A important analysis of using “stop and search” by the police
A crucial analysis of the use of “stop and search” by the police
Police officers have a elementary function to maintain up legislation and order in the society (Smith, G. 2001: 372). They cope with crimes and arrest offenders. They are supposed to be vigilant on a regular basis and monitoring any potential criminal exercise and prevent its incidence the place possible. According toHess, K. M., &Wrobleski, H. M. (2006: 57), they do that by participating in neighborhood patrols and responding to emergency calls. As the complexity of civilization is increasing, so is the level of crimes (Nick, et al.
, 2000: 7). This makes the position of the law enforcement officials even more difficult. In order to understand their objectives, police officers ought to be sure that they create and keep a good relationship with most of the people. This is as a end result of the potential criminals are in the community and information relating to them can also be inside the neighborhood. Again, any profitable policing operation should be accomplished inside the stipulated laws by the state.
Otherwise, any operation carried out outdoors the rules is deemed illegal (Hagan, F. E. 2008: 89). It is also of greatest significance for the police officers to uphold the precept of transparency, consensus, legitimacy and accountability when carrying out their operations (Nick, et al., 2000: 8). The use of the “stop and search” by the police is under section one of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (1984) (Ozin, P. & Spivey, P. 2006: 28). This section provides law enforcement officials powers to stop any individual or car within the public place and conduct a search on the basis of suspicion.
This operation has its successes and its shortcomings. The purpose of this paper is to critically put into perspective the place of this policing operation in the society.
The Police and Criminal Evidence Act (1984) has given cops power to detain offenders, to cease and search people and automobiles in reference to offences whether actual or suspected, to arrest with out warrant for minor offences and to control the habits of persons in public locations (Hagan, F. E. 2008.: 28). With regard to the power to stop and search a person or a car, the purpose is to search for proof to assist the suspicion leveled towards the person. According to Hagan, F. E. (2008: 30), stop and search is done where there could be suspicion of possessing stolen items, firearms, unlawful fireworks, articles suspected to be to be used in committing a criminal act similar to theft, fraud or burglary amongst others. In carrying out such an operation on an individual, clear and affordable suspicion ought to exist to keep away from subjecting innocent folks to embarrassments and anxiety. This is categorically contained in the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (1984) section one (Bevan, V., &Lidstone, K. W.1985: 29). Police officers are supposed to be guided by the provisions within the Act (Great Britain. Home Office, 2012: 17). However, that is far from the truth. Critical look at the cease and search operations reveal that although one method or the other useful in controlling legal actions, it has pitfalls that want correct considerations.
Discretion has been recognized as one of many key parts in a good policing operation (Norris, C., et al., 1992: 113; Nick et al., 2000: 21). However, discretion so far as police stop and search practices are concerned has been questioned. First and foremost, allow us to have a look at the problem of the legitimacy in the stop and search policing. There are three fundamental questions that we need to ask ourselves with regard to legitimacy of this policing. First, we have to ask ourselves how do cops resolve who to cease and search? Secondly, which factors immediate the police officers to hold out stops and searches of the public? Finally, which components form the premise for the affordable suspicion that underpin the cease and search on a selected individual? Police officers have been accused of conducting stop and search operations discriminatorily (Browling, B. & Philips, C., 2007: 965). In Whales and England, it has been reported that each time there is an alarm and want to hold out a public cease and search operation, a black particular person is seven times more more doubtless to be searched than a white individual. If this is the case then, the police officers make the operation illegitimate in phrases of its effectiveness (Miller, J. 2000: 21). The blacks, regardless of whether or not they’re law-abiding and harmless or in any other case, really feel weak and alienated. Miller, J. (2000: 21-23) argues that awhite one who is a potential felony might survive detection just because the level of reasonable suspicion on him or her is low compared to that connected to the black counterpart. It is crucial to say that in accordance with the labeling theory of criminology, constant application of stigmatizing label on the blacks may stimulate the deviant conduct in in any other case law-abiding people (Hagan, E., 2008: 116-118).
The energy within the Act stipulates that before a cease and search is finished, a police officer ought to have cheap suspicion on the suspect (Nick et al., 2000: 4-6). Based on the anomaly of the affordable suspicion, it is anticipated that the interpretation of this necessities will range from one police officer to another. It has been established by way of analysis that this is actually true. Suspicion is rooted within the culture of the police and resistant to alter from external influences (Norris, C., et al., 1992: 189). Therefore, following the requirements of the Act as to the way to develop suspicion isn’t simple. Often, police officers develop suspicion towards folks based mostly on the generalizations. They use a person’s age, look, conduct and location because the landmarks (Delsol, R. 2006: 48). This generalization types the roots for alienating some members of the common public. They assume that younger men are the prime suspects for any felony exercise. As already mentioned, it turns into even worse when you are a black and residing in poor elements of the region in Whales and England (Nick, et al. 2000: 6). Here, we again ask; does being young increase your probabilities of committing a crime? No. Being younger is not a motivating factor! Do black people turn into potential criminals just because they’re black? No. This notion has been perpetuated by the racist perspective that typically plagues the world. In the same manner, being poor or residing in a poor estate doesn’t make one qualify to be a potential criminal. It just isn’t a motivating issue on its own. Therefore, police officers’ ways of creating the theme of reasonable suspicion require correct understanding. Clarification has to be made in the Act as to whether, and to what extent is cease and search policing is appropriate (Nick, et al., 2000 26). In view of this, cheap suspicion for cease and search encounters may be obtained from the next: if the particular person matches the outline given of the suspect, if the individual behaves suspiciously, if the individual is out at uncommon time like at night time or if the individual is present in a place associated with the crime(Stone, V., & Pettigrew, N. 2000: 142).
Though stipulated in a authorized frame, public stops and searches have been carried out in an unlawful manner. Persons have been subjected to embarrassing searches in public (Evans, J. M. 1990: 54). Sometimes, false info has been planted on the suspect to find a way to have him or her charged and prosecuted illegally (Nick et a., 2000: 29). Often, when law enforcement officials are on patrol on the scene of crime, efforts are made to incriminate somebody. In such circumstances, an harmless individual suffers unlawfully within the arms of the police officers who’re alleged to safeguard the rights of such a person. As already talked about, stops and searches operations are carried out disproportionately. This is evidenced by the statics obtained in Whales and England (Browling, B., & Philips, C. 2007: 154). Racism and ethnicity is rife in these operations. According to Browling, B & Philips, C (2007: 154), stunning statistics present that a black is seven instances likely to be stopped and searched than a white. An Asian is twice prone to be stopped and searched that a white counterpart. The bitter reality is that the identical development as endured regardless of numerous debates to vary it.It has been established by way of research by FitzGerald (1999: 42) that calls from the public had contribution in the disproportionality observed within the cease and searches. Bias within the suspect description can be liable for disproportionate stops and searches based on Browling, B., & Philips, C. (2007: 157). He argues that almost all descriptions made in incidences of robbery suit members of the minority communities. However, this can be a much disputed view as a result of it borders on ethnicity. This view however although, cops don’t use description data given however use race to suspect an offender. This is typical ethnicity in policing. It typically damages the relations inside and between communities. It is essential to note that if the policing is perceived unfair, then its legitimacy shall be significantly undermined and co-operation of the public with the police and willingness to obey the legislation will be decreased (Terris, B. J. 1997: 93).
Public confidence is indispensable in determining the success and legitimacy of stops and searches. It is built upon the belief that stops and searches are used pretty and successfully. This is the center of the precept of policing by consent. It encourages the basic public to co-operate with and give help to the police. According to Janet, B & Chan, L (1999: 13), if police handled people including offenders with respect so as to reduce fear, then the level of co-operation between them and the community would enhance. As already said, one of the things that make the operation legitimate in the eyes of the basic public is the police determination on who to cease. Stone and Pettigrew (2000) recommend that police officers ought to solely cease people for genuine and good causes. In addition, they should not goal those that they feel like however goal the “real criminals”. Public stops and searches which are deemed inappropriate because they are primarily based on unfavorable stereotyping constitute harassment.
The method during which public stops and searches are carried can be of nice concern. It is required that a police officer should introduce himself or herself to the suspect and clearly state the reason for stopping the person (Nick et al., 2000: 29). According to Nick et al (2000 29) when a search is important, the individual ought to be frisked in a dignified manner. If necessary, the person can only be requested to remove the outer clothes only such as a coat. If an in-depth search is critical the place the person may be requested to take away all his or her garments, then the particular person must be taken to police custody and search be carried out in privacy. For such kind of a search, a police officer of the same gender as the suspect shall be involved.This constitutes respect to the particular person upon whom the search is completed. The outcomes of the search also wants to be communicated to the particular person accurately and as quickly as potential to alleviate extreme anxiety (Zander, M. 1985: 27). In all this course of, a police officer should remain well mannered even when the scenario appears difficult to handle. If this easy requirement just isn’t adopted, the public lose confidence in the stop and search policing operation. Distrust normally follows and finally, co-operation is misplaced between the cops and the members of the common public (Nick et al 2000: 32).
It is important to look at a few of the attainable sources of suspicion. One of the factors that give oblique details about a suspect is age. As already talked about above, law enforcement officials are tremendously prompted to cease young people because they’re associated with “causing trouble” typically (Nick, et al., 2000: 19). Furthermore, it is extra probably that youths found on the road very early in the morning, whether or not walking or driving, shall be stopped and searched. In addition, youths discovered driving out of town at night time got stopped on the suspicion that the driver could be drunk (Nick, et al., 2000: 20). It becomes even worse if the youths are found in teams. This concentrate on younger individuals with regard to cease and searches has been acknowledged by Stone and Pettigrew (2000: 187). This generalization just isn’t applicable as a outcome of there may be nothing that hyperlinks a teenager directly to being a criminal. Unless cops apply the provisions in the Act that stipulate that age shouldn’t be used as a foundation to develop suspicion, the problem is inclined to prevail.
Moreover, how an individual is dressed has been a prompting issue to conduct a cease and search by the cops. Nick, et al (2000: 20) mention that folks present in dark garments at night time were deemed to be potential candidates to commit a criminal act. They had been thus liable to stop and search operations by the police officers. Does this then imply that people shouldn’t wear dark clothes at night? According to the police officers, those who wear dark garments at evening achieve this in an attempt to hide their identity. They additionally argue that such folks achieve this to make it onerous to note them at evening. Accordingly, they assume that such folks could presumably be out to commit against the law or have already committed one and therefore making an attempt to flee. Others types of adornment have additionally been labeled as suspicious. According to Stone and Pettigrew, (2000: 187), white individuals on skinhead hairstyle and blacks on dreadlocks obtained stopped and searched regularly. This is as a end result of such kinds are related to criminals. However, that is again primarily based on generalization and should not form basis for creating cheap suspicion on a suspect in accordance with the PACE Act.
The type of the automotive pushed additionally sometimes gave grounds for suspicion. Police officers report being prompted to stop old cars because they suspected a possibility of it having defects or lacking insurance or highway tax (Nick, et al., 2000: 21-22). In addition, high-powered cars were targeted because they have been likely to be stolen. In their opinion, police officers classify cars which are less more doubtless to be stolen and people that are most prone to theft. Furthermore, high-class vehicles are suspected to be ferrying unlawful items. This is predicated on the idea that felony are tempted to use flashy automobiles to decrease their probability of being nabbed by police. In addition, automotive thieves steal high-class cars more usually than their low-class counterparts. But primarily based on these assumptions, the cops run a danger of stopping and searching the innocent. This turns into a giant drawback if one will be subjected to constant stops and searches because of the model of their automotive. According to Nick et al. (2000: 22), blacks or Asian individuals who possessed expensive cars would be stopped a lot more in comparison with the whites. By extension, some folks had been compelled to vary the model of their cars in an attempt to keep away from fixed harassments from the law enforcement officials. The results of this generalized operationpropagated negative stereotyping on the minority ethnic groups. It meant that these individuals from minority teams didn’t hold good jobs and therefore could not afford expensive vehicles. This generates resentment and bad relationship between the public and the police officers.
Police officers often did congruency assessment on the individual in an try to ascertain and develop affordable suspicion on the suspect (Webber, L. 2013: 47). They in contrast the motive force of the car and the category of that car. If no congruency existed in their own opinion, the driver would be suspected to be a thief. If this driver is actually the proprietor of this car, it goes with out saying that she or he will feel offended to the extreme. This additionally might happen if a person was present in a spot that doesn’t swimsuit him or her. For occasion, law enforcement officials report creating suspicion on a person present in a faculty compound and not dressed like a scholar (Nick, et al., 2000: 24). This usually occurs as a outcome of cops have learnt to affiliate sure locations with certain individuals. They have assumed that there are locations that are completely for the whites and others for the blacks. This implies that if a person of the white ethnic group is found in some areas the place blacks are predominant, the first instinct to the law enforcement officials is that such an individual is doing unlawful drug enterprise. Similarly, if a black person is found round premises which would possibly be identified to belong solely to whites, the instinct of the police officers would take such a person as a suspect intending to steal. This assumption is mistaken as a outcome of it promotes ethnicity and alienating to a large diploma based on Nick et al (2000: 34).
Police officers additionally depend on suspicious activities to develop suspicion on a person (Weitzer, R., &Tuch, S. A. 2004: 59). The argument is that such behavior like checking locks or trying inside vehicles are suspicious activities. People hanging or loitering round obtained stopped and questioned regularly on their intentions (Nick, et al., 2000: 25). At a hotspot of crime, these observations may be relied upon as sources of cheap suspicion. But one may ask; what constitutes a suspicious exercise in driving? Perhaps a police officer may observe the way by which the automobile is driven aimlessly. Also, dashing the automotive on the sight of law enforcement officials might recommend a criminal intent. This can be a dependable supply of suspicion too. Also, taking unusual routes could counsel one thing sinister such as avoiding a police stop and search operation. In addition, automobiles which might be parked in secluded places generate suspicion. A police officer may be prompted to carry out a search on such a scenario.
Moreover, law enforcement officials are often prompted to stop a person on the grounds of furtive habits (Nick, et al., 2000: 39). Furtive behavior is described as avoiding being seen, trying to hide an object, making an attempt to run away or feeling nervous in the presence of police officers. These elusive types of conduct can arguably be grounds to develop affordable suspicion. To a point, a police officer will be right in deciphering them to suit his or her opinions. For occasion, a suspect would try as much as potential to keep away from being seen. In the identical means, if somebody is in possession of an object that is illegal, stolen or meant for committing against the law, then she or he will try to hide it. In addition, an individual will attempt to run away from law enforcement officials if he or she is conscious of that they’ve done something that may result in their arrest. Again, cops are inclined to assume that one can be nervous of their presence if he or she is guilty. This is how police officers might need to justify using furtive behavior to develop suspicion on a person.
However, there is a limitation to using furtive conduct as a ground to develop suspicion (Williams, B. N., &Stah, M.2008: 73). This is as a result of furtive habits could also be culturally or socially motivated generally. For instance, culture may dictate when and to what extent is making a watch contact acceptable. Feeling uneasy in the presence of police officers can happen even when the person feels that there is nothing to cover. This is associated with the worry of being stopped or searched (Stone and Pettigrew, 2000: 192). A particular person might opt to run away as an alternative of being subjected to police search even when there is no affordable ground to concern. By extension, some fear being incriminated falsely by police.
In the study done by Nick, et al., (2000: 24), it was established that police officers usually targeted the particular person that they already knew. On receiving the suspect description, most police officers attach it to a prolific offender who’s the current goal of the police surveillance. Furthermore, in accordance with the Stone and Pettigrew (2000: 188), cops focused individuals who had a legal report prior to now. This is actually in opposition to the provisions in the PACE Act that clearly states that an individual cannot be suspected due to their previous historical past. Some folks have also reported having been stopped and questioned simply because they had been discovered walking with a person identified to the police. This is offending to say the least. If an individual is suspected to be a felony simply because she or he has been involved in felony exercise in the past without cheap suspicion is tantamount to police harassment. It also makes a reformed felony to constantly feel guilty and develop tactics to outlive in such an surroundings. Some may turn out to be hostile while others may revert to committing crimes (Smith, G., 2009: 253). They will take it that the society does not trust in them anymore and that they are undesirable. As a outcome, an even bigger drawback result due to the unreasonable cops.
Time and place also usually shaped the idea for the police officers to develop suspicion on an individual. Findinga particular person at a specific place and at a particular time of the day might give law enforcement officials a basis to suspect that person (Evans, J. M., 1990: 439). For instance, if a particular person is discovered on the website of crime at night, the first impression that the police officer on patrol will get is that the particular person may need been concerned within the committing of the crime. Again, if an individual is found in a automotive in an isolated place at night time, then that turns into the idea of creating an affordable suspicion to stop and search such an individual. However, it isn’t obvious that if someone is discovered ina certain place and at a particular time she or he is as much as some felony exercise. Stone and Pettigrew (2000: 162) give an accountof the sufferings of the blacks and Asians in England who worked in fast meals outlets, minicab drivers, shift workers at factories or as postmen. Their work required them to stroll or drive at evening often. On such occasions, they often received stopped and searched to the disappointments of the officers as a outcome of they never found anything suspicious with them. This is to overrule the notion that being found on the road at uncommon time does not necessarily mean you are a suspect.
Police officers also depend on the descriptive data given by a sufferer or witness about the suspect. This data ought to be as correct as attainable (Webber, L., 2013: 78). It helps the police officers have a general thought on who to stop and search and who not to. However, this does not all the time occur because the knowledge given is most likely not reliable. The caller might not have the ability to give a correct description of the suspect. In addition, the particular person receiving the knowledge might document incomplete information that does not help a lot. In such instances, police officers are left to use their method of generalizing (Nick et al., 2000: 32).
In addition, intelligence info is often given to the police officers on the bottom by the intelligence company (Gelman, A., et al., 2007: 815). The information is meant to help them to make rational selections and know the place and when to do intensive cease and search operations. The data given to the police officers ought to be accurate and clear to assist in the operations. The intelligence info could additionally be on the forms of crimes that are predominant in a specific place, the crime hotspots, both seasonal and long-term as well as the data concerning the well-known criminals (Miller, J., 2000: 49). Intelligence info can tremendously influence how the police officers carry out their patrols because they tend to direct most of their effort in the course of hotspots (Nick et al., 2000: 34). But it’s not surprising that most cops tend to make use of generalization and stereotypes to make stops and searches instead of counting on the given intelligence information.
In conclusion, stop and search policing is an efficient policing approach utilized by police if carried out in accordance with the supplied rules. Some of the problems that arise within the follow of cease and looking in the policing service need evaluation. The most necessary of all is the issue of discrimination and disproportionality in these stops and searches. As we now have seen, this often results in poor relationship throughout the community. People lack belief and confidence in the police providers. Some individuals feel weak when they’re subjected to unlawful stops and searches. According to Weitzer, R. and Tuch, S. (2004: 321), police unit should discover probably the most suitable approach to conduct stops and searches in a manner that yield many optimistic outcomes and reduce unfavorable result.
Behan, T. R. (1988). Stop and Frisk: A Clarification. American Bar Association Journal, 54(10), 968-969.
Bevan, V., &Lidstone, K. W. (1985).A Guide to the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. London: Butterworths.
Browling, B., & Philips, C. (2007). Disproportionate and discriminatory: reviewing the evidence on police cease and search. The Modern Law Review, 70(6), 936-961.
Delsol, R. (2006). Institutional Racism, the Police Stop and Search: A Comparative Study of cease and Search within the UK and USA. New York: University of Warwick.
Evans, J. M. (1990). Police Power to Stop with out Arrest.The Modern Law Review, 33(4), 438-441.
Gelman, A., Fagan, J., & Kiss, A. (2007).An Analysis of the New York City Police Department’s “Stop-and-Frisk” Policy in the Context of Claims of Racial Bias.Journal of the American Statistical Association, 102(479), 813-823.
Hagan, F. E. (2008). Introduction to criminology: theories, methods, and felony habits (6th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications.
Hess, K. M., &Wrobleski, H. M. (2006) Police Operations: Theory and Practice. (4th Ed.). Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.
Janet, B., & Chan, L. (1999).Governing Police Practice: Limits of the New Accountability.The British Journal of Sociology, 50(2), 251-270.
Miller, J. (2000). Profiling populations obtainable for stops and searches. London: Home office, Policing and Reducing Crime Unit, Research, Development and Statistics Directorate.
Nick, B., Paul, Q. & Joel, M. (2000). Police Stops, Decision-making and Practice. Police ResearchSeries.Paper 130.
Norris, C., Fielding, N., Kemp, C., & Fielding, J. (1992). Black and Blue: An Analysis of the Influence of Race on Being Stopped by the Police. The British Journal of Sociology, 43(2), 207-224.
Ozin, P., Norton, H., & Spivey, P. (2006). PACE: A Practical Guide to the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Smith, G (2001) ‘Why Don’t More People Complain Against the Police?’European Journal of Criminology.6 (3) 249-266
Stone, V., & Pettigrew, N. (2000).The views of the public on stops and searches. London: Home Office, Policing and Reducing Crime Unit, Research, Development and Statistics Directorate.
Terris, B. J. (1997). The Role of the Police.Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 374(24), 58-69.
Tomaskovic, D., Wright, C. P., Czaja, R., & Miller, K. (2006).Self-reports of Police Speeding Stops by Race: Results from the North Carolina Reverse Record Check Survey.Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 22(4), 279-297.
Webber, L. (2013). Stop and Search: Police Power in Global Context. Abingdon, U.K.: Routledge.
Weitzer, R., &Tuch, S. A. (2004).Race and Perceptions of Police Misconduct.Social Problems, 51(3), 305-325.
Williams, B. N., &Stah, M. (2008). An Analysis Of police Traffic Stops And Searches in Kentucky: A Mixed Methods Approach Offering Heuristic And Practical Implications. Policy Sciences, 41(3), 221-243.
Willis, C. F. (1997). The Use, Effectiveness, and the Impact of Police Search powers. London: Home Office.
Zander, M. (1985). The Police And Criminal Evidence Act 1984. London: Sweet & Maxwell Police Review Publishing Corporation.