*** This Article Is Not Parody or For Entertainment Purposes ***
Foreword: On the 3rd of June 2026, violence erupted at a protest in the Southampton area, despite an appeal by the Leaders in Southampton’s Sikh Community who called for “peace and harmony,” following the murder of Henry Nowak by Vickrum Digwa, a British Sikh man from the local area of Portswood.
The violence also resulted in multiple police officers being injured, having been drafted into the area to maintain social order and keep the peace.
Protest yes, but violence? Not in his name.
Editor: We unequivocally condemn violence. Our ‘condemnation’ of violence extends far beyond the United Kingdom’s borders, whether it be violence committed by or towards individuals, groups and or nations. We cannot be clearer about this.
On 3rd of December 2025 Henry Nowak was making his way back towards his university accommodation following an evening out when an incident occurred resulting in his murder, by a British man of Sikh lineage.
These are 3 of the 35 paragraphs of what His Honour Judge William Mousley K.C said during his summing up of events leading to Henry Nowak’s death and His Honour’s final sentencing remarks, before instructing court security officials to ‘take him [Digwa ] down.’
Here is the link to the full sentencing remarks:
https://www.judiciary.uk/wp-content/uploads/2026/06/Digwa-Final-Sentencing-Remarks.pdf
What followed the sentencing was this:
There is an ongoing enquiry by the IOPC into the death of Henery Nowak, much of which will be centred around how the police officers who arrived first at scene dealt with Vickrum Digwa, but more importantly, how they medically assessed Henry Nowak who died as a result of ‘stab wound’ inflicted upon him by Digwa.
https://www.policeconduct.gov.uk/news/iopc-statement-henry-nowak-investigation
The Police have released footage of the incident and it is absolutely harrowing to watch and it is understandable why people were highly charged with anger and yes, the expression for this anger could or should be reflected by animating the community, positively, but taking to the ‘streets’ and protesting violently serves no one.
We wholly support ‘peaceful’ non-violent lawful protesting and if this should be the case for Henry Nowak, if conducted silently over a carefully selected route, a protest march would result in maximum impact attracting mass mainstream media coverage from all around the world.
Surely it would be better to have a peaceful silent march letting the placards carry the message and not hateful or inciteful ones, or perhaps no words at all, but a far more impactful statement, an image of Henry Nowak himself, showing how we the public or more importantly, how his family and friends choose to remember him.
Imagine the impact of a silent march, people stopping and standing in the street, joined by people coming out of their workplaces to show their quiet respect, too.
Then there are the vehicles, which would willingly stop whilst the march for Henry passes them by, turning their engines off as their vehicles remained stationary.
No words, no shouting, no violence, just Henry’s image and the Mainstream Media will do all the talking for us both at home, as well as on an international scale.
Police Officers as we know are under investigation by the IOPC and after reviewing the actions and inactions of the police officers up and down the rank structure, the IOPC report will be released in due course and into the ‘public domain.’
Then there is another issue and it is a complex one, so rather than me attempt to explain what the IOPC will have to consider, perhaps involving police forces up and down the UK, I’ll refer you to this headline from The Guardian newspaper:
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2026/jun/03/police-anti-racism-policies-henry-nowak-explainer
If this should turn out to be the case, then it will be a highly protracted investigation, which will take a great deal of time depending on the extent of the ‘Terms of Reference’ for the investigators.
Whatever the results of the IOPC investigation, they will make their conclusions public and should a police force be found at fault re its officers or as an institution, I have no doubt that the police will ‘own it’ in a very public way. Make no mistake about it, the IOPC investigation will have started on the day of the tragic incident resulting in the death of Henry Nowak.
Without doubt the Prime Minister and his Home Secretary will be all over this and they will know that the findings in the IOPC’s report will be expedited, no doubt with much of the investigation having already been completed during the past six months.
Be under no illusion, the violence we saw being committed in Southampton served no one….did you hear that? I’ll say it again, the violence we saw being committed served no one: Not the offender, not the protesters, not the community, not the country or the United Kingdom as a whole.
The only people responsible for the violence and damage directly were the offenders themselves who took part in it and we all know what will happen to them. They will be sought, arrested and most likely convicted of ‘public order’ offences ranging from: Section 5, Section 4, Section 3 Affray and Section 2 Violent Disorder, possibly even Section 1 Riot. Other offences will be examined involving those who committed Assault, Damage and Arson in a ‘non exhaustive list.’
Then there are the ‘Auditors’ who will and must come under official scrutiny,’ the self-proclaimed and unofficial ‘police checkers’ if you like, in their minds of course and not mine, who are well known for lawfully, as it still stands, filming the police at their places of work to see how they react and testing not only the officers knowledge of the law, but also their patience, too.
However, this type of ‘auditing’ being conducted is an area that is beginning to grey, so expect clarification for this in the future.
Now I move on to the subject of those people at the violent protest who claimed to be ‘Auditors’ and or ‘Influencers’ who were filming the protesters who were verbally and physically attacking the police. Their attendance is for me a ‘grey area,’ and clarification from their attendance at violent protests might well result in legislation regulating their attendance at such events and I’ll explain why.
At Red Brick we are ‘Free Speech Absolutists,’ but not without exception, because there are certain limits, such as deliberately inciting acts of violence towards a person and or property etc. However, the live-streaming provided by some of the ‘auditing influencers,’ for us at Red Brick either over-stepped the mark, or had their tip-toes touching the red line of demarcation where for them being socially responsible stops, and them becoming part of the problem. begins.
Their commentary involved warning the protesters of imminent police public order tactics, by advising the protesters to avoid being ‘kettled,’ or contained within an area that they could not walk freely from.
Then there was the ‘auditors’ constant acknowledgement of the protesters and being on ‘first name’ terms with many of them present.
The ‘auditors’ lack of condemnation at the violence and damage being committed during their ‘running commentary,’ including their almost, if not actual delight when a brick hit the shield of a police officer or a lit up industrial bin was rolled into the police line, suggests to me that their auditing had stopped much earlier during the protest, and had now become ‘influencers’ to the event itself and its subsequent outcomes, because they clearly were having an adverse effect on the police’s ability to control the violence, in my opinion, of course.
Also, there were the people present at the protest, the onlookers, although not directly part of the physical violence, yet remained to watch its content, an irony above and beyond the intelligence for many of them present.
However, people still chose to remain and listen to the vile rhetoric and ineloquence of ‘idiots,’ idiots whose attempts to make themselves heard through the use of their clearly limited vocabulary, resulting in the enunciation of words with over two syllables sounding more like the birth of a new language, although ‘linguists’ they are not.
You see, there is a view and it is a view that by remaining at a protest, which at some point becomes violent and that the violence shows no immediate sign of abating, then those who were there to protest peacefully and can no longer do so, safely, should leave, an opinion I share.
But as is so often the case the ‘peaceful protesters’ decide to stay and become onlookers, choosing to watch the violence as if it has now become a ‘spectator sport’ when they should have, in my opinion, walked away.
By choosing to remain as a ‘spectator’ does not ‘cut it’ with me, because by choosing to remain there once the violence erupts, they ‘passively’ become part of it and become the audience or crowd if you like that, the violent protesters play to and in effect, they become the oxygen that fans the flames.
So, getting back to the auditing influencers the questions for me are:
- Are they reporting on the event [violent protest] or
- Have they over-stepped the demarcation line and entered into the realms of ‘influencing’ both the event and its ‘outcomes.’
And yes, there is a difference between the two, which clearly requires some ‘clarification’ and be in no doubt about it that, the clarification will, in due course, come.
In our second article we will let you know what we think is required for ‘institutional change’ and how we, the people, can take back the power within our communities, perhaps, even parliament and let this be in the name of Henry Nowak.
In memory of Henry Nowak R.I.P.
Editor, The Red Brick International Media News Group.