Henry Nowak: a victim of anti-white racism

The British Police are guilty too

With the release last night of audio from a 999 call and some bodycam footage, many of us are feeling what Nigel Farage called ‘Pure. Cold. Rage’. Much of that rage will be directed at Gurpreet Digwa, the brother of Vickrum Digwa, the man who murdered Henry Nowak. In his 999 call, aired by GB News last night, Gurpreet said:

‘Yeah we just been attacked by someone racially… we just got attacked racially by a white person… yeah literally I just parked up my car to come home and he’s attacked my brother.’

It has been reported elsewhere that Gurpreet went on to tell the 999 operator that:

‘He’s physically attacked my brother, we’re Sikhs, we wear a turban and he’s just attacked my brother. We’re restraining him right now because he’s just attacked my brother and took my brother’s turban off. He also, he’s verbally, he’s verbally attacked my brother racially. I’m not having this as a regular occurrence, I live here, I’m not having this a regular occurrence. He ain’t fighting people, he’s racially attacking people, that’s what he’s doing. Nah, he sees some brown people, that’s what it was.’

As a result of the murder trial, we now know that every single detail of this was false. There was no ‘racial’ attack. Perhaps Gurpreet Digwa believed his brother’s lies and repeated them on the 999 call. But he certainly lied when he claimed to have been present at the scene. At the very least, he should be prosecuted for attempting to pervert the course of justice, and depending on whether Henry’s life might have been saved if police had helped him rather than handcuffed him, unlawful act manslaughter. That this has not yet happened, alongside his previous charges for possession of offensive weapons (and six charges against their father, Moga Singh, for the same offence), is deeply concerning.

More rage will be directed at the police officers who attended the scene. From the bodycam footage we know that when police arrived at the scene, despite being told Henry had ‘a mouthful of blood’, despite Henry’s obvious confusion, despite him saying ‘I can’t breathe’ and ‘I’ve been stabbed’ repeatedly, the police officer responded by saying ‘I don’t think you have mate’, then cuffed and arrested him. Meanwhile, Henry’s killer was left free.

Last night, Jonathan Hinder, a Labour MP who was a police officer until 2022, described the police officers’ behaviour at the scene as ‘unfathomable’ because police ‘have emergency life support training which should be deployed immediately in those circumstances — you should be treating it as a medical emergency if someone is telling you those things repeatedly. And crucially, they are not a threat, so the use of the handcuffs is just impossible to explain.’ Hinder went on to say that ‘the most troubling thing about that video for me was the apparent indifference… the casual nature with which the police officer says “I don’t think you have mate”.’

I spoke this morning with David Spencer, Head of Crime and Justice for Policy Exchange and a former Metropolitan Police Officer. He echoed Hinder’s view, but went on to say that he believes this is a much wider issue of culture and policy than just the individual officers. According to Spencer, ‘many officers are now so petrified of being called a racist that it’s the number one thing in their minds.’

Other police officers agree. One serving officer has told The Telegraph’s Allison Pearson (who will be publishing there, but kindly provided me with the comments) that:

‘For years, officers have been subjected to cultural awareness and DEI training that, in many cases, presents policing as institutionally racist by default. Guest speakers are regularly brought in to discuss their lived experiences and, regardless of individual conduct or professionalism, officers are often left feeling collectively labelled as prejudiced.

Operationally, there are clear differences in scrutiny depending on ethnicity. For example, if an officer stop-searches a person of colour, that interaction may be reviewed within 24 hours, whereas searches involving white individuals are often processed routinely at a later stage.

Many younger officers are now so concerned about allegations of discrimination that they default to the safest option administratively rather than relying on judgement, experience, or common sense. In my view, the decision to handcuff Henry Nowak reflects that environment.

The wider issue is that policing has become too politically influenced. Senior leadership teams have allowed external pressure, ideology, and optics to shape operational policing. Officers are increasingly expected to treat people differently depending on race, religion, sexuality, or perceived vulnerability, rather than applying the law impartially and consistently.’

This is correct. The callous, negligent behaviour of the officers at the scene, and the lies told by Vickram and Gurpreet Digwa are not an aberration within our current system of policing; rather, they are the behaviours we would expect given the incentive structure which has developed since the Macpherson Report in 1999 and escalated since 2020, as ‘anti-racism’ has become dominant.

It is important to remember that for the British state, racism is something which doesn’t happen to the white British. As Laurie Wastell and I wrote for Pimlico Journal, the Starmer Government’s 2026 paper on ‘social cohesion’, Protecting What Matters, gives examples of Hindus, Muslims, Jews, and Roma as victims of ‘hate crimes’, but has not a word for the Pakistani rape gangs targeting white English girls, or the white victims of racially-motivated murders, such as Richard Everitt and Kriss Donald.

So ‘anti-racism’ — in this sense — must inherently mean weighing the scales in favour of ethnic minorities and against the white British. As a part of ‘anti-racist’ policing culture, police forces have produced guidelines and rules and begun a new wave of indoctrination training for officers.

Hampshire & Isle of Wight Constabulary, the police force responsible for Henry Nowak’s arrest in Southampton, produced a ‘Race Action Plan 2024-26’. The Plan’s introduction states that:

The murder of George Floyd by serving police officers in the USA in 2020 was a pivotal moment for policing in the UK, driving the need for real change. Whilst this tragic event happened in another country, policing across the UK has over many years had a strained relationship with some communities.

This obsession with the death of career criminal George Floyd, thousands of miles away, is both odd and malignant because it has evidently imbued our police with a moral fervour to ‘solve’ another country’s problem by changing how we police.

The plan itself is remarkably contradictory. It states that ‘we will protect all of our communities’, before going on to specify that ‘we will pursue offenders and deal with offences that cause the most harm to our ethnic minority communities’, with no mention of those crimes which harm the majority population. Thus, the system shifts to being more concerned by crimes against (or claims of crimes against) ethnic minorities than against the white British majority.

This is also evident in the plan’s ‘commitments’ which include:

• Zero tolerance of racism and ensuring Hampshire & Isle of Wight Constabulary (HIOWC) is anti-racist in all it does.

• Understanding and reducing our disproportionality using a reform or explain approach.

• Understanding the impact, trauma and history of policing ethnic minority communities.

• Improving outcomes and support for ethnic minority victims of crime.

Each of these commitments had a role to play in Henry Nowak’s seemingly inexplicable arrest. Hampshire & Isle of Wight Constabulary’s ‘zero tolerance of racism’, and being ‘anti-racist’ means that claims like Gurpreet Digwa’s — of being ‘attacked racially by a white person’ — must be treated with the utmost seriousness. ‘Reducing our disproportionality’ means arresting fewer black and brown people, and relatively more white people.

Indeed, Hampshire & Isle of Wight Constabulary now run a training programme, ‘Inclusion Matters’, ‘mandatory for all staff’, which they proudly state has resulted in ‘race disproportionality in stop and search’ being ‘nearly halved in the force area’.

In practice, this means arriving at scenes where a white boy is lying on the ground saying he’s been stabbed, and a Sikh man is standing nearby with a visible scabbard at his waist, and arresting the white victim while not bothering to cuff or even search his non-white killer.

Similarly, ‘understanding the impact, trauma and history of policing ethnic minority communities’ and ‘improving outcomes and support for ethnic minority victims of crime’ both lead to exactly these events. Soft-touch policing for ‘ethnic minority communities’, an unwillingness to arrest, and a tendency to believe what the judge called their ‘wicked lies’.

The result of all these policies, all this mandatory training is that the police officers in this case behaved exactly as the system demands. They believed the claim of racism. Believed the brown man. Treated an allegation of racism as more important than one of stabbing. Told the white victim he hadn’t been stabbed. Cuffed and arrested him. Left the brown killer free. This is what ‘anti-racism’ means in practice — anti-white and anti-justice.

It’s not surprising. People respond to incentives. And the career incentives for a police officer in Hampshire, or elsewhere in the country, are to care disproportionately about claims of racism by ethnic minorities, avoid searching ethnic minorities and arrest relatively more White British people.

The same incentives apply to the family. The Digwa family knew the magic incantations to summon the police on their side. Outraged claims of racism ensured that officers were primed to treat Henry Nowak as the aggressor. Indeed the Digwa family seem to have been so confident in the state’s support that they believed there was a chance of their murderous son avoiding justice.

Gurpreet Digwa lied on the 999 call. His mother hid the knife. The father’s complicity is somewhat less clear. But the shape of their behaviour is obvious — they lied to the police and did nothing to help Henry Nowak as he drowned in his own blood, because they cared more about their clan loyalty than justice, or the life of a white boy. Even at his sentencing, Digwa’s family were shouting about ‘racism’ — by which they presumably meant their murderous relative being sent down for his crime.

We can not share a society with people like this.

The regime will hope to bury this case in a lengthy IOPC investigation and to pile all the blame on the Digwa family and the individual police officers. But we must not allow that. As Farage said this morning, ‘the public must have confidence that everyone is treated equally before the law’. That confidence does not exist because British policing no longer treats everyone equally before the law. Cases like Henry’s will happen again and again.

As Nigel Farage also said, ‘I suggest the rest of us respond to this with pure cold rage.’ He is right. We must until the poison of anti-racist, anti-White culture is expunged from our police.

---

This article was written by David Shipley, a Pimlico Journal contributor. Have a pitch? Send it to submissions@pimlicojournal.co.uk.

If you wish to support what we do, please consider subscribing. If you are already subscribed, why not upgrade to a paid subscription?