237
this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2026
237 points (98.4% liked)
Crazy Fucking Videos
9137 readers
3 users here now
Dive into the World of Insane Videos!
Rules
- No hate speech of any kind.
- Content warnings are required in post titles where applicable. Example: [CW: Injury]
- Use your best judgement and mark NSFW posts as such.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
all 39 comments
sorted by:
hot
top
controversial
new
old
[deleted]
Yeah, no wonder he was. If it happened to me, I'd start a channel called "Misandry Exposed" or something as soon as I got home. (Or at least I would if I didn't know it was a more complicated issue than that. Or if I was just too upset to care at the moment.)
FYI, the far right are using this as them being persecuted for being white.
I think a better explaination would be the left should use this as a reason to defund the police.
I don’t see how that would fly with a public fed up with resource starved policing. You can’t even get them to show up for a burglary.
Resource starved police???
A small town police force has a literal tank for a city of less than 40,000. They're CONSTANTLY getting swat level gear and equipment.
They're not resource starved. They're just bad at their jobs.
Could it be that America’s problems are not the same as Britain’s problems? A town of 40,000 may not even have a police station, and would statistically be covered by less than 100 officers split over shifts, including administrators and specialists, and they may be 20 miles away when the call comes in.
In my largely rural county of 700,000, policing levels may be as low as 40 on some shifts, with 1/5 of officers planning to quit in the next 2 years. There are typically 2 cars with armed response officers.
it did not work out well for minneapolis when that happened. is there a better option?
IIRC They never did. They voted to, but then increased police funding before implementing it.
It’s not easy to get this stuff right but it seems like they try really hard to get it wrong.
That's a good example of how the UK is half between Europe and US in many ways.
Far more than halfway, and much worse in many ways.
Yeah at the very least, to my knowledge, the US has ever charged people with terrorism for holding a sign with 2 words
I keep seeing everyone call the Sikh the killer, but like, no mentions on whether he actually stabbed the other person in actual self defense or not, even in some articles, and find that highly suspicious as well.
Edit: as in, what was the actual real motive?
Edit 2: apparently, the motive was anger after subtle racist commentary. Explains why it's left out more.
Here's some reporting from the actual criminal trial with comments from the judge on some of the questions you've asked.
Judge William Mousley KC says Henry Nowak "perhaps cheekily" had made a comment to Vickrum Digwa, asking him "if you were a bad man".
"He was filming you on his phone when he spoke. The tone of his voice was not aggressive or threatening."
But Mousley says this turned out to be a "tragic error of judgement".
"You moved towards him and confidently told him that you were a bad man," he adds.
"You drew the dagger from its sheath...and deliberately stabbed Henry with it. It passed upwards through soft tissue between the two uppermost ribs, catching a lung and cutting an important vein behind the collarbone."
Judge William Mousley KC
The judge says the pathologist explained how no emergency medical treatment would have permitted access to the bleeding vein: "In simple terms, he would not have survived, however quickly he received first aid, CPR or medical treatment."
just to add, it is most likely here that 'bad man' in the transcript is actually the slang term 'badman'
https://www.artandpopularculture.com/Badman_%28slang%29
https://grimedictionary.net/badman
Thank you.
So it's as suspected - racism, just not the kind the murderer said (or to make this more relatable to Americans, imagine a white guy asking a black dude in a sarcastic way "are you a bad guy?" while filming).
He still needs to be incarcerated for murdering, but I had a feeling there was a reason most news aren't mentioning how the incident happened. And life in prison for what wasn't premeditated murder seems excessive - but don't know how laws in the UK work. Then again, it's UK. Maybe had Vickrum been honest the sentencing would be different, but either way it's unlikely the court would see how such commentary is racist, especially if described as "cheeky". Likely this comment was the one that finally make Vickrum snap after who knows how many. At least, based on anecdotal experience.
The killer was sentenced the other day with life imprisonment for murder, so yeah, no doubts for this one.
Why did he do it though? That's what I haven't seen when I looked this up in the past.
People don't usually just stab a person.
The suspect claimed the white kid said racist things, tore off his turban, and pulled his hair. In trial, the court found that literally nobody else supported the suspects claims and the history of the victim cast serious doubt as to the legitimacy of the claims to begin with. The courts also found that the suspect had his mom hide the knife. All combined it was enough for a guilty verdict and a life sentence.
Can you link the court case? Searching it up can't find the details because the news is now flooded by the right wing groups taking advantage of this and about protests that happened.
Of the reason of racist harassment was disproven, then what was the real reason?
The court wasn't looking at why the guy who claimed racial harassment actually attacked the victim. They just had to prove he did it, which they know because he admits it, and that the claim of racial harassment wasn't actually justified. They did that to the best of their abilities and managed to secure a conviction. What actually happened leading up to the stabbing is moot besides the finding the court made that the claim of racial harassment was not supported by any statement besides the suspects nor by the character of the victim in the judgement of the magistrate.
Maybe in the UK it's different, but in other countries motive is very relevant.
Getting approached while being filmed and cheekily asked "are you a bad man?" Before getting stabbed would be very relevant in multiple places, both Finland, Mexico, El Salvador, and USA, for example, because it would indicate it was not premeditated murder and instead "crime of passion" and in some cases, "crime of instigation".
I've been curious about what led up to it not because of legality however, but because of morality.
I don't think it's moral to stab someone over this. But I understand now why someone was stabbed over this. And most importantly, it's not just a random stabbing, but one that was instigated by the victim, which could have been avoided by not being an asshole. It's unfortunate he couldn't learn the lesson in a way that resulted in his life coming to an end, and more unfortunate still that the police didn't act professionally and try to save his life, although apparently a pathologist said it would have been unlikely be would have survived that wound.
Thankfully these details were provided by another comment with a link.
one that was instigated by the victim, which could have been avoided by not being an asshole
This is victim blaming - motive is relevant when it's something like self defence, not fucking mouthing off a bit.
That racism isn't relevant a motive to you says more than anything. And shows the downfall of the primary English speaking countries.
Hate speech does not justify murder. If you can't stop yourself from stabbing someone over an insult you should not be part of society.
I'm not saying it's justified, I'm saying that it's a form of violence, and it's unsurprising that violence might beget violence. It's why societies form laws - as both a deterrent and a punishment for escalating things further. And in this case, the murderer was indeed punished.
But that hate speech in general goes relatively unpunished is what least to this situation either way. Lashing out like that usually happens when humans don't see justice repeatedly. It's highly doubtful the murderer struck angrily at the moment because of this single instance, but rather this was the last domino in a series.
Yet that so much focus is only placed on the errors of the police, and that's why the UK will continue to see societal issues as these. The incident was multifaceted, but only one thing is focused on, to the benefit of the far right
You literally blamed the victim for being stabbed. Yes you justified it you disgusting little pig.
Fuck off racist. If we're going to do insults, you're the one also hard defending a racist white boy. Guess you're full of racist shit just like your username suggests.
Next in your parlor tricks you'll say brownshirts that were attacked were victims too.
This wasn't some innocent incident of some guy just walking around doing nothing minding his own business randomly getting stabbed. He literally went and antagonized someone via racist profiling on camera. He fucked around and found out quite damn literally.
That doesn't mean he deserved getting stabbed. A good punch in the face yeah, but not a full killing. Yet here you are not understanding (or better yet, likely purposefully ignoring) the difference between just going about your day vs whacking at bears with sticks.
Eat shite, filthy racist.
one that was instigated by the victim, which could have been avoided by not being an asshole
Yes, you specifically blamed them and said they deserved to be stabbed, justifying it with "fighting words" laws. I haven't said a single thing you've accused me of, and you've had to jump to people who literally dragged Jews into the street and murdered them as your comparison because you know your position is so aggressively unhinged. You notice how every time you try to talk about it you bring up actual violence? Once again, if you're not mature enough to be called names without resorting to murder you're not mature enough to participate in society.
For fucks sake you said it yourself "fighting words" not "self defense". A fight breaking out is reasonable, not murder. Either way the idiot went looking for a fight and isn't completely innocent! That's the point!
Yet you keep trying to twist this into victim being 100% innocent in his intentions! That's what's fucking unhinged, you racist sack of shit
So you've completely flipped your position to exactly what I explained to you in the first place, and are pretending you're arguing against me?
Shut the fuck up you self important loser, the only reason for you to be starting this shit is that you see actual leftists teaching you as a threat and have to resort to accusations of racism to reassure yourself you're not a bad person.
Oh look, shitewood full of more shite.
Point out where I said the victim deserved to be stabbed, shitpig.
Motive is situationally relevant in pretty much all countries. Motive plays a particularly significant role in trying to prove someone may have done something, be it murder or theft.
In this situation, the motive is less important. We know the guy did the thing. He says he did it. He claimed he did it because x, and the court ruled that x wasn't supported by any other witnesses and was out of character for the person accused of x, and therefore likely did not happen. That is the end of the relevance of the Motive to this situation.
Even in the case that the Motive had been relevant, there is no justification legally for what he did. "This guy said x. I dont like x. I hated the guy that said x, so I stabbed him." is not a legally recognized justification for self defense.