The police arrested and handcuffed him in error because mistakes happen.

The arrest and handcuffing of murder victim Henry Nowak by police officers in Southampton in the UK last December and the political fallout after the conviction of the young British Sikh, Vickrum Singh Digwa, for his murder last week was bound to cause tensions in British society.

The anti-immigrant party Reform UK and their fellow travellers at home and abroad claim that an anti-white culture has taken hold of the police in UK who it is alleged are engaged in two tier-policing unfavourable to the majority white community for fear of being branded institutionally racist. 

All the political parties, however, have expressed concern about the case. In particular why the police who arrived on the scene of the murder arrested and handcuffed the victim as he lay dying on the ground telling them repeatedly that he had been stabbed and could not breathe? And why are Sikhs presumed by prosecutors to have a reasonable excuse for carrying bladed articles in religious observance when the same excuse is not available to everyone else?

The most reliable version of the facts of any criminal case usually comes from the judge at trial because he or she hears all the evidence. They are bound by the jury’s findings on the essential facts that prove the accused’s guilt, but they alone are responsible for passing sentence and their sentencing remarks are the most accurate narrative of the facts of the case as they have to explain why the punishment fits the crime.

According to the judge the incident took place in Belmont Road in Southampton late at night at about 11 pm last December during a chance encounter between Henry Nowak and Singh. 

As Nowak passed Singh, dressed in Sikh garb complete with a turban and dagger in a sheath visible outside his clothes, he mocked the fact that Singh had a dagger by asking whether he is “a bad man” as he filmed Singh using his mobile phone.

Singh felt disrespected and replied “yes I am a bad man” and snatched the mobile from Nowak. Nowak tried to get his phone back and a fight ensued during which Singh’s turban fell or was pulled off. During the fight Singh stabbed Nowak causing him serious injuries from which he died shortly afterwards – it seems the incident was filmed up to the moment Nowak’s mobile was snatched.

It was, as the judge said, a tragic error of judgement for Henry to mock and film a total stranger carrying a knife in the middle of the night, but you don’t kill a man just because he mocks you however provocative you perceive the mocking to be.

As the judge said, Singh was entitled to be angry and to use strong words, but the indulgence that Sikhs are granted not to be prosecuted for carrying bladed articles carries with it a heavy responsibility not to abuse wearing their ceremonial knives in public.

What happened afterwards was that Singh’s brother telephoned the police and gave his brother’s false version of the facts claiming that his brother had been the victim of a racist attack. So when the police arrived, they had a one-sided version of the facts and were not to know that Henry Nowak was seriously hurt when they arrested and handcuffed him – it is apparently standard practice to handcuff suspects.

To be fair to the officers they uncuffed Nowak within a minute when they realised he was seriously wounded and, importantly for them, the medical evidence before the court from a pathologist was that he would not have survived however quickly he received first aid, CPR or expert medical treatment as there was a cut to an important vein behind the collar bone that flooded his lungs with blood.

The judge exonerated the police of any fault but his judgement on their conduct towards Henry is not in any way binding on anyone as it was not a fact in issue in the case between Singh and the prosecution.

Singh was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 21 years for Henry’s murder. The minimum term is the number of years he will have to spend in custody before he is eligible for release on licence if he no longer poses a danger to the public.

The attorney-general is considering whether to appeal the sentence in case the judge fell into error in his choice of the starting point of 15 years – the judge decided that 15 years was the appropriate starting point and worked upwards taking into account aggravating and mitigating factors before arriving at the minimum term at 21 years.

The way those convicted of murder are sentenced is that the judge has to decide the starting point for setting the minimum term of a life sentence from four categories of seriousness the law ascribes to different kinds of murder and adjust aggravating and mitigating features accordingly.

For exceptionally serious murders like the murder of children and terrorist and serial murders the starting point is a whole life sentence; for particularly serious murders involving the use of firearms or committed in the course of robbery or motivated by racial or religious hostility, it is 30 years; for murders involving having a knife or other weapon intending to commit an offence or to have available for use as a weapon, it is 25 years; and 15 years  for murders that do not fall within any of the above. 

The judge decided Singh did not have the dagger intending to commit an offence or to have it available for use as a weapon and did not commit the murder in the course of robbing Henry and therefore adopted 15 years as his starting point.

The judge took into account ten aggravating features mostly concerned with Singh’s callous disregard of the injuries he inflicted on Henry Nowak and his attempt to cover up his crime by lying to the police instead of informing the officers immediately that he had stabbed and seriously injured Henry in a fight and that he needed urgent medical attention.

Although the police were primed by Singh to believe that Henry was the aggressor, they made a mistake which they quickly put right by uncuffing Henry within a minute.

All the blame falls on Singh. He stabbed Henry and instead of owning up he stupidly told lies when it was obvious he was caught bang to rights. He was as he said a bad man. No one else is to blame. Not the police, nor police training and certainly not the judge.