stop and search powers was biased. (Sanders, 1997). Willis studied the Metropolitan
Police in the early 1980’s and discovered that the officers tended to target young males,
especially those who were black. She also noted other groups who were targeted such as
homosexuals, people with long hair or unconventional dress and those who looked poor
or scruffy. (Sanders and Young, 2000). Similarly Smith and Gray (1985) identified four
characteristics which were highly correlated to the probability of being stopped, these
were: age, sex, ownership or use of a vehicle and ethnic group. They also identified
several other weaker factors such as whether or not the person had a job, those of
unconventional appearance and those who drove a particular type of car.
Smith and Gray (1983) found that in the stops they had observed, one third of people
had produced no ‘reasonable suspicion’ to be stopped. In 1985 they stated:
Membership of a demographic group- that is, being for
example, young, male and black- certainly does not
constitute reasonable grounds for suspicion in itself. If
a high proportion of any such group has been stopped,
than as far as that group are concerned it would seem
that the police are failing to use ‘care and discretion’ to
prevent annoyance to innocent persons, since it is fair to
assume that the great majority of any such group are
innocent persons. (Smith and Gray, 1985:86).
There have been a significant amount of studies highlighting the discrimination in the
use of stop and search powers. For example in 1975, 18,907 stop and searches were
carried out in Greater London. 14,000 of these took place over a 2 month period in two
of London’s largest black communities. From these 14,000 stop and searches only 403
resulted in an arrest. (Carter and Coussins, 1991). A survey by Tuck and Southgate in
Moss Side in 1979-80, found that one third of males aged 16- 35 had been stopped,
searched or arrested. (Sanders 1997). In a study by Norris et al in 1986-7, 272 stops in a
borough in London were observed. 28 per cent of the stops were on black people even
though the proportion of black people in the local population was only 10 per cent.
(Sanders, 1997).
In order to try and over come these biases in the use of stop and search by the police,
more controls were introduced through the implementation of the Police and Criminal
Evidence Act 1994. (Sanders, 1997). The Home Office’s Code of Practice for stop and
search devised under PACE rules that:
There must be some objective basis for the suspicion
which can never be supported on the basis of personal
factors alone. The objective factors envisaged include
information received, someone acting covertly or warily,
and someone carrying a certain type of article at an
unusual time or in a place where there have been
relevant crimes recently. (Sanders, 1997:1054).
However Sanders (1997) then criticises the police decisions to stop and search stating
that they are ‘constrained only loosely by the law,’ and also that the powers the police
have and the offences in which these powers cover, are vaguely defined and prejudiced.
Furthermore he criticises the police stating that they appoint their own priorities.
Although new legislation and rules were introduced to try and overcome discrimination,
it still occurred. In 1999/2000 throughout the UK black people were recorded as being 5
times more likely to be stopped and searched than white people. 40% of all stop and
searches carried out by the Metropolitan Police were of ethnic minorities. However at
the same time more white people (13%) were arrested as a result of stop and search, than
black people (16%). (, 2001). When looking at PACE research, Brown
(1997) also discovered that black people were more likely to be stopped than white
people or Asians, they were also more likely to be repeatedly stopped, more likely to be
searched and more likely to be arrested. (Sanders, 1997).
A potential explanation for this high proportion of stops on black people could be that
black people do commit particular types of crime more often than white people do, and so
are more probable to be targeted by the police. However this explanation has been
criticised by many criminologists and the broad agreement between them is that
differences in offending behaviour between black and white people, can account for some
of the reasons why black people are particularly targeted by the police, but it only
explains part of it. (Coleman and Norris, 2000).
Another explanation why black people tend to be targeted more than white people is due
to police officer’s prejudice and discriminatory attitudes and behaviour. (Coleman and
Norris, 2000). An important factor here is that of ‘cop culture’. This is the notion that
the police have their own occupational culture in which racism and sexism exist along
with the stereotyping of certain groups of people, for example those who live in ‘rough’
areas. (Sanders, 1997).
There are many other reasons why stop and search is used discriminatorily by the
police, as Sanders and Young (2000) found, the number of stops and quality of arrests
has a direct impact on promotion and maintaining high position jobs. Therefore police
officers are under a great deal of pressure. Also young people tend to be stopped more at
night than older people because there are more young people about at night time than
there are older people. (Smith and Gray 1985). The reason why there are more stop and
searches carried out on males rather than females, is directly related to their incidence of
criminal activity, which is far higher for men than it is for women. (Smith and Gray,
1985).
The viewpoint of stop and search from a due process model is that the minor value of
each arrest would most likely not compensate for the loss of liberty that a person
encounters. On the other hand, from a crime control viewpoint the loss of liberty of a
suspect, regardless of whether they are innocent or not, is worth risking for a higher rate
of detections. (Sanders and Young, 2000). Sanders and young (2000) noted that
although police practices attempt to be half way between due process and crime control,
in actual fact practices are more slanted towards crime control than the rules for PACE
are. This slant towards crime control is because the influence of police culture and the
perceived demands of the job overshadow the officers’ anxiety for the penalty of a
breach. Consequently this can account for part of the reason why black people are over-
represented in the statistics for stop and search. (Sanders and Young, 2000).
From this research, both before and after the introduction of PACE and indeed research
from other countries such as Australia and America, we can conclude that there is an
overwhelming use of stereotyping in police discretion. Police make rapid judgements
about a person’s nature based on their physical appearance. (Sanders and Young, 2000).
We can see that there is no doubt that stop and search powers are used discriminately by
the police. Research shows that the most discriminated group consists of those who are
young, black and male. Although efforts are being made to reduce this discrimination,
evidence shows that it still exists. For example the number of stop and searches
in London fell by 40% in 1999/2000, however the fall for black people was much less
than for any other ethnic group. (, 2001).
Bibliography
Carter, T. & Coussins, J. (1991) ‘Education and the Black Community’ in Cashmore, E. & McLaughlin, E. (eds) Out of Order? Policing Black People. London: Routledge.
Coleman, C. & Norris, C. (2000) Introducing Criminology. Devon: Willan Publishing.
Lambert, J. L. (1986) Police Powers and Accountability. London: Croom Helm.
Sanders, A (1997) ‘From suspect to trial’ in Maguire M. Morgan, R. & Reiner, R. (eds) The Oxford Handbook of Criminology (2nd Edition), Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sanders, A. & Young, R. (2000) Criminal Justice (2nd Edition), London: Butterworths.
Smith, D. & Gray, J. (1985) Police and People in London. Aldershot: Gower.
Willis, C. (1985) ‘The use, effectiveness and impact of police stop and search powers’ in Heal, K. Tarling, R. & Burrows, J. (eds) Policing Today. London: HMSO.
(2002)
(2001)
MARK: 63%