Racism, Policing and the Henry Nowak Case: Racial illiteracy

Watching the media report on the Henry Nowak murder and associated remarks from people in the public eye and journalists has been incredibly frustrating. No one seems able to grapple properly with the issues and challenge responses.

We need to think more critically.
We need to become more racially literate.

If we don’t, people like Nigel Farage will continue to gain traction by inciting fear, anger and ‘responses’ as he has done over the last couple of days.

We are heading towards yet another summer where racist riots feel not just possible, but predictable. Those of us with influence have a responsibility to anticipate this and to act. A first step is simple but vital. We must understand what we are looking at when race becomes part of the narrative.

There is a clear pattern

If you can’t name something, you can’t deal with it.

It is clear that journalists and politicians cannot pin down the language to use to properly identify and robustly debate racist ideologies and rhetoric.

We have had racist riots in 2024 which according to the government were ‘largely instigated by far-right groups’ who framed their behaviour in response to the awful murder of three young girls in Southport. Those girls, and the girls who were injured (some with life changing injuries) have been completely lost from the narrative.

We had racist riots in 2025. Anti-immigration protests and disorder outside asylum accommodation. The justification was about “protecting our women” and “protecting our children” from ‘immigrants’– a common battle cry throughout history of the white supremacist.

Now, we are on the cusp of this again.

Henry Nowak has been murdered and the assailant is Sikh. As someone who has lost a family member to murder, I empathise greatly with his family.

The perpetrator has faced the courts of law and is imprisoned. And yet, instead of focusing on the victim, we are once again watching race being dragged into the conversation with very little literacy, knowledge or common sense. In the case of Nigel Farage, he is using language some would describe as inciting violence. He said,

“I suggest the rest of us respond to this with pure, cold, rage.’

‍ ‍

A GCSE student could analyse this and find violent connotations and implications. You’ll struggle to get, ‘everyone stay in your homes and stay calm’ from his sentence.

Instead of focusing on the victim, our attention is now on whether or not the police can police effectively when race is a factor, and whether Sikhs should be allowed to carry the kirpan.

All of this is a distraction.

As Toni Morrison said,

“The function, the very serious function of racism is distraction. It keeps you from doing your work.

It keeps you explaining, over and over again, your reason for being”.

‍ ‍

Journalists seem incapable of addressing the arguments properly and so I feel the need to so with a few.

Argument 1: The police couldn’t do their job because they were too focused on the race of the murderer at the expense of Henry Nowak.

The BBC quoted a serving police officer not related to the case:

"We've had several reports about how racist we are in the last few years when it comes to Black people and Asian people, and so we're very cautious when handling cases involving different races - and so what happened in Southampton is easy to see why. Maybe we're too cautious now."

Consider - what is the alternative to not being cautious? What does that look like?

The fact is there have been reports about how racist the police force is, because there is clear evidence that the police as an organisation is racist. So, what is the problem? Racism in police ranks, or saying it out loud? The reports come from the police and government, should we not believe data?

The problem is that people are not taught racial literacy, so they cannot handle situations where race may be a factor properly or lawfully. They are given facts, but not the skills to apply them beyond surface-level unconscious bias training. So, individual police officers lack of skill now becomes everyone else’s problem.

Argument 2: The police just accepted the claim that a racist assault had taken place

Why is it unreasonable for a police officer to attend a scene and assume that the person who has asked for help is genuine?

‍If I were to call the police and ask for help because my house is burgled, I expect the police officer to ask me questions about burglary, not approach me as a criminal. Are we asking the police to now assume that everyone who calls for assistance is a liar?

‍The assailant is a liar.

‍There is a whole other blog I could write about model minorities and colourism which may also add to our reflections on why this particular brown person may have been more readily believed by a police officer, than say a Black man, Muslim man, Roma or Traveller. I urge you to look this up yourselves.

‍Let’s consider the history and future consequences if we assume anyone asking for help are liars. ‍ ‍

Historically, women have not been believed when they have asked for help often categorised as ‘innocents’ or ‘prostitutes’. Haven’t we worked hard to address this and make sure police officers believe women and act accordingly? Or is the issue how we approach Black and brown people? Because this person lied, are all Black and brown people liars?

Argument 3: There is a two-tier system of policing?

Yes there is.

‍Where is the evidence of a two-tier system?

‍Farage said, ‘if the public lose trust in how they will be treated by the police, can he [Keir Starmer] take some action and end this divisive practice of two-tier policing and make sure that all British citizens are treated the same’.

There has always been a two-tier policing system for Black and brown people, sex workers, gay people, Irish, trans people, women of any description. These groups have failed to get justice from the police and be treated with dignity for years. Ask Dame Doreen Lawrence, ask Nicole Smallman and Bibaa Henry’s mother, ask Stephen Port’s victims’ families, ask the Birmingham Six.

Assuming the lack of care for Henry was because police have been told to be mindful of bias in their interactions with Black and brown communities doesn’t make sense when you hold that narrative up against the ongoing statistics which show how over policed Black and brown people are and how much poorer their outcomes are when they have interactions with the police.

How have the police attempted to address the discrepancies in outcomes for Black people?

There have been numerous publications of data, the Macpherson Report, the Police Race Action Plan etc. All recognising that outcomes for Black people are much poorer than for white people. Taking the proportion of the population they represent into account, Black people are 6.4 times more likely to die in police or following police custody. For white people the figure is 0.84%. Read the full report here.

Apart from commitments around things like pay gaps, the Police Race Action Plan simply asks police officers to be more culturally aware and to address the bias that is there in their own data. Their commitment reads:

‍“Producing equality of policing outcomes for people from different ethnic groups by responding to individuals and communities according to their specific needs, circumstances and experiences, with understanding that these will be racialised and with the aim of reducing harm”.

‍As a former teacher, I can tell you that in the classroom, this is called differentiation - meeting the needs of every learner. It’s a requirement of the Public Sector Duty contained within the Equality Act 2010. Never mind, in the spirit of fairness, shall we get rid of this silly ‘meeting specific needs’ in teaching too? If so, wave goodbye to SEND provision.

Fairness sometimes means treating people differently. Not better, or worse. Differently according to the circumstances in front of you.

The two -tier nature of policing isn’t the real problem - it’s a distraction from racism

If two-tier public services was the real issue, he wouldn’t be advocating so hard for private health care and would probably be apologising for his private education, because a two– tier system in health and education would be completely unfair according to him wouldn’t it. But …. Tumbleweed.

What Farage is really saying is he wants to go back to a time when Black people weren’t believed, where they were treated with suspicion and where white people were automatically prioritised. Back to sus laws? Back to police brutality? The term we are looking for here is white supremacy.

‍Argument 4: Sikhs shouldn’t be allowed to carry the kirpan, especially in public spaces.

The same logic if applied to nursing would suggest that no white women should be neonatal nurses because Lucy Letby murdered babies. 

‍One Sikh did something terrible - all Sikhs must suffer. This is the collective responsibility that racists love to use. Turning a vast and diverse group of people into a monolith represented by one thing: Dreadlocks, a Hijab, a beard, a Durag, a kirpan. That symbol becomes the target of the hate and now all Sikhs have either to wait to see if there will be some new rule about carrying it, or remove it to signify that, ‘they are one of the good ones.

The issue isn’t the kirpan. It isn’t even about knives because if it were, surely we would have heard Farage talking about the impact of knife crime on everyone. But this wouldn’t suit his narrative because whilst knife crime is a real issue it has been declining for the last two years. The racist shouts,

‘why are they allowed to carry a knife and we’re not.’

This begs some scrutiny. Do they want to carry a knife? If so why? The kirpan is a religious symbol, do they want to carry a religious symbol? If so, what’s stopping them? What’s the real issue here?

‍The kirpan is a specific knife held by a specific group of people and this is why we know this thinking is rooted in racism.

Faux outpourings of rage that have nothing to do with the real issues.

‍We know an idea or action is discriminatory when it is not applied to everyone or treats one group more poorly intentionally or otherwise. How do we know these utterances from Farage and his ilk, and the protests are rooted in racism?

‍We don’t see the same sorts of rioting and demonstrations for other murders. It simply does not happen. In March, Stephen McCullagh was found guilty of murdering his white/white presenting and pregnant partner. McCullagh is also white/white presenting. No riots.

‍Sarah Everard was raped and murdered in 2021. There were sit-ins and vigils held in support of protecting women from misogyny and the police – no riots by white men outraged by this heinous crime. No cries of ‘protect our women from the police’.

‍Last month three boys got away with no custodial sentences after raping two girls. Where was the outrage? Where was the commentary from Nigel Farage and his ilk then? Eventually, we have to realise that this is nothing to do with frustration at immigration. It has nothing to do with violence against women and girls. It has nothing to do with Henry Nowak.

When there is only outrage in circumstances that involve a racialised person as the aggressor, that tells you that the thinking and more importantly the behaviour is racist.

What happens next?

We know how this plays out.

Most racists cannot distinguish between different ethnic or religious groups – it’s not important to them. When rhetoric escalates, anyone who is perceived as visibly South Asian becomes a target. That means people will go about their daily lives facing increased risk of harassment or violence.

This is predictable. Racist rioting and marches are also predictable. Read more here.

So, what can you do?

Get back to the actual issues, and focus solely on those.

Firstly, let’s get this in perspective. We should be focusing on the victim, and his family’s wish to focus on knife crime rather than divisive issues.

The criminal has been sentenced for his crimes. Justice in the eyes of the law has been served. We may not be satisfied with the sentence, but the legal process has happened. Having been through the process of watching my family member’s murderers stand trial and be sentenced, we may not be satisfied with the sentence – what could possibly be enough – but whatever Farage and his ilk are calling for can’t be called justice for Henry. If you feel strongly about the sentence, there are proper channels you can use to express your views, and you can encourage others to do so. This usually separates out those motivated by racism, and those with genuine concerns about justice.

Deal with incompetence and racial illiteracy. These police officers completely failed Henry. Notwithstanding the allegations of racism, they didn’t manage to identify a seriously injured person and that’s breathtaking incompetence and stupidity. Surely there are processes that have or need to be put in place to deal with the failure of the police officers to help Henry and manage the scene effectively. I imagine these are taking their course. If fear of being accused of being racist is a factor, this is an indication of lack of adequate training, skill, understanding and racial literacy in these individual officers, or potentially this division. It is not reason to throw away all training and initiatives to deal with bias and poorer outcomes for Black people. Deal with the actual problem.

If you have implemented antiracism policies, you don’t now need to start ripping them up and being reactionary. If you are concerned that you or your people aren’t properly racially literate and only have surface level understanding, then deal with that issue. The policy isn’t the problem, the humans implementing it are. If there are things in this piece that have made you think, read up.

Support people who are going to need it most. Start thinking now about riots happening in the next few months. What are your plans for ways of working and potential abuse of people in your workplace. Speak to your people, ask if there is anything you should be aware of, and ask what would be helpful to them at this time.

Use your voice. Speak up and speak to your parliamentary representatives so they get a proper understanding of how people really feel – don’t let thugs hijack the narrative.