Man admits murder of customer who was stabbed in bank
Haybe Cabdiraxmaan Nur appeared at Derby Crown Court on Thursday charged with the murder of Gurvinder Singh Johal, who died after the stabbing in Lloyds Bank in St Peter's Street on May 6.
Nur, 47, of Western Road, Derby, entered a guilty plea in front of Judge Shaun Smith KC and sentencing was set for October 29, a court official confirmed.
Mr Johal, who was 37 and known to friends as Danny, was pronounced dead at the scene after emergency services were alerted at around 2.35pm.
Detective Inspector Tony Owen, from the East Midlands Special Operations Unit, said: 'I am pleased that Mr Johal's family will not have to sit through a trial now that Nur has admitted this offence.
'I'd like to thank them for their support throughout and my thoughts, and those of all the team, remain with them.'
Janine McKinney, chief crown prosecutor with Crown Prosecution Service East Midlands, said: 'Haybe Cabdiraxmaan Nur has pleaded guilty and accepted that he murdered Gurvinder Johal.
'This was a truly shocking crime, committed in broad daylight in a busy city centre bank.
'While the whole community has been affected by this happening in their midst, our thoughts and profound sympathies are with Mr Johal's family, friends and loved ones.
'They have had a much-loved husband, father and son snatched from them by this senseless crime.'
In a tribute to the Derby Telegraph after Mr Johal's death, Ajit Atwal, leader of the Liberal Democrat group on Derby City Council, who knew the victim, said: 'He was a good businessman and nothing was ever too much trouble for him.
'He was humble, quiet and a kind guy and would always go above and beyond for everyone.
'His family are devastated and cannot understand what has happened.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Independent
a few seconds ago
- The Independent
Warning far-right has ‘hijacked' women's safety for political gain
Leading women's rights groups have warned that the far right movement has 'hijacked' the issue of women's safety for political gain. More than 100 organisations have written to prime minister Sir Keir Starmer to urge the government to stop far-right groups from 'weaponising' violence against women and girls (VAWG) for a 'racist, anti-migrant agenda'. It comes after weeks of far-right protests outside hotels housing asylum seekers across the country, with many participants claiming to be there under the banner of 'protecting' women and girls in their community. The letter states how in recent weeks, the organisations had seen 'vital conversations' about VAWG be 'hijacked by an anti-migrant agenda' that 'fuels division' and harms survivors. The groups have expressed concerns that the issue is being 'hijacked by people seeking to use women and girls' pain and trauma – and the threat of it – for political gain'. The letter, co-ordinated by End Violence Against Women Coalition, Women for Refugee Women, Hibiscus and Southall Black Sisters, read: 'Over recent weeks, people claiming to care about the 'safety of women and children' have left families, women and children living in temporary asylum accommodation afraid to leave their front door. 'They follow in the footsteps of the rioters who used the appalling murder of three young girls as an excuse to bring violence to our streets; with targeted attacks against migrant, minoritised and Muslim communities.' The statement was supported by frontline organisations including Rape Crisis England and Wales, Refuge and the Suzy Lamplugh Trust. The groups have joined to 'refuse to let women's safety be turned into hate speech' and have told the government to act urgently to prevent misinformation spreading. They warned that they had seen MPs share false statistics about the nationality of perpetrators, and warned that ministers saying protestors have 'legitimate concerns' risks 'normalising and enabling the spreading of racist narratives by the far-right'. The organisations warn that false narratives reinforce 'damaging myths' about gender-based violence, such as that it primarily comes from strangers. They say the false picture allows perpetrators who harm women and girls 'to hide behind racial stereotypes and scapegoating', while hostile immigration policies put marginalised women and survivors in the UK at an 'even greater risk of harm'. 'The far-right has long exploited the cause of ending violence against women and girls to promote a racist, white supremacist agenda,' Andrea Simon, director of the End Violence Against Women Coalition, said. 'These attacks against migrant and racialised communities are appalling and do nothing to improve women and girls' autonomy, rights and freedoms.' Andrea Vukovic, co-director of Women for Refugee Women, said the organisation had supported women in recent weeks that had fled war and persecution, and have been too afraid to leave their homes due to attacks on migrant and racialised communities. Selma Taha, executive director of Southall Black Sisters said: 'Attempts to weaponize VAWG through racist scapegoating of migrants not only distract from real solutions, but also deepen the marginalisation of Black, minoritised and migrant victim-survivors. 'The government, our public institutions, and the media must take responsibility for shaping an accurate, evidence-based narrative on immigration, and must end the normalisation of far-right misinformation in debates on immigration and VAWG.' A Home Office spokesperson said: 'All acts of violence against women and girls are intolerable, so our upcoming VAWG Strategy will set out how we will protect the most vulnerable and halve these crimes in a decade. "At the same time, we know that people are concerned about the impact of illegal migration. That's why we are changing the law to deny registered sex offenders' asylum and we will do everything in our power to deport them from the UK."
The Independent
a few seconds ago
- The Independent
Former priest ‘instilled culture of fear' enabling him to sexually abuse women
A former priest convicted of sexual offences against nine women 'instilled a culture of fear' within church members which enabled him to abuse his victims, the Crown Prosecution Service has said. Christopher Brain, 68, from Wilmslow, Cheshire, was the leader of the Nine O'Clock Service (NOS), part of the Church of England, in Sheffield, South Yorkshire, between 1986 and 1995. On Wednesday, he was found guilty of 17 counts of indecent assault during the years he led the movement by a jury at Inner London Crown Court. The former priest was cleared of a further 15 counts of indecent assault. The following day, the 11-strong jury was discharged after failing to reach a verdict on five more counts, having started deliberations on August 12. In total, Brain was charged with one count of rape and 36 counts of indecent assault between 1981 and 1995 against 13 women. He pleaded not guilty to all charges. Julie Moss, senior crown prosecutor of the Crown Prosecution Service, said: 'Chris Brain abused the trust and power he gained as a religious leader to sexually exploit and abuse young women. 'He instilled a culture of fear to subjugate and control NOS members into submission and to do his bidding. 'Brain discouraged members of the Nine O Clock service from having any contact with family or friends outside of the NOS community to isolate members them and make them susceptible to his control.' Ms Moss said Brain had set up a 'home base team' where he required female NOS members to assist his household, including 'attending upon him in his bedroom' before he slept, which is when many of the offences occurred. She added: 'The victims were too scared of being excluded from the religious group to refuse. 'This became known as the 'putting to bed rota'. 'Brain clearly engaged in controlling behaviour and is a narcissist who subjected his victims to awful and horrendous act of sexual violence. 'We hope that these convictions help in some part to see justice delivered for the victims.' Addressing the jury on Thursday, Judge Freya Newbery said: 'I am going to discharge you now on those counts. For you it all comes to an end now. 'I am really grateful for such a lot of time that you have given.' Ms Newbury gave the jurors the option of exemption from jury service if summoned within the next 10 years. A further hearing to determine whether prosecutors believe there are grounds for a retrial for the charges was set for September 4.
.jpeg%3Ftrim%3D0%2C66%2C0%2C65%26width%3D1200%26height%3D800%26crop%3D1200%3A800&w=3840&q=100)
The Independent
a few seconds ago
- The Independent
What next for social media ‘martyr' Lucy Connolly after leaving prison?
Lucy Connolly is out of jail. She was one of about 1,800 arrested for offences during riots last summer in the wake of the Southport murders. Connolly, from Northampton, was convicted and jailed for publishing 'threatening or abusive' material on social media including an incitement to 'set fire to all the f****** hotels full of the bastards for all I care.' Hers is one of the more high-profile cases and some activists have taken up her cause, claiming she has been a victim of 'two tier' policing, harsh sentencing, and restricted free speech. Her sentence was 31 months; a bid to reduce it was rejected by the Court of Appeal in May. Under current early release rules, she is allowed out on licence for the remainder of her sentence, having served 40 per cent. What did Connolly do wrong? Her supporters mostly concede that what she said was wrong, but many also minimise it as mere 'hurty words' for which nobody should be given a custodial sentence. There is also the suspicion in some quarters that the punishment was heavier because of political pressure; the prime minister said at the time that the full force of the law should be brought down on offenders. But her case was carefully examined at Birmingham Crown Court and at the Court of Appeal. The facts were not in dispute, she pled guilty, and the judges have considered the context and acted within the guidelines approved by ministers. What did she post on social media? The mother-of-three, who was working as a childminder at the time and is the wife of a Tory councillor, wrote a number of messages but attention focused on this X post that was later deleted: ''Mass deportation now. Set fire to all the fucking hotels full of the bastards for all I care. While you're at it, take the treacherous government and politicians with them. I feel physically sick knowing what these families will now have to endure. If that makes me racist, so be it.' While visible, it had been viewed 310,000 times and reposted 940 times. Four days earlier, Connolly had responded to a video shared online by Tommy Robinson, showing a black male being tackled to the ground for allegedly masturbating in public. 'Somalian, I guess. Loads of them,' she wrote, adding a vomiting emoji. Five days after the Southport murders Connolly stated on social media, referencing an anti-racism demo: 'Oh good. I take it they will all be in line to sign up to house an illegal boat invader then. Oh sorry, refugee. Maybe sign a waiver to say they don't mind if it's one of their family that gets attacked, butchered, raped etc, by unvetted criminals. Not all heroes wear capes.' Another message, on WhatsApp, read: 'The raging tweet about burning down hotels has bit me on the arse lol.' Another message, sent later, was in response to the furore she'd caused. According to the Court of Appeal, in another message she said she intended to tell authorities she had been the victim of doxing and went on to say that if she got arrested she would 'play the mental health card'. Did she have a defence? According to the Court of Appeal: 'The stabbings of the children in Southport had put her into a rage. She said she felt hatred about the incident and the circumstances, not about race. She said she had taken the post down because she realised it was wrong. Later in the interview she said her tweets were not racial and she had no intention to cause hate or racial issues.' Is she a hero? To some, she is akin to Emmeline Pankhurst or Joan of Arc. Senior members of the Trump administration have raised questions about freedom of speech in the UK as a result of the treatment of those who sent messages and were subsequently convicted of public order offences. Nigel Farage, leader of Reform UK, has lauded her in these terms: 'Welcome to freedom, Lucy Connolly. You are now a symbol of Keir Starmer's authoritarian, broken, two-tier Britain.' Kemi Badenoch has attacked the way the courts treated Connolly, going in hard on the two-tier charge: 'Lucy Connolly finally returns home to her family today. At last. Her punishment was harsher than the sentences handed down for bricks thrown at police or actual rioting… meanwhile, former Labour councillor Ricky Jones called for protestors to have their throats slit. Charged with encouraging violent disorder, he pleaded not guilty and was acquitted by a jury who saw his words as a disgusting remark made in the heat of the moment, not a call to action.' Connolly will have no shortage of media outlets, some highly sympathetic, on which to appear should she wish. What does Keir Starmer think? He thinks politicians should stay out of the courtroom, and has no regrets. He told the Commons in May: 'Sentencing is a matter for our courts, and I celebrate the fact that we have independent courts in this country. I am strongly in favour of free speech … but I am equally against incitement to violence against other people.' What will happen next? Another extended skirmish in Britain's endless and debilitating culture wars. Maybe that chap who took a brick to his testes during the disturbances will be the next contender for martyrdom.
