The daughter of a man who was killed by two children has told Sky News “there is a possibility” he could have still been alive if police had taken anti-social behaviour reports more seriously.
Susan Kohli has spoken to The UK Tonight With Sarah-Jane Mee about what she says were failures by the Leicestershire force, leading up to the death of her 80-year-old father Bhim Kohli near Leicester in September 2024.
Mr Kohli was racially abused and physically attacked just yards from his home as he walked his dog in Franklin Park, Braunstone Town. He suffered a broken neck and fractured ribs, and died in hospital the next day.
Image: Susan Kohli
Susan Kohli is critical of how LeicestershirePolice dealt with earlier reports of anti-social behaviour in the area in July and August 2024, before the attack on her father. The force said it did not identify misconduct or missed opportunities, which could have prevented Mr Kohli’s death.
In one of the cases, Ms Kohli said her father faced abusive and racist comments and was spat at. Although the incident in August was not related to her father’s death, she believes a stronger police response could have deterred her dad’s killers.
“Why is it that they’re not taking these things seriously? Are they just waiting for something to happen? Because that’s literally what it looks and feels like.
“They waited for someone to lose their life before they took any stance. If they had arrested these two boys prior to that incident on the 1st of September, there is a possibility my dad could still be here,” she said.
More from UK
A boy, who was 14 at the time of the attack, and a girl, who was 12, denied their part in the killing but were found guilty of manslaughter at Leicester Crown Court in April. The pair cannot be named because of their age.
Jurors heard the boy kicked and punched Mr Kohli – encouraged by the girl who recorded parts of the attack while laughing.
Image: Susan Kohli told Sarah-Jane Mee she felt the children’s sentences were too lenient
Ms Kohli said she felt their sentences were too lenient after the boy received seven years’ detention while the girl was given a three-year youth rehabilitation order.
“We need the sentencing guidelines to be looked at, whether it’s a child or an adult, they know what they are doing at that age.
“Why is it that because they are a child that they get half the sentence of an adult? He’s going to be out in three and a half years or even less. How is that justice for taking somebody’s life? But that’s not justice at all. They’ve given us a life sentence.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:32
Daughter’s anger over child killers
In August, the Court of Appeal ruled the boy’s sentence will not be changed, saying it was neither unduly lenient nor manifestly excessive.
Solicitor General Lucy Rigby had referred the sentence to the court under the unduly lenient sentence scheme. The girl’s sentence was not referred to the Court of Appeal.
Leicestershire Police told Sky News that, due to prior police contact with Mr Kohli, the force referred itself to the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC).
The force found that proportionate and reasonable lines of enquiry were followed and concluded that no misconduct or missed opportunities which could have prevented Mr Kohli’s death were identified.
Chief Superintendent Jonathan Starbuck said: “The death of Bhim Kohli is an extremely shocking, traumatic and upsetting incident and our thoughts, sorrow and sympathies continue to remain with Mr Kohli’s family and friends.
“We know that anti-social behaviour has a huge impact on people’s lives. Preventing and addressing incidents and community concerns is of the utmost importance to our force in order to ensure the safety of our residents. This is something we continue to work on, address and to make ongoing improvements wherever we can.
“Through our own local investigation, following direction by the IOPC, we also identified organisational learning in relation to improving our system of logging and tagging anti-social behaviour incidents.”
An IOPC spokesperson said: “We agreed with Leicestershire Police’s finding that police officers did proactively investigate matters reported to them and there was nothing to indicate any officers or police staff committed a criminal offence or behaved in a manner justifying disciplinary proceedings.
“And we agreed with learning identified by the force in respect of accurately recording and tagging incidents of anti-social behaviour (ASB), thus ensuring incidents can be dealt with appropriately and to support the long-term management and deterrence of ASB.”
Sky News’ royal commentator has explained why Prince Andrew has not given up being called a prince – while another expert has said “the decent thing” for him to do would be “go into exile” overseas.
Andrew announced on Friday that he would stop using his Duke of York title and relinquish all other honours, including his role as a Royal Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter.
However, he will continue to be known as a prince.
Royal commentator Alastair Bruce said that while Andrew’s other honours and titles were conferred to him later in life, he became a prince when he was born to Elizabeth II while she was queen.
He told presenter Kamali Melbourne: “I think […] that style was quite special to the late Queen,” he said. “And perhaps the King, for the moment, thinks that can be left alone.
“It’s a matter really for the King, for the royal household, perhaps with the guidance and advice of government, which I’m sure they are taking.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:49
Who pushed Andrew to drop his titles?
Since Andrew’s announcement, there has been speculation over whether any further measures will be taken – and one author has now called for him to “go into exile”.
More on Prince Andrew
Related Topics:
Andrew Lownie, author of The Rise And Fall Of The House Of York, said: “The only way the story will go away is if he leaves Royal Lodge, goes into exile abroad with his ex-wife, and is basically stripped of all his honours, including Prince Andrew.”
Royal Lodge is the Windsor mansion Andrew lives in with his ex-wife, Sarah Ferguson, who has also lost her Duchess of York title.
Image: Andrew and his former wife continue to live on the Windsor estate. Pic: Reuters
Mr Lownie continued: “He makes out he’s an honourable man and he’s putting country and family first. Well, if he is, then the optics look terrible for the monarchy. A non-working royal in a 30-room Crown Estate property with a peppercorn rent.
“He should do the decent thing and go. And frankly, he should go into exile.”
Mr Lownie added if the Royal Family “genuinely want to cut links, they have to put pressure on him to voluntarily get out”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:11
Windsor’s take on Prince Andrew
Andrew’s decision to stop using his titles was announced amid renewed scrutiny of his relationship with paedophile Jeffrey Epstein, and fresh stories linked to the late Virginia Giuffre.
Ms Giuffre, who was trafficked by Epstein, alleged she was sexually assaulted by Andrew on three occasions – which he has always vigorously denied.
But what about his style ‘prince’? Some want that ditched too.
It’s a complicated but not impossible process. Andrew could, of course, just stop using it voluntarily.
Some want him to give up his home, too. For a non-working royal, the stately Royal Lodge, with its plum position on the Windsor Estate, is an uncomfortable optic.
With the reputation of the monarchy at risk, William does not want to appear weak. He’s putting loyalty to “the firm” firmly above his familial relationships.
Prince Andrew has always strongly denied the allegations, and restated on Friday: “I vigorously deny the accusations against me”. Sky News has approached him for comment on the fresh allegations set out in the Mail on Sunday.
But with Virginia Giuffre’s tragic death and posthumous memoir due out on Tuesday, Buckingham Palace will be braced for more scandal.
When Andrew gave up his titles, there was certainly a sense of relief.
There is now a sense of dread over what else could emerge.
Bereaved families whose loved ones took their own lives after buying the same poison online have written to the prime minister demanding urgent action.
Warning: This article contains references to suicide
The group claims there have been “multiple missed opportunities” to shut down online forums that promote suicide and dangerous substances.
They warn that over 100 people have died after purchasing a particular poison in the last 10 years.
Among those who have written to Downing Street is Pete Aitken, whose daughter Hannah was 22 when she took her own life after buying the poison from a website.
Hannah was autistic and had ADHD. She was treated in six different mental health hospitals over a four-year period.
He said: “Autistic people seem to be most vulnerable to this kind of sort of poison and, you know, wanting to take their lives.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:05
Pete Aitken speaking to Sky News
Sky News is not naming the poison, but Hannah was able to buy a kilogram of it online. Just one gram is potentially fatal.
“There’s this disparity between the concentration required for its legitimate use and that required for ending your life. And it seems quite clear you could make a distinction,” Mr Aitken said.
Analysis from the Molly Rose Foundation and the group Families and Survivors to Prevent Online Suicide Harms says at least 133 people have died because of the poison. It also says coroners have written warnings about the substance on 65 separate occasions.
The report accuses the Home Office of failing to strengthen the regulation of the poison and says not enough is being done to close dangerous suicide forums online.
Lawyers representing the group want a public inquiry into the deaths.
In a joint letter to the prime minister, the families said: “We write as families whose loved ones were let down by a state that was too slow to respond to the threat.
“This series of failings requires a statutory response, not just to understand why our loved ones died but also to prevent more lives being lost in a similar way.”
The group’s lawyer, Merry Varney, from Leigh Day, said: “The government is rightly committed to preventing deaths through suicide, yet despite repeated warnings of the risks posed by an easily accessible substance, fatal in small quantities and essentially advertised on online forums, no meaningful steps have been taken.”
Image: Hannah’s dad is one of the family members to have signed the letter
A government spokesperson said: “Suicide devastates families and we are unequivocal about the responsibilities online services have to keep people safe on their platforms.
“Under the Online Safety Act, services must take action to prevent users from accessing illegal suicide and self-harm content and ensure children are protected from harmful content that promotes it.
“If they fail to do so, they can expect to face robust enforcement, including substantial fines.”
They added that the position is “closely monitored and reportable under the Poisons Act, meaning retailers must alert authorities if they suspect it is being bought to cause harm”.
“We will continue to keep dangerous substances under review to ensure the right safeguards are in place,” they said.
Anyone feeling emotionally distressed or suicidal can call Samaritans for help on 116 123 or email jo@samaritans.org in the UK. In the US, call the Samaritans branch in your area or 1 (800) 273-TALK.