Henry Nowak: a victim of anti-white racism
The British Police are guilty too
PIMLICO JOURNAL
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
[email protected].
If you wish to support what we do, please consider subscribing. If you are already subscribed, why not upgrade to a paid subscription?
This article (Henry Nowak: a victim of anti-white racism) was created and published by Pimlico Journal and is republished here under “Fair Use”
See Related Article Below
No Country For White Men
Henry Nowak – A Psychologist’s Perspective
XANDRA H
As a psychologist, I have listened to some jaw dropping explanations in my time, but the obfuscations of the police and the utter silence of the politicians and the media over the death of Henry Nowak comes pretty high up the scale.
The only comparison in this country that I have is when Lee Rigby got his head half hacked off in broad daylight and the Labour Party was fearful of a backlash against Muslims.
As others have said; some drug addled psychopath gets killed four thousand miles away and there are riots in this country, critical race theory is instantly accepted and slebs all over the media including politicians are down on their knees, begging forgiveness for the empire and a slave trade that ended hundreds of years ago for white peoples, even as it carries on today between blacks.
A black boy gets knifed in London, his mother is elevated to the House of Lords where she is given the power to influence government policy and vent her hatred of white people under cover of making society more equal.
What is going on?
Let’s take a look at this from a psychological perspective, rather than a frustrated man in the street perspective.
If I look at this from the perspective of me as an ordinary citizen, when I think of what happened, I can almost feel the layers of civilisation peeling off and exposing the animal underneath. Why? Because it makes me feel vulnerable, exposed to potential life-threatening danger at any time, not necessarily physical, that I am not allowed to defend myself against, without state intervention occurring and possibly severe state punishment.
This danger comes from a section of society whose cries of victimhood or racism are always believed, even if they are standing there with someone else’s blood all over them.
Apparently they are incapable of lying (police were shocked)! and according to Sadiq Khan and others, go round in constant fear of being attacked and having their places of worship bombed.
This is a classic case of accusing others of what you do yourself. It is the Palestinian playbook transferred to this country.
Viciously attack a country you have a grudge against in the most sadistic way possible and when the sheer horror of what you have done strips away any sort of civilised response, blame them for the destruction of your country and go for the greatest victim trophy of all time; genocide.
After that, no one will be able to accuse you of anything ever again and will be a willing servant to fulfilling every mad destructive desire you have no matter what the cost.
If I think of this as a purely as a psychologist, the Stanford experiment and the obedience to authority experiments in the sixties come to mind.
In the prisoners and guards experiment, it was staffed by students who knew one another and so it was supposed, would keep their humanity. Somehow the prisoners uniform and the idea they were criminals lead to the guards completely dehumanising them, no matter how much they tried to cooperate to avoid being beaten. Once that had happened, all civilised bets were off and the experiment was abandoned.
Same with the fake electric shocks given to people who gave the wrong answer to a question. All but one student, who refused to turn up the voltage, carried on at the behest of the scientist in the white coat, even when the dial said danger. They didn’t know the person wasn’t really being shocked and were warned of the effects of higher voltage, but still chose to carry on.
In order to do this, it is necessary to dehumanise the person receiving the shock so that mutual empathy could not be established; or the person giving it would not have been able to carry on.
The need to be seen as a competent and worthy member of the group by the scientific leader, was worth more than the life of someone they didn’t know who couldn’t get anything right anyway.
The danger to white people of any nationality in this country, is that critical race theory, institutional racism, equality of outcomes and other gobbledygook have led to the dehumanisation of white peoples, otherwise, it could not carry on. We are treated as though any minute, we are about to do terrible harm to anyone not exactly like us. This is all the excuse needed to dehumanise a racial type as what? Too uncivilised to be out in polite society? Evil beyond redemption? Not “good” like us? Too thick to run their own lives? Not quite as human as us?
Maybe all of these and more I’m sure.
This is whole heartedly facilitated by the people in power of our own racial group, who seem to either take delight, or downplay and remove, anything that shows black racism towards whites or their victimisation.
Why they do this is another article in itself, but they do; there cannot be any possible doubt about it now.
The worst thing about this was not that the murderer was a Sikh, but that cries of racism acted like a dog whistle to the police to handcuff a dying man who was bleeding out as a criminal. He too cried out “I can’t breathe, I’m dying”. However, that is not being cried out in the streets today as it was with Floyd. What on earth is taught in police training that can manipulate someone into being that callous and yes, wicked, without turning a hair. Are they put in front of that spinning spiral brainwashing wheel so beloved of sixties spy programmes with “racism” as a trigger word for zombie like action? Enquiring minds need to know!
If things follow the accepted playbook, over the next month or two we are likely to be encouraged to empathise with the moron who did this ( he is traumatised; historical trauma may come into play here if needed) and the broken family of the perpetrator (who will have to live with this for the rest of their lives), in order to dampen down our visceral response to what happened to the real victim, so that it can be safely forgotten.
I would like to see openly published, the diversity and inclusion, anti-racist and any other woo woo syllabus that is taught to any organisation that is funded by the public, or has influence and control over the population, especially children.
Any ethnic group who is presented as less worthy or more morally suspect than others is automatically put in a dehumanised position. This is not just a black prerogative. They are less likely to be believed or taken seriously; see grooming gangs etc.
Even if they are believed, because dehumanisation has led to the severing of true empathic responses, it is more likely that other political and social needs will occlude a fair and just resolution.
At the most, that awful run of platitudes trotted out by people with deadpan faces will appear and make things worse, because we all know they don’t mean a word of it.
Let’s put it this way. If your dog and your child simultaneously rush into the road in front of a speeding car; which would you rush to grab out of the way? You may have a fondness for your dog, but for most people, the genuine empathic bond with the child would win out. Blood of my blood and dearest to me.
This country is rapidly becoming dangerous and toxic for all white people, not just Jews and white men; they were just the canaries in the mine.
The question is, do we just allow it to carry on, or do we just try to leave and let them get in with it? All legitimate ways of challenging the system have been closed since the conservatives joined Labour and the Lib Dem’s to become the Uniparty and the new supposedly right wing lot have nothing to say either, at least not in public, so it looks like they’re both set to become the new right wing of the Uniparty.
You tell me, any ideas?
This article (No Country For White Men) was created and published by Free Speech Backlash and is republished here under “Fair Use” with attribution to the author Xandra H
••••
The Liberty Beacon Project is now expanding at a near exponential rate, and for this we are grateful and excited! But we must also be practical. For 7 years we have not asked for any donations, and have built this project with our own funds as we grew. We are now experiencing ever increasing growing pains due to the large number of websites and projects we represent. So we have just installed donation buttons on our websites and ask that you consider this when you visit them. Nothing is too small. We thank you for all your support and your considerations … (TLB)
••••
Comment Policy: As a privately owned web site, we reserve the right to remove comments that contain spam, advertising, vulgarity, threats of violence, racism, or personal/abusive attacks on other users. This also applies to trolling, the use of more than one alias, or just intentional mischief. Enforcement of this policy is at the discretion of this websites administrators. Repeat offenders may be blocked or permanently banned without prior warning.
••••
Disclaimer: TLB websites contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available to our readers under the provisions of “fair use” in an effort to advance a better understanding of political, health, economic and social issues. The material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving it for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material for purposes other than “fair use” you must request permission from the copyright owner.
••••
Disclaimer: The information and opinions shared are for informational purposes only including, but not limited to, text, graphics, images and other material are not intended as medical advice or instruction. Nothing mentioned is intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment.
Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of The Liberty Beacon Project.
Leave a Reply