Henry Nowak’s killer should have had longer sentence, court of appeal hears
Summary
The Court of Appeal heard arguments over whether Vickrum Digwa’s minimum 21-year term for murdering Henry Nowak was too lenient or too long. The attorney general argued that Digwa’s false accusations, use of a knife, efforts to obstruct justice and conduct after the attack warranted a longer term; Digwa’s lawyer argued that the sentencing judge had already considered those factors and that the sentence should not be increased.Key Facts
- Digwa was sentenced in June to life in prison with a minimum term of 21 years for murdering 18-year-old Henry Nowak in Southampton in December 2025.
- The attorney general referred the sentence to the Court of Appeal as potentially unduly lenient.
- The court also heard Digwa’s appeal that his sentence was manifestly excessive.
- The attorney general’s lawyer argued that Digwa falsely accused Nowak of racism and said the minimum term did not reflect the combined weight of aggravating factors.
- Digwa used a large dagger in the attack; the sentencing judge said he also carried a small kirpan, a knife Sikhs are required to carry as part of their faith.
- The attorney general’s lawyer cited Digwa’s attempts to obstruct justice, his mother’s help in concealing the knife, and his filming of the dying victim.
- Digwa’s mother, Kiran Kaur, was jailed for three years for taking the knife from the scene to the family home.
- Digwa’s lawyer argued that the sentencing judge had already considered the weapon and religious exemption, and that carrying a kirpan should not itself lead to a longer sentence.
Read the Full Article
This is a fact-based summary from The Actual News. Click below to read the complete story directly from the original source.
