Stacey

I’ve been reading the judgment in the Henry Nowak case. The judge says the police officers at the scene were misled by lies told to them. Believing Henry was the offender, they arrested and handcuffed him. Moments later they realised he had a serious chest wound and began desperately trying to save his life. As a result the judge concluded that the officers did their best in extremely difficult circumstances. Perhaps. However, Henry was bleeding; he told the officer he’d been stabbed and he was struggling to breathe. Shouldn’t that have prompted a more thorough search for injuries before the handcuffs came out and were snapped onto his wrists? The judge says the wound wasn’t obvious. It was dark and Henry was wearing a dark top. He also pointed out in his judgment that the officers had been given a convincing but false account of what had happened. All of which may be true, but what he is not doing is ruling on whether the police response was correct. That’s for the separate investigations now under way. However, if someone gasps that they’ve been stabbed is it unreasonable to expect that possibility to be investigated first? In those circumstances, should concern for a potentially life-threatening injury take precedence over treating someone as a suspect? Genuine question. It is not the natural order of things for your child to die before you and under such devastating circumstances. My thoughts are with his parents as Henry’s murderer is sentenced to life in prison.