Stopped and Searched under Terrorism Act!

[The Squire of Gothos]

Anyone else had any similar experiences?

Pink slip? You got a pink slip? We never got a pink slip. It was a simple four questions from the Army;

"May I see some form of identification please?"
"Where are you coming from?"
"Where are you going to"
"Can you open your boot please."

I miss those guys

 

[the 4th hanson bro]

I think it's a small price to pay if it stops people getting blown up.

My cousin is a copper, and you'd be surprised what they can turn up by being nosy in just this way... she's told me they manage to get murderers on the run etc, just by looking into mere suspicious behavior.

But who defines suspicious? And when the definition is so broad as to carrying a backpack on public transport, something's wrong, IMO.

How many people has it stopped from getting blown up?

Sorry, that's a matter of National Security and we can't tell you that information as it would compromise our sources and methods. Just trust us, it's working.

That's one of those questions that's impossible to answer. It's like fitting a security system to your house. How many burglaries has it stopped?

Apples and oranges. If I fit a security system to my house, without putting the signs up in the yard advertising said security system, I will know how many burglaries it stops by the number of times someone tries to break in and is stopped by the audible alarm.

I will never know how many people look at my house and say, "not going to burgle that one today".

Since 2000, I'm sure that at least one bomb or person with the components to make a bomb have been captured in these stops?

 

[Stone_Cold_Sisko]

Everytime I come into the country at JFK i get pulled aside into a room, have to wait an hour before they 'update' my record of what i do, etc. While everyone else just waltzes through immigration.

 

[Hugo Rune]

Apples and oranges. If I fit a security system to my house, without putting the signs up in the yard advertising said security system, I will know how many burglaries it stops by the number of times someone tries to break in and is stopped by the audible alarm.

I will never know how many people look at my house and say, "not going to burgle that one today".

Since 2000, I'm sure that at least one bomb or person with the components to make a bomb have been captured in these stops?

The sign is the MOST important thing - or in the case of the UK a BRANDED known alarm fitted to the front of the property. Statistically only 1.8% of properties burgled in the UK have a visable branded alarm box on the front of the residence.

Having police actively patrolling around, and RANDOMLY stopping and accounting/searching the public, transport hubs is rather vital in this climate in my opinion. The problem is that there is NO random stop/searching, even in S44 (you rather stand around thinking "I haven't had an East Asian Female yet, must get me one of those"), and because the power is for blanket use it can be abused.

Still, given all Police Stations in London are on HIGH Alert for a terrorist attack S44 isn't going away and CAN play a role in Counter Terrorism if the sruveillance teams are working.

Hugo - did about 50 last year

 

[Deckerd]

Since 2000, I'm sure that at least one bomb or person with the components to make a bomb have been captured in these stops?

If you're talking about the UK then our start date was really 2005 but yes, people have been captured. But the deterrent effect cannot be underestimated just because it's difficult to quantify.

 

[the 4th hanson bro]

Hugo, I don't want you to violate and secrecy acts or anything, but I ahve a couple of questions about these stops.

When you do one, what makes you decide to do one, and then how do you pick who you'll stop? By my understanding they're pretty time consuming. Doing 50 last year works out to about 1/week.

Have you ever found what you're looking for? Generally speaking?

Can they be used as an excuse or cover for looking for other things?

What typically happens to the citizen following the search?

thanks

 

[Lindley]

What typically happens to the citizen following the search?

Soylent Green.

 

[Mr Awe]

While everyone else just waltzes through immigration.

Personally I like to Salsa through immigration, much more fun.

Mr Awe

 

[Hugo Rune]

Hugo, I don't want you to violate and secrecy acts or anything, but I ahve a couple of questions about these stops.

When you do one, what makes you decide to do one, and then how do you pick who you'll stop? By my understanding they're pretty time consuming. Doing 50 last year works out to about 1/week.

Have you ever found what you're looking for? Generally speaking?

Can they be used as an excuse or cover for looking for other things?

What typically happens to the citizen following the search?

thanks

Honestly, the brass in the police want us to give as much information to the public regarding stop search (be it Section 44 Terrorism, or any other kind) as it is starting to become vilified again, when in fact it is one of the most powerful tools we have in combatting street and aquisative crime.

If you are talking about a Terrorism Stop then you are either targetting known terrorism nominals (which frankly, almost no standard police officer is really going to know) or stopping people completely at random. The idea is to create an environment so hostile to terrorism nominals that they divert away. Simple as that. It is also a reassurance tactic - the public are meant to be comforted that we are stopping/hampering the terrorists.

BUT, any stop and search is based on grounds: Criminal Intelligence, suspect descriptions, loitering around known drug/robbery/violence hotspots with no reasonable excuse. S44's allow a blanket authority to stop and account (i.e. just talk to and ask direct reasonable questions) or stop and search anyone.

Generally you are directed to areas that the Intelligence Unit think would favour S44 Stop Account/Search. An officer will VERY rarely do one on the spot, instead being assigned the task by a senior officer.

You pick people to match the ethnic background of the area you are working in, so to ensure you are not profiling people. It's a typical misconception in the UK that the police stop Ethnic Minorities more than anyone. Where I work the Stop/Search stats show that the breakdown actually nigh-on mirrors the ethnic profile of the area. So, S44 is meant to be the same way. You can stop people you think are suspicous, but if you have grounds or notions that they are to be searched under another power THAT is what you do. The idea is to be as random as possible frankly.

Are they time consuming...? Well, a form takes about 5-10 minutes to fill out on the street (depending on conversation level) and then another 5 minutes to input onto the a stops database. If a person stopped doesn't want to have the stop slip there and then they are given up to 12 months to collect one from any police station. Stop slips are only time consuming if you stop large groups of people and have to issue out 10+.

Of the 50 I did last year I'd say 40 of them were over one weekend around one transport hub. Two shifts of S44 stops. As I said, day to day officers are directed to do the stops.

Never found "What we're looking for", but unless you are at Paddington/Waterloo/Victoria train stations or any of the Airports/Embassies you're very very unlikely to either. As I said, the S44 stops are designed to divert people away from tansport hubs, and if surveillance is on the job they can make the call as to whom acts suspiciously in said diversion.

Can S44 be used unscrupulously...? Of course, any power can be. S44 can be a lazy man's tool to "turn over" people whom the officer can not find reasonable grounds to search otherwise. The possibility of abuse of power is there, but then it is in almost ANY power a police officer has. Integrity is non-negotiable!

When the citizen is stopped/searched they are asked if they want a copy of the stops slip. In terrorism searches its rather mandatory from a police officers POV, so they have to wait for the slip to be filled out. The information is then input into a computer database and the citizen can ask for a copy at any time at any police station for up to 12 months after the stop/search. They are then released about their business.

Frankly, it's all rather painless and the majority of the time it will be a Stop and Account rather than Search (i.e. a chat and then particulars, name/dob/address etc taken).

As I said above, it's all about HOW you do a Stop/Search/Account. People resent it when the officer doesn't explain absolutely everything. And if anyone in the UK isn't given a full explaination of who the officer is, what he's doing, why he's doing it, the searchees entitlements and rights, when being stopped/searched then frankly the officer is just shite and deserving of his/her comuppance


Hugo - hope that helps answer a few questions

 

[Holdfast]

yeah definitely that's why i never leave the house with a backpack if i know i am going to use public transport

Seriously?

I'm having a hard time wrapping my head around this.

I used to use Canary Wharf everyday to get to work and as it's the banking district I'd be at risk of getting stopped all the time especially with a backpack so after 7/7 I stopped using the tube and have driven to work everyday, saves me getting stopped and it's more comfortably then the stinky boiling hot tube.

Get a Swaine-Adeney-Brigg bridle hide briefcase. They'll be so awestruck, they won't DARE to stop you!

Plus there are daily quotas in London for the number of S44 stops performed...

I find this disturbing, but unsurprising.

 

[Count Zero]

What information gets put into this database and how long is it saved there?

 

[Hugo Rune]

Lol - Oh crap, Pandora's box...

Umm - any and all questions to PM?

Let me see - Name, age, sex, address, height, Police ethnic code (IC code), Self Defined Ethnicity (by the MoP), vehicles involved (including registration), grounds for stop account/search, disposal (i.e. how the officer decided to finish the stop - Do nothing, give words of advice, give warning, arrest, etc), officers details. There used to be sections for clothing descriptions as well, but that's been dropped recently. All the information we take YOU get too (on carbon copy), so you get our details in case you feel you have been improperly treated (complaints), or been wonderfully treated (compliments )

And it's kept on record for 6 years I think, but I could be wrong... Cultcross might be able to confirm/deny that.

On a stop and account you attempt to gain as much information as you can. On a stop and search with relevant grounds it becomes an offence to give false particulars (name, age, address etc).

The Stop/Search form was designed as an intelligence gather device for nominals, but has been whittled down somewhat.


Hugo - Doesn't make the law, just helps enforce it

 

[Holdfast]

Lol - Oh crap, Pandora's box...

Umm - any and all questions to PM?


Hugo - err, yeah

I'm sure Gordon Brown will love receiving mail from disgruntled TrekBBS posters.

(he can add it to the pile of hate mail he gets from me already. )

 

[CaptainHawk1]

My husband has just returned home from a business trip to London. While he was there, he was stopped and searched under S.44(1) of the Terrorism Act 2000! The pink slip he was given by the officers said that the reason he'd been searched was because of carrying items related to terrorism. He was stopped at New Street Station. The officers gave him a pink slip relating to the stop and search. In reality, the whole thing was a training session for two trainee officers and he was asked first if he would agree to the training session, but the paperwork is scary-looking. We're a law-abding, civic minded family so this kind of thing is a bit of a big deal for us.

Anyone else had any similar experiences?

Why are you complaining about something your husband agreed to in the first place?

I guess I missed the complaining part.

The whole thing seems to me to be a symptom of the steady and constant erosion of civil liberties and freedoms based on fighting a nebulous enemy like "terrorism".

When terrorists use backpacks to carry bombs, it doesn't seem like too big of a leap to then classify all backpacks as "tools of terrorism", therefore justifying a stop and search.

As for me, I fly for work 3 weeks out of 4 so I'm well acquainted with the TSA potemkin village that passes for airport security since 2001.

But enough ranting.

On what basis can one get stopped for such a search, assuming it's not a training exercise?

I don't know what kind of civil liberties you think are eroding, but clichés notwithstanding, there has been no "constant erosion" of civil liberties to fight terrorism.

The fact of the matter is that in the U.S., the courts have ruled over and over again that the police may stop you at anytime and conduct a limited investigation (which may include frisking your person for weapons) if they have observed conduct that leads them to suspect criminal activity. This didn't start after 9/11, this has been going on forever in the U.S. and was confirmed in 1968 (look up "Terry Stop" as I'm not doing all fo the legwork for you). I recently did a 14 page memorandum on three 4th Amendment issues and the case law is pretty clear on this.

All the Patriot Act has done has close up loopholes and more specifically define what already hadn't been specifically defined under U.S. law. But this nonsense about 'eroding civil liberties' is pap for the masses.

For the record, I couldn't agree with you more about the TSA. I went to job fair a few years ago and found out that the starting pay was $26,000 per year. So there's your problem with the TSA. They are hiring the lowest common denominator. These are the people who had a choice in life to either work for the TSA or rob convenience stores.

-Shawn

 

[CaptainHawk1]

Look, if your husband didn't mind it then that's up to him. However, other people don't want to spend nights in cells, have their property searched or confiscated and they shouldn't have to based on what coat they were wearing or if they allowed a train to go past.

I think it's a small price to pay if it stops people getting blown up.

How many people has it stopped from getting blown up?

Sorry, that's a matter of National Security and we can't tell you that information as it would compromise our sources and methods. Just trust us, it's working.

It's obviously working in the U.S. and you're asking someone to prove a negative which is dishonest.

But I'll make it easy for you this time as there have been 19 confirmed terrorist attacks thwarted in the U.S.

http://www.heritage.org/research/HomelandDefense/bg2085.cfm

-Shawn

 

[Count Zero]

Thanks for the detailed information, Hugo. I must admit, although our police has always been able to stop and search people pretty much at random (in theory you have to be suspicious, in practice they can pretty much search anyone they want), I'd be disturbed by this database. To me, that reeks of a surveillance state.

 

[Pingfah]

On a stop and account you attempt to gain as much information as you can. On a stop and search with relevant grounds it becomes an offence to give false particulars (name, age, address etc).

Uh huh. So in what circumstances am I permitted to give false information then?

Just out of curiosity.

 

[Holdfast]

These are the people who had a choice in life to either work for the TSA or rob convenience stores.

Now they combine their life of working for the TSA and robbing passengers both at their convenience and of the convenience.

On a stop and account you attempt to gain as much information as you can. On a stop and search with relevant grounds it becomes an offence to give false particulars (name, age, address etc).

Uh huh. So in what circumstances am I permitted to give false information then?

Just out of curiosity.

I think historically under UK law, you can provide false information to anyone, provided you're not actively attempting to defraud them. For instance, regardless of my actual name, and without formally changing it, I could call myself Balthazar Greatmane III, provided I wasn't attempting to defraud someone by doing it.

I think the law might have been tightened up in this regard recently, but that was the historic pre-1997 situation at least. I think.

 

[CaptainHawk1]

These are the people who had a choice in life to either work for the TSA or rob convenience stores.

Now they combine their life of working for the TSA and robbing passengers both at their convenience and of the convenience.

Now THAT was clever!

-Shawn

 

[Hugo Rune]

Pingfah: I'd go with basically none. Giving false particulars can lead to arrest and detention to ascertain a subjects identity. However, that would only honestly only happen for a relevant criminal offence, or if the officer feels you are deliberately giving a false name etc to cover your identity on the Police National Computer checks carried out by officers on the street (to find out if the subject is wanted/missing). Any other time and they'll just roll their eyes and say "try again".

In criminal-related matters (investigation) you are by law obliged to give your details. If it's a civil matter then you can give nothing. If I recall, an officer will prefer to walk away with full particulars on a S44 Terrorism stop (because we're anal perfectionists on the whole), but if it's just an account then technically (because there is no offence) the MoP can walk away giving nothing and the officer will write it up accordingly. On a search Police Officers are by law required to fill out the form fully with all of the subject's details.


Hugo - trying to not get ambushed here