A critical evaluation of the use of “stop and search” by the police Essay

A critical evaluation of the use of cut off and case by the jurisprudenceIntroduction natural law legal philosophy officers gift a fundamental function to maintain law and order in the rules of order (Smith, G. 2001 372). They deal with crimes and face offenders. They atomic number 18 supposed to be vigilant each(prenominal) the time and monitoring any authority criminal activity and continue its occurrence where come-at-able. According toHess, K. M., &Wrobleski, H. M. (2006 57), they do this by taking part in community patrols and responding to emergency calls. As the complexity of civilization is increasing, so is the level of crimes ( ding, et al., 2000 7). This drags the role of the law of nature officers even more challenging. In order to ca-ca their quarryives, legal philosophy officers should make sure that they create and maintain a swell family with the general commonplace. This is because the potential criminals be in the community and cultivatio n realiseing them is withal within the community. Again, any successful policing exploit must be d wizard within the stipulated regulations by the state. Otherwise, any operation make forth(p) the guidelines is deemed unlawful (Hagan, F. E. 2008 89). It is also of greatest importance for the patrol officers to uphold the article of belief of transp arency, consensus, legitimacy and accountability when carrying out their trading operations (Nick, et al., 2000 8). The use of the diaphragm and face by the constabulary is under theatrical role one of the guard and wicked induction mo (1984) (Ozin, P. & Spivey, P. 2006 28). This section gives law officers powers to hitch any mortal or vehicle in the cosmos place and conduct a seek on the foundation garment of perplexity. This operation has its successes and its shortcomings. The aim of this paper is to critically put into perspective the place of this policing operation in the society. The Police and flagitio us Evidence come (1984) has addicted law officers power to detain offenders, to hold the line and wait deal and vehicles in connection with offences whether actual or doubted, to arrest without warrant for minor offences and to control the manner of someones in universal places (Hagan, F. E. 2008. 28). With reckon to the power to snap off and turn up a soul or a vehicle, the aim is to try for evidence to support the suspiciousness leveled against the soulfulness. According to Hagan, F. E. (2008 30), embarrass and search is done where thither is suspense of possessing stolen unassailables, firearms, illegal fireworks, articles suspicioused to be for use in directting a criminal act much(prenominal)(prenominal) as theft, fraud or burglary among others. In carrying out such(prenominal) an operation on an individual, clear and fairish distrust should exist to avoid subjecting innocent well be produced deal 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 in the Act (Great Britain. topographic point Office, 2012 17). However, this is far from the truth. Critical look at the closing and search operations reveal that though in some means servingful in controlling criminal activities, it has pitfalls that need fitting considerations. discernment has been recognized as one of the key elements in a good policing operation ( noris,C., et al., 1992 113 Nick et al., 2000 21). However, discretion as far as practice of law divulge and search practices are concerned has been questioned. First and fore most(prenominal), let us look at the issue of the legitimacy in the stop and search policing. There are three fundamental questions that we need to deal ourselves with forecast to legitimacy of this policing. First, we need to ask ourselves how do jurisprudence officers decide who to stop and search? Secondly, which factors prompt the constabulary officers to carry out simoleons and searches of the public? Finally, which factors form the basis for the credible hesitation that underpin the stop and search on a picky individual? Police officers have been charge of conducting stop and search operations discriminatorily (Browling, B. & Philips, C., 2007 965). In Whales and England, it has been propounded that whenever there is an disheartenment and need to carry out a public stop and search operation, a discolor person is seven propagation more promising to be searched than a gaberdine person. If this is the case then, the natural law officers make the operation il authoritative in terms of its hard-hittingness (Miller, J. 2000 21). The blacks, regard little of whether they are observant and innocent or otherwise, feel vulnerable and alienated. Miller, J. (2000 21-23) argues that awhite person who is a potential criminal whitethorn sur vive detection simply because the level of healthy distrustfulness on him or her is low compared to that attached to the black counterpart. It is pressing to mention that according to the labeling theory of criminology, constant application of stigmatizing label on the blacks whitethorn stimulate the deviant deportment in otherwise lawful sight (Hagan, E., 2008 116-118). The power in the Act stipulates that before a stop and search is done, a police officer should have reasonable suspicion on the shadowy (Nick et al., 2000 4-6). Based on the ambiguity of the reasonable suspicion, it is judge that the interpretation of this requirements bequeath vary from one police officer to a nonher. It has been conventional by dint of research that this is actually true. Suspicion is rooted in the shade of the police and resistant to change from external influences (Norris,C., et al., 1992 189). Therefore, following the requirements of the Act as to how to develop suspicion is not ea sy. Often, police officers develop suspicion against populate ground on the generalizations. They use a persons age, appearance, behavior and location as the landmarks (Delsol, R. 2006 48). This generalization forms the roots for alienating some members of the public. They take on that teenaged men are the prime suspects for any criminal activity. As already mentioned, it becomes even worse if you are a black and spirit in short parts of the region in Whales and England (Nick, et al. 2000 6). Here, we again ask does being young increase your chances of committing a crime? No. existence young is not a motivating factor Do black flock become potential criminals simply because they are black? No. This notion has been perpetuated by the racist attitude that generally plagues the world. In the resembling manner, being poor or living in a poor estate does not make one qualify to be a potential criminal. It is not a motivating factor on its own. Therefore, police officers ways of developing the theme of reasonable suspicion require proper understanding. Clarification has to be do in the Act as to whether, and to what completion is stop and search policing is acceptable (Nick, et al., 2000 26). In view of this, reasonable suspicion for stop and search encounters can be obtained from the following if the person fits the comment given of the suspect, if the person behaves suspiciously, if the person is out at unusual time like at night or if the person is found in a place associated with the crime( treasure, V., & Pettigrew, N. 2000 142). Though stipulated in a legal frame, public stops and searches have been carried out in an unlawful manner. Persons have been subjected to ungainly searches in public (Evans,J.M. 1990 54). Sometimes, false info has been planted on the suspect in order to have him or her charged and prosecuted illegally (Nick et a., 2000 29). Often, when police officers are on patrol at the scene of crime, efforts are make to incriminat e someone. In such circumstances, an innocent person suffers unlawfully in the hands of the police officers who are supposed to safeguard the rights of such a person. As already mentioned, stops and searches operations are carried out disproportionately. This is manifest 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), shocking statistics show that a black is seven times likely to be halt and searched than a white. An Asian is twice likely to be halt and searched that a white counterpart. The bitter truth is that the alike(p) trend as persisted despite numerous debates to change it.It has been established through studies by FitzGerald (1999 42) that calls from the public had contribution in the disproportionality observed in the stop and searches. Bias in the suspect description can also be responsible for disproportionate stops and searches a ccording to Browling, B., & Philips, C. (2007 157). He argues that most descriptions made in incidences of robbery suit members of the minority communities. However, this is a much con hunt down view because it borders on ethnicity. This view notwithstanding though, police officers do not use description teaching given but use hightail it to suspect an offender. This is typical ethnicity in policing. It lots damages the relations within and amidst communities. It is important to note that if the policing is perceived unfair, then its legitimacy exit be greatly undermined and co-operation of the public with the police and leaveingness to obey the law will be decreased (Terris, B. J. 1997 93). Public confidence is indispensable in ascertain the success and legitimacy of stops and searches. It is built upon the trust that stops and searches are used fairly and effectively. This is the center of the principle of policing by consent. It encourages the public to co-operate with and give assistance to the police. According to Janet, B & Chan, L (1999 13), if police treated people including offenders with respect in order to reduce fear, then the level of co-operation between them and the community would improve. As already stated, one of the things that make the operation legitimate in the eyes of the public is the police decision on who to stop. fossa and Pettigrew (2000) raise that police officers should yet stop people for genuine and good reasons. In addition, they should not sharpen those that they feel like but target the real criminals. Public stops and searches that are deemed in suppress because they are base on negative stereotyping constitute harassment. The manner in which public stops and searches are carried is also of great concern. It is required that a police officer should introduce himself or herself to the suspect and clearly state the reason for lemniscus the individual (Nick et al., 2000 29). According to Nick et al (2000 29) w hen a search is necessary, the person should be frisked in a dignified manner. If necessary, the person can only be asked to channelise the outer clothes only such as a coat. If an in-depth search is necessary where the person may be asked to remove all his or her clothes, then the person has to be taken to police custody and search be conducted in privacy. For such kind of a search, a police officer of the same gender as the suspect will be manifold.This constitutes respect to the person upon whom the search is done. The turn ups of the search should also be communicated to the person accurately and as soon as contingent to alleviate excessive anxiety (Zander, M. 1985 27). In all this process, a police officer must remain polite even when the situation appears ambitious to handle. If this simple requirement is not followed, the public lose confidence in the stop and search policing operation. Distrust usually follows and finally, co-operation is lost between the police officer s and the members of the public (Nick et al 2000 32). It is important to look at some of the potential sources of suspicion. One of the factors that give indirect information about a suspect is age. As already mentioned above, police officers are greatly prompted to stop young people because they are associated with causing trouble generally (Nick, et al., 2000 19). Furthermore, it is more likely that youths found on the road very early in the morning, whether pass or driving, will be stopped and searched. In addition, youths found driving out of the city at night got stopped on the suspicion that the suitr might be drunk (Nick, et al., 2000 20). It becomes even worse if the youths are found in groups. This focus on young people with regard to stop and searches has been recognized by Stone and Pettigrew (2000 187). This generalization is not appropriate because there is nothing that links a young person now to being a criminal. Unless police officers apply the provisions in t he Act that stipulate that age should not be used as a basis to develop suspicion, the problem is inclined to prevail. Moreover, how a person is milled has been a prompting factor to conduct a stop and search by the police officers. Nick, et al (2000 20) mention that people found in dark clothes at night were deemed to be potential candidates to commit a criminal act. They were thus liable to stop and search operations by the police officers. Does this then fee-tail that people should not sham dark clothes at night? According to the police officers, those who stomach dark clothes at night do so in an strain to conceal their identity. They also argue that such people do so to make it hard to notice them at night. Accordingly, they assume that such people could be out to commit a crime or have already committed one and therefore hard to escape. Others styles of adornment have also been labeled as suspicious. According to Stone and Pettigrew, (2000 187), white people on skinhea d hairstyle and blacks on dreadlocks got stopped and searched frequently. This is because such styles are associated with criminals. However, this is again based on generalization and should not form basis for developing reasonable suspicion on a suspect according to the PACE Act. The eccentric of the car driven also sometimes gave causal agency for suspicion. Police officers report being prompted to stop old cars because they suspect a possibility of it having defects or lacking insurance or road tax (Nick, et al., 2000 21-22). In addition, high-voltage cars were targeted because they were likely to be stolen. In their opinion, police officers classify cars that are less likely to be stolen and those that are most susceptible to theft. Furthermore, high-class cars are suspected to be ferrying illegal items. This is based on the trust that criminal are tempted to use flashy cars to lower their probability of being nabbed by police. In addition, car thieves steal high-class car s more a good deal than their low-class counterparts. But based on these assumptions, the police officers run a risk of stopping and searching the innocent. This becomes a big problem if one will be subjected to constant stops and searches because of the model of their car. According to Nick et al. (2000 22), blacks or Asian people who possessed expensive cars would be stopped a lot more compared to the whites. By extension, some people had been hale to change the model of their cars in an attempt to avoid constant harassments from the police officers. The result of this generalized operationpropagated negative stereotyping on the minority ethnic groups. It meant that these people from minority groups did not hold good jobs and therefore could not bear up under expensive cars. This generates resentment and bad relationship between the public and the police officers. Police officers very much did congruency assessment on the individual in an attempt to establish and develop rea sonable suspicion on the suspect (Webber, L. 2013 47). They compared the driver of the vehicle and the class of that vehicle. If no congruency existed in their own opinion, the driver would be suspected to be a thief. If this driver is actually the owner of this vehicle, it goes without apothegm that he or she will feel offended to the extreme. This also could cash in ones chips if a person was found in a place that does not suit him or her. For instance, police officers report developing suspicion on a person found in a school increase and not dressed like a student (Nick, et al., 2000 24). This usually slip aways because police officers have learnt to associate certain places with certain people. They have assumed that there are places that are exclusively for the whites and others for the blacks. This means that if a person of the white ethnic group is found in some areas where blacks are predominant, the get-go instinct to the police officers is that such a person is doing illegal drug business. Similarly, if a black person is found around premises that are known to belong exclusively to whites, the instinct of the police officers would take such a person as a suspect intending to steal. This assumption is unlawful because it promotes ethnicity and alienating to a large degree according to Nick et al (2000 34). Police officers also rely on suspicious activities to develop suspicion on an individual (Weitzer,R., &Tuch,S.A. 2004 59). The argument is that such behavior like checking locks or looking inside cars are suspicious activities. People hanging or loitering around got stopped and questioned frequently on their intentions (Nick, et al., 2000 25). At a hot spot of crime, these observations can be relied upon as sources of reasonable suspicion. But one may ask what constitutes a suspicious activity in driving? peradventure a police officer may observe the manner in which the vehicle is driven aimlessly. Also, speeding the car at the sight of p olice officers may suggest a criminal intent. This can be a reliable source of suspicion too. Also, taking unusual routes may suggest something sinister such as avoiding a police stop and search operation. In addition, cars that are parked in secluded places generate suspicion. A police officer may be prompted to carry out a search on such a situation. Moreover, police officers are often prompted to stop a person on the grounds of backstair behavior (Nick, et al., 2000 39). Furtive behavior is described as avoiding being seen, attempting to hide an object, trying to run away or feeling nervous in the comportment of police officers. These elusive forms of behavior can arguably be grounds to develop reasonable suspicion. To some degree, a police officer will be right in interpreting them to suit his or her opinions. For instance, a suspect would try as much as possible to avoid being seen. In the same way, if someone is in possession of an object that is illegal, stolen or intende d for committing a crime, then he or she will try to hide it. In addition, a person will try to run away from police officers if he or she knows that they have done something that can lead to their arrest. Again, police officers tend to assume that one would be nervous in their presence if he or she is guilty. This is how police officers may want to justify using surreptitious behavior to develop suspicion on a person. However, there is a limitation to using furtive behavior as a ground to develop suspicion (Williams, B. N., &Stah, M.2008 73). This is because furtive behavior may be culturally or socially propel sometimes. For instance, culture may dictate when and to what extent is making an eye finish off appropriate. Feeling uneasy in the presence of police officers can happen even when the person feels that there is nothing to hide. This is associated with the fear of being stopped or searched (Stone and Pettigrew, 2000 192). A person may opt to run away preferably of bein g subjected to police search even when there is no reasonable ground to fear. By extension, some fear being incriminated wrongly by police. In the study done by Nick, et al., (2000 24), it was established that police officers usually targeted the person that they already knew. On receiving the suspect description, most police officers attach it to a prolific offender who is the current target of the police surveillance. Furthermore, according to the Stone and Pettigrew (2000 188), police officers targeted persons who had a criminal record in the past. This is actually against the provisions in the PACE Act that clearly states that a person cannot be suspected because of their past history. Some people have also reported having been stopped and questioned simply because they were found walking with a person known to the police. This is offending to say the least. If a person is suspected to be a criminal just because he or she has been involved in criminal activity in the past wit hout reasonable suspicion is tantamount to police harassment. It also makes a reformed criminal to constantly feel guilty and develop tactics to survive in such an environment. Some may become hostile while others may check to committing crimes (Smith, G., 2009 253). They will take it that the society does not trust in them any longer and that they are unwanted. As a result, a bigger problem result thanks to the unreasonable police officers. Time and place also often formed the basis for the police officers to develop suspicion on an individual. Findinga person at a occurrence place and at a particular time of the day may give police officers a basis to suspect that person (Evans, J. M., 1990 439). For instance, if a person is found at the identify of crime at night, the first impression that the police officer on patrol gets is that the person might have been involved in the committing of the crime. Again, if a person is found in a car in an free place at night, then that bec omes the basis of developing a reasonable suspicion to stop and search such a person. However, it is not frank that if someone is found ina certain place and at a particular time he or she is up to some criminal activity. Stone and Pettigrew (2000 162) give an accountof the sufferings of the blacks and Asians in England who worked in fast food outlets, minicab drivers, shift workers at factories or as postmen. Their work required them to walk or drive at night occasionally. On such occasions, they often got stopped and searched to the disappointments of the officers because they never found anything suspicious with them. This is to overrule the notion that being found on the road at unusual time does not necessarily mean you are a suspect. Police officers also rely on the descriptive information given by a victim or find about the suspect. This information should be as accurate as possible (Webber, L., 2013 78). It helps the police officers have a general idea on who to stop and search and who not to. However, this does not always happen because the information given may not be reliable. The caller may not be able to give a correct description of the suspect. In addition, the person receiving the information may record incomplete information that does not help much. In such instances, police officers are left to use their order of generalizing (Nick et al., 2000 32). In addition, intelligence information is usually given to the police officers on the ground by the intelligence agency (Gelman, A., et al., 2007 815). The information is meant to assist them to make rational decisions and know where and when to do intensive stop and search operations. The information given to the police officers should be accurate and clear to assist in the operations. The intelligence information may be on the types of crimes that are predominant in a particular place, the crime hotspots, both seasonal and long as well as the information regarding the well-known criminals (Miller, J., 2000 49). Intelligence information can greatly influence how the police officers carry out their patrols because they tend to direct most of their effort towards hotspots (Nick et al., 2000 34). But it is not surprising that most police officers tend to use generalization and stereotypes to make stops and searches instead of relying on the given intelligence information. In conclusion, stop and search policing is an effective policing technique used by police if done in consent with the provided regulations. Some of the issues that arise in the practice of stop and searching in the policing service need evaluation. The most important of all is the issue of difference and disproportionality in these stops and searches. As we have seen, this often leads to poor relationship within the community. People lack trust and confidence in the police services. Some people feel vulnerable when they are subjected to unlawful stops and searches. According to Weitzer, R. and Tuch , S. (2004 321), police unit should find the most suitable way to conduct stops and searches in a manner that yield some positive results and minimize negative result.ReferencesBehan,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 stop and search. The Modern Law Review, 70(6), 936-961.Delsol, R. (2006). Institutional Racism, the Police Stop and Search A Comparative Study of stop and Search in the UK and USA. mod York University of Warwick.Evans,J.M. (1990). Police Power to Stop without Arrest.The Modern Law Review, 33(4), 438-441.Gelman,A., Fagan,J., & Kiss,A. (2007).An Analysis of the New York urban center Police Departments Stop-and-Frisk Policy in the Context of Claims of racial Bias.Journal of the American Statistical A ssociation, 102(479), 813-823.Hagan, F. E. (2008). Introduction to criminology theories, methods, and criminal behavior (6th Ed.). Thousand Oaks, Calif. salvia 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 available for stops and searches. London Home office, Policing and Reducing Crime Unit, Research, increase 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 vipers bugloss 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 an d Criminal Evidence Act 1984. Oxford Oxford University Press.Smith, G (2001) Why Dont More People Complain Against the Police?European Journal of Criminology.6 (3) 249-266Stone, 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 go Stops by Race Results from the North Carolina Reverse Record obstructor Survey.Journal of Quantitative Criminology, 22(4), 279-297.Webber, L. (2013). Stop and Search Police Power in ball-shaped 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 Mixe d Methods Approach Offering Heuristic And Practical Implications. Policy Sciences, 41(3), 221-243.Willis, C. F. (1997). The Use, Effectiveness, and the contact of Police Search powers. London Home Office.Zander, M. (1985). The Police And Criminal Evidence Act 1984. London Sweet & Maxwell Police Review print Corporation.Source document