A London music manager celebrating his 32nd birthday was targeted by a robbery crew over what they believed was an extremely valuable designer watch, then fatally stabbed during the attack even though the gang ultimately escaped with the watch they had come to steal.
Gun-rights activist and YouTuber Colion Noir used the 2022 killing of Emmanuel Odunlami to challenge the familiar advice that robbery victims can guarantee their safety simply by surrendering their property, arguing that compliance may sometimes be the safest choice but can never control what an attacker decides to do next.
The case itself is especially disturbing because Odunlami did not appear to become a random target on the street. According to the account featured by Noir, he was identified inside a restaurant, information about his watch was allegedly passed to accomplices, and a group followed him outside before attacking him near his car.
Odunlami Was Marked While Celebrating His Birthday
Odunlami was celebrating his birthday near St Paul’s Cathedral in central London when security guard Kavindu Hettiarachchi noticed the diamond-encrusted Patek Philippe-style watch on his wrist.
The watch was fake, although the robbers apparently believed it was genuine and highly valuable.
Noir’s video described it as potentially worth as much as £300,000, while the underlying report put the estimated value of a genuine version at around £125,000. Either way, the important point was that the attackers believed they were pursuing a major prize.
Hettiarachchi allegedly filmed Odunlami and passed the information to Louis Vandrose, who was connected to the group waiting to rob him.
After Odunlami left Haz restaurant, Vandrose, Jordell Menzies and Quincy Ffrench followed him toward his vehicle.
The attack then turned deadly.
Menzies stabbed Odunlami in the heart, while Ffrench took the watch, and the men fled in a Mercedes with altered number plates.
Odunlami’s friends tried desperately to save him, but he died later in hospital.
Noir Challenges The “Just Comply” Argument
For Noir, the central lesson was not that people should always resist a robbery.
In fact, he explicitly said that if someone confronted by several attackers decides handing over property gives them the best chance of surviving, he would not second-guess that decision.
His objection was to treating compliance as a guarantee.
“Just give them your stuff and you’ll be fine,” Noir said, describing that advice as something he has heard repeatedly throughout his adult life.
He argued that Odunlami had every reason not to fight over the watch. He was outnumbered, the item was fake, and there was no rational reason to risk his life over something replaceable.
The robbers still killed him.
It is worth being precise here: the supplied reports establish that the gang took the watch during the attack and that Odunlami was fatally stabbed, but they do not clearly establish that he peacefully handed it over before the stabbing. Noir’s broader point is that surrendering property cannot force violent offenders to stop once they have already chosen to attack.
That distinction makes the argument stronger, not weaker. Compliance can reduce risk in some circumstances, but no victim can control an assailant’s behavior with certainty.
The Attack Had Been Planned Before He Reached His Car
Noir also focused heavily on the fact that Odunlami had allegedly been selected before he even left the restaurant.
He said this was not a spontaneous confrontation where a victim had time to negotiate with someone demanding a wallet.
The gang had allegedly identified him, tracked his movements and followed him to his vehicle.
“He wasn’t in a negotiation,” Noir argued, saying Odunlami had effectively been treated as “inventory” because of the watch on his wrist.
That element makes the case particularly unsettling.
A security guard is normally someone customers expect to increase their safety, yet prosecutors said Hettiarachchi was the person who spotted the watch and tipped off the men who later carried out the robbery.
Odunlami’s fiancée, Rajbir Kaur, later described him as vulnerable and innocent and said the loss had been traumatic for their two sons.
Judge Patrick Field KC similarly described Odunlami as a successful and devoted father and acknowledged the profound grief experienced by those close to him.
Four Men Received Long Prison Sentences
Police eventually tracked down the group after investigators recovered evidence including the weapon and identified the getaway vehicle.
Menzies was convicted of murder and robbery and received a life sentence with a minimum term of 31 years.
Vandrose and Ffrench were convicted of manslaughter and robbery and each received 15-year prison sentences.
Hettiarachchi was also convicted of manslaughter and robbery and received 13 years.
A fifth man, Antonios Kfoury, was convicted separately of perverting the course of justice and received an 18-month custodial sentence.
Noir criticized the fact that some members of the group could eventually return to society after serving their sentences, using that point to broaden his argument about weapon restrictions and violent people.
His commentary became explicitly political from there.
Noir Says Gun Control Cannot Eliminate Violent Intent
Noir presented the killing as evidence against the idea that strict gun laws can eliminate serious violence.
He argued that Britain’s gun restrictions did not prevent Odunlami from being murdered because his attackers simply used a knife.
From Noir’s perspective, restricting weapons available to ordinary citizens does not eliminate people willing to rob or kill; it only changes what weapons are present when violence occurs.
That is his gun-rights argument, and it should be understood as advocacy rather than a conclusion established by this one case.
A single stabbing cannot by itself determine whether a country’s broader gun-control policies reduce or increase overall violence.
Still, Noir’s narrower point about personal encounters is harder to dismiss: laws can influence risk, but they cannot promise that a violent offender will behave rationally or stop after receiving what he wants.
Compliance Is A Choice, Not A Guarantee
Noir ultimately rejected any universal rule for how victims should react during a robbery.
He said surrendering property may absolutely be the right decision when someone is outnumbered, surprised or facing an immediate threat.
What angered him was the suggestion that anyone can know with certainty that compliance will produce safety.
Odunlami’s case is a tragic reminder of why that promise cannot be made.
The men who targeted him wanted the watch, they ultimately got the watch, and he still died from a stab wound to the heart.
Whether resistance or compliance is safer depends on circumstances that can change in seconds, and there is no formula that removes the danger once violent criminals have already committed to an attack.
Noir used that uncertainty to argue for armed self-defense rights, while others may draw different policy conclusions from the same crime.
But on one point, the case leaves little room for comforting assumptions: giving a robber what he wants may sometimes save a life, but it can never guarantee that the robber will spare it.
Ed spent his childhood in the backwoods of Maine, where harsh winters taught him the value of survival skills. With a background in bushcraft and off-grid living, Ed has honed his expertise in fire-making, hunting, and wild foraging. He writes from personal experience, sharing practical tips and hands-on techniques to thrive in any outdoor environment. Whether it’s primitive camping or full-scale survival, Ed’s advice is grounded in real-life challenges.
