UK Police - procedures for search of a female

When she was stopped she shuld have been told various bits of information

The grounds, the objectives, the identity of the officers (Warrant card if in plain clothes), what they are looking for and the fact that a record is being made and the fact that she is entitled to a copy

If any were absent they breached PACE. Now a breach of PACE is not necessarily illegal IF it can be justified (and in the circs you describe I wold suggets it could not)

You do not have to be arrested to be searched BUT the Police can search ONLY for the stated objectives/items. In other words if you are looking for a lawnmower you cannot get someone to drop their trousers.

Your wife going to the station created her a bit of a dileofftopic as an intimate search can be conducted there as opposed to the street/public. (Personally I would have searched her bag in the street regardless of her wishes IF I had the necessary grounds).

The intimate search as described sounds like a comedy of errors. Should have been two, and should have been in a room that had no possibility of "outside" viewing. I canot see why it was required unless they had specific grounds for thnking she hid something in her undergarments.

Without reviewing the full case I would suggest that there are grounds for a complaint. Police work is hard enoug without officers walking around like circus chimps.

They need to be re-educated at the very least
 
not true -you can search for items on an intimate search WITHOUT arrest.
The circumstances you have outlined are just typical post-arrest/pre-custody searches.
 
I think an intimate search can be performed by a police officer or designated staff member in exceptional circumstances (a doctor or nurse isn't available), but either way it has to be authorised by an inspector or above...
 
Time to be definitive here ....


read the next post much more informative and up to date too!!!

Thanks redbranch

Smurf
 
From the Codes of Practice:

62
C
ANNEX A – INTIMATE AND STRIP SEARCHES
A Intimate search
1. An intimate search consists of the physical examination of a person’s body orifi ces other
than the mouth. The intrusive nature of such searches means the actual and potential
risks associated with intimate searches must never be underestimated.
(a) Action
2. Body orifi ces other than the mouth may be searched only:
(a) if authorised by an offi cer of inspector rank or above who has reasonable grounds
for believing that the person may have concealed on themselves:
(i) anything which they could and might use to cause physical injury to
themselves or others at the station; or
(ii) a Class A drug which they intended to supply to another or to export;
and the offi cer has reasonable grounds for believing that an intimate search is the
only means of removing those items; and
(b) if the search is under paragraph 2(a)(ii) (a drug offence search), the detainee’s
appropriate consent has been given in writing.
2A. Before the search begins, a police offi cer, designated detention offi cer or staff custody
offi cer, must tell the detainee:-
(a) that the authority to carry out the search has been given;
(b) the grounds for giving the authorisation and for believing that the article cannot be
removed without an intimate search.
2B Before a detainee is asked to give appropriate consent to a search under paragraph
2(a)(ii) (a drug offence search) they must be warned that if they refuse without good
cause their refusal may harm their case if it comes to trial, see Note A6. This warning
may be given by a police offi cer or member of police staff. A detainee who is not legally
represented must be reminded of their entitlement to have free legal advice, see Code
C, paragraph 6.5, and the reminder noted in the custody record.
3. An intimate search may only be carried out by a registered medical practitioner
or registered nurse, unless an offi cer of at least inspector rank considers this is not
practicable and the search is to take place under paragraph 2(a)(i), in which case a
police offi cer may carry out the search. See Notes A1 to A5
6724-TSO-Criminal Evidence Act.i62 626724-TSO-Criminal Evidence Act.i62 62 14/7/06 09:35:4514/7/06 09:35:45
Codes of practice – Code C Detention, treatment and questioning of persons by police offi cers
63
C
3A. Any proposal for a search under paragraph 2(a)(i) to be carried out by someone other
than a registered medical practitioner or registered nurse must only be considered as a
last resort and when the authorising offi cer is satisfi ed the risks associated with allowing
the item to remain with the detainee outweigh the risks associated with removing it. See
Notes A1 to A5
4. An intimate search under:
• paragraph 2(a)(i) may take place only at a hospital, surgery, other medical premises
or police station
• paragraph 2(a)(ii) may take place only at a hospital, surgery or other medical
premises and must be carried out by a registered medical practitioner or a
registered nurse
5. An intimate search at a police station of a juvenile or mentally disordered or otherwise
mentally vulnerable person may take place only in the presence of an appropriate adult
of the same sex, unless the detainee specifi cally requests a particular adult of the
opposite sex who is readily available. In the case of a juvenile the search may take place
in the absence of the appropriate adult only if the juvenile signifi es in the presence of
the appropriate adult they do not want the adult present during the search and the adult
agrees. A record shall be made of the juvenile’s decision and signed by the appropriate
adult.
6. When an intimate search under paragraph 2(a)(i) is carried out by a police offi cer, the
offi cer must be of the same sex as the detainee. A minimum of two people, other than
the detainee, must be present during the search. Subject to paragraph 5, no person of
the opposite sex who is not a medical practitioner or nurse shall be present, nor shall
anyone whose presence is unnecessary. The search shall be conducted with proper
regard to the sensitivity and vulnerability of the detainee.
(b) Documentation
7. In the case of an intimate search, the following shall be recorded as soon as practicable,
in the detainee’s custody record:
(a) for searches under paragraphs 2(a)(i) and (ii);
• the authorisation to carry out the search;
• the grounds for giving the authorisation;
• the grounds for believing the article could not be removed without an
intimate search
6724-TSO-Criminal Evidence Act.i63 636724-TSO-Criminal Evidence Act.i63 63 14/7/06 09:35:4514/7/06 09:35:45
Codes of practice – Code C Detention, treatment and questioning of persons by police offi cers
64
C
• which parts of the detainee’s body were searched
• who carried out the search
• who was present
• the result.
(b) for searches under paragraph 2(a)(ii):
• the giving of the warning required by paragraph 2B;
• the fact that the appropriate consent was given or (as the case may be)
refused, and if refused, the reason given for the refusal (if any).
8. If an intimate search is carried out by a police offi cer, the reason why it was impracticable
for a registered medical practitioner or registered nurse to conduct it must be recorded.
B Strip search
9. A strip search is a search involving the removal of more than outer clothing. In this Code,
outer clothing includes shoes and socks.
(a) Action
10. A strip search may take place only if it is considered necessary to remove an article
which a detainee would not be allowed to keep, and the offi cer reasonably considers
the detainee might have concealed such an article. Strip searches shall not be routinely
carried out if there is no reason to consider that articles are concealed.
The conduct of strip searches
11. When strip searches are conducted:
(a) a police offi cer carrying out a strip search must be the same sex as the detainee;
(b) the search shall take place in an area where the detainee cannot be seen by
anyone who does not need to be present, nor by a member of the opposite
sex except an appropriate adult who has been specifi cally requested by the
detainee;
(c) except in cases of urgency, where there is risk of serious harm to the detainee or
to others, whenever a strip search involves exposure of intimate body parts, there
must be at least two people present other than the detainee, and if the search is
of a juvenile or mentally disordered or otherwise mentally vulnerable person, one
of the people must be the appropriate adult. Except in urgent cases as above, a
6724-TSO-Criminal Evidence Act.i64 646724-TSO-Criminal Evidence Act.i64 64 14/7/06 09:35:4514/7/06 09:35:45
Codes of practice – Code C Detention, treatment and questioning of persons by police offi cers
65
C
search of a juvenile may take place in the absence of the appropriate adult only if
the juvenile signifi es in the presence of the appropriate adult that they do not want
the adult to be present during the search and the adult agrees. A record shall be
made of the juvenile’s decision and signed by the appropriate adult. The presence
of more than two people, other than an appropriate adult, shall be permitted only
in the most exceptional circumstances;
(d) the search shall be conducted with proper regard to the sensitivity and vulnerability
of the detainee in these circumstances and every reasonable effort shall be made
to secure the detainee’s co-operation and minimise embarrassment. Detainees
who are searched shall not normally be required to remove all their clothes at the
same time, e.g. a person should be allowed to remove clothing above the waist
and redress before removing further clothing;
(e) if necessary to assist the search, the detainee may be required to hold their arms
in the air or to stand with their legs apart and bend forward so a visual examination
may be made of the genital and anal areas provided no physical contact is made
with any body orifi ce;
(f) if articles are found, the detainee shall be asked to hand them over. If articles are
found within any body orifi ce other than the mouth, and the detainee refuses to
hand them over, their removal would constitute an intimate search, which must be
carried out as in Part A;
(g) a strip search shall be conducted as quickly as possible, and the detainee allowed
to dress as soon as the procedure is complete.
(b) Documentation
12. A record shall be made on the custody record of a strip search including the reason it
was considered necessary, those present and any result.
Notes for guidance
A1 Before authorising any intimate search, the authorising offi cer must make every
reasonable effort to persuade the detainee to hand the article over without a search.
If the detainee agrees, a registered medical practitioner or registered nurse should
whenever possible be asked to assess the risks involved and, if necessary, attend to
assist the detainee.
A2 If the detainee does not agree to hand the article over without a search, the authorising
offi cer must carefully review all the relevant factors before authorising an intimate search.
6724-TSO-Criminal Evidence Act.i65 656724-TSO-Criminal Evidence Act.i65 65 14/7/06 09:35:4514/7/06 09:35:45
Codes of practice – Code C Detention, treatment and questioning of persons by police offi cers
66
C
In particular, the offi cer must consider whether the grounds for believing an article may
be concealed are reasonable.
A3 If authority is given for a search under paragraph 2(a)(i), a registered medical practitioner
or registered nurse shall be consulted whenever possible. The presumption should be
that the search will be conducted by the registered medical practitioner or registered
nurse and the authorising offi cer must make every reasonable effort to persuade the
detainee to allow the medical practitioner or nurse to conduct the search.
A4 A constable should only be authorised to carry out a search as a last resort and when
all other approaches have failed. In these circumstances, the authorising offi cer must be
satisfi ed the detainee might use the article for one or more of the purposes in paragraph
2(a)(i) and the physical injury likely to be caused is suffi ciently severe to justify authorising
a constable to carry out the search.
A5 If an offi cer has any doubts whether to authorise an intimate search by a constable, the
offi cer should seek advice from an offi cer of superintendent rank or above.
A6 In warning a detainee who is asked to consent to an intimate drug offence search, as in
paragraph 2B, the following form of words may be used:
“You do not have to allow yourself to be searched, but I must warn you that if you refuse
without good cause, your refusal may harm your case if it comes to trial.”
 
Thanks Hannibal - I knew you'd come through with your thoughts when you spotted this (Always had great respect for your real life knowledge AND your common sense )



Working on it The 'Acting Inspector' said all the right things, and laid out the 2 directions to proceed.



I will try very hard not to quote you on this...... but won't promise anything
 
Jang Bong,

You can be treated far worse than this by many police forces around the world, I would not bat an eyelid over something like this, tell your friend she’s lucky to live in the UK and that she should relax and get on with her life.

The police though useless and stupid at times are just doing their job, and in the UK they are far more civilised and respectful of human rights than in many other countries. Following various human rights vendettas will only make the police more impotent than they already are, IMO.
 
The fact that many police forces round the world may be far worse than ours is totally irrelevant. We expect high standards from our police, and that is why they have strict guidelines to follow.

If every time someone (in any capacity) screws up, we can't just say "I'm so glad I don't live in X country where things are so much worse!" We'd end up accepting shoddy standards in everything that way!

Jang Bong - I'm sorry to hear about this, and I hope that Mrs Bong is getting over this extremely distressing experience. Very best wishes.
 
Its perfectly logical to expect high standards from your national police force, but the whole human rights issues in countries like the UK is ridiculous, IMO. The police should be feared by criminals, not laughed at.

Personally, I would prefer “shoddy standards” on how people are treated by the police as opposed to how the police do their job, which IMO is the case. The balance between human rights and effective policing is quite a fine one, but I would say in the UK it has leaned far too much towards sacrificing effective policing to protect human rights.



No offence, and don’t mean to rub salt in any wounds but I find this laughable. Mistreatment by the police caused trauma and humiliation, oh no. If people keep legally pursuing some sort of apology or compensation for such minor infringements, you may as well abolish your police force all together cause soon enough they will be made completely impotent.
 
rubbish man. there's too many thugs and incompetant idiots in the force already - they need weeded out to improve the force.
 
Addressed above - mea culpa!

Us detectives just drink coffee and leave the searching to the workers you know ;-)
 
There are no excuse for shoddy standards or downright rudeness in the Police. Yes it is hard work, but it is not impossible. I have occasionally "bitten" in verbal exchanges, but I would NEVER initiate.

The reasons for this are twofold. Firstly (to quote Skeletor on "Robor Chicken") it is common courtesy. Secondly - and more pragmatically - if an individual is ticked off about the way they have been handled then it makes my job as an investigator that much harder. Reciprocity is a great tool and it starts from the minute a person is stopped in the street.

I have only ever had two complaints in my service - one from a complete balloon and one from a guy who's arm I broke when I arrested him. I was exonnerated on both counts.

The human rights issue has to a large extent been hijacked. It alters nothing about the way the law is enforced other than the thought process behind an action. Whereas before a force might say "cuff everyone you rrest", now it might say "assess whether cuffing is necessary". I don't see the problem with that.

Remember that EVERY human right can be suspended (except the right not to be tortured) - even the right to life. The circumstances just have to be explainable.
 
Thank you - too kind. I like to think I am fairly typical of the vast majority of LEO's..but then I also like to eat tripe so what do I know!




Make sure you at least get a face to face apology! Sometimes Bobbies can get a bit "tunnel vision" on a job and lose sight of the fact we are Public SERVANTS. I am sure they did not set out to be wally's (the handbag contents comments were meant to be light-hearted I am quite sure).



If you do can you correct my crappy typing first? ;-)
 
What provisions of the European Convention on Human Rights (as set out in Schedule 1 of the Human rights Act 1998) do you feel are incapacitating the police so badly?



OK, explain this: how exactly would explaining the reasons for the search, telling her what they're searching for and having two female officers present make the search any less effective?
 
No idea mate, have not read it, and not planning to either, nor was I referring to it. What I am saying is that if the police have to concern themselves with following all sorts of guidelines as to absolutely not offend anyone, so that they don’t get sued and loose their jobs, etc.. then I don’t think they can fully concentrate on catching criminals and protecting the public. Wanna see what I mean, hang about a dodgy council estate and see how the police react towards unruly youths. Where I come from the cops will kick the crap out of you if you give them grief, not tip toe around them a like a feeble babysitter, as a result we don’t really have unruly youths.

I don’t think criminals should be treated with respect and dignity, do you?



Mate, a hunch is a good enough reason in my opinion.

EDIT: Just wanted to add. In my opinion and experience, the best way to reduce crime is to have very harsh laws and very harsh police. The logic here is quite simple, if people fear the law, they will avoid breaking it.
 
I sense your frustration, but KTC out of people does not work per se. Yep some seem to "deserve it" and I have been known to be physical from time to time;-) , but the day I cannot out-talk, out-think and out-wit one of these "chavites" is the day I hang up my helmet. The trick is to be able to back up your talk when necessary and to make them look foolish in front of their peers. Worked/works for me.



Actually yes I do. I don't think their rights should be upheld at the expense of victims or society, but as a human being I measure myself from how I treat the lowest element.

Anyone can be nice to a puppy - being kind to a slug takes more effort.




I wish this were so!



I am 50/50 on this. History has shown that this is not in fact the case, but I feel what passes for sentencing these days is laughable.

I would prefer to see more custodial sentences with an emphasis on education and rehabilitation. Few people are beyond hope and a curriculum of teaching would help enourmously. Certainly more than a "breakfast,TV, play pool, lunch,TV, dinner, lights out" regime.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Woman sues KC police officers in federal court after alleged illegal home search
Replies
0
Views
3
admin
A
A
"I've been trapped in my home for 12 years by badgers and mould"
Replies
0
Views
21
admin
A
A
Police issue plea for information on missing city man
Replies
0
Views
21
admin
A
A
Kristi Noem’s New Dog Pleads for His Life on SNL
Replies
0
Views
29
admin
A
A
Family Wants Deeper Probe Into ‘Suicide’ of South Carolina Preacher’s Wife
Replies
0
Views
21
admin
A
Back
Top