Horror as prisoner freed early by Labour stabs mum-of-two to death
Dickiesa Nurse was stabbed to death at her home in McCormick House, Tulse Hill (Image: Google Street View)
The case of a convicted knife offender who was released from prison before the end of his sentence before going on to murder a mother of two has placed renewed pressure on the Government over its approach to early prisoner release and the supervision of offenders in the community.
Robert Sabat, 59, is due to be sentenced at the Old Bailey on Wednesday, October 7, after pleading guilty to the murder of Dickiesa Nurse, 42. Nurse was stabbed to death at her home in McCormick House, Tulse Hill, south London, on October 27, 2025.
Sabat had previously received a custodial sentence after being convicted of possessing a knife and harassment without violence. He was subsequently released early under the Standard Determinate Sentence 40% system, commonly known as SDS40, which allows eligible prisoners to be released after serving 40% of their custodial term rather than the previous 50% point.
The circumstances have prompted a review by the Probation Service. Ministers now face questions about how Sabat was assessed, what supervision was in place following his release and whether warning signs were identified before the killing.
A murder that has become part of a wider political argument
The death of Dickiesa Nurse is first and foremost a criminal case involving the loss of a mother of two. But the circumstances surrounding Sabat’s release have inevitably drawn the case into the increasingly heated political debate over Britain’s prison system.
The Government has been under sustained pressure to address severe overcrowding across prisons in England and Wales. The prison population has remained close to capacity, creating pressure on accommodation, staff and the probation system responsible for supervising offenders after release.
SDS40 was introduced in September 2024 as one of the measures designed to relieve that pressure. Under the policy, certain prisoners serving standard determinate sentences could be released at the 40% point rather than the previous 50% point, with the remainder of the sentence served in the community under licence and probation supervision.
That distinction is important in assessing Sabat’s case.
His release was not an unrestricted declaration that his sentence had ended. Like other eligible prisoners released under the scheme, he remained subject to the legal framework governing release on licence and community supervision.
However, the fact that a man with a previous knife conviction was subsequently accused and convicted of a fatal stabbing has raised a much more difficult question: whether the safeguards surrounding early release were sufficient in this particular case.
What happened to Dickiesa Nurse?
Sabat pleaded guilty to murder at the Old Bailey (Image: Getty)
Police were called to McCormick House in Tulse Hill shortly before 5pm on October 27, 2025, following reports of a disturbance.
Officers arrived at the property and found Dickiesa Nurse suffering from multiple stab wounds. She was pronounced dead.
Sabat was arrested at the scene. Police used a Taser during the arrest, according to reporting at the time, and he was subsequently charged with murder and possession of an offensive weapon.
The case was eventually brought before the Old Bailey, where Sabat pleaded guilty to murder on September 17, 2026.
The Old Bailey listing for October 7 records his sentencing hearing, meaning the court is now expected to determine the punishment for the killing.
The circumstances surrounding the attack have also highlighted the fact that Nurse was killed in what should have been the security of her own home.
For her family, the political argument over prison policy cannot change the reality of what happened.
Family remembers a “joyful soul”
Following Nurse’s death, relatives launched a fundraising campaign to help with funeral costs.
Her family described her as a joyful person whose presence brought “light, laughter and love” to those around her.
They also spoke about the permanent absence created by her death and the effect it had on those closest to her.
Nurse was a mother of two, meaning her death also left children facing the consequences of a crime they did not commit.
That human cost has become an important part of the wider discussion about criminal justice. While governments measure prison capacity, release rates and reoffending statistics, individual cases can expose the consequences behind those numbers.
The Ministry of Justice has expressed sympathy for Nurse’s family and said the Probation Service is conducting a thorough investigation into what happened.
The early-release system was introduced because prisons were running out of space
The Government’s current prison strategy cannot be separated from the overcrowding crisis that preceded the latest release programme.
Official statistics show that SDS40 began operating on September 10, 2024. The first phase covered eligible prisoners serving determinate sentences of less than five years, while a second tranche followed for eligible prisoners serving longer sentences.
The Ministry of Justice has subsequently published detailed data on people released under SDS40, including releases between September 2024 and March 2026.
The policy was designed to create additional space without simply allowing the prison population to continue rising.
But it also shifted more responsibility into the community.
Once a prisoner is released on licence, probation services become central to managing that person. Conditions can include requirements to report to probation officers, restrictions on behaviour or movement and, where appropriate, electronic monitoring.
That creates a delicate balance.
Keeping every offender in prison until the final day of a sentence would require considerably greater prison capacity. Releasing prisoners earlier reduces pressure on cells but increases the importance of effective risk assessment, accommodation, probation supervision and enforcement.
The Sabat case has therefore raised questions about whether those different parts of the system operated as intended.
Labour’s latest release programme is different — but the political fallout is connected
The current political controversy is also complicated by the fact that several different early-release measures have operated over recent years.
The latest programme, introduced under the Sentencing Act 2026, came into force on October 1 and is being phased in over ten tranches. Around 5,000 prisoners are expected to be released over the following year under the new arrangements.
The Government reduced the scope of the programme after criticism, excluding certain categories of serious offenders, including rapists and the most serious child sexual offenders.
The new rules move automatic release points for eligible prisoners earlier, with some moving from 40% to one third of the sentence and others from two thirds to half, depending on the type of sentence and applicable rules.
The Government argues that the changes are necessary to prevent the prison system from reaching breaking point.
But the murder of Nurse has provided critics with a powerful example to use when challenging the broader principle of early release.
The political question is not simply whether early release exists. It is whether the people selected for release are being properly assessed and whether the probation system has enough capacity to manage them once they are outside prison.
Electronic tagging becomes a major issue
Electronic monitoring has emerged as another major point of controversy.
The Government has introduced a presumption that offenders released early will be electronically monitored where appropriate. Ministers have also promised expanded use of GPS tagging and other forms of monitoring.
On October 1, the Government introduced new powers allowing probation services to impose tightly defined “restriction zones” on some serious offenders leaving prison. These can limit where offenders are permitted to go, with GPS monitoring used to help identify breaches.
The policy is intended to give victims greater protection while allowing offenders to access essential services and appointments.
Yet the practical implementation of tagging has itself become controversial.
Justice Secretary Alex Norris recently acknowledged that he could not immediately say how many prisoners released in the first wave of the latest programme had actually been fitted with electronic tags.
Around 700 prisoners were released in the first phase, with thousands more expected to follow.
That admission has intensified scrutiny because electronic monitoring is only effective if equipment is fitted correctly, offenders comply with the conditions and probation services have the resources to respond when breaches occur.
The Government says serious further offences remain rare
Ministers have stressed that the vast majority of offenders supervised in the community do not go on to commit serious further offences.
A Government source cited in relation to the Nurse case said fewer than 0.5% of people under Probation Service supervision go on to commit serious further offences, while acknowledging that those cases can have devastating consequences.
That distinction matters.
A low overall rate does not make an individual serious further offence less significant for the victim or their family. At the same time, a single tragic case cannot by itself demonstrate that every early-release decision is unsafe.
The challenge for policymakers is therefore to examine whether this case represents an isolated failure or reveals a broader weakness in the system.
That is one reason the Probation Service review is significant.
The review could prove crucial
The central unanswered questions concern what happened before Sabat’s release and during the period between his release and Nurse’s death.
Officials will need to establish what information was available to decision-makers, what risk assessments were completed and whether the conditions imposed on Sabat were followed.
They will also need to examine whether any warning signs were missed.
Those questions cannot be answered simply by looking at the length of his original sentence.
A 12-month sentence does not automatically indicate that a prisoner is safe to manage in the community. Equally, a previous conviction does not mean that an offender will inevitably commit another serious offence.
Modern probation policy relies heavily on individual risk assessment.
The effectiveness of that system therefore depends on the quality of information available to probation officers, the consistency of supervision and the ability to intervene when behaviour changes.
Prison overcrowding remains the underlying problem
Behind the immediate political argument lies a problem that has built up over years.
The Government has acknowledged the need for additional prison capacity and says it is investing in thousands of new prison places.
At the same time, the number of prisoners has continued to place pressure on the existing estate.
The early-release programmes are, in part, an attempt to create breathing space while longer-term capacity is developed.
The House of Commons Library has noted that people serving prison sentences are normally released before the end of their nominal sentence and serve the remainder in the community under supervision. It also notes that prisoners can be recalled if they breach licence conditions.
That means the argument is more complicated than simply “prison versus freedom”.
The real question is where the sentence is served and what controls exist during the period outside prison.
A case that will continue to fuel political pressure
Sabat’s case has arrived at an especially difficult moment for the Government.
The latest early-release programme is only beginning, with thousands of prisoners scheduled to leave custody in stages.
Ministers insist that the new system will combine earlier release with stronger supervision, electronic monitoring and restrictions on movement.
Critics, meanwhile, argue that the public should not be asked to accept greater risk simply because prisons are overcrowded.
The murder of Dickiesa Nurse has become one of the most serious cases cited in that debate.
But the final assessment of what went wrong will depend on the evidence gathered by the Probation Service and the courts rather than political slogans.
The fact that Sabat had previously been convicted of a knife offence makes the case particularly difficult for officials. It raises legitimate questions about how his risk was assessed and why he was considered eligible for release.
At the same time, the precise legal and administrative circumstances of his release must be established before responsibility can be assigned to any individual official or policy.
The focus now turns to the Old Bailey
On October 7, the immediate issue is the sentence for Robert Sabat following his guilty plea to murder.
The court’s decision will determine the next stage of the criminal justice process.
For Dickiesa Nurse’s family, however, no sentence can reverse the loss of a mother and relative.
For the Government, the case presents a separate test: whether the review into Sabat’s supervision can identify what happened and whether changes are required to prevent similar failures.
Britain’s prison system faces a difficult calculation between capacity, punishment, rehabilitation and public protection.
Early release can reduce pressure on overcrowded prisons, but it also places greater demands on probation and monitoring services.
The case of Dickiesa Nurse demonstrates why those safeguards matter.
The political debate will continue, particularly as thousands more prisoners leave custody under the latest reforms. But the crucial question now is not simply whether prisoners are released early.
It is whether every decision to release an offender is accompanied by an effective assessment of risk, meaningful supervision and the resources needed to protect the public.
That is the question the Government’s review will ultimately have to answer.