of up to six inches and a blade of up to three inches of with some specific shape", but so far I've not been able to find anything.

There is no length limit. You can lawfully carry any bladed weapon provided you can show it is a kirpan and carried for religious purposes.

That is why Digwa was not charged with any offences relating to carrying that weapon, and why the judge accepted it as a kirpan, and it was being lawfully carried up to the point where it was used as an offensive weapon.

It is unambiguous. The murder weapon was a kirpan, lawfully carried under the exemption.

 

[Tetchytyke]

It's a world where...is not incitement to violence.

Pure whataboutery.

The police didn't believe Novak because they thought he was a racist, an allegation which was unfounded and which the court did not accept as true. They probably thought he claimed to have been stabbed as some sort of attention seeking stunt rather than keeping an open mind about who was the victim.

The bit I've bolded seems to be an unfounded opinion rather than anything else.

The murderer's brother was the one who called 999 and alleged that there had been racial abuse. The murderer was with several associates who all said the same thing. Nowak was on his own. There are definitely questions to be asked about the police conduct and competence, especially the male officer involved, but it isn't as though the police just turned up unannounced and assumed without reason that the white guy was a racist thug. They'd been called out to a 999 call explicitly stating that there had been a racially motivated assault. There's probably a large element of confirmation bias in this case but I don't see anything to suggest the police made an unreasonable assumption based on the information they had when they arrived.

I didn't think I'd ever be the one to defend the police, but here we are.

It's a shame that his brother doesn't seem to have been prosecuted for perverting the course of justice. Maybe he will be. His mother- who hid the weapon afterwards- has been convicted of assisting an offender. I hope they throw the key away. Rather puts the murderer's family's claims of apology and sorrow into perspective, with his mum helping him hide his tracks rather than helping the police, but there we are.

Sikh extremism seems to fly very much under the radar, it always has. I'm not quite sure why. Sikh extremists were responsible for the biggest aviation terrorist bombing in history in 1985 and, to be quite honest, that extremism is still bubbling away- and not very far under the surface either.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Jun 2026 ==

There is no length limit. You can lawfully carry any bladed weapon provided you can show it is a kirpan and carried for religious purposes.

And this is something else that needs to be fixed. Most people just carry a small badge kirpan in their turban. It really does need to be restricted in law to that.

 

[Bletchleyite]

And this is something else that needs to be fixed. Most people just carry a small badge kirpan in their turban. It really does need to be restricted in law to that.

Totally agree. Arguably the law should also require it to be blunt - it is a symbolic device not to be used as an actual knife so there is no reason for it to need to be sharp other than religious doctrine, and there is plenty of precedent for that to be overridden in cases where it causes more harm than good to wider society.

To be honest a symbolic one on a chain around one's neck similar in size and concept to a crucifix should really be enough. Meanwhile the law should be clarified that a reasonable excuse for carrying a non-folding blade or a blade over 3" (or whatever it is in cm if it's defined that way) only relates to a need to actually use the blade as a tool where a sub-3" folding blade would not be adequate (or to transport it as expediously as possible to/from a place where it is needed for that purpose, or to/from a place where it is to be sold, purchased or otherwise disposed of e.g. given up to a knife amnesty box), not to any symbolic purpose.

 

[AlterEgo]

The bit I've bolded seems to be an unfounded opinion rather than anything else.

The murderer's brother was the one who called 999 and alleged that there had been racial abuse. The murderer was with several associates who all said the same thing. Nowak was on his own.

Well, yeah! They thought he was a racist, and the perpetrator.

How is that unfounded opinion on my part? They arrested him for assault, which they were told was racially aggravated. It's a fact the officer believed that is what happened.

That perception, however reasonably held, coloured the entire interaction, because they thought he was the criminal claiming he'd been hurt to get sympathy or lighter treatment. Even Digwa's father who was at the scene said Nowak had blood in his mouth - it was pretty much the first thing that was said when the officer turned up - and the officer said he thought Nowak was making it up. There was no basis for the officer to have done so. It was completely unreasonable for the officer to have disbelieved Nowak's assertion in the circumstances.

And this is something else that needs to be fixed. Most people just carry a small badge kirpan in their turban. It really does need to be restricted in law to that.

Indeed it is mad, and I could not believe it when I read the law on this. Most Sikhs do as you say, and keep it around their neck or in the turban, concealed and blunt.

The exemption also applies to national dress as well, so Scotsmen with sgian dubh are also covered.

 

[35B]

There is no length limit. You can lawfully carry any bladed weapon provided you can show it is a kirpan and carried for religious purposes.

That is why Digwa was not charged with any offences relating to carrying that weapon, and why the judge accepted it as a kirpan, and it was being lawfully carried up to the point where it was used as an offensive weapon.

It is unambiguous. The murder weapon was a kirpan, lawfully carried under the exemption.

Which is where I'd welcome clarification, both on the size and the number being carried - Sikh opinion is far from united in favour of the murderer's interpretation. There's a very interesting discussion on Fraser Nelson's Substack about this entitled "What Henry Novak's murder says about the Kirpan", with a guest post by Professor Jagbir Jhutti-Johal OBE, Professor of Sikh Studies at Birmingham University. It's far too long to paste in full, but the paragraph below is important:

Q: Do Sikhs have any concerns about the kirpan law?

A: Yes, and we should be honest about them. When legislation was debated in 2019, Sikh organisations — the Sikh Federation, the then Sikh Council UK and Lord Singh — lobbied the Government very hard. But some of us were also raising concerns about misuse by a small minority of young Sikh men.

I have been asked to respond to cases, which never received public attention, of young men keeping large swords - or what were effectively hunting knives - in their cars “for protection”, while describing them to police as kirpans or religious articles of faith. This should be seen as part of the broader knife-carrying culture we see among some young men today. Blades being carried, in theory, for protection, identity or intimidation - but, ultimately, creating the conditions for serious violence and tragedy. Police conduct stop-and-searches for precisely this reason. Officers can hardly be expected to have detailed knowledge of Sikh practice. If they are told that the knife is being carried for religious reasons, officers may accept the claims at face value. That concern about abusing the law is real and should not be ignored.

So this is the potential for abusing the law. Young men exploiting the exemption, claiming that a blade is religious when it’s not. As a community we should be able to have honest conversations about misuse and accountability — with government, police, educators and wider society. Avoiding those conversations helps nobody.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Jun 2026 ==

Perhaps Labour could consider bringing legislation legally prohibiting the false statement of such titles? It seems to have similar impact in a way to Impersonation of a Police Officer which is an offence.

Labour are wise to avoid doing anything of the sort. It would create a "censorship" narrative, while failing completely to deal with the political reality that Farage and Yusuf are taken seriously because they may plausibly hold office in the next government

 

[43096]

There is no length limit. You can lawfully carry any bladed weapon provided you can show it is a kirpan and carried for religious purposes.

That is why Digwa was not charged with any offences relating to carrying that weapon, and why the judge accepted it as a kirpan, and it was being lawfully carried up to the point where it was used as an offensive weapon.

It is unambiguous. The murder weapon was a kirpan, lawfully carried under the exemption.

The law needs changing then. There should not be a religious exemption for something that would otherwise be illegal.

 

[bb21]

That is why Digwa was not charged with any offences relating to carrying that weapon, and why the judge accepted it as a kirpan, and it was being lawfully carried up to the point where it was used as an offensive weapon.

It is unambiguous. The murder weapon was a kirpan, lawfully carried under the exemption.

This is where I still struggle to understand the whole situation surrounding existing legislation despite looking extensively last two days. Tan Dhesi claimed in parliamentary debate yesterday the kirpan was not used in this incident, so I am at a complete loss what the actual truth is. Is the larger dagger a kirpan or not?

(Above is the youtube link to Tan Dhesi's speech.)

This discussion reinforces my discomfort at the lack of fact in the discussion, and especially the way that assertions are being made about what was or wasn't determined at the trial.

Quite.

I fear the problem for the Sikh community leaders now is optics. While I find it incredibly sad they had to come out and defend their community against the appalling actions of a select few maniacs, mainly because of the rampant racism that has been allowed to run amok in the current political environment, knife crime is a real concern for many people. Rather than waiting for the inevitable conversation on minimising the risk such a religious symbol can be abused by a very small minority of extremists to be led by a bunch of far right agitators on their narrative, Sikh community and religious leaders grabbing the initiative and leading the conversation proactively would surely be a much wiser move. Some might say this is bowing down to the pressure from the far right, but religious practice and protocols can and do evolve over time to align with prevailing societal developments, and seizing the narrative from the far right will be the most powerful rebuttal.

 

[AlterEgo]

This is where I still struggle to understand the whole situation surrounding existing legislation despite looking extensively last two days. Tan Dhesi claimed in parliamentary debate yesterday the kirpan was not used in this incident, so I am at a complete loss what the actual truth is. Is the larger dagger a kirpan or not?

It is unambiguously a kirpan under the law. Bear in mind that Digwa belonged to a fringe sect of Sikhism which numbers in the "low hundreds" in the UK and the MP cannot really be speaking on behalf of all Sikhs.

This is akin to a Catholic trying to speak on behalf of all Christians.

 

[35B]

It is unambiguously a kirpan under the law. Bear in mind that Digwa belonged to a fringe sect of Sikhism which numbers in the "low hundreds" in the UK and the MP cannot really be speaking on behalf of all Sikhs.

This is akin to a Catholic trying to speak on behalf of all Christians.

Agreed. But the flip side of that is that we accept the ability of religious leaders to define the norms of that religion, and to state that particular interpretations are beyond the parameters of that faith as generally accepted.

As Digwa was convicted of carrying an offensive weapon, I don’t think we can take the judge’s sentencing comments as a definitive statement of the law - another reason why the kirpan exemption needs to be much more precisely defined.

 

[AlterEgo]

As Digwa was convicted of carrying an offensive weapon

Was he? Where, and which weapon? A bladed article in public? He had loads of non religious weapons he was convicted of possessing.

 

[Mojo]

The murderer's brother was the one who called 999 and alleged that there had been racial abuse. The murderer was with several associates who all said the same thing. Nowak was on his own. There are definitely questions to be asked about the police conduct and competence, especially the male officer involved, but it isn't as though the police just turned up unannounced and assumed without reason that the white guy was a racist thug. They'd been called out to a 999 call explicitly stating that there had been a racially motivated assault. There's probably a large element of confirmation bias in this case but I don't see anything to suggest the police made an unreasonable assumption based on the information they had when they arrived.

I am minded to agree with you on this part, but what has failed to be mentioned is the complete failure of basic duty that is what makes me so angry at the police in this case.

Where was the DR-ABC(E) when the “I’ve been stabbed” claim was made? Why was Henry placed in cuffs when he was clearly injured and not fighting?

If anything, I feel (slightly) for the female PC who can quite clearly in the BWV footage encouraging her counterpart to undertake checks but is quite clearly ignored.

 

[35B]

Was he? Where, and which weapon? A bladed article in public? He had loads of non religious weapons he was convicted of possessing.

As I understand it, the large pile of other weapons that are the subject of an ongoing trial. From the list reported as being subject to trial, it’s certainly not clear that the motive was religious observance.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Where was the DR-ABC(E) when the “I’ve been stabbed” claim was made? Why was Henry placed in cuffs when he was clearly injured and not fighting?

If anything, I feel (slightly) for the female PC who can quite clearly in the BWV footage encouraging her counterpart to undertake checks but is quite clearly ignored.

The behaviour of the male PC was disgraceful. It’ll be interesting to see how the IOPC try to brush it under the carpet. I have no doubt that they will.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Jun 2026 ==

How is that unfounded opinion on my part? They arrested him for assault, which they were told was racially aggravated. It's a fact the officer believed that is what happened.

Ah, see you what you mean, originally read it more in a Faragey way i.e. that the police expected the white guy to be a racist and worked backwards.

There was definite confirmation bias going on, and they didn’t stop to think whether what they were told was truthful or not. The male PC in particular behaved appallingly.

 

[AlterEgo]

As I understand it, the large pile of other weapons that are the subject of an ongoing trial.

None of those are ceremonial knives, all of them are some other sort of weapon.

From the list reported as being subject to trial, it’s certainly not clear that the motive was religious observance.

For those weapons? Certainly not.

I don't know what you think this separate trial will show about the legal status of knives as kirpans though because none of them are claimed to be kirpans or even ceremonial knives. This is being prosecuted by the same CPS which didn't prosecute Digwa for the kirpan he was carrying when he murdered Nowak. The CPS unambiguously accept that weapon as a kirpan and the judge accepted this too. It is very simple - there is no lawfully defined size limit on what constitutes a kirpan (in practice it is treated as nine inches). Any bladed article may be one provided it is being carried for religious reasons.

The Sikh community lobbied hard for exemptions to the Offensive Weapons Act 2019. This means, in the words of MP Preet Kaur Gill:

"The bill would have meant that Sikhs who possessed a 50cm kirpan in the home would be committing a criminal act and subject to a year’s imprisonment so I am grateful for the minister's intervention to amend the justification for a Sikh possessing a kirpan from the narrow 'religious ceremonies' to 'religious reasons. This was a fundamental change to protect the rights of Sikhs to purchase and possess a kirpan. With this amendment, the Sikh community has been given a clear commitment by the government that they will not be penalized."

Note that a 50cm kirpan is legal! Digwa's was half that size.

The judge at trial explained the law:

In his sentencing remarks, Judge William Mousley was explicit about how the law applies in practice.

He said those carrying a nine-inch blade in a public place for religious reasons would typically not be prosecuted for possessing a dangerous weapon due to existing exemptions.

The knife Digwa used to kill Nowak was eight inches long, and was therefore within that limit.

The Sikh community is running around about this because there is a danger for them that people misconstrue Sikhs as violent and that they may perceive all British Sikhs as packing some large knife on their person at all times. What we haven't heard is anyone from the several hundred Nihang Sikhs who live here, whose opinion is relevant. And we haven't heard much from Sikhs admitting that a 50cm kirpan is still a kirpan, and legal, as per their own lobbying, and you can carry a 9 inch blade in public lawfully. There's a lot going unsaid.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 3 Jun 2026 ==

Ah, see you what you mean, originally read it more in a Faragey way i.e. that the police expected the white guy to be a racist and worked backwards.

There was definite confirmation bias going on, and they didn’t stop to think whether what they were told was truthful or not. The male PC in particular behaved appallingly.

Indeed, it's just confirmation bias at play. I think really only the male PC was beyond the pale. He was specifically told by an "opposition" witness that Nowak had blood in his mouth and whether he was guilty or not he deserved proper immediate medical attention.

(I note from the sentencing remarks that his injury was unsurvivable due to its location but still)

 

[bb21]

... the MP cannot really be speaking on behalf of all Sikhs.

This is akin to a Catholic trying to speak on behalf of all Christians.

That is the problem though. A Sikh MP speaking on Sikh religious practice and protocols will be seen as reliably speaking the complete truth. If that weren't the case for some sections of the following, he needs to make it explicitly clear. I don't think this is comparable to Christians. The fact there is a distinction between Catholicism and Protestantism is well understood by the majority in our society. The distinction between different branches of Sikhism is not and are seen by most as one.

We may among ourselves be interested in more nuanced detail before forming an opinion, the general public mostly won't.

 

[TravelDream]

I've just watched the bodycam footage and have to say I found it terribly distressing.

Henry Nowak's injuries may not have been survivable, but the exceptionally callous nature of the police officers and disdain shown by them towards Henry who was, quite literally, gasping his final breaths is heartbreaking.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I've just watched the bodycam footage and have to say I found it terribly distressing.

Henry Nowak's injuries may not have been survivable, but the exceptionally callous nature of the police officers and disdain shown by them towards Henry who was, quite literally, gasping his final breaths is heartbreaking.

I completely agree. The officers here failed in the basic principle that preserving life (or allowing a death with dignity if life cannot be preserved) takes precedent over arresting people even if (and obviously this was not the case here) they have actually committed a serious crime. I note that one of them (though we don't know which one) was reported on the radio earlier as having resigned*, hopefully it is the one who doubted that he had been stabbed.

The kid (and he basically was one even though he was technically an adult) died in fear and distress because of the actions of these officers. That is a disgrace, even if their actions could not have prevented that death.

* This article refers: https://www.lbc.co.uk/article/one-officer-captured-in-henry-nowak-bodycam-footage-resigns-5Hjdb4P_2/

Student Henry Nowak, 18, was handcuffed and arrested by police after being fatally stabbed by Vickrum Digwa in December 2025.

Henry’s killer lied and claimed that he had been racially abused by the student, leading officers to restrain him while he pleaded that he could not breathe.

In a statement, a spokesperson for the Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary said: “Three of the officers are still serving, one officer has resigned.”
Read more: Police officer captured in Henry Nowak bodycam footage resigns - as remaining three serving officers 'being treated as witnesses'
Read more: Questions remain after Nicola Sturgeon's estranged husband Peter Murrell pleads guilty to embezzling £400k of SNP funds

The force confirmed that all officers are being treated as witnesses in the ongoing investigation.
It comes as around 300 people gathered outside Southhampton Police Station to protest Nowak's death - including Tommy Robinson and UKIP leader Nick Tenconi.


Crowds could be heard chanting "I can't breathe", with the crowd later led in chants of "shame on you".
It follows a plea by Henry's family, which saw them urging others not to weaponise his death or use it to divide.


AdChoices Sponsored
Hampshire and Isle of Wight Constabulary have since apologised on behalf of the officers but reiterated that they were deceived, and that they would have been unaware of Mr Nowak's injury.
The shocking bodycam footage of the arrest, which was released on Monday, shows Henry, a finance student who was travelling home from a night out, calling out "I've been stabbed" multiple times on Belmont Road, Southampton.
An officer replies: "You've been stabbed? Whereabouts? I don't think you have mate."

Tommy Robinson with protesters outside Southampton police station. Vickrum Digwa was jailed at Southampton Crown Court for life with a minimum term of 21 years for the murder of 18-year-old student Henry Nowak. Picture: Alamy
A female officer can then be heard calling for an ambulance as another says "his pupils aren’t even reacting" to her torch.
The footage begins with officers approaching the address to which an unknown voice says: "He (Henry Nowak) keeps dropping side to side so I am just trying to keep him sat up. He's got a mouthful of blood so.."
Digwa then is heard saying: "He's jumped over these fences and stuff like that."

People protest outside Southampton police station. Vickrum Digwa was jailed at Southampton Crown Court for life with a minimum term of 21 years for the murder of 18-year-old student Henry Nowak. Digwa stabbed Henry to death. Picture: Alamy
Earlier in the day, Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer said there are “serious questions” to answer following the murder of Southampton teen Henry Nowak.
Addressing members of the press, the PM added that the police bodycam footage depicting the death of the teenager was “harrowing' - as he hit out at Nigel Farage over his framing of Henry Nowak's murder.
The Prime Minister also told broadcasters: “I have to say, as a father of a 17 year old boy, I felt sick watching it.
“It is absolutely right that the IOPC (Independent Office for Police Conduct) are looking at this."

 

[Cdd89]

One point I haven't seen made is about Nowak's use of the phrase "I can't breathe".

Up to (and including) George Floyd, that phrase was obviously expected to be taken at face value. But since then, I expect the police hear it on a near-daily basis from chancers trying it on.

I'm not sure there's a corrective, but I've often thought if I were in that situation I wouldn't use that phrase - literally any other form of words would be preferable. This incident has reinforced this!

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'm not sure there's a corrective, but I've often thought if I were in that situation I wouldn't use that phrase - literally any other form of words would be preferable. This incident has reinforced this!

I'm not sure that someone who's been knifed repeatedly and is on the edge of death is going to be thinking rationally about what they say, though.

 

[Cdd89]

I'm not sure that someone who's been knifed repeatedly and is on the edge of death is going to be thinking rationally about what they say, though.

Oh I didn't mean to victim-blame (and rereading my post I can see how it read like that).