Stop and search - what are my rights?
Discussion
Just back from gym where I watched a BBC programme about Oxford Street. Amongst many "dramas" was a man stopped and searched by a plain clothes police officer because he "looked suspicious" and had been giving the "eye" to a mobile phone bag that the police officer was carrying (as a lure). The commentator said that the officer was relying on "his instincts". Seems to me to be pretty insubstantial grounds for a stop and search and could easily happen to me if it were thought I looked suspicious enough. If that were to happen i wonder what would be my rights to refuse a search and does the officer have to give clear grounds for requesting such action? As it turned out the man stopped had in his possession a stolen mobile phone - but does the end justify the means. I am sure this has been discussed here many times particularly regarding the disproportionate number of BME subjects stopped - but i wonder how I would react if it happened and what should I do...so, what are my rights and what should I do?
It would have been a search under S1 PACE. The officer should give the grounds of the search, the object of the search, give his identify, show warrant card if not in uniform and give his station. He should also inform the subject that he's entitled to a copy of the stop search slip.
The officer would have to justify his grounds. Personal appearance is not sufficient grounds for a search. However, acting suspiciously can be. You can decline a search, however force can be used to conduct searches. There is no such thing of searching a person "with their consent".
The officer would have to justify his grounds. Personal appearance is not sufficient grounds for a search. However, acting suspiciously can be. You can decline a search, however force can be used to conduct searches. There is no such thing of searching a person "with their consent".
I guess my question is, what is the search for? Drugs, weapons? So if it happened to me, i'd be inconvienced, but unless you are wandering along carrying something you shouldn't be, is it a major issue?
Given the "sting" operation, im not sure how they'd identify stolen goods if thats what they are looking for?
Given the "sting" operation, im not sure how they'd identify stolen goods if thats what they are looking for?
ATG said:
Rather than get too preoccupied with our rights, perhaps better to think about our responsibilities in these situations? In this case I'd say that would be to cooperate with the police so that they can get the search over and done with as quickly as possible.
Well, while not wanting to sound like an anarchist, I would take profound objection to being stopped and searched if the officer had no better reason to do so than "trust his instinct" as was portrayed in this particular programme. I think there have been many people in this situation and you could see how this could escalate - as I guess it must have happened on many occasions. Edited by Beggarall on Friday 12th December 20:18
Beggarall said:
Well, while not wanting to sound like an anarchist, I would take profound objection to being stopped and searched if the officer had no better reason to do so than "trust his instinct"
Why? Even if the bloke was being a bit of a dick or just made a bad call, why would you allow that to make you feel a "profound" degree of anything. It's a minor inconvenience.Didn't see the program but it seems to have been a job well done in my mind. The fact that the officer was touting a lure suggests pick pocketing was a known problem in that area. Crooks don't walk around with a sign on their head advertising the fact they are going to nick something in the next ten minutes, if they were actually seen stealing they would be arrested anyway. So yes, acting in a suspicious way would justify a search. The commentator says the officer went on instinct, who's to say the suspect wasn't already known to the officer?
Beggarall said:
ATG said:
Rather than get too preoccupied with our rights, perhaps better to think about our responsibilities in these situations? In this case I'd say that would be to cooperate with the police so that they can get the search over and done with as quickly as possible.
Well, while not wanting to sound like an anarchist, I would take profound objection to being stopped and searched if the officer had no better reason to do so than "trust his instinct" as was portrayed in this particular programme. I think there have been many people in this situation and you could see how this could escalate - as I guess it must have happened on many occasions.I for one, as a normal law abiding citizen, wouldn't mind being stopped/searched as I have nothing to hide!
I also don't usually act suspiciously cos I'm not a thieving scrote!
A search under Section 1 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 allows a police officer, in a public place, to search any person or vehicle if they have reasonable grounds to suspect that stolen or prohibited articles will be found. Prohibited articles being articles for use in criminal damage, fraud, offensive weapons, burglary or theft or some restricted fireworks.
There are other search powers, such as Section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act (which, surprisingly, is for controlled drugs), however these are too numerous to list here but you can see some here
Providing the officer complies with certain requirements (such as having lawful grounds, explaining your rights, explaining who they are and what they are doing, etc) you have no right to refuse the search.
An officer can you reasonable force to detain you and search you. You do not need to consent and they can even handcuff you and restrain you in order to search you safely. (Usually using Section 117 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and Section 3 Criminal Law Act).
Like most things the police do if you are not happy or do not believe they are doing it properly it is generally best to make a mental or physical note of everything they are doing and complain later officially.
9 times out of 10 you will not win an argument on the street with an officer who is determined to do something you believe they shouldn't. You only risk inflaming the situation and possibly getting yourself in trouble or injured. Further you may not know the law as well as they do and could be arguing from mistaken belief which could see you fighting back where you shouldn't and subsequently charged with assaulting a police officer for example.
It is much better, easier, and officially recognised to complain after the fact with full details of what has happened, why you feel wronged, and what evidence you have. No, you shouldn't have to go along with an unlawful search, for instance, but is better to not have the search and subsequent legal challenge and complaint or would you prefer to stand there, argue the toss, have a scrap with the officer, and end up nicked for assault on police?
There are other search powers, such as Section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act (which, surprisingly, is for controlled drugs), however these are too numerous to list here but you can see some here
Providing the officer complies with certain requirements (such as having lawful grounds, explaining your rights, explaining who they are and what they are doing, etc) you have no right to refuse the search.
An officer can you reasonable force to detain you and search you. You do not need to consent and they can even handcuff you and restrain you in order to search you safely. (Usually using Section 117 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and Section 3 Criminal Law Act).
Like most things the police do if you are not happy or do not believe they are doing it properly it is generally best to make a mental or physical note of everything they are doing and complain later officially.
9 times out of 10 you will not win an argument on the street with an officer who is determined to do something you believe they shouldn't. You only risk inflaming the situation and possibly getting yourself in trouble or injured. Further you may not know the law as well as they do and could be arguing from mistaken belief which could see you fighting back where you shouldn't and subsequently charged with assaulting a police officer for example.
It is much better, easier, and officially recognised to complain after the fact with full details of what has happened, why you feel wronged, and what evidence you have. No, you shouldn't have to go along with an unlawful search, for instance, but is better to not have the search and subsequent legal challenge and complaint or would you prefer to stand there, argue the toss, have a scrap with the officer, and end up nicked for assault on police?
You have no rights whatsoever if the cop wants to stop and search you.
The rules are laid out in such a way that no matter what,if the cop wants to search you,he/she will,regardless.
even if its just because they have had a bad day,just don`t like the look of you,a personal grudge,or has a massive chip on their shoulder,you are getting searched,what ever reason you may have against it there will be a reason under some other rule to counter you and cover any reason for the search legal or not.
So what is the point of complaining afterwards,when you have already been searched.?
you are not going to get anything back.
It would not be too bad if they were discreet about these things,taking people to one side,out of view.
In the stops I`ve seen on tv or in person they seem to revel in embarrassing people in the busiest places imaginable with no concern for dignity or the stigma of being searched in public with a crowd of your peers gathered round making assumptions,this stuff though trivial can affect some people quite badly.
Besides complaints against police very rarely get anywhere,its not like they are fastidious in ensuring that they themselves stick to the rules that they enforce is it?
There is plenty of evidence to support the fact that they bend over backwards to help when one of their own goes too far,even bending the rules to suit.
One rule for them.........
Our local bobby parks illegally regularly,uses his estate police car for his personal use,shopping and moving larger items and drives too fast in his own car,with no belt on,complaints are pointless as personal experience proves.
And they wonder why the public perception of the police is poor?
The rules are laid out in such a way that no matter what,if the cop wants to search you,he/she will,regardless.
even if its just because they have had a bad day,just don`t like the look of you,a personal grudge,or has a massive chip on their shoulder,you are getting searched,what ever reason you may have against it there will be a reason under some other rule to counter you and cover any reason for the search legal or not.
So what is the point of complaining afterwards,when you have already been searched.?
you are not going to get anything back.
It would not be too bad if they were discreet about these things,taking people to one side,out of view.
In the stops I`ve seen on tv or in person they seem to revel in embarrassing people in the busiest places imaginable with no concern for dignity or the stigma of being searched in public with a crowd of your peers gathered round making assumptions,this stuff though trivial can affect some people quite badly.
Besides complaints against police very rarely get anywhere,its not like they are fastidious in ensuring that they themselves stick to the rules that they enforce is it?
There is plenty of evidence to support the fact that they bend over backwards to help when one of their own goes too far,even bending the rules to suit.
One rule for them.........
Our local bobby parks illegally regularly,uses his estate police car for his personal use,shopping and moving larger items and drives too fast in his own car,with no belt on,complaints are pointless as personal experience proves.
And they wonder why the public perception of the police is poor?
Mk3Spitfire said:
^^
There's certainly someone here with a chip on their shoulder. I fear you have very little knowledge about this, and it shows in your post.
I have no chip on my shoulder and could not give two hoots my self.There's certainly someone here with a chip on their shoulder. I fear you have very little knowledge about this, and it shows in your post.
I have nothing against the police as an institution,apart from the old boys club element that allows them to escape punishment for the very acts they themselves are supposed to be
Just pointing out,given the information in these few posts its not hard to work out that once you cut through all the bulls
t it boils down to you having no rights that are worthwhile having,nothing you can say or do will stop them searching you so in effect you have no rights.All there is to know is that if they want to search you they will no matter what your reason or protest against it as they have laid out the rules to achieve that,if you protest they will arrest you,
Objection is plainly futile and what is to be achieved by complaining afterwards?
absolutely bugger all!
And if you are trying to tell me that all police force staff are whiter than white then you are obviously massively naive.
Jim1556 said:
As the program (and many others) shows, the BIB do develop instincts for 'wrongdoers', sometimes they're wrong (as we all are), however, sometimes they're most definately right and by being right have probably prevented another crime!
I for one, as a normal law abiding citizen, wouldn't mind being stopped/searched as I have nothing to hide!
I also don't usually act suspiciously cos I'm not a thieving scrote!
This a million times over!!!!I for one, as a normal law abiding citizen, wouldn't mind being stopped/searched as I have nothing to hide!
I also don't usually act suspiciously cos I'm not a thieving scrote!
Landshark said:
This a million times over!!!!
The current rules are there to prevent the Police form stopping any searching anyone they feel like without GOOD REASON -that all. If you refuse the search and they had no reasonable grounds in the first place then it'll be a struggle for them to justify the arrest. Only 10% of searches resulted in arrest last year which indicates there were probably no grounds for many of the searches in the first place
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff