Stop, search and arrest

Assignment 1.1

By Roxanne Slevin

The main piece of legislation regulating police powers is the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE). The act was passed due to the miscarriage of justice in 1980, when a man (Maxwell Confait) was murdered. He had been strangled to death with an electrical flex in a burning house. Three boys at the age of fourteen, fifteen and eighteen were charged with the murder; however, three years later they were released after the Fisher report concluded they had nothing to with the murder.

In the case of Jack, there are many things to consider about the legality of the actions of the police. Code A Under section 1 of PACE, the police officer was legally allowed to search Jack as there was a reasonable suspicion; this was due to the fact that the patrol officer was looking for suspects that were vandalising bus shelters, and where jack was acting suspiciously this is therefore reasonable. On the other hand, if it had been on the basis of personal factors, this would have been seen as discrimination and therefore, would have been illegal.

Before the search begun, the police officer would have had to indentify himself and the police station of where he/she is based and tell the person to be searched the grounds for the search. Plus, If the police officer is not in uniform, then the officer must provide documentary identification, under section 2 of PACE. For instance, in R v Bristol, it was rendered that a stop and search was unlawful if the officer failed to provide the correct information. There is no evidence this took place in Jacks case.

There is also no evidence that a written record was produced. Under section 3, a written record must be made at the time of the search, unless there are exceptional circumstances which would be made at the time of the search.

This is a preview of the whole essay

The law states that nobody is obliged in common law to answer police questions. For instance, in Rice v Connolly (1966), Rice refused to answer questions about where he came from/where he was going, and so was arrested. The case was squashed on appeal as he was not obliged to talk. However, in comparison, in Rickets v Cox, two men approached by officers, antagonised them by using abusive language and refused to answer questions. Although they were not obliged to talk, being abusive obstructs police duties and so the appeal was dismissed. Jack was abusive. Moreover, under the Police and Reform Act, a uniformed officer can require a person who has behaved badly to give their name and address. Jack also refused to do this. Furthermore, under section 17, the police are allowed to make an arrest without a warrant to prevent serious damage to property. Therefore the arrest of Jack was lawful, as long as reasonable force was used, which means that it was proportionate to the threat from the person and that officers subject to the higher standards placed on them.

If a person is granted bail, this means that a person accused, convicted or under arrest may be released under a duty to attend court or the police station at a given time. There are many Acts governing bail, this includes: Bail Act 1976 contains the criteria for granting/refusing bail. Criminal Justice and Court Act 2000 questions whether the defendant has ever misused drugs. Criminal Justice Act 2003 states a refusal for bail is law, if the drug abuser refuses a treatment. The Crime and Disorder Act - if a person has a previous conviction of an indictable crime, then they cannot be granted bail unless there is an exceptional reason. Plus, there is the Police and Justice Act 2006, which increases the range of conditions that can be imposed when granting bail, Criminal Justice Act 2003 gives the police the right to grant bail at the place of arrest (known as street bail) and Criminal Justice and immigration Act allows half the time spent on bail, with a tagged curfew, to be deducted from sentenced.

After an arrest, PACE provides that the suspect should be taken to the police station after an arrest, although this may be delayed if their presence else where is necessary for an immediate investigation under section 30.

All police stations must have a custody officer on duty at all times. It is the custody officer’s job to ensure suspects are treated accordingly to PACE and is independent from the actual investigation. When the suspect is first brought in, they must decide whether there is already sufficient evidence to charge them. If there is not enough evidence to charge when a suspect is first brought in, then the person cannot be detained for the purpose of securing and obtaining such evidence which is done often through questioning. However the safeguard to custody officers is limited, this is because many feel that they will not distance themselves from the needs of the investigation and put suspect’s rights first. Usually, custody officers are ordinary members of staff and therefore unlikely to share their view of the investigation, in addition they may be of a junior rank than an investigating officer and so unlikely to refuse to allow the detention of a suspect or prevent breaches of PACE and its codes during detention.

If there is sufficient evidence, a suspect will be charged and then released on bail. On the other hand, some suspects may be refused bail. This may be because the defendants name and address is not known or there are reasonable grounds to believe the address is false. Or if they believe the suspect may commit another crime whilst on bail. If the suspect is refused bail, then the he must be brought before the magistrates as soon as possible, and in any even – no later than the first sitting after being charged.

Bail can be subject to conditions, such as that the accused must obtain legal advice before their next court appearance or that the third party gives a security; where people guarantee to pay into court a fixed fee if the bailed person absconds. Or the defendant has to report to the local police station at regular times. A residence order is where the defendant has to stay at a certain address and also restrictions can be placed, such as a curfew, or a ban on speaking to a certain witness or even electric tagging. Perhaps in Jacks case the most appropriate conditions are to restrict him to a curfew, so that he is not out late and being abusive towards people. Also, a surety may be used, so try and encourage him to turn up to court – his lack of cooperation during the search could portray a lack of cooperation in court. Finally, he may also have to report to the police station, to make sure things are ok with him, and to make sure he is not getting into any more trouble. It is unlikely that they will give him a residence order as he would be living with his parents still, and also electric tagging is too extreme in this circumstance.