Stop, police
I was, you may recall, stopped and searched under the Prevention Of Terrorism Act 2006 on December 17, 2007. Less than six months later, this morning in fact, I was stopped and searched again. It's becoming a regular occurrence. Suspiciously so, in fact. On both occasions, the apprehension by an officer of the law took place at an overground station heading into Central London. On both occasions, I was carrying a black shoulder bag, designed to carry a laptop, which is what it was doing. The first time, it being winter, I was wearing a long, dark overcoat and a black woolly hat. I also had earphones in, and was walking purposefully, which is how I walk. This time, I had just been to the gym and was on my way to the office, and thus had two black bags, the shoulder bag, and my PE kit bag, a small rucksack. I was also carrying a white plastic bag which contained my lunch. I also had my earphones in, although, having just come through the automatic ticket barriers, I can't have been walking that fast. Either way, a policeman stopped me, and searched my bags, and, as is the law, took down all my details, from address and place of birth to descriptions of my hair and clothes (next to "Build", he wrote, "Prop.", which is anyone's guess - I look like a prop forward? My build is proportionate?). He claimed it was a "random" stop-and-search, but I suspect it was because of my bags. Or my purposeful stride, which might resemble a terrorist's, I don't know. The fact that I had already "been done" in the last six months did not wash with this officer, which is fair enough I suppose. Now I have been logged as a non-terrorist by the Metropolitan Police twice. Does this make me less of a suspect? Or does it mean that I now have two marks next to my innocent name? I do understand that the police are doing a job and trying to stop us all getting blown up, but I'm officially bored with being stopped and searched now. I complied with the officer's every request, as I didn't wish to be detained for 42 days without charge, a prospect I suspected might become closer to statute before the day was out. I was right. Don't worry, I'm not going to go into a rant about living in a police state. But how random are these searches? If they're not random, then don't say they are. And if they are random, why not have targeted searches instead? (He asked me what I did for a living. I told him I wrote. He wanted to know what I wrote. I told him I wrote scripts for the BBC. He asked me which programmes. I told him comedy programmes. He insisted I tell him which programmes. I told him Not Going Out. He said he had never heard of it. That put me in my place.)The ultimate insult? On the form, next to "Hair", he wrote, "Short dark brown, greying." Don't imagine a jackboot stamping on a human face forever, it's more like a biro writing bitchy remarks about a man's hair colour forever.
posted by Andrew Collins @ 1:02 PM
22 Comments
Contact
Andrew at
22 Comments:
To date I have been stopped and [kind-of] searched four times this year. All because I carry around the most lethal weapon known to western society: a camera.
And not some innocent looking mobile phone, or a James Bond-esque button. No, for me it is a conspicuous camera, so loved of those trying to avoid drawing attention to their activities.
Given the rate at which I arouse suspicion I am naturally beginning to doubt my own pacifistic nature.
So as officially - and it is official, they have league tables and everything, probably - you are only half as much a not-a-terrorist as me, I am now getting concerned that this seemingly innocent blog is in fact some kind of covert effort to subvert all that is good and proper about this green and pleasant land.
Shame on you, Mr Collins. Shame.
But yes, it is bloody annoying having to wait while they radio in for a background check. Though credit to the officers as, in my experience at least, they are always friendly and quick to recognize they are wasting their time too. Sadly they have orders from on high to follow.
it's too late in the evening/early in the morning to do a properly thought-out comment, but I'm not sure you were give a satisfactory reason for this search. Have a look at http://www.met.police.uk/stopandsearch/what_is.htm
Ahh, a PE kit bag. Brings back such gymnasium-type memories of wooden horses and climbing frames.
I have friend who owns a very nice and expensive car. He also happens to be from Jamaica. Last time I spoke to him he told me he was being stopped, on average, about five times a month by the police. He’s actually getting familiar with some of the officers, to the point that they now exchange pleasantries about the state of the weather or how the test match is going.
What on earth could "prop." mean?
I guess if you'd been to the gym it could be "proper buff". That would make up for the "greying" comment.
I got stopped myself on the way in to work on Monday -- four officers, three chatting while the one searched through my bag. As the chap's fingers roamed playfully amongst the crap and detritus that I end up carrying around (I no longer have a car, so don't have a glove box for such things), I noted several people, all rucksacked-up or carrying a plethora of bags all just as likely to contain bombs as mine. Except theirs would have held far more impressive explosive devices.
Being British (and a coward) I meekly complied with every request without urging the constable's colleagues to 'stop talking and go and search that dodgy-looking bloke with the two suitcases and suspicious American accent'. And was bemused to find myself having to wait five minutes after the (one minute) search while the silly form was completed. Which was for who's benefit, exactly? I didn't get a copy of the damn thing, and I strongly doubt the data collected could be used for anything other than stop-and-search-bingo.
And yes, I also noted him writing under the 'hair' section: 'brown w/ grey streaks'. To think I used to respect the police...
I initially read that as "aromatic ticket barrier," and wondered if there was some kind of new, perfumed Oyster card.
Speaking of which, where's the obligatory Apprentice post?
I'm working on right now, but it's an epic. You people are so demanding!
They could be a bit more selective. It's absurd really. Perhaps it's your swarthiness, Andrew.
It's like making old ladies remove their shoes at aiport security. It's just a waste of everyone's time. Some frail old bid from Box Hill is not likely to want to bring down flight 489 from Gatwick to Alicante. But still they hold everyone up by bodysearching her and X-raying her K Shoes.
But they say it must be done because they do it to everyone and therefore can't be accused of singling out certain factions.
It gets more like Children Of Men everyday.
If that Apprentice blog is not uploaded and on my desk by 11am you will have me to answer to, Collins. No second chances unless you let me suck your lips off.
If Lee doesn't have a Stop and Search encounter in series three then I'm going to be disappointed!
I agree with David. You were not given sufficient information.
http://www.adviceguide.org.uk/nm/index/your_rights/legal_system/police_powers.htm
http://www.yourrights.org.uk/your-rights/chapters/the-rights-of-suspects/police-powers-to-stop-and-search-persons-and-vehicles---without-arrest/
A constable contemplating a search under any power to search - before or without arrest - must take reasonable steps to bring the following to your attention:
• If the constable is not in uniform, proof that he or she is a constable, which the Code says must be by showing a warrant card.
• The constable's name and police station.
• The object of the proposed search.
• The constable's grounds for proposing to search.
• The availability of a search record if it is practicable to make one.
The search may not be commenced until the constable gives you such information, and the information must be given even if not requested.
I'd complain if I were you. Listen to the mighty Mark Thomas and make a fuss! Actually, you could probably get advice from his website.
Police Powers was one of the few interesting things I covered in A Level Law. The rest of the syllabus was about property rights, so I spent every lesson convincing myself not to stab the person next to me in the eye as a distraction from the intense boredom.
This is all very illuminating, and I thank you, but as I understand it, doesn't the Prevention of Terrorism Act push all of that to one side? This was the British Transport Police, not that I noticed at the time, but checking the copy of the form against the one I got in December, it's slightly different. On the previous form, it requires GROUNDS FOR SEARCH to be filled in, and it said, "Section 44 Terrorism stop to prevent terrorist activity - subject on platform, train into London, also carrying a black holdall." This time the form said GROUNDS FOR AUTHORITY, rather than GROUNDS FOR SEARCH (not sure of the distinction), and the officer wrote, "ITEMS FOR USE IN CONNECTION WITH TERRORISM 5.44 (2) TERRORISM ACT 2000 CC BTP." I'll be honest I don't really understand it, but he claimed I was randomly stopped. The previous officer never used that reason.
Liberty also has some guidance: http://www.liberty-human-rights.org.uk/issues/6-free-speech/s44-terrorism-act/index.shtml
As per my earlier post, I'm wondering, on the basis of your account, whether the Met's own guidance was followed, and whether this was a situation where 'there [was] evidence of a specific terrorist threat'.
Don't want to bang on about this, just intrigued.
Well, next time they search you they'll be able to take thier time over it. Probably around 42 days.
I know, amazing isn't it? You'd think people had been blowing themselves (and more to the point- others) up on tube trains and buses as a robust critique of British foreign policy or something...
Don't stress too much about it.
I got used to being stopped and questioned by the Police everytime I entered the UK.
Sometimes I was questioned leaving the UK. Just to be sure to be sure.
After a couple of years you hardly notice it.
Just a small point, if you were stopped inside a train station surely it was an officer from the British Transport Police who searched you?
Janice
British Transport Police - what's the difference? (The first time it was the Metropolitan Police, and that was inside a railway station.)
On both occasions - and I have the paperwork - I was stopped and searched under the Prevention of Terrorism Act. Same procedure. Same details required. Same effect.
DJ Bear - let me guess (and please dissuade me of this assumption if I'm wrong) - you agree with the 42 day detention without charge rule currently being pushed through Parliament?
Without getting all militant about it as seems to be my wont as I get older - this sort of situation seems to be a slow creep back to the sinister SPG and SUS days for me. I got stopped by a railway 'officer' a while back for not buying a ticket. I couldn't buy a ticket as the machine didn't work at my outgoing station which is why I wanted to buy a ticket (and not dodge) at the other end. This was apparently not good enough. Then I got pulled to one side to be issued a penalty fare which I refused to give any information for re: the fact I had done everything possible to try and buy a ticket. As I glanced over in a rapidly increasing fury I could see people very obviously 'dodging' fares in the crush. Why weren't they stopping them? Due to my refusal to give them any information they called the Transport Police which induced an extremely vociferous rant about contravention of my basic human right. Finally - I was forced to give my address to the transport police officer at which point the railway officer tapped it into his handheld piece of uselessness and said "You are lying - that address isn't on our system". I purchased a house 8 years ago in my name, I pay council tax, utility bills etc. Staggering. 30 furious minutes later where I had been told to calm down at least 6 times they let me go. I even managed to call one of them a bastard as I lurched into the tube. Not very proud of that now - but I was very angry at the time. I then wrote a long letter of complaint and got a very short letter of apology. Not a good experience. We need to stand up more for ourselves we really do and stop cow-towing to the 'politics of fear' that seems to be at an all-pervading high in this country at the moment.
Rockmother, I agree. There's absolutely no point in silently seething about injustices.
During my little encounter with Stop and Search the police officer estimated my height.
I stand a proud 190cm (6 foot, two inches in old money). He marked me down as 5 foot 8. Luckily he didn't notice my greying hair or modest beer belly.
Post a Comment
<< Home