A street corner education: Stop and search, trust, and gendered social norms

Drawing on work into procedural justice and legal socialisation, we test the empirical link between experiences of stop and search and the extent to which male adolescents hold negative gendered beliefs regarding sexuality and intimate partner relations. We reason that procedurally unfair stop/searches can signal to young people that it is ‘ok’ to abuse power at an interpersonal level. Using data from a survey of male Londoners aged 14-16, we find support for the notion that unjust stop and search experiences are associated with lower levels of trust in the police, higher levels of involvement in and exposure to gang-related activities, and believing it is acceptable to harass females in public space and control one’s intimate partner.

3. The Powers to Stop, Search, and Arrest

The police have extensive statutory powers to stop and search and to arrest a person in connection with the investigation of a criminal offence under various statutes, including the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE 1984), the Terrorism Act 2000, the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, and the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act 2005. This chapter examines the powers of stop and search before arrest; powers of arrest under PACE 1984; powers to search a person and his property after arrest; the power to grant street bail; and the right to liberty under Article 5 European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR 1950).

2. Stop and search

This chapter examines the powers of the police to stop and search people in the context of an initial discussion of police culture and discretion in general. The development of greater powers over the last 35 years since the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) was introduced is charted. The chapter considers whether stop and search is racially discriminatory; the constraints and controls on the exercise of discretion; and the impact of stop-search powers. It argues that the working assumptions based on ‘suspiciousness’—i.e. hunch, incongruity, and stereotyping on the basis of types of people, previous records, and so forth—still play as important a part in influencing the exercise of discretion as do legal constraints. This is all true even when responding to citizen reports of suspected offences.

The role of prejudicial stereotypes in the formation of suspicion: An examination of operational procedures in stop and search practices

One of the current and visible controversies in UK policing that challenges the heart and foundation of the principle of law is arguably the apparent disproportionate use of stop and search powers involving ethnic minority communities. Prior research found that differential exposure by the police to certain types of suspected offenders led to the development of cognitive scripts that operate as stereotypes and which may play a role in informing suspicions concerning police stops and searches. Focusing on whether police officers use negative stereotypes to inform suspicions when conducting stops and searches, this study examined more than 2,100 stop and search records held by a police force in England, in addition to conducting 20 semi-structured interviews with frontline serving police officers from the same force. It was found that the use of stop and search powers is consistent with: (a) the use of stereotypes with respect to age, appearance, and social class; and (b) the disproportionate recorded use of stop and search powers involving Black, Asian and Mixed communities. The implications of these findings are discussed.

12. The Investigation of Crime

This chapter examines the investigation of crime. It begins with a discussion of how law enforcement is organized, exploring the role of agencies such as the police, the National Crime Agency, and HM Revenue and Customs, amongst others. It then critically considers police powers around stop and search and arrest and detention, before moving on to examine the rights of suspects in police custody, particularly in relation to interview.