Henry Nowak murder

Man-chester copperpot said:
Let’s for a minute pretend he was not stabbed.

My question is why was he handcuffed in the first place?

Law enforcement officers generally handcuff subjects for the following reasons:
  • Preventing Violence: Restraining a subject's hands significantly reduces the risk of sudden attacks on officers or bystanders. [1, 2]
  • Deterring Escape: Handcuffing physical movement makes it extremely difficult to flee from custody. [1, 2]
  • Conducting a Safer Search: It prevents a subject from resisting, concealing weapons, or discarding/destroying vital evidence before it can be documented. [1, 2]
  • Safe Transport: Many police agencies enforce mandatory handcuffing policies during vehicle transport to ensure the detainee cannot interfere with the driver, open doors, or pose a threat during transit. [1]
Is there something he did which led them to handcuffing him straight away?
Click to expand...
In my opinion, that and the officer's dismissive remark will be the focus of the IOPC.

But, he would have submitted a use of force form explaining that justification (one would hope).
 
bert38 said:
In my opinion, that and the officer's dismissive remark will be the focus of the IOPC.

But, he would have submitted a use of force form explaining that justification (one would hope).
Click to expand...
I hope so too.
He was injured, no threat and going nowhere as lay on the floor.
It does not make sense
 
domalino said:
Tragically, 18 year old lads die every week. The reason this is front page news across the country and has a thread when all the others don't is because of the political aspect.
Click to expand...
I think that’s partly true, but the reason it’s front page news in my opinion is because how horrific it is, particularly the way the police treated an innocent young boy. That isn’t something that happens regularly.

Have you seen many videos/ things like this, in the uk?

The way the police acted should be front page news and be highlighted. Why wouldn’t it be/ why play it down as if this happens every week?
 
Yaxley Lennon is on his way to Southampton now according to his latest video. So I'm sure that will calm things down.
 
Last edited:
He told the “officers” NINE times he couldn’t breath whilst on the floor clearly in distress so they think it’s logical to put hand cuffs on him, I mean are they absolutely fucking stupid or what?? They need a prison sentence themselves for this.

RIP to the poor lad.

This case has got me raging.
 
The plod in the UK, just like most of its citizens, are so obsessed with racism that all common sense gets thrown out the window. One little porkie pie and the old bill lap up the racism and let a lad bleed to death. The worst part it's not surprising. I get a feeling there is zero remorse too.
 
Crouchinho said:
The plod in the UK, just like most of its citizens, are so obsessed with racism that all common sense gets thrown out the window. One little porkie pie and the old bill lap up the racism and let a lad bleed to death. The worst part it's not surprising. I get a feeling there is zero remorse too.
Click to expand...
a lot of assumptions there mate
 
Has it been mentioned how the Henry Nowak ended up on what seems to be the drive of the home of the Digwa family?

Did the perpetrator lure/lead him there before the stabbing or move him to try and make the alleged racial abuse more plausible.

Think there might be more about this to come out, understandable that the sentence for Digwa may be reviewed for being to lenient.
 
Had a look at the sentencing remarks and the part that deals with aggravating features in particular:

30. I have to apply Schedule 21 of the Sentencing Act 2020 to identify the starting point for that minimum period. In this case, that gives a minimum term is 15 years. The murder did not involve taking a knife to the scene with the purpose to use it to commit an offence or to have it available to do so. It is possible that you had a good legal reason for having the dagger when you met Henry although, considering the jury’s verdict, that reason must have come to an end after you removed it from its sheath. Neither was it a murder for gain; whilst you did take his phone, or even rob him of it, that was neither the purpose of the murder nor clearly a part of it but I am sure it was a further trigger for what happened to Henry.
Click to expand...

31. There are a number of aggravating factors to increase the starting point. In no particular order, they are as follows, Firstly, you stabbed Henry three other times than when inflicting the fatal wound, all with a highly dangerous weapon. Secondly, mental suffering was inflicted on Henry once he lay dying from his injuries, by your attitude towards him of which he would have been aware and, separately, by your lies which had resulted in a young adult of good character being arrested and handcuffed. Thirdly, there was additional degradation by filming his suffering. Fourth, your repeated and concerted actions after the event included attempts to cover up and to conceal evidence had a tendency to pervert the course of justice. Fifth, you wrongly placed blame on Henry and your lies also led to unnecessary arrests for members of your family which would not have happened if you had told the truth. Sixth, you prevailed upon your mother to assist your attempts to pervert the course of justice. Seventh, Henry was only 18, unarmed and alone which made him additionally vulnerable. Eighth, the offence has had a significant community impact upon others as described and evidenced in press reporting and social media reaction. Ninth, your lies misled the attending police officers which influenced their decision not only to arrest and handcuff Henry but also to give subsequent emergency first aid in ignorance of the fact that he had a serious chest wound. Lastly, you abused the privilege extended to Sikhs to have a knife in a public place for religious reasons, dishonoured your religion and have now put others at risk of repercussions . Those factors increase the minimum term to 23 years. A number of these would not have applied if you had told the police what you said to your brother in the police van on 5/12/2025.
Click to expand...

Firstly don’t agree with the starting point. He took a knife to the scene, and the fact he was (arguably) lawfully permitted to carry it should not provide any mitigation in my view. He was afforded a degree of latitude as a Sikh that other members of society would not be, in (arguably) being permitted to carry such a weapon and there must be severe consequences for using that weapon in those circumstances, especially with a fatal outcome. Break that legal trust that is placed on you, then there should be severe consequences and it should be viewed in the same terms as taking a knife to the scene for the purposes of using it in my view. I don’t see view this perspective as remotely controversial and could potentially act as a deterrent to others. So the starting point should be 25 years, not 15 imo.

Agree with the aggravating features (as outlines in paragraph 31) which are profound and extensive and reckon they should add another ten years to the sentence.

Think a slight reduction for the age of the defendant and his previous good character (whatever that is worth in a murder trial) should knock a couple of years off the sentence, at most.

Therefore think 33 years isn’t excessive in the scheme of things, taking into account the guidance, the foregoing aggravating and (limited) mitigating features and the interests of justice - and I expect the CoA will substantially increase it to around that figure.

And if so, don’t expect he’ll have any realistic prospect of parole until he’s in his early ‘60s.
 
Worzel Gummidge#9 said:
He told the “officers” NINE times he couldn’t breath whilst on the floor clearly in distress so they think it’s logical to put hand cuffs on him, I mean are they absolutely fucking stupid or what?? They need a prison sentence themselves for this.

RIP to the poor lad.

This case has got me raging.
Click to expand...

Such things have sadly happened before and no lessons seem to have been learnt.

I remember many years ago footage was released of man in custody on the floor saying he couldn't breathe and they ignored him and he died.

He was black, so this two tier thing is also bullshit.
 
Blue Maverick said:
Having seen the video and the claims from the family Henry had not been stabbed, I’ve seen reports he gave the knife to his mum to hide, if that’s the case are they getting done for been accomplices?
Click to expand...
The mother took the knife away but she was heard on the video saying the lad hadn’t been stabbed..

Lock the bitch up
 
brummie blue said:
Has it been mentioned how the Henry Nowak ended up on what seems to be the drive of the home of the Digwa family?

Did the perpetrator lure/lead him there before the stabbing or move him to try and make the alleged racial abuse more plausible.

Think there might be more about this to come out, understandable that the sentence for Digwa may be reviewed for being to lenient.
Click to expand...
Fingers crossed he gets life 60 plus years
 
gordondaviesmoustache said:
Had a look at the sentencing remarks and the part that deals with aggravating features in particular:





Firstly don’t agree with the starting point. He took a knife to the scene, and the fact he was (arguably) lawfully permitted to carry it should not provide any mitigation in my view. He was afforded a degree of latitude as a Sikh that other members of society would not be, in (arguably) being permitted to carry such a weapon and there must be severe consequences for using that weapon in those circumstances, especially with a fatal outcome. Break that legal trust that is placed on you, then there should be severe consequences and it should be viewed in the same terms as taking a knife to the scene for the purposes of using it in my view. I don’t see view this perspective as remotely controversial and could potentially act as a deterrent to others. So the starting point should be 25 years, not 15 imo.

Agree with the aggravating features (as outlines in paragraph 31) which are profound and extensive and reckon they should add another ten years to the sentence.

Think a slight reduction for the age of the defendant and his previous good character (whatever that is worth in a murder trial) should knock a couple of years off the sentence, at most.

Therefore think 33 years isn’t excessive in the scheme of things, taking into account the guidance, the foregoing aggravating and (limited) mitigating features and the interests of justice - and I expect the CoA will substantially increase it to around that figure.

And if so, don’t expect he’ll have any realistic prospect of parole until he’s in his early ‘60s.
Click to expand...
I read the Judges pre sentence statement as well that bit baffled me, wasn't him and most of his family back in court today changed with possessing a large number of illegal weapons. Bloody strange family if you ask me tragedy waiting to happen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top