Plod pulling and searching for drugs on the M5
Discussion
Hi,
It was on the news last night that the Police were stopping people on the M5 travelling to Gladsonbury and searching them for drugs.
I thought the police had to have a "real" reason to pull you over? Surely they can't legally just pull everyone over and search them for drugs just coz they are off to Gladstonbury?
It was on the news last night that the Police were stopping people on the M5 travelling to Gladsonbury and searching them for drugs.
I thought the police had to have a "real" reason to pull you over? Surely they can't legally just pull everyone over and search them for drugs just coz they are off to Gladstonbury?
They must have a suspicion that you have illegal substances in your possession before they can search anyone. That suspicion can be gained in a manner of different ways but the Police must state the grounds for the search and the object of the search BEFORE THEY COMMENCE IT.
Pace states that before a seacrh the Police officer MUST
1. Give the grounds for his search (reasons and suspicions)
2. Object of the search (what he/she is looking for)
3. If not in uniform show his warrant card
4. Identify his name (unless searching under Terrorism Act then only his shoulder number)
5. Identify the station he works from
6. Explain that the subject has a right to a copy of the search record at that time or within 12 months from the station he works from
7. He must now include a race identity code on the search form and must get the subject to self classify his racial origin from a list presented to the subject. The subject is not obliged to comply with this request or even to tell the truth ( a white European male could indicate that he is in fact a black chinese and the officer MUST put this on the form). The officer also has to include an opinion of the persons racial origin as well.
Section 1 of PACE 1984 gives the guidelines on when and where and who can be searched and for what reasons.
Section 23 Misuse of Druigs Act 1971 also gives a power for Police to enter, search and seize under the act.
Section 23(2) gives the power to search individual persons. Briefly it states that
1) Anyone who is reasonably suspected to be in possession of controlled substances may be detained and searched for as long as is necessary to search.
2) Search any vehicle or vessel that the Police suspect may contin a drug AND FOR THAT PURPOSE REQUIRE THE PERSON IN CHARGE TO STOP THE VEHICLE OR VESSEL.
3) Seize and detain for the purposes of proceedings under this act, anything which is evidence of an offence under the act
VESSEL includes hovercraft (So the Police can stop Glastonbury bound hovercraft too
)
The Police are bound strictly by the guidelines in Section 1 of PACE 1984 in relation to what suspicion is. They cannot use single reasons such as a persons colour, the fact they have a previous conviction or the fact they are at a specific location at that time alone. They must have a number of factors coming together before that gives them reasonable grounds to search. That is unless they see evidence of drug paraphenalia or smell the presence of an illegal substance (many do smell strongly especially if they have just been burnt!) Those factors alone are sufficient to warrant a seacrh under Sect 23 Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.
The possession of drug paraphenailia is not an offence. You can have these articles without penalty. It is grounds to search someone and it can be confiscated under the act and or as evidence of an offence under the act.
The Police can stop any person driving a vehicle on the road to check their driving licence. This is the power and only power they can use to randomly stop vehicles. They can stop vehicles under Section 23 Misuse of Drugs act and some other Acts if they have the grounds for suspicion under that particular Act (Firearms Acts to name but one) prior to the vehicle coming within their vicinity.
So all in all vehicles, vessels and hovercraft attending Glastonbury this year can be stopped randomly under Road Traffic Act powers to check driving licences. Once stopped, if further suspicion arises about what is being carried by the person or in the vehicle, a search under either Section 1 of PACE 1984, or Section 23 Misuse of Drugs 1971 will probably ensue.
I hope that explains it for you.
Pace states that before a seacrh the Police officer MUST
1. Give the grounds for his search (reasons and suspicions)
2. Object of the search (what he/she is looking for)
3. If not in uniform show his warrant card
4. Identify his name (unless searching under Terrorism Act then only his shoulder number)
5. Identify the station he works from
6. Explain that the subject has a right to a copy of the search record at that time or within 12 months from the station he works from
7. He must now include a race identity code on the search form and must get the subject to self classify his racial origin from a list presented to the subject. The subject is not obliged to comply with this request or even to tell the truth ( a white European male could indicate that he is in fact a black chinese and the officer MUST put this on the form). The officer also has to include an opinion of the persons racial origin as well.
Section 1 of PACE 1984 gives the guidelines on when and where and who can be searched and for what reasons.
Section 23 Misuse of Druigs Act 1971 also gives a power for Police to enter, search and seize under the act.
Section 23(2) gives the power to search individual persons. Briefly it states that
1) Anyone who is reasonably suspected to be in possession of controlled substances may be detained and searched for as long as is necessary to search.
2) Search any vehicle or vessel that the Police suspect may contin a drug AND FOR THAT PURPOSE REQUIRE THE PERSON IN CHARGE TO STOP THE VEHICLE OR VESSEL.
3) Seize and detain for the purposes of proceedings under this act, anything which is evidence of an offence under the act
VESSEL includes hovercraft (So the Police can stop Glastonbury bound hovercraft too
) The Police are bound strictly by the guidelines in Section 1 of PACE 1984 in relation to what suspicion is. They cannot use single reasons such as a persons colour, the fact they have a previous conviction or the fact they are at a specific location at that time alone. They must have a number of factors coming together before that gives them reasonable grounds to search. That is unless they see evidence of drug paraphenalia or smell the presence of an illegal substance (many do smell strongly especially if they have just been burnt!) Those factors alone are sufficient to warrant a seacrh under Sect 23 Misuse of Drugs Act 1971.
The possession of drug paraphenailia is not an offence. You can have these articles without penalty. It is grounds to search someone and it can be confiscated under the act and or as evidence of an offence under the act.
The Police can stop any person driving a vehicle on the road to check their driving licence. This is the power and only power they can use to randomly stop vehicles. They can stop vehicles under Section 23 Misuse of Drugs act and some other Acts if they have the grounds for suspicion under that particular Act (Firearms Acts to name but one) prior to the vehicle coming within their vicinity.
So all in all vehicles, vessels and hovercraft attending Glastonbury this year can be stopped randomly under Road Traffic Act powers to check driving licences. Once stopped, if further suspicion arises about what is being carried by the person or in the vehicle, a search under either Section 1 of PACE 1984, or Section 23 Misuse of Drugs 1971 will probably ensue.
I hope that explains it for you.
Madcop,
If the police pull you and state what they are searching for, for example bootleg beenie babies, if they then find drugs in the car even though they are searching for bootleg beenie babies can they still prosecute for having drugs in the car since they were not actually searching for it?
This is to settle a pub argument with a friend of mine!
If the police pull you and state what they are searching for, for example bootleg beenie babies, if they then find drugs in the car even though they are searching for bootleg beenie babies can they still prosecute for having drugs in the car since they were not actually searching for it?
This is to settle a pub argument with a friend of mine!
Mr2Mike said:
Another clear, concise post from MC that cut's through the crap and gives the facts. These posts really should be pulled togther to form an FAQ or something.
FAQ idea is actually a really good one.
I am always interested in MCs clarifications of the law (didn't know that the police are allowed to stop you at any time to ask to see your DL. Seems doubley odd, as I'm not obliged to carry it....)
Cheers MC.....
gh0st said:
Madcop,
If the police pull you and state what they are searching for, for example bootleg beenie babies, if they then find drugs in the car even though they are searching for bootleg beenie babies can they still prosecute for having drugs in the car since they were not actually searching for it?
This is to settle a pub argument with a friend of mine!
Yes.
This is not the USA.
If a power is being lawfully executed and evidence of another seperate and different offence is uncovered, the Police officer should immediately caution the person to that effect.
Sect 1 PACE 1984 only allows for the search to identify stolen goods, articles connected in connection with theft burglary or cheat ( Criminal Deception), sharply pointed blades or dangerous instruments and finally offensive weapons.
If however you are found to be in possession of an illegal firearm, drugs, child porn etc, then you will be arrested on suspicion of that offence and cautioned. Providing the Section 1 search was being properly conducted, then even if no items were found in relation to the power to seacrh under that section, the fact that other stuff was found is perfectly within the law.
It is the same if a Police officer is in a house to search for a person who has absconded after being arrested for an arrestable offence (under Section 17 PACE). The officer can search for the person even if it is not the persons own residence (say he ran into a friends house to take refuge).
If the officer has entered lawfully (no need for a warrant either) under that power and the friend even though he was unaware that the suspect had escaped from the police happens to have some cannabis on the coffee table when the officer breaks the door down, the friend is liable to arrest for the offence of possession of class B drugs. The officer was lawfully on the premises and the search for the offender revealed a drug offence. They are both then arrestable.
Mr E said:
(didn't know that the police are allowed to stop you at any time to ask to see your DL. Seems doubley odd, as I'm not obliged to carry it....)
Cheers MC.....
You are not obliged to carry it but if you cannot produce it on demand you commit an offence of failing to produce it THERE AND THEN
The law has an exemption to that offence and allows the officer to give you either 5 or 7 days to produce it at a station of your choice depending on the reason for your requirement to produce.
5 days if you were involved in an accident where injury was caused,
7 days in any other circumstances.
If I stop and ask someone to produce their licence and they cannot do it immediately, I always caution them for that offence there and then and report them after I have dealt with all the other issues.
I then tell them that if they produce at the station of their choice within the required time scale, they will not be proceeded against for the offence of failing to produce. I also report them for the alternative of No driving licence.
This is done so that in 3 weeks time after the stop, they have not produced, I do not have to make exhaustive enquiries to try and find them (especially if they are from the other end of the country) so that I can then report them for an offence they committed at the time they were stopped.
edc said:
Are the powers to stop much different to those of arrest? I understand that Police can arrest you if they suspect you have or may be about to commit an offence, whereas a civilian can only do so after the event.
Most of the powers police use in day to day arrests are those which are available to the public.
The powers to stop are nothing to do with powers to arrest. They are not linked in any way whatsoever. A power of arrest is applicable when someone commits an arrestable offence or an offence which has a power of arrest attached to it. These are themselves quite different.
If a person is wanted for an arrestable offence and they are in a vehicle, the fact that they are required to stop is to affect their arrest and for no other reason.
A person required to stop as a pedestrian can commit offences if they fail to do so!
An arrestable offence is one which is deemed so by Section 24(2) PACE 1984. They are offences which hold varying sentences on first conviction under 5 years imprisonment, such as TWOC (6 months)
Where the sentence is fixed by law ( such as murder)
The other definition is those offences which hold 5 years imprisonment or more on first conviction.
These are offences such as the theft act (10 yrs)
Burglary (aggravated = life) and robbery (14 yrs)
Assaults (5 yrs) unless serious (up to and including life for GBH with intent)
Drug possession Class A and B (5 yrs for class B increasing to life for possion with intent to supply class A)
Basically and briefly the powers to arrest are as follows
ANYONE
can arrest someone who is committing
1. an arrestable offence or has reasonable suspicion they are committing an arrestable offence.
2. When an arrestable offence has been committed, anyone who is guilty of it or anyone whom he has reasonable grounds to suspect is guilty of it.
POLICE ONLY
can arrest anyone if
1. reasonable grounds to suspect an arrestable offence has been committed (so he does not need to know it has) and arrest anyone he has reasonable grounds to suspect of committing it
2. Is about to commit an arrestable offence or anyone he has reasonable grounds to suspect is about to commit an arrestable offence.
Number 2 above is a preventative arrest power such as in operations following a team of armed bank raiders.
The Police can take them out on the way to commit the offence, or even in the planning stage to protect the public before the act is finalised.
Dont get arrest powers and requirements to stop confused as they are complete and utterly nothing to do with each other.
edc said:
As an aside when was the last update to PACE?
Recently. There was an ammendment to PACE in January this year which revised some powers of arrest including them in Section 24(2) PACE as arrestable offences and taking them out of the offences with powers of arrest attached. These were Driving whilst disqualified, failing to stop for Police officer in uniform, leaving the scene of an injury road accident.
Also another ammendment in April which took account of and reduced the level of authorisations for searches within custody and other such powers from Superintendent authority to Inspector authority.
These were all to do with the codes of practice in relation to arrest, detention, interview and identification procedurs Codes A to D PACE 1984.
This is a very complex area of law and is not easy to explain. Even some Police officers do not understand it properly or even know a lot of it. That is understandable as it is a very large volume of law.
I know a lot of it as I have just studied for an exam, but there are parts that I do not know without refering to the books.
Custody officers (Sgt rank) are probably the most up to date with Codes of practice because they live with them every day and with every customer they accomodate
Even the Superintendent asks the custody officer for advice when it is needed!madcop said:
VESSEL includes hovercraft (So the Police can stop Glastonbury bound hovercraft too
So all in all vehicles, vessels and hovercraft attending Glastonbury this year can be stopped randomly under Road Traffic Act powers to check driving licences.
Glad that some BIB have a good sense of humour Madcop
Are you sure that they dont need to search you for whacky backy though, or do you just have a strange fetish for hovercrafts?! Not the first vehicle that springs to my mind to be honest, but I will have some of what you are having! You know, its really refreshing to see yet again the posts from Madcop - nothing more than just explaining the legal situation and our / BiB rights in certain situations....
Not sure if this would work though, but cant help thinking that there should be some sort of teaching of these rules and regulations to ordinary people to clear up any rumours / crap / misinformation that tends to circulate....
On the reverse side, might mean that people are more cocky with the BiB, which wouldnt necessarily be a step forward though..
Cheers,
Paul
Not sure if this would work though, but cant help thinking that there should be some sort of teaching of these rules and regulations to ordinary people to clear up any rumours / crap / misinformation that tends to circulate....
On the reverse side, might mean that people are more cocky with the BiB, which wouldnt necessarily be a step forward though..
Cheers,
Paul
pbrettle said:
You know, its really refreshing to see yet again the posts from Madcop - nothing more than just explaining the legal situation and our / BiB rights in certain situations....
Not sure if this would work though, but cant help thinking that there should be some sort of teaching of these rules and regulations to ordinary people to clear up any rumours / crap / misinformation that tends to circulate....
On the reverse side, might mean that people are more cocky with the BiB, which wouldnt necessarily be a step forward though..
Cheers,
Paul
The rules and regulations are there for all to read and learn. The difference is the Police must know them to apply them properley. 'Civilians' feel hard done by but IMO most simply don't know the rules or laws. Maybe ppl should get off their own back to learn these things? After all, it is for their benefit.
edc said:
The rules and regulations are there for all to read and learn. The difference is the Police must know them to apply them properley. 'Civilians' feel hard done by but IMO most simply don't know the rules or laws. Maybe ppl should get off their own back to learn these things? After all, it is for their benefit.
Sorry, not having a pop or anything - I just know what Joe Public is like and they wont do anything unless they are forced. Maybe something to be included in the written / practical driving test?
Cheers,
Paul
pbrettle said:
The rules and regulations are there for all to read and learn. The difference is the Police must know them to apply them properley. 'Civilians' feel hard done by but IMO most simply don't know the rules or laws. Maybe ppl should get off their own back to learn these things? After all, it is for their benefit.
Sorry, not having a pop or anything - I just know what Joe Public is like and they wont do anything unless they are forced. Maybe something to be included in the written / practical driving test?
Cheers,
Paul
I agree but would Joe Public be prepared to pay more to the Government for them to show you the methods they will use to 'do you'?
The problem with including it in the test is that laws will invariably change just as driving has changed and some people are driving to outdated regulations.
Another problem I envisage is that ppl simply don't like to be forced to do something. They would much rather use their own judgement and make their own decisions. If ppl are too lazy to help themselves why should somebody else help them?
I know one of the problems is that law used to use many archaic words and was worded in such a way to make it difficult to understand. However, the Law Society and other bodies are addressing this so that it is much easier for the man in the street to grasp. Still, if you don't understand, simply ask?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff