Three Men Sentenced for Violent Actions at Henry Nowak Police Protest

Three jailed for violence at Henry – Following the fatal stabbing of Henry Nowak, a 18-year-old man, in a violent incident that sparked widespread unrest, three individuals have been convicted of causing disorder during a protest in Southampton. The court in Southampton Crown Court handed down sentences on June 2, 2025, as part of an ongoing investigation into the events that unfolded after police bodycam footage revealed Nowak’s death. The three men—Darren Medhurst, Callum Darch, and Harley Haynes—were each found guilty of participating in the chaos that left 12 officers and a police canine injured. This marks the latest chapter in a case that has drawn significant public attention due to its alleged connection to a deep-seated hostility toward law enforcement.

Convictions and Sentencing Details

Darren Medhurst, 36, from Carnation Road, Southampton, received a three-year and three-month sentence. His actions were described as pivotal during the disorder, with the prosecution emphasizing his role in escalating tensions. Medhurst was reported to have hurled objects at officers and ignited a flaming bin that was thrown toward them. This sentence, which is the longest yet issued for the incident, reflects the severity of his involvement. Callum Darch, 27, of St Blaize Road, Romsey, and Harley Haynes, 23, from Avenue Road, Southampton, were both given two-and-a-half year terms. The court heard that Darch had thrown a wheelie bin directly at police, an act that reportedly intensified the crowd’s aggression. Haynes, captured on video with a black hood covering his face, was alleged to have hurled a brick and several glass shards, causing a lamppost to shatter and scattering debris across the area.

“Local residents were subjected to fear, distress and a genuine sense of danger.”

This statement from Judge William Mousley KC, who presided over the sentencing, underscores the court’s recognition of the public’s exposure to heightened risk. Mousley, who had also overseen the trial of Digwa, the suspect in Nowak’s murder, reiterated his earlier conclusion that the violence was a “hate crime, borne out of a hatred of the police and in some cases racist views.” This classification has fueled discussions about the motivations behind the protest, with prosecutors and judges pointing to a deliberate intent to target officers.

The court was informed that Medhurst had a lengthy criminal history, including 51 previous convictions for 96 offenses. These range from petty theft and shoplifting to more serious charges like burglary and handling stolen goods. His defense, however, argued that his actions were impulsive and not part of a broader pattern. In contrast, Haynes’ case highlighted his involvement in a visible act of defiance, as video footage showed him participating in the disturbance with a hood over his head. His nine convictions for 21 offenses, including theft and criminal damage, were cited as evidence of prior misconduct, though his defense framed the protest as a single, spontaneous event.

The Protests and Their Escalation

The protests began as a demonstration outside the city center police station, with crowds gathering to express anger over the murder of Henry Nowak. The incident occurred in December 2025, when Digwa, 23, stabbed Nowak with a large blade, claiming it was in defense of his Sikh faith. However, the footage later revealed Digwa had lied to officers at the scene, falsely asserting that Nowak had initiated the attack. This misinformation led to Nowak’s arrest instead of Digwa, sparking outrage among the community and intensifying the protests.

As the crowd grew, the situation escalated into chaos. Prosecutors described the scene as one of uncontrolled violence, with participants acting with a “reckless disregard for police safety.” One officer told the court that individuals in the crowd appeared to treat the event like “a party or blood sport,” while another expressed concern over threats received by officers. A third officer recounted feeling a “fear that someone might be killed” during the disturbance, highlighting the severity of the moment. The disorder reportedly cost the police force £443,000 in staffing and accommodation expenses, while Southampton City Council incurred £6,700 for cleanup efforts.

Ongoing Legal Proceedings and Broader Context

As of June 2, 2025, a total of 12 people have been sentenced for their roles in the incident. However, 21 defendants remain under investigation, with several more expected to face charges in the coming weeks. Kamil Josef Klonek, 33, from Lordswood Road, Southampton, became the first of these defendants to plead not guilty. The prosecution described him as being at the “heart of the disturbance,” where he was seen chanting at police and throwing a beer can. Klonek was denied bail and remanded in custody, with a trial scheduled for November 30.

Meanwhile, Tyler Burley, 18, from Shakespeare Road, Southampton, had his sentencing adjourned until June 30 for a pre-sentence report. Burley had already pleaded guilty to charges of violent disorder, but the court wanted additional details before determining his final sentence. The prosecution’s case against Burley and others has focused on the coordinated nature of the violence, with one officer’s testimony suggesting that the crowd’s behavior was “intentional and sustained.”

The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) has launched an investigation into how the police force responded to the initial incident. The inquiry will assess whether officers acted appropriately in the aftermath of Nowak’s stabbing, particularly given the misinformation they received. The protest, which began as a show of solidarity with the victim, has since evolved into a broader movement questioning police conduct and accountability. The classification of the violence as a hate crime has added another layer to the debate, with critics arguing that the protests were not just about Nowak’s death but also about systemic issues within the police department.

As the legal proceedings continue, the case has become a focal point for discussions about public trust in law enforcement. The sentences handed down so far reflect the court’s acknowledgment of the role played by each individual, while also highlighting the collective impact of the disorder. With 21 people still facing charges, the full extent of the event’s consequences remains to be seen. The public’s reaction, however, has been marked by a mix of anger, solidarity, and calls for justice, ensuring that this case will linger in the national conversation for some time to come.