Policing us all – delivering that equality in practice post the Henry Nowak tragedy

The circumstances of Henry Nowak’s death have caused understandable shock, but the political debate surrounding this tragedy risks distorting the pursuit of justice.

The Crown Court Judge found that the attending officers were presented with a “convincing but wholly false” account of events, honestly believing they had reasonable grounds to act as they did. The killer’s deliberate lies materially contributed to the confusion at the scene. That finding matters. It is now for the Independent Office for Police Conduct to determine whether the officers’ actions amount to misconduct, and it must do so on the evidence, not under political pressure.

Responding to spontaneous incidents is rarely straightforward. Officers often make rapid decisions in confused, sometimes deliberately misleading circumstances. That reality does not excuse individual failings, and the IOPC exists to hold officers to account. But it does require that we assess their actions in context rather than through the clarity of hindsight.

Swindon Reform Councillors are reportedly writing to the Chief Constable of Wiltshire Police urging revision of the force’s Police Race Action Plan to focus on building trust within all communities, including White British communities. That framing reflects Reform UK’s broader criticism of diversity, equality and inclusion initiatives and the party’s stated desire to repeal the Equality Act. Their argument is that public institutions should focus on equal treatment under the law rather than group identity. That principle is not wrong, but it risks misreading what equality in policing requires.

Sir William Macpherson’s 1999 report into the murder of Stephen Lawrence defined institutional racism as the collective failure of an organisation to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture, or ethnic origin. Police Race Action Plans were a direct response to those findings, focusing on Black communities and the eradication of discriminatory conduct. Reform UK’s position places less weight on that history. In my view, that would be a mistake.

Every citizen’s entitlement to equal protection under the law is beyond debate. But fairness does not mean treating every individual identically. Officers deal daily with people whose needs and circumstances differ markedly. An autistic person may require a different communication approach; someone in mental health crisis may require a different tactical response than a conventional offender; an elderly witness may need additional support.

The question is not whether people should be equal before the law, but how the police deliver that equality in practice. In a diverse society, that means applying the law impartially while recognising that people’s needs and circumstances are not all the same. The challenge for policing is not choosing between equality and difference but reconciling the two.