Transcript Policing & Police Powers

POLICING THE CRISIS: ‘RACE’,
‘RIOTS’ AND THE REGULATION
OF STOP AND SEARCH
MICHAEL SHINER & REBEKAH DELSOL
REFERENCES
Lea, J. (2000) ‘The Macpherson Report and the Question of Institutional
Racism’, The Howard Journal, 39(3): 219-233
Sanders, A., and Young, R. (2006) Criminal Justice, Oxford University
Press
Reiner, R (2000) The Politics of the Police, Oxford University Press
Shiner, M. (2010) ‘Post-Lawrence Policing in England and Wales: Guilt,
Innocence and the Defence of Organisational Ego’, British Journal of
Criminology, 50(5): 935-953
Shiner, M. (2011) Organisational Strategies for Change and Regulation,
presented to Roundtable on Current Debates, Research Agendas and
Strategies to Address Racial Disparities in Police-initiated Stops in the
UK and USA, John Jay College of Criminal Justice, New York.
www.jjay.cuny.edu/centers/race_crime_justice/4788.php#conferencepapers
STUART HALL et al’s CRISIS
“This book started
out with ‘mugging’,
but it has ended in a
different place… we
start with ‘mugging’,
but we end with the
way society is
‘policing its crisis”
(1978: pi, ix).
OUR CRISIS
A 'SORT OF REVENGE' AGAINST
THE POLICE
85% of respondents to Reading the Riots study
said policing was an "important" or "very
important" factor in why the riots happened
Again and again, rioters from different parts of
the country described the police as a "gang“
Shooting of Mark Duggan resonates with more
mundane, routine abuse of police powers
www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/dec/05/riots-revenge-againstpolice
POLICING AND THE
LEGITIMATE USE OF FORCE
“The only reason to maintain police in modern society is to
make available a group of persons with a virtually unrestricted
right to use violent and, when necessary, lethal means to bring
certain types of situations under control. That fact is as
fundamentally offensive to core values of modern society as it is
unchangeable. To reconcile itself to its police, modern society
must wrap it in concealments and circumlocutions that sponsor
the appearance that the police are either something other than
what they are or are principally engaged in doing something
else… To the extent that these circumlocutions worked, they
worked by wrapping police in aspirations and values that are
extremely powerful and unquestionably good”
Klockars, C.B. (1988) ‘The Rhetoric of Community Policing’, in J.R. Greene and S.
Mastrofski (eds) Community Policing: Rhetoric or Reality?, Praeger, reprinted in T.
Newburn (2005) Policing: Key Readings, Willan
DEMOCRACY AND
PROCEDURAL JUSTICE
Defining feature of a democratic society is a
police force that:
 Is subject to the rule of law
 Can intervene in the life of citizens only under limited and
carefully controlled circumstances; and
 Is publicly accountable.
Marx, G.T. (2001) Police and Democracy, in M. Amir and S. Einstein (eds) Policing, Security and Democracy,
Office of International Criminal Justice
Heavy-handed policing is divisive, counterproductive and criminogenic
Bradford, B. (2011) Assessing the Impact of Police-initiated Stop Powers on Individuals and Communities: the UK
Picture www.jjay.cuny.edu/centers/race_crime_justice/4788.php
REGULATION OF STOP
AND SEARCH
Conflict and consensus models
Complaints procedure
Scarman and policing by consent
Police and Criminal Evidence Act, 1984




Procedural safeguards
Reasonable suspicion
Internal supervision and monitoring
External accountability
REASONABLE SUSPICION
WWW.HOMEOFFICE.GOV.UK/PUBLICATIONS/POLICE/OPERATIONAL-POLICING/PACECODES/PACE-CODE-A?VIEW=BINARY
Reasonable grounds for suspicion depend on the
circumstances in each case. There must be an objective
basis for that suspicion based on facts, information, and/or
intelligence which are relevant to the likelihood of finding an
article of a certain kind…Reasonable suspicion can never be
supported on the basis of personal factors. It must rely on
intelligence or information about, or some specific behaviour
by, the person concerned. For example, other than in a
witness description of a suspect, a person’s race, age,
appearance, or the fact that the person is known to have a
previous conviction, cannot be used alone or in combination
with each other, or in combination with any other factor, as
the reason for searching that person. Reasonable suspicion
cannot be based on generalisations or stereotypical images
of certain groups or categories of people as more likely to be
involved in criminal activity. A person’s religion cannot be
considered as reasonable grounds for suspicion and should
never be considered as a reason to stop or stop and search
an individual.
INDEPENDENT SCRUTINY
THE LIMITS OF REGULATION
Discretion and complaints
Impact of PACE rules on police practices
 Much is ritualistic and presentational, affecting little of substance
(Reiner, 2010)
Reasonable suspicion remains a vague and elusive concept
(Sanders and Young 2000)
Senior officers required to give account for their decisions but
under no legal requirement to take account of any critical response
(Reiner, 2010).
Consultative forums often lack independence and are little more
than ‘talking shops’ (Lea, 2000)
THE FAILINGS OF REGULATION
Since the introduction of PACE
 Massive increase in use of stop and search
 Reduction in the arrest rate
 Growth of exceptional powers
 Ongoing problem of disproportionality
Lawrence Inquiry - institutional racism is
apparent in disproportionate use of stop and
search against black people
 “…there remains, in our judgment, a clear core conclusion of
racist stereotyping.”
WHAT’S CHANGED?
“The blunt reality, more than a decade after
Macpherson and several years after the reforms
were implemented, is that aggregate- measured
levels of disproportionality for grounds-based
searches have not improved. Moreover compared
to the later 1990s, the situation has become worse
for black and Asian people. The relative chances
of people in these groups being searched,
compared to whites have apparently increased.”
Miller, J. (2010) ‘Stop and Search in England and Wales: A Reformed Tactic or
Business as Usual? British Journal of Criminology, 50(5): 954-974.
NUMBER OF S.60 SEARCHES PER 1,000
POPULATION – ENGLAND & WALES
www.runnymedetrust.org/events-conferences/econferences/ethnic-profilingin-uk-law-enforcement/the-report/young-people-and-section-60/section-60stop-and-search-powers.html
SECTION 60 ARRESTS ETC.
Total searches
(n)
Persons found carrying
weapons etc. (%)
Arrests weapons (%)
Arrests other (%)
Arrests –
total (%)
2000/01
11,330
3.2
2.7
3.6
6.4
2001/02
18,900
7.2
1.1
2.6
3.6
2002/03
44,400
3.5
0.8
4.8
5.6
2003/04
40,400
1.4
0.7
3.1
3.8
2004/05
41,600
0.7
0.6
2.3
2.9
2005/06
36,300
1.5
0.5
4.2
4.7
2006/07
44,700
1.6
0.6
3.1
3.6
2007/08
53,319
1.4
0.6
3.3
3.9
2008/09
150,172
0.8
0.4
2.5
2.9
2009/10
118,446
0.7
0.3
2.1
2.4
Povey, D. et al., (2011) Police Powers and Procedures England and Wales 2009/10, London: Home Office
BARRIERS TO CHANGE
Structural inequality
Organisational barriers - reform resistance
and the psychology of denial
The politics of denial
DEFEND, DEFEND, DEFEND
SHINER, 2010
Lawrence inquiry as collective trauma
Psychological defences
Denial, projection, splitting and fantasies
Intellectualisation
Regression
Displacement
Patterns of resistance
Formal adherence
Absorption
Adaption
Subversion Intelligence
Police cannot be relied upon to self-regulate, but likely to
resist external regulation
POLITICAL DENIAL
“…the ‘Next Steps’ process developed by the National Policing
Improvement Agency… helps the police to understand the way in
which they use stop and search and how the population of an area
and the apparent levels of disproportionality might in some
circumstances not present a true picture. The early feedback on
‘Next Steps’ is positive, and we hope to be able to expand it to other
areas shortly” (Nick Herbert, Minister for Policing and Criminal
Justice)
“Nobody in the minority ethnic communities believes that the
complex arguments which are sometimes used to explain the
figures as to stop and search are valid…It is pointless for the police
service to try to justify the disparity in these figures purely or
mainly in terms of the other factors which are identified”
(Macpherson, 1999: 45.8-45.10)
PROMOTING ORGANISATIONAL
CHANGE
Dealing with the central paradox
Performance management
Community consultation
Anticipate resistance and responses to it




Organisational change is anxiety inducing
Carrots and sticks
Working with defences (e.g. Critical Encounters)
Working around defences (principles and pragmatics)
APPEALING TO ORGANISATIONAL
PRIORITIES AND SELF-INTEREST
“If people perceive the police to be procedurally fair and
if they trust their motives in behaving the way that they
do, all current evidence suggest they are not only more
likely to actively cooperate by reporting crime,
cooperating in investigations, providing witness
evidence, even intervening in situations of low-level
deviance and incivility. They are also more likely to defer
to officer’s instructions and obey the laws that the police
in many ways still embody. In the long run, the fight
against crime might be more efficiently, more costeffectively, and certainly more ethically served by
treating the public with fairness, dignity, and respect than
by instigating another ‘crack-down’ on crime”.
Jackson, J., and Bradford, B. (2010) ‘What is Trust and Confidence in the Police?’,
Policing: A Journal of Policy and Practice, 4(3): 241-248.
RESPONSIVE REGULATION
Source: Ayres and Braithwaite, 1992
BACKLASH
• Denial of Institutional Racism:
“Anybody who had read the Macpherson report would recognise an
institution that was treating people in a very monochrome way. I don’t
necessarily believe there was anything racist about the activities of the
Metropolitan police in relation to the Lawrences. …That is what has
changed.”
Sir Ian Blair (April 2009)
“does this mean that I believe that the Met, or any force for that matter,
should be pilloried with the single blanket accusation of being
institutionally racist? I don't think so. That would imply that nothing has
changed.”
Sir Trevor Philips (January 2009)
• Continued justifications around disproportionality and
use of exceptional powers
• Abolition of national requirement to record stop and
account and reductions to stop and search recording
23
STOPWATCH - WHO ARE WE?
STOPWATCH’S OBJECTIVES:
1) Reintroduction of full recording and extension of measures to
ensure police accountability and transparency in their use of
stop-searches.
2) Substantial reductions in the use of stop-searches and
elimination of ethnic disproportionality.
3) Challenge the use of stop-searches, which do not require
‘reasonable suspicion.’
5) Investigate and advocate alternatives to stop-searches, and
support the police in implementing them.
24
6) Empower impacted communities and help them to make their
voices heard.
STOPWATCH PHILOSOPHY
Politics of “race”
“If you have come here to help me, you are wasting your time. But if you
have come because your liberation is bound up with mine, then let us
work together.” (Aboriginal activist group / Lila Watson)
Mainstreaming a minority experience – “Not in Our
Name!”
Helping to ensure impacted communities have a voice
in public debate
Combining the strengths of conflict and consensus
approaches
Political advocacy
Awareness raising
Research and policy
Good practice
Youth
Voices of experience
Awareness raising
Social media
Empowering youth
Legal
Legal challenges
Know your rights
Individual complaints
26
Research
and policy
STOPWATCH’S MODEL
Consensus
27
Conflict
WHAT HAVE WE DONE?
• Research and data analysis
• Disseminated information to the public and policy makers
• Developing media stories, writing blogs and commentary
• Speaking at meetings, seminars, lectures, etc.
• Meetings with politicians, policy-makers, police, the
national equality body etc.
• Hosting community events to provide a constructive and
open avenue for people to engage in debate and help
shape policies
• Film: “Profiles of the profiled”
28
• Identifying, supporting and tracking good practice
STOP AND SEARCH BACK
ON THE AGENDA
WHAT WE HAVE ACHIEVED....
• National voice on stop and search
• Major media coverage
• Political advocacy, relationships with key policy makers
• 18 questions in Parliament, 3 meetings
• Dropping clause introducing ethnic profiling into PACE
• Holding police and public bodies to account eg. MPS, EHRC
MPS to keep recording stop and account
Two legal challenges
Reduction in the numbers of section 60, schedule 7
Reduction in length of time keep DNA & Fingerprint
retention from indefinitely to 6 months
• Home Office to now regularly publish Schedule 7 stats
• Calls for review of exceptional powers
30
•
•
•
•
CHALLENGES
• Hostile government with little concern for racial equality
• Public cuts – police, regulatory organisations and NGOs
• Police resistance/ half-hearted reform
• “Rubber-stamping” exercises
AND NEXT STEPS…
• Elected commissioner campaign
• Innovative ways of using the data
• Using film and new media
31
• Humanising impact of stop and search
SUPPORT AND
FOLLOW STOPWATCH:
WWW.STOP-WATCH.ORG
TWITTER: @STOPWATCHUK
32
FACEBOOK: STOP-WATCH
WHAT NOW?
Window of opportunity
“Riots” etc.
Police and crime commissioners
Public criminology
What can we do?