The man convicted of murdering 18-year-old Henry Nowak has launched a legal challenge in an attempt to overturn his murder conviction and reduce the life sentence imposed by the court.
Vickrum Digwa, 23, was sentenced to life imprisonment with a minimum term of 21 years after a jury found him guilty of fatally stabbing Henry Nowak. The case drew widespread public attention and remains one of the UK’s most closely followed criminal cases.
During the original trial, Digwa claimed he had acted after being subjected to a racist attack and alleged that Henry Nowak had been the aggressor. However, the prosecution argued the evidence did not support those claims, and the jury unanimously convicted him of murder.
It has now been confirmed that Digwa has submitted an application to the Court of Appeal seeking permission to challenge both his conviction and the length of his sentence. The legal grounds for the appeal have not been disclosed publicly.
The appeal process will begin with a judge deciding whether the application has sufficient merit to proceed. If permission is granted, the case will be heard before the Court of Appeal, where judges will determine whether the conviction or sentence should be reconsidered.
At the same time, the case is also subject to a separate review concerning the length of Digwa’s minimum prison term, meaning the Court of Appeal could ultimately be asked to consider whether the sentence should remain the same, be reduced, or potentially increased.
Following the sentencing, Henry Nowak’s family spoke of the devastating impact of losing their son and called for dignity and respect as they continue to cope with their loss. They also urged the public not to allow the tragedy to fuel further division or hostility.
Questions surrounding the police response on the day of the incident have also remained the subject of public discussion, with senior political figures previously calling for answers after footage emerged from the scene.
For now, Digwa remains in custody while the Court of Appeal considers both his application to challenge the conviction and sentence, alongside the separate review into whether his minimum term was appropriate.
