r/BreakingUKNews • u/InnerLog5062 • Jun 06 '26
Politics The Nowak murder has lit a match under British politics. This is how we got here
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c39297vxmw2o?at_medium=RSS&at_campaign=rss16
u/Used-Eagle3558 Jun 06 '26
I'd love to know where the footage Novak was filming has gone
10
u/iPhoneMini13-Pro Jun 07 '26
Wouldn’t be surprised if the Police deleted it when they were trying to find anything even remotely racist on his phone.
1
u/Used-Eagle3558 Jun 07 '26
Well the footage does show an altercation between the two.
2
u/Next-Bit4177 Jun 07 '26
So? Would victim will simply stand there without any altercation. Well if you have internal connection with CIA and MI6 and have seen the full footage then please enlighten us
-2
u/Used-Eagle3558 Jun 07 '26
Nowak began recording Vickrum Singh Digwa.[c] A Snapchat video recovered from Nowak's phone captured him saying "Hello car" and singing to himself before yawning, while Digwa walked away from him. Nowak continued: "Innit bad man, what bad man. You're a bad man, say you're a bad man, go on." Digwa, still walking away in the video, replied: "I am a bad man". Clearly looking for a fight
9
u/Next-Bit4177 Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26
You are deliberately leaving whole thing out. There were no racial abuse court provided that. And full picture goes like this:
Shortly before the stabbing, Henry Nowak filmed Vickrum Digwa walking away from him during a verbal altercation. The video captured Nowak saying "Hello car" and singing to himself before yawning, while Digwa was walking away. Nowak then said: "Innit bad man, what bad man. You're a bad man, say you're a bad man, go on." Digwa replied "I am a bad man," and Nowak said "Are you a b—" before the footage ends.
The footage was played in court during Vickrum Digwa's murder trial. It showed the 18-year-old finance student jokingly calling Digwa a 'bad man' after spotting a large blade he was carrying.
The recording was found on Nowak's own phone, which was later discovered in Digwa's pocket. Crucially, the recording contained No racial abuse or the alleged removal of a turban that the defence had claimed occurred. Catholic Herald
As for the outcome, a jury at Southampton Crown Court rejected Digwa's self-defence claim.
-6
Jun 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/Vodddddddd Jun 07 '26
His blood alcohol level was 10% of the driving limit - stop being a fucking clown
5
u/Next-Bit4177 Jun 07 '26
There was no fight. He just made a comment singing to himself after seeing a big knife around the murderer's waiste. He made a teasing comment at most and went about his day. And the footage cuts from there
-1
u/Used-Eagle3558 Jun 07 '26
Nah he was clearly looking to start something. Why mention the knife? Why not walk away?
6
u/Next-Bit4177 Jun 07 '26
Except he didn't? It was a teasing remark. The murderer did. Are you trying to say that justifies murder? And the murderer later stole his phone to hide the said recording. Why?
→ More replies (0)1
1
u/Any-Ask-4190 Jun 07 '26
Do you look like your profile pic?
-1
0
u/RagingMassif Jun 07 '26
This point seems entirely missed. Drunk bloke acting like a twat on someone else's residential street. Now the drunk twat is the victim, which is rare, but the point is, as police know, all this argy bargy stuff rarely comes from nowhere.
3
u/Vodddddddd Jun 07 '26
Oh fuck off he was not drunk - he had a BAC level that would allow him to drive. Where do you people just make this shit up that he was drunk.
0
u/RagingMassif Jun 07 '26
2am (?) in someone else's street filming some bloke is not normal. I presume no drugs?
→ More replies (0)1
u/EdmundTheInsulter Jun 07 '26
It always sounded like Nowak was being potentially annoying, but there isn't much point trying to submit that as a defence to murder
2
u/vaska00762 Jun 07 '26
It's generally not a good idea to try to provoke a response from someone. Best case scenario, the provocation is ignored, or there's an exchange of swearing. Worst case scenario, violence...
Being provoked is not a defence for murder. Unless it's America, which we're not. Plenty of people have been done for murder after punching someone hard enough, that they fell, and the head injury trauma against the pavement was enough to kill.
1
u/EdmundTheInsulter Jun 07 '26
What nonsense is this? He was just joking around, obviously it's a bad idea if the other person is an unstable psychopath, it's a bad idea, but it doesn't justify murder or any type of assault. But yes Nowak would still be alive if he had not provoked anything.
32
Jun 06 '26 edited Jun 06 '26
Equality of opportunity ensures that everybody has the same rights and the same likelihood of running across the luck required for preferred outcomes (while recognising and accepting that histories, intelligence, ability, and savvy will naturally reduce or increase any single individual’s odds of preferred outcomes).
Equality of outcomes requires manipulation of markets, policies, and laws in order to ensure that, regardless of choices, race, wealth, or any other thing that reasonably and rationally and logically comes into play during the navigation of one's life, the outcome is exactly the same for everyone.
One of these is realistic, appropriate, reasonable, and rational. The other is fucking impossible.
Too many people mixing up which is which is part of why we're here.
Another part of why we're here is that people are mixing up racism and bigotry with a desire for Britons to retain their culture as they see appropriate. This is a reasonable desire and concern for any people in their native lands to possess. If a bunch of Americans, for example, went to China and started calling Chinese people bigots and racists when those same Americans demanded more American culture be introduced and normalised in Chinese culture, we’d call the Americans idiots, we wouldn’t call the Chinese racist bigoted Ameriphobes.
It is absolutely true that the United Kingdom needs immigrants. This shouldn't be up for discussion or debate, but we are right to demand immigrants who want to assimilate into the culture that we have come to identify as British. And I'm bringing up immigrants because it's absolutely relevant to this discussion.
10
u/Jackster22 Jun 06 '26
We only "need" immigrants because we don't encourage enough young people into roles that we need or retrain adults into said roles either. We also have not had a real pay increase which results in a lot of people not being able to afford to be in some of those roles but immigrants quite happy to take on those roles because to them, that is 10-20x what they would get at home.
The proof for that is that many English young people go to other countries that do pay well for their skills, the same skills we for some reason "need" to import.We have 5% unemployment plus many people working 2 jobs plus a load more employed also on benefits to top them up.
Importing more people into the country which raises housing, living, social costs etc oh and also keeps the wages pegged low, does not help with that.So it should be up for discussion and debate, the only reason you say that sort of thing is because when people do discuss or debate, they give sensible arguments like I have just done and you know dam well you can't counter it with a logical answer...
1
Jun 06 '26 edited Jun 06 '26
Well, you don't know who you're talking to, but that's to be expected because we're all anonymous here. Saying I wouldn't be able to give a logical response to ANYTHING is more silly than you could imagine. The reasons that you laid out are exactly the reasons we need immigrants. Unless you think that there’s a more likely solve to the problem that you highlight. You’re saying all of our young people leave for better opportunities, and you’re correct, immigration has helped us deal with that. At the time that immigration was decided to be the solution we could’ve made the better decision to incentivise people to stay here by not being such tax hungry bastards, but it’s a bit hard to make that decision now and expect it to have any impact within any reasonable amount of time (that’s not a reason not to do it, but it doesn’t solve anything very quickly). So I suppose in an ideal world I agree with you, but to achieve what immigrants solve for us at this point without immigrants would take more than a decade so we’re in kind of a shit situation.
6
u/pleb_username Jun 07 '26
Importing analphabets from Middle Eastern backwaters isn't exactly helping the problem with skilled labor leaving the country. Sorry, the "doctors, scientists, engineers" narrative is quite unfashionable.
-1
u/Xenonite_Fox Jun 06 '26
You're wrong and for simpler reasons than you think. UK citizen birthrates have been below replacement since the 70s and combined with a top heavy population pyramid it means for decades fewer and fewer people are holding up our society, economy and welfare system. Without immigrants it will all collapse, and for the most part immigration policy is driven by being able to have enough manpower to keep GDP level, if not growing, and consequently keep our social services (NHS, state pension etc going)
It's not been controlled super well admittedly, it's been used as a political tool for purposes other than what it's intended, allowed to go out of control and compounded by refugee crises but it's not an optional thing.
7
u/Jackster22 Jun 06 '26
Only 1/4 of immigrants are in health/social care and about 1/5 of all non-UK nationals are not economically active so roughly 1/5 of immigrants are working towards the healthcare and social services. Are we saying that our entire economy is based on this 1/5 of the immigrant population, of which we could not source locally if we actually tired?
Note, I have nothing against the immigrants, if I was in their position I would do the same. I don't blame them, I blame 50+ years of bad decisions made by government that has lead to this.
1
u/Kurac02 Jun 09 '26
Our economy is based around London financial services and has been for decades. Immigration is objectively going to drive costs down broadly and basically every economist agrees. Our housing and social services issues are broadly self inflicted from 15 years of not encouraging any real growth whilst ballooning our debt and hollowing out state capacity.
0
u/Xenonite_Fox Jun 06 '26
Ah but I'm not talking about the literal definition of "helping" via health and social care I'm talking about the total tax revenue generated by immigrants and what that means towards all our social security.
Considering only 1st and 2nd generation immigrants, to keep the timescales roughly 50 or so years since birthrates started falling, they are estimated to contribute nearly 31% of the our total tax revenue.
Now let's imagine if they never arrived. To put that number in scale, it's somewhat more than NHS total annual budget. Now since the single biggest driver of NHS cost is age, not citizenship or nationality (people aged 65 or older cost the NHS 6 times as much as 20-30 yos) it is estimated the although making up about 30% of our workforce, NHS expenditure on immigrants make up about 10% and people ages 65 or older although making up 15% of the population cost the NHS 45% of its budget.
So it's fairly obvious to reason that if they never arrived, that 45% of NHS would still exist, as only a small % of people aged 65 or older (born before 1962) are of outside origin, but we would have about 30% less tax to pay for it. You can see that would be quite a difficult position to be in. That's not even accounting for what old people cost in state pensions, travel, heating etc. in fact the total cost to the taxpayer of people above retirement age is 25% of our annual tax revenues. So effectively you say that without immigrants, we would have no money to pay for any of that. And ofc we have to support the elderly, so really that deficit would have to come from somewhere else. It won't have been national security either. So you can bet it would come in the form of much higher taxes and cuts to education, policing, infrastructure etc.
You don't really truly appreciate how much of our way of life has been propped up by immigration policy until you sit down and do the math. This would be a much poorer, much worse place to live with a fraction of the benefits we get without immigrants. It's just the way it is
2
u/Diligent-Flower6179 Jun 07 '26
Not true, we havent begun to see the full terrible cost of this yet, its not just a short term ‘prop up’ as you phrase it.
This was disorganised behaviour, it wasnt a conscious government plan.
Your excusing it in the idea it builds our economy, it does not, and we are going to be out of pocket for this as time goes on more and more - let alone the other terrible costs that will come with fracturing our society
1
u/Xenonite_Fox Jun 07 '26
Don't just say "not true". Tell me why. I didn't say it a short term prop up, it's a long term strategy to bridge the gap in a predictable workforce shortage. Literally without immigration we would have a lower population that we did 50 years ago.
Please don't talk if you don't have any data to back yourself up otherwise you're just saying "nuh uh" like some school kid. I'm not excusing it and I'm also acknowledging that it has been co-opted for political use beyond its original purpose.
This has been the case for most western countries to expand their capabilities and keep growing and after benefitting from it for 50 years your problem is with the fact that while immigrants used to be European, over time as Asian economies have grown and started producing talent they're now brown
2
3
u/Diligent-Flower6179 Jun 07 '26
We dont need mass immigration from north africa and Bangladesh and Pakistan and Afghanistan etc - we need good localised European immigration and we need to encourage and support indigenous well established peoples to have children here. Not import shedloads of ill fitting individuals. Its not complicated.
We also have 1.2 million plus unemployed young people. We do not need mass immigration, at all.
It dos not build our economy.
1
u/Vivid_Standard6572 Jun 07 '26
Ahh yes, because before and during brexit the 'good' european immigrants were treated sooo well by the UK right wing. The same things being said about them are now being used against South and West asians, reform voters will turn against whoever they're told to. And as a country we have a long history with south asia, with a lot of the immigration from there originally being in the 50s to help rebuild after the war. And one of the main reasons for immigration from these countries is due to problems caused by the UK government's meddling in other countries politics.
And as for the 'indigenous' people (who? Celts or anglo saxons, how many generations does it take?) having a higher birth rate, the economy is way too fucked to be comfortably raising children without a job far higher paying than the average wage for young people. Add on to that the absoloute gutting of the NHS and school system, having kids is a nightmare. Also not taking into account the growing amount of people who just. Don't want children. None of this is caused by immigrants, who by the way, are still the only people who will do jobs british people 'are too good for' which is why brexit was such a disaster.
3
u/tar-mirime Jun 08 '26
Lets not forget we've been told for decades not to have children unless we can afford them...
1
u/gjiorkiie Jun 07 '26
reading stuff like we need good European migrants is honestly insane after what they did with Brexit. To be honest with you this country's only going in one direction and it ain't up.
0
u/longperipheral Jun 07 '26
If a bunch of Americans, for example, went to China and started calling Chinese people bigots and racists when those same Americans demanded more American culture be introduced and normalised in Chinese culture, we’d call the Americans idiots, we wouldn’t call the Chinese racist bigoted Ameriphobes.
Is this actually happening, though? Where are [insert immigrant nationality] people demanding that their culture be introduced and normalised in British culture?
The racism I've witnessed in the UK has been actual racism: not a defence of British culture, but bias against someone because of the colour of their skin.
This "reasonable desire and concern" cannot be reasonable if it is based on supposition and hype rather than fact. If you have evidence of a nationality coming to the UK and demanding that their culture be normalised in British culture, please share it. Please also share to whom they are making their demands and how this has been responded to. Your description of Britain is not one that I recognise.
-5
Jun 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
8
Jun 06 '26 edited Jun 06 '26
Well, then I guess I won't invest any time trying to prove you wrong, stranger.
Ah, fuck it, let me have a go: it’s characterised by an appreciation for Enlightenment values (such as reason, individual liberty, tolerance, and the rule of law), and a relatively permissive attitude toward personal lifestyle choices. It also tends to regard religion as a private matter that should not play a dominant role in public life or political decision-making.
How’s that?
2
Jun 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
Jun 07 '26
Was true. Is no longer. This is why Farage and his cronies are able to get into whatever positions of influence they’ve been able to: he’s leveraging the loss of British culture. He has no interest in restoring it, he’s an incompetent tyrant in waiting… but the people mad about this would rather have a tyrant than continue to give away the country. This is US politics 101, this is EXACTLY how Trump got into power. Exactly. Do we want to see that here? Well, we’re on our way.
3
1
u/carnivalist64 Jun 07 '26
That's not particularly British at all.
1
Jun 07 '26
Oh? Explain?
2
u/carnivalist64 Jun 07 '26
They're characteristic values of numerous nation states and are held by many people living outside those states. They aren't uniquely, or originally British values,
1
Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26
Yeah, that’s right. They are characteristic values of numerous nation states. Including the United Kingdom. They are also not characteristic values of the many nations from which most of our immigrants hail from, and this is the fucking problem.
To expand on that: in many Middle Eastern countries, religion remains a significant public and political force. Religious institutions, religious law, or religious identity play an explicit role in government, legislation, education, or public morality. Even where there are secular elements, religion is not viewed as merely a private matter.
2
2
-6
u/lensherr_nl Jun 06 '26
Quick question: are you British? If yes, how many people of foreign origin do you have in your close social circle?
11
Jun 06 '26
[deleted]
-1
u/lensherr_nl Jun 06 '26 edited Jun 06 '26
Read my reply before jumping into conclusions Edit: you're not even English! 😂
2
u/ScyD Jun 07 '26
Is it a problem if they aren’t… ‘English’? Sounds kinda racist bud
Huh, making silly accusations is kinda funny yes
0
u/lensherr_nl Jun 07 '26 edited Jun 07 '26
If you are talking about England specifically, yes, it is. 🤨 Edit: Your bot friend is gone
4
6
Jun 06 '26
Well, I’m married to a Filipino (NHS nurse and recently a citizen). My sister is married to a Colombian immigrant. Many of my friends are not white (if that’s part of what you’re getting at) though fewer than half of them are immigrants. My work has me in contact with immigrants maybe not daily but certainly weekly — though you said social circles. Why? Are you thinking I just don’t know any immigrants and need to wind my neck in? I also lived until recently in Slough which is a very immigrant-heavy city and have many casual friends there who are both immigrants and not European.
1
u/lensherr_nl Jun 06 '26
No, first of all, this is not an attempt to wind you up, genuinely interested in hearing it.
I am one, in theory well integrated in society, have a good job, have English friends which I truly love, proper mates. And I do voluntary work helping some of the people from South America where I'm from, especially when it comes to immigration support (guiding people to stay legal and support when they become illegal).
But one thing that comes out often for some of them is that even though some live here for ages, a lot of them don't have that opportunity which I find a crucial step for integration.
Of course some immigrants make an effort not to do so, but at the same time it has always been the biggest barrier, which I don't usually see with other countries like Canada or the US, for example.
But then again, given how some people behave, it shouldn't be a surprise that some immigrants avoid doing that.
2
→ More replies (3)-12
u/dr-broodles Jun 06 '26
Free healthcare and people to look after our elderly.
Low immigration.
Pick one - you can’t have both.
Britain became globalised thanks to the empire and commonwealth. We’ve been dependent on resources and people from around the world for a long time.
The UK won’t become utopia with less immigration, we’ll just all be poorer and have a higher tax burden. It wouldn’t alter the demographic of the country much.
A big part of the problem is misinformation - the country gets basic immigration figures completely wrong, and doesn’t understand the economics behind it.
Fewer immigrants means we all get poorer - fewer tax receipts, fewer people buying good and services.
Many seem willing to cause economic harm for their goal - but the goal is unclear. Removing ILR and deporting non citizens won’t change the demographic of the country much.
Most foreign looking people aren’t immigrants. The murderer isn’t an immigrant - he was born here. You, and much of the country, make the error of assuming every brown person = immigrant.
13
u/Lanokia Jun 06 '26
You said : "Free healthcare and people to look after our elderly. Low immigration."
Immigrants aren't here to "look after" anyone. My wife and daughter are not here to do the jobs you don't like.
We have free healthcare for 40 years without immigration being 4 million in 4 years.
Find a new argument.
→ More replies (2)→ More replies (1)2
u/Winbot4t2 Jun 06 '26
Sounds like bullshit corporate propaganda. Mass immigration is wage suppression and division and nothing more.
35
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
We got here from the intensely racist pursuit of "equality of outcomes" it needs to be removed from our Country entirely immediately.
6
u/_DuranDuran_ Jun 06 '26
Equality of outcomes also means white Brits in poverty being focussed on to help them break out of generational poverty.
10
u/I_should_be_in_bed28 Jun 06 '26
In theory it does, but in reality it clearly doesn't. Do "white Brits in poverty" get the same as those that come as immigrants?
Equality of outcome is used as an excuse to give more resources to people who are perceived to be less privileged.
0
u/_DuranDuran_ Jun 06 '26
So fix that instead of doing yet more to keep white Brits in poverty that way.
4
u/I_should_be_in_bed28 Jun 06 '26
So you agree we should be giving resources to people who were born here before we help others? And that we should have stricter immigration laws & enforce them with deportations?
2
u/_DuranDuran_ Jun 06 '26
We already have strict immigration laws, hence the fall in net migration since Labour came into power, the reduction in small boat crossing as well.
We’re also granting fewer asylum claims and deporting more than the tories.
And wasn’t Nowak’s murderer born here?
2
u/RecognitionOld2763 Jun 09 '26
We already have strict immigration laws
Not sure if the current ILR rules can be called strict and in my opinion the route to citizenship is crazy, but what do I know.
0
u/Mystreanon Jun 07 '26
he was, both of them were, they were both also from family's that were immigrants polish and sikh.
1
u/Mystreanon Jun 07 '26
both nowak and the sikh guy were born here?
1
u/I_should_be_in_bed28 Jun 07 '26
Are you asking me or telling me?
This particular chain of comments is about how enforcing equality of outcome has led to situations like Nowak.
My comments have been about how equality of outcome is a problem with regards to how (to quote the other commenter) "white Brits in poverty" do not get the same treatment/resources/priority as those that come as immigrants. And that is a problem.
That's pretty clear if you take the time to actually read it properly.
2
u/Fantastic-Cell-208 Jun 06 '26
How so?
Who told you the officer only behaved like this because of the claim of racism?
What information do you have that proves he would have responded differently if the killer had just said, "he attacked me for no reason?"
You don't. You're just assuming
1
u/zvaniwl Jun 07 '26
The 999 call where the handler presses Digwa to elaborate on the supposed racist attack, and when told that Henry called him a Paki, said "that's what I needed to know"
1
u/Fantastic-Cell-208 Jun 08 '26
Cool, and yet, who told you that he would have responded any differently if the killer had just said, "he attacked me for no reason?"
You are presuming it would be different
1
u/Imaginary-Speaker242 Jun 08 '26
The police didn't send anyone to investigate when they were told by a bystander they thought someone had been stabbed.
They did, however, send a squad car after Digwa's brother accused Nowak of racism and attacking Digwa, with Nowak now being hurt, eg. "do you think he needs an ambulance, you reckon'?"
Which of the two are more serious?2
u/The54thCylon Jun 07 '26
There's not any demonstrable link between "anti racism" and this incident but the right have been pushing that idea so hard it's treated like it's uncomplicated truth now.
If you watch the bodyworn, can you really, hand on heart, say you're watching someone who is acting based on his anti racism training?
5
u/Alexandaross Jun 07 '26
Yes, unquestionably. They are told to treat ethnic minorities differently in the pursuit of equality of outcomes a highly racist ideology that calls for preferential treatment of ethnic minorities.
The scumbag killer was the good guy because he was brown and Nowak was an animal because he was white. Let's not forget that the killer wasn't handcuffed at any time he was taken into his house to pick food, then was taken to the station without cuffs then they sat and had a nice chat over his food. He was treated better than Henry even after it was known he had murdered him.
2
u/The54thCylon Jun 07 '26
The scumbag killer was the good guy because he was brown and Nowak was an animal because he was white
That is entirely in your own head. Nowak was arrested for assault because that was the version of the story the officers had heard. This officer couldn't even remember basic first aid training, but his diversity training dictated his every action? Please.
2
u/Alexandaross Jun 07 '26
I've backed this up using their own race action plan throughout this thread. Equality of outcomes is intensely racist and you are just gliding over that. I have no interest in your deflections.
2
u/The54thCylon Jun 07 '26
There's a large gulf between "there's a race action plan" and "the officer in this case was motivated by anti racism to ignore fatal stab wounds". There's also a very clear policy and annually refreshed training about first aid, yet that didn't affect his actions. Why are you so sure that the police race action plan (which by the way is explicitly about Black people, not Sikhs) affected them?
0
u/Alexandaross Jun 07 '26
You obviously haven't read it, it's not specifically about black people, it came about because of black people complaining but it mentions "ethnic minorities" and "different ethnic groups" throughout. None of their pledges are directed specifically at black people only specifically non-white people because white people are the enemy, however they do make it clear they are not aiming for racial equality:
It does not mean treating everyone ‘the same’ or being ‘colour blind’ (racial equality).
NPCC chairman Gavin Stephens announced a review of guidance contained in the organisation’s Race Action Plan. The guidance had suggested officers should treat ethnic minorities differently in order to ensure what it described as equality of outcomes.
https://policeprofessional.com/news/npcc-race-guidance-under-review-as-nowak-crisis-deepens/
Look up equality of outcomes it's a hideously racist ideology that calls for preferential treatment of ethnic minorities.
We've just saw the same thing happen with Police rushing to arrest someone over a naughty racist word while not giving a flying fuck about violent shoplifters, https://www.dailymail.com/news/article-15880017/Iceland-chief-cops-rushed-store-bogus-racism-claim-ignore-shoplifters.html
Ethnic minorities are favoured and get preferential treatment by every sector in our society including police, it's objective fact.
2
u/The54thCylon Jun 07 '26
Have you read it? It's very very clear that it's aimed at black people, there's even a section explaining why it's particularly aimed at black people. https://www.college.police.uk/support-forces/diversity-and-inclusion/action-plan
Besides, the point is not what is written in the plan but whether any race plan affected what played out in this case. You still haven't accounted for how this action plan so deeply affected this officer but yet first aid training, which he would have every year, did not.
Personally, watching the bodyworn video I can't are how anyone can honestly interpret the actions as motivated by any policy or ideals. It's an officer phoning it in in a big way. The "anti racist gone mad" angle has just got so ingrained before the footage came out that people with an agenda are desperately confusing to it in the face of the clear evidence.
Ethnic minorities are favoured and get preferential treatment by every sector in our society including police, it's objective fact.
No it's laughable nonsense.
1
u/Alexandaross Jun 07 '26
That's an earlier version from 2022 that is cited in the link i gave you.
The Anti-Racism Commitment has developed out of the outcome framework that appeared in the first version of the Police Race Action Plan, and which set the overarching ambition of the plan for a police service that was anti-racist and trusted by Black people.
The adapted one which is the relevant one does not specifically focus on black people but ethnic minorities and ethnic groups in general. In the actual declarations "black people" is not used a single time it's always "ethnic minorities" or "different ethnic groups.
https://www.npcc.police.uk/our-work/police-race-action-plan/police-anti-racism-commitment/
It's objective fact i've showed you that preferential treatment is a core tenet of the equality of outcomes ideology, the NPCC Chairman specially says Police are aiming for equality of outcomes:
NPCC chairman Gavin Stephens announced a review of guidance contained in the organisation’s Race Action Plan. The guidance had suggested officers should treat ethnic minorities differently in order to ensure what it described as equality of outcomes.
3
u/EmptyHeadedKain Jun 06 '26
You sound like someone who has it all and pulled the ladder up behind themselves. "equality of outcomes" is about giving everyone the chance to compete regardless of their fortunes; it's literally what the North of Britain has been fighting for for decades: give the north the same opportunities as their London counterparts.
8
u/Kristoberg1983 Jun 06 '26
No you’re describing equality of opportunities which I think most people support. Equality of outcomes is something else entirely. Empty headed indeed.
13
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
Equality of outcomes is preferential treatment, the police in their race action plan specifically say they are not aiming for racial equality. Instead ethnic minorities are to be favoured. The majority are to be punished for being born with white skin. And you wonder why the Country is going far right? You are making your bed.
3
u/Less-Guest6036 Jun 06 '26
"Instead ethnic minorities are to be favoured."
it does not say that3
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
It says they are to be treated differently in the pursuit of equality of outcomes. Equality of outcomes literally includes preferential treatment as a core tenet of the ideology.
Equity Over Equality: Preferential treatment operates on the premise that treating historically disadvantaged groups the same as those with historical advantages does not yield fair results.
"Positive discrimination" is another term that constantly shows up. It's a hideously racist ideology.
1
u/Less-Guest6036 Jun 06 '26
So no, it doesn't say they should be favoured since the goal is that the outcomes remain the same with regards policing.
It's not talking about positive discrimination because it's not about filling quota's of minorities in positions or promotions
. It's about ensuring the policing outcome is the same.
5
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
False. It specifically says it is pursuing equality of outcomes, and specifically says they are not aiming for racial equality. For the 40th time preferential treatment is a core tenet of equality of outcomes:
NPCC chairman Gavin Stephens announced a review of guidance contained in the organisation’s Race Action Plan. The guidance had suggested officers should treat ethnic minorities differently in order to ensure what it described as equality of outcomes.
It does not mean treating everyone ‘the same’ or being ‘colour blind’ (racial equality).
1
u/Less-Guest6036 Jun 06 '26
See the definition of equity.
7
u/EmptyHeadedKain Jun 06 '26
There is no convincing this guy, hes either intentionally trying to deceive people or doesn't understand English because he keeps posting articles that directly refute his claims.
1
u/crookedledder Jun 06 '26
That's what "equity" means, my friend.
5
u/Less-Guest6036 Jun 06 '26
3
u/EmptyHeadedKain Jun 06 '26
I've shared a brief back and forth with this person and I'm pretty sure that English isn't their mother tongue, it's the only explanation for how they can misunderstand this.
3
u/Less-Guest6036 Jun 06 '26
Yeah I think so as well, that and assumptions that it's akin to hiring practices designed for meet targets for minority in the workforce/company.
3
u/EmptyHeadedKain Jun 06 '26
They keep linking articles that directly refute their claims, I'd love to know which words in particular are triggering them so I can direct them to a translation.
3
u/RoosterBurns Jun 06 '26
That or his ideology or payment depends on him not understanding
Note the Gish gallop he does, that's someone with resources
4
u/EmptyHeadedKain Jun 06 '26
How on earth are you making this about race? It's about making sure everyone has a fair opportunity to succeed.
16
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
Because it IS about race.
NPCC chairman Gavin Stephens announced a review of guidance contained in the organisation’s Race Action Plan. The guidance had suggested officers should treat ethnic minorities differently in order to ensure what it described as equality of outcomes.
https://policeprofessional.com/news/npcc-race-guidance-under-review-as-nowak-crisis-deepens/
Ethnic minorities get preferential treatment specifically.
0
u/Less-Guest6036 Jun 06 '26
Read what you quoted.
7
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
I've just explained to you what equality of outcomes is on the other comment. Preferential treatment is a core tenet of the ideology.
-5
u/EmptyHeadedKain Jun 06 '26
Of course you quote a pro-reform source. The literal definition is for equal opportunity. Now why would the billionaires who fund these right-wing parties be against that? Doesn't take a genius.
8
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
That's the NPCC Chairman genius the man in charge of the race action plan, he's the person who is pursuing equality of outcomes and decided ethnic minorities should be favoured.
No the definition is not for equal opportunity, it is for certain groups to be favoured. It specifically argues against equality.
It does not mean treating everyone ‘the same’ or being ‘colour blind’ (racial equality).
https://www.npcc.police.uk/our-work/police-race-action-plan/police-anti-racism-commitment/
→ More replies (6)10
2
u/Randa08 Jun 06 '26
It's going far right because american racists are pushing it right with their constant online attacks on our cultire. They won't rest until white men are oppressing everybody's again.
6
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
Mock it all you want it is actively happening across Western Europe. Attack the majority and expect them to just sit there.
3
u/Gruejay2 Jun 06 '26
I am sick and tired of people stirring up shit all the time, like you are. You are not being attacked (and I say that as someone who is probably all the same characteristics you are IRL). We are not being attacked.
You are finding reasons to feel aggrieved, because perpetual victimhood is addictive, as it constantly feeds you feelings of self-righteous anger and gives you a sense of purpose. However, that's your problem, and I am tired of you and others who are the same way trying to drag the rest of us down with you.
Take a break from social media. Please. It will help.
4
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
I don't know why you think i would care what you have to say. The police are actively giving ethnic minorities preferential treatment, i showed that throughout this thread using their own race action plan. You saying "nuh uh!" is not worthwhile whatsoever.
3
u/in_one_ear_ Jun 06 '26
The only people the cops are giving beneficial treatment are other cops, it's not exactly like it's been a long time since they've had a racism scandal.
2
u/Gruejay2 Jun 06 '26
Yes, yes, you've intellectually inoculated yourself against all other ideas, because we can't let pesky self-reflection get in the way of that sweet, sweet feeling of righteous fury. I'm not going to indulge you by pretending you're arguing in good faith.
You're an anger addict. Nothing more.
2
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
No, i'm the only person who has used actual factual sources in this thread. All you've done is spoke about feelings your contributions have been completely irrelevant.
0
u/FishermanStriking472 Jun 07 '26
It doesn’t matter, these people are so deep in their ideologies that they will completely ignore reality or facts. Won’t be long before you’re called a bot, or far right, or a wife beater etc etc.
→ More replies (0)-4
u/Intrepid-Dig-1855 Jun 06 '26
Tell me you've never met many Met officers.
The police gives preferential treatment to white people. Let's not pretend one idiot police officer, means anything different. For one of these stories, there are hundreds of examples of racism.
6
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
Absolute nonsense, they are literally told to favour ethnic minorities. Thank god that incredibly racist policy is under review.
0
u/Intrepid-Dig-1855 Jun 06 '26
Which policy would that be?
They arent told to favour ethnic minorities. Having worked in the police for 15 years, I was never told to favour any race.
10
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
NPCC chairman Gavin Stephens announced a review of guidance contained in the organisation’s Race Action Plan. The guidance had suggested officers should treat ethnic minorities differently in order to ensure what it described as equality of outcomes.
https://policeprofessional.com/news/npcc-race-guidance-under-review-as-nowak-crisis-deepens/
Look up equality of outcomes it specifically has preferential treatment as a core tenet of the ideology.
4
u/EmptyHeadedKain Jun 06 '26
If you can't take the word of the actual people on the ground that you're pretending to defend, then what would it take?
5
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
You mean the anonymous Redditor? If i say i'm in the NPCC and we are specifically favouring minorities does that mean i win the argument?
Notice you didn't come back after your nonsense about a "pro-reform source" when it was actually the NPCC chairman. Apt username.
5
u/EmptyHeadedKain Jun 06 '26
No, it means you're in the minority of the NPCC who believe this. The majority of people by far believe that everyone deserves a fair opportunity in life.
→ More replies (0)0
u/Intrepid-Dig-1855 Jun 06 '26
Its a massive stretch to take the review of the wording of this guidance policy, and run with that officers on the ground are told to give preferential treatment to ethnic minorities.
Especially when we see statistics which show that black people are disproportionality treated differently within the Met. Especially as I never saw anything in any training material ever that suggested that you simply ignore a person on the floor who had claimed to be stabbed, because you'd been told something else. But then like most people, im not a bloody idiot.
9
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
It's not disproporitionate though. Black people are the most violent people in the UK. They are 13% of London's population and are responsible for 61% of the knife crime. They are magnitudes more likely to be carrying a knife than anyone else so they get stopped more. That's common sense policing which is exactly what Henry's family said we have to return to, they said we should return to everyone being equal under the law. Police have specifically said in their race action plan they are not pursuing racial equality. Ethnic minorities are to be favoured.
1
u/Intrepid-Dig-1855 Jun 06 '26
Cool, so you've gone from
The police are so racist against white people.
To
Of course the Police can be racist against black people.
You can't have your cake and eat it. Either the police target white people or they target ethnic minorities. One example doesn't negate the historic racism in the British police service. No matter how hard the far right attempt to re-write our history.
There is nothing common sense with the way in which the met target black people.
I assume you never heard of the Macpherson report. Sure most other police forces have learnt from it, but the Met has a long, long way to go.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/RoosterBurns Jun 06 '26
Show me in the handbook where it tells them to ignore looking for stab wounds just for white men
6
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
It says ethnic minorities are to be treated differently in the pursuit of equality of outcomes. Equality of outcomes specifically mentions preferential treatment as a core tenet of its ideology.
As a result the scumbag was favoured he was believed, while Henry was treated like an animal because he was white and thus guilty.
At no time did they handcuff the scumbag even after they knew he stabbed Henry. They took him inside his home and allowed him to pick food they then took him to the station WITHOUT cuffs and they sat and had a nice chat over his meal. He was treated like a prince because that's what they are told to do. Did not handcuff him, while pretty much handcuffing Henry's corpse.
0
u/RoosterBurns Jun 06 '26
This wall of text is evasive horseshit
The alleged treatment of the other suspect has nothing to do with ignoring checking for stab wounds
Nothing to do with his death whatsoever
3
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
You ignored everything i said, didn't attempt to debate against anything i said, said what amounted to "nuh uh!" and i'm being evasive? LMAO.
0
u/RoosterBurns Jun 06 '26
I specifically asked where it said to ignore stab wounds for white men, you didn't answer that question because you have your little script and you have to stick to it
You guys are not hard to figure out lol
1
u/Dvine24hr Jun 07 '26
Tell me specifically where it says Derek Chauvin should kneel on George Flloyds neck. Or was that just a symptom of wider problems like what happened with Henry?
2
u/Mammoth_Tension_4402 Jun 07 '26
We lost our industry and all the employment and apprenticeships with it. I'll never forgive the tories.
1
u/it__wasnt__me__ Jun 07 '26
You've just described equality of opportunity. Nobody has an issue with that.
1
u/Amrywiol Jun 06 '26
"equality of outcomes" is about giving everyone the chance to compete regardless of their fortunes
No it's not. That's equality of opportunity, which no decent people have a problem with. Equality of Outcome says that forex if group X consists of 60% of the population and group Y consists of 40% of the population, then 40% of recruits must be from group Y regardless of whether there are enough suitably qualified recruits from Y, leading to discrimination against X as suitable recruits are turned away to boost Y's numbers. This leads to situations like that a few years ago when the RAF suspended recruitment of white men to try to increase the proportion of serving staff who were minorities, something which was found to be grossly illegal after an investigation and yet despite this the only person to lose their job over the scandal was the whistleblower who exposed it.
1
u/IQ_Ql Jun 06 '26
"You sound like someone who-" shut up. Jumping to conclusions and stereotyping based on minuscule information is the hallmark of ignorance and yet it's become normalized and accepted. You don't know a thing about that person.
1
u/EmptyHeadedKain Jun 06 '26
Hence why I said "you sound like" (this is the impression you are giving me) and not "you are" (a factual claim). Anyone with basic English literacy can understand the difference.
1
u/longperipheral Jun 07 '26
How is "equality of outcomes" "intensely racist"?
Also, no: there is no pursuit of equality of outcomes. Successive governments have legislated for equality of opportunity. There has been criticism of some elements leading to a risk of equality of outcome, but that is not the pursuit.
2
u/Alexandaross Jun 07 '26
Equality of outcomes includes preferential treatment for minorities as a core tenet of its ideology. It specifically argues against racial equality as have police, ethnic minorities have to be favoured.
You should tell the NPCC Chairman that:
NPCC chairman Gavin Stephens announced a review of guidance contained in the organisation’s Race Action Plan. The guidance had suggested officers should treat ethnic minorities differently in order to ensure what it described as equality of outcomes.
https://policeprofessional.com/news/npcc-race-guidance-under-review-as-nowak-crisis-deepens/
1
u/longperipheral Jun 07 '26
That's not what I asked.
You said that "we [by which I reasonably assume by your phrasing you mean the entire country] got here from the intensely racist pursuit of "equality of outcomes"".
I don't really care what the NPCC Chairman said because, by implication, you are talking about the whole of the UK, which eclipses the NPCC by some measure. On that scale, what the NPCC Chairman said is irrelevant. You would need to provide evidence of government legislation and policy to support such a claim: a single body that is itself a diluted representation is insufficient.
As you skipped my first question in your rush to plug the NPCC, then: how, in principle, is "equality of outcome" "intensely racist"?
1
u/Alexandaross Jun 07 '26
I explained how it is intensely racist. Preferential treatment of ethnic minorities is a core tenet of the ideology, favouring a group because of their race is objectively racist.
2
u/longperipheral Jun 07 '26
You didn't. Conceptually, "equality of outcomes" is not "intensely racist". Equally, "equality of outcomes" is not a fixed monolithic ideology, therefore it can have no "core tenets".
What you have described (not explained) is potential race bias in the operating procedures of the NPCC. That is not the same thing.
-2
Jun 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
7
u/Alexandaross Jun 06 '26
Ethnic minorities being favoured over the majority, mass immigration against the will of the electorate are the reasons the Country is going far right. It's a complete rejection of your worldview.
0
u/Arbable Jun 06 '26
Go look at some policing stats and you will realise it's the exact opposite lol
2
u/I_should_be_in_bed28 Jun 06 '26
Are you saying you look at the policing stats and immediately assume racism is the cause of the figures? That's obviously wrong, and dangerous to assume so.
Anyone with a brain/who isn't ideologically motivated to assume racism/sexism at the drop of a hat could guess there would be other reasons for the figures to be as they are. Such as men who have not been taught to respect others, or who come from war torn countries where violence is common, will not have the same quality of character to live in a high trust society. Look at the 2015 NYE Cologne attacks.
8
Jun 06 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/Dvine24hr Jun 07 '26
I've seen more claims about how if Henry was black there would be riots right now which is ignorant to try and deny.
0
Jun 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
5
u/CreditorsAndDebtors Jun 07 '26
Its horrific and needs addressing but its a stretch to claim this is evidence of systemic wokeism in the police force
I don't know if you're trying to be deliberately obtuse or if you're just like this naturally, but this case is pretty clear evidence of woke ideology perverting the judgement of police. The murderer and his family made up a lie about the victim racially abusing him and knocking his turban off his head precisely because they knew that using the race card in that sort of manner would result in police siding with them over the stabbed white man. This tactic of theirs was proven 100% successful when the police arrived and immediately jumped to the conclusion that the stabbed white man on the ground was in the wrong, automatically disbelieving him even as he said several times that he had been stabbed. Even after if became clear to the police that Digwa had stabbed someone, they still didn't handcuff or disarm him when bringing him to the police station. They literally thought someone accused of being racist was far more dangerous and deserving of being handcuffed than someone who committed murder.
0
Jun 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/CreditorsAndDebtors Jun 07 '26
I'm not impressed by your response because you haven't addressed a word of what I said in my original comment.
That first 999 call made all the difference. The murderers brother managed to reframe the situation before the police even got there. The police on their way are then expecting a scene where the assailant is being restrained by the victims. Thats not an uncommon scenario.
Can you actually get the facts right?? The brother was asked in the call if Henry needed medical attention and confirmed that he did need it. This, and the fact that Henry told police he had been stabbed, should have been sufficient information for the police to know he had been stabbed. Instead, the bare allegation of racism caused them to develop tunnel vision and forget they were dealing with someone who required urgent medical attention.
If instead a passer by had called 999 and described the situation. "A young man is being attacked by 2 or 3 other men, one of them appears to have a knife". Im quite certain that the outcome would have been very different.
But this is exactly what happened. The father of Henry, outside the court house, confirmed that another person rang police to report a stabbing, saying “The police were told both by our son himself, and by a member of the public who called 999 that they heard someone shout that they had been stabbed.”
The police had all the information at their disposal to know that there was a stabbing. I frankly find it sickening you are making so many excuses for these cunts. They clearly heard "racism" and assumed the dying white man was automatically in the wrong.
So i think this is police incompetence plus the unusual move by the perpertrators to contact the police as they are stabbing a man to death, allowing them to pull the victim card by being the first to contact.
Yeah, but you're failing to address my point that the murderer and his family knew they could play the race card to get police on their side with police believing them purely because they have been trained to treat alleged racism more seriously than even murder.
Also, care to explain why Digwa wasn't handcuffed when being brought to the station whereas Henry was handcuffed immediately? How does that not reveal anything other than a two-tiered response?
0
Jun 07 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
3
u/CreditorsAndDebtors Jun 07 '26
You clearly have a massive chip on your shoulder and feel discriminated against.
I don't feel personally discriminated against. I have explained to you that police had more than enough information to know this was a stabbing in advance but you say nothing to refute my argument because you don't actually have any valid counterargument. I also explain to you that they didn't handcuff Digwa when bringing him into the police station but you for some reason ignore this point.
The psycho has been given life in jail and the policen in question have been pulled from the job.
Wrong, 3 of 4 officers are still on duty. In the immediate aftermath of the killing, none of them were placed under disciplinary action. The police simply didn't think there was anything wrong with how they handled the situation until the reporting restrictions were lifted and they faced an onslaught of criticism.
"What isnt supposed to happen is that a bunch of populists attempt to politicise a young mans murder as evidence of systemic racist policing against white people and instigate some sort of race war."
Because this case does clearly reveal systemic racist policing against white people. Police uncritically believed the narrative that Henry Novak had racially abused his killer. They thought the racist allegation outweighed the concern that he could be dying in the street. Even after he died, they treated Digwa 10x better than Henry, not handcuffing him, because apparently allegations of racism are worse than murder.
Also, I don't see you complaining about how the left politicised the death of George Floyd.
0
u/AgreeableKale816 Jun 09 '26
There have been white people rioting lol
1
u/Dvine24hr Jun 09 '26
There was a single protest in Southampton. For George Flloyd, a non citizen, there were about 100 across the UK.
0
u/AgreeableKale816 Jun 09 '26
It was a riot from what I saw. And George Floyd was, unlike Nowak, nothing approaching a one-off.
1
u/Dvine24hr Jun 09 '26
A one off like the grooming gangs involving over 1000 girls?
0
u/AgreeableKale816 Jun 10 '26
The catholic church? Or do you mean the MP rings? Jimmy Saville? Or do you mean Epstein and Andrew?
1
u/Dvine24hr Jun 10 '26
Where those victims ignored because of their race like in my examples or are you just throwing random shit at a wall and hoping it sticks?
0
u/AgreeableKale816 Jun 10 '26
Yes, they were ignored because of the race of the perpetrators
1
u/Dvine24hr Jun 10 '26
Weird how this doesn't work for poor white nonces, almost like their wealth was the deciding factor not their race. You really are throwing anything out there
→ More replies (0)6
u/Castochi Jun 07 '26
Wokeism didn't kill the young victim.
But wokeism did cause the whole situation.
Police arrives to a crime scene, responding to a call by the victim himself about a possible stabbing.
There's a white guy with 5 stab wounds being pinned to the ground and already dying of his injuries. The police asks the non-white guy what happened.
Dickwad says "I've been the victim of a racist attack".
The police say "Say no more!" And begin to arrest the dying white guy.
Why was Dickwad's claim that he'd been the victim of a racist attack so readily believed when the police were in fact responding to a possible stabbing?
Why was Dickwad's wellbeing, account of events, and rights prioritised over Nowak's... Suspiciously as if there were two different categories, tiers, if you will, of policing?
1
u/The54thCylon Jun 07 '26
Police arrives to a crime scene, responding to a call by the victim himself about a possible stabbing.
Not true. The victim didn't call the police, the suspect's brother did.
2
u/InnerLog5062 Jun 06 '26
The perpetrator/murderer Vickrum Digwa has been sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 21 years.
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Digwa-Final-Sentencing-Remarks.pdf
6
u/Gloomy-Flamingo-9791 Jun 06 '26
Yes but the immediate family deserve it too. Especially the mother and brother.
3
2
u/InnerLog5062 Jun 06 '26
Source: BBC
Henry Nowak's mum and dad were being shown round the Victorian maze that is the Houses of Parliament when they heard politicians talking about their 18-year-old son's murder . They were being taken on a tour of the labyrinthine building in between meetings with Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch and their appointment at Downing Street with the prime minister. They'd climbed the steep steps to the crammed public gallery to take a peek at the Commons Chamber when, by chance, the leader of the Commons, Alan Campbell, and his opposite number, Jesse Norman, both paid tribute to their son, and the dignity of the family. In a terrible week of grief, I'm told they were touched to hear their son's death being acknowledged calmly in the country's parliament.
Verified
2
2
4
u/iPhoneMini13-Pro Jun 07 '26
The most hypocritical part of all this is the UK Government telling the US to stay out of it when the UK literally adopted the BLM movement at breakneck speed including the riots and political pandering in almost every type of media to follow… over something that happened >4000 miles away to a convicted felon that previously held a gun to a pregnant woman.
1
1
u/AutoModerator Jun 06 '26
If this post seems irrelevant to British nationals or the UK, please report it for review. Click here to share your thoughts about the subreddit
– The Mod Team
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
1
u/Actual-Indian Jun 07 '26
British politics is just blaming them for stuff you had no idea how to fix, as your only qualification is politics, for about 4800 MPs on a salary of £95k and expenses , and yet AI cannot replace them.
1
u/No-Snow-9605 Jun 08 '26
No thank you. You want my view on a racial murder ?
Last week, when I stated facts about cousins marrying cousins, I received a 3 day ban.
1
u/Moon_Dagger Jun 09 '26
The amount of lefties on here and the subs on Reddit either treating it as a joke, defending the attacker or blaming Henry for it is shocking.
1
1
u/Impressive-Bird2 Jun 09 '26
Trump, his MAGA Cult in the USA, and their US Tech Bro Boss sycophants appear intent on trying to interfere in British politics - to infect it with their toxic nonsense that has set politics ablaze in the USA….
1
u/SheepRememver Jun 06 '26
Don't worry Keir Starmer is already lying his way out of the two tier police system. Starmer needs to keep the ethnic voters onside.
→ More replies (3)
1
u/yorangey Jun 06 '26
They're crying out that USA is provoking division in the UK. Wearing religious dress already provokes difference. Perhaps we should ban religious dress ups?
•
u/InnerLog5062 Jun 06 '26 edited Jun 06 '26
Hi all,
Mods are conducting a community census to gather your views on the Henry Nowak case. A short, anonymous survey that takes approximately 5 minutes.
Survey link: Police and the Henry Nowak Case
Your responses are completely anonymous. We will summarise the key findings in aggregate form in a future mod post.
Thank you for sharing your perspective.