The case of Henry Nowak”s murder is distressing. It’s clear that the police made mistakes and that a young man and his family were seriously let down. It is also clear that an evil and violent crime was committed.
However, we need to be careful in our responses. We are seeing Nowak now used as a rallying cause for those wishing to build a case against anti racism and wokeness. Some have even presented him as a kind of white equivalent to George Floyd and have been seen “taking the knee.” There are however, fundamental differences
It’s important first of all to distinguish what we know from what we don’t know. First of all, we know that Nowak asked Nikram Digwa if he was a bad man and Digwa agreed. We know that Digwa took Nowak”s phone. We know that Digwa appeared later without his turban and with a swollen eye. He claimed to police that he had been racially abused and assaulted
We do not know what led to the conversation. We do know that the court did not believe Digwa ‘s claim that it was started by a racial provocation. We do not know if a fight took place. However the conclusion of the judge was that it seemed a scuffle had taken place and that this was possibly caused by Nowak seeking to recover his phone and Digwa believing his honour as a Sikh had been brought into question.
We know that when the police arrived, they were told that Nowak had assaulted Digwa and so they sought to put him under arrest. He told the police that he was injured, had been stabbed and could not breathe, the police at first did not believe him but they do appear to be checking for an injury although unable to find it. The judge was sympathetic to the challenges of arrested suspects feigning injury. The police do seem to have sought to administer first aid
The police have now apologised to the family for their failings. My take would be that given Nowak was not resisting and for whatever reason was struggling physically that they did not need to and should not have handcuffed Digwa. There may also have been question marks at this stage about whether the circumstances fully fitted Digwa ‘s account and whether or not it was credible
However, it is important to make two crucial observations. First, Nowak”s death was not caused by the arresting officers. They did not murder him. This is not equivalent to the George Floyd case.
Second, the arrest was not because of racist remarks. Racism was not prioritised over murder. Rather, he was arrested because he had been accused of assault. The conclusion of the court was that this was a false accusation. However, that was not for the police to determine at the time.
I think this means we can answer the original question as “no, murder was not treated less seriously than racism.”. The murderer was punished and it is clear that the court viewed it particularly serious because the deceit and cover up on top added to the distress of the victim and their family. This does not mean that there are no concerns arising from the case.
There are things to consider from the case. The judge noted that Sikhs by religious custom are required to carry a small knife, attached around the neck. Some have also taken to carrying a large knife in public in a sheaf. It was this larger knife used to kill Nowak. Whilst it is included in religious exemptions to laws on carrying weapons, it is not a requirement for Sikhs to carry one. It is legitimate to review the legal exemption on this. Should that be in place? Should there be any legal exemptions around the carrying of sharpened usable blades at all? I understand that a kirpan may be blunted or even welded into its sheaf for safety reasons
Secondly, the police will want to review their practices around arrest where there is possibility of injury and where clearly the suspect is not resisting.
What we do not want to see happen is this case used incorrectly as part of a culture war.
Faithroots 