The stop and search of minors: A ‘vital police tool’?
| Date | 01 July 2018 |
| DOI | 10.1177/1748895817720485 |
| Published date | 01 July 2018 |
| Author | Simon Flacks |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
research-article2017
Article
Criminology & Criminal Justice
2018, Vol. 18(3) 364 –384
The stop and search of
© The Author(s) 2017
Reprints and permissions:
minors: A ‘vital police tool’?
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
https://doi.org/10.1177/1748895817720485
DOI: 10.1177/1748895817720485
journals.sagepub.com/home/crj
Simon Flacks
University of Westminster, UK
Abstract
Police stop and search powers have been widely criticized for the disproportionate manner
in which members of black and ethnic minority communities are targeted. However, the use
of such powers on minors in England and Wales has largely escaped comment, despite good
evidence that such practices are harmful and counter-productive. Whilst data on the stop and
search of under-10s and even toddlers has been reasonably widely reported by the mass media,
there has been little interest in the welfare of older children who are subject to such police
powers. Drawing on police data, qualitative research and information obtained through Freedom
of Information requests, this article considers the relationship between potentially corrosive stop
and search practices, young people’s use of public space and the question of vulnerability. It is
concluded that policy and practice around the use of such powers should be amended to take
account of the specific needs of individuals under the age of 18, and that children’s welfare should
be a central consideration.
Keywords
Policing, public space, race, stop and search, youth
Introduction
The practice of police stop and search, which has long concerned civil liberties groups,1
mainly in respect of black and ethnic minority (BME) communities, has recently been
the subject of renewed political attention. Both the Scarman and Stephen Lawrence
inquiries into policing,2 which followed the Brixton riots and racist killing of a black
teenager in the 1980s and 1990s respectively, highlighted the problems associated with
the use of such powers. Following the riots that took place across England in 2011,3
Home Secretary Theresa May resolved to address criticisms of the ways in which stop
Corresponding author:
Simon Flacks, University of Westminster, 4–12 Little Titchfield Street, London, W1W 7BY, UK.
Email: s.flacks@westminster.ac.uk
Flacks
365
and search tactics are deployed. The ‘Best Use of Stop and Search Scheme’, announced
in April 2014 and initially adopted by all 43 territorial police forces in England and
Wales,4 was devised in order to achieve greater transparency and ‘better outcomes’
including ‘an increase in the stop and search to positive outcome ratio’ (HO and College
of Policing, 2014: 2).
The scheme was launched in response to claims that stop and search powers continue
to be deployed in a manner that is both disproportionate and discriminatory (Bowling
and Phillips, 2007; StopWatch, 2013).5 Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary
found that 27 per cent of stop and searches did not satisfy the ‘reasonable grounds for
suspicion’ requirement, meaning more than 250,000 of the one million searches con-
ducted during the previous year could have been illegal (HMIC, 2013). As a possible
result of the renewed political focus on the tactic, there were 541,000 stop and searches
conducted by police in England and Wales in the year ending 31 March 2015, a 40 per
cent fall on the previous year (HO, 2015a). Twelve per cent of all stop and searches car-
ried out by police in England and Wales led to an arrest, an increase of 2 per cent from
the previous year (HO, 2015a). In addition to the scheme, PACE Code A, the Code of
Practice for statutory powers of stop and search, including requirements to record public
encounters by police officers and staff, was revised and relaunched in March 2015 (HO,
2015b) to help curtail the use of such powers on the basis of ‘hunch or instinct’ (para.
2.6B) or stereotypes (para. 5.1). The government remains broadly supportive of the use
of stop and search. The Home Office justifies the power as a ‘vital police tool’, particu-
larly in efforts to combat gangs, knife crime and drug offences (HO, 2013). In a position
statement, the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), often the subject of the most trench-
ant criticism, has argued that ‘stop and search is a legitimate power that is used by MPS
to protect Londoners, tackle crimes and keep [the] streets safe’ (MP, 2014).
The attempts to introduce fairness and transparency into stop and search policing
practices are welcome, albeit problematic, and will be discussed further below. However,
the purpose of this article is to highlight a hitherto largely unexplored aspect of the
debate on stop and search. Delsol and Shiner (2006) have suggested that regulation has
become too tightly bound to ‘race’ and measures of disproportionality, and that the cur-
rent focus should be broadened to include other groups that may be subject to over-
policing. The harm caused to under-18s – although particularly those from BME
communities – has remained, until recently, underreported. That changed with the reve-
lation that more than 1000 children under the age of 10 had been stopped and searched
in London within a five-year period (Travis, 2014), and that even toddlers had been
subject to stop and search powers (Barrett, 2015). A Freedom of Information (FOI)
request by a city newspaper revealed that, between 2009 and 2014, at least 576 children
between the ages of one and nine were stopped and searched in London alone (Blundy,
2015; MP, 2015b). Some data suggest that disproportionality according to race and eth-
nicity applies to under-18s as much as it does adults (APPGC, 2014). Concerns about
very young children have, however, generally eclipsed any concerns about the apprehen-
sion of older children in England and Wales, although the issue has received greater
attention in Scotland. Research published by the Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice
Research (Murray, 2014) revealed that searches, which were largely non-statutory and
required ‘consent’, were being undertaken at a rate four times higher than England and
366
Criminology & Criminal Justice 18(3)
Wales, and fell disproportionately upon children and young people (see also Murray and
Harkin, 2016). The purpose of this article is to consider the effects of stop and search
practices on all children, as defined in UK and international law as individuals under the
age of 18.6 Using insights from scholarship on policing and youth studies, it will begin
by discussing the value of stopping and searching under-18s given the availability of
research on the harms caused by the practice, but limited evidence on its effectiveness. It
will then develop the claim that much greater attention should be paid to child protection
when considering the use of such powers, drawing on evidence from interviews with
young people who have been stopped and searched, data gleaned from Freedom of
Information requests, interviews and a small survey of parents about the impact of stop
and search on their children. Finally, it will propose suggestions for reform.
Childhood, Public Space and the Legitimacy of Stop and
Search
The evidence on the effectiveness of stop and search powers, in respect of both children
and adults, is weak. Ben Bradford (2015: 119) argues that there is ‘essentially no evi-
dence relating to the effectiveness of stop and search in comparison with other policing
methods and, furthermore, very little evidence concerning the marginal effectiveness of
stop and search in apprehending or deterring offenders or reducing crime’. Rebekah
Delsol (2015: 79) suggests that the effectiveness of the tactic has been taken for granted,
particularly by police ‘who have an almost mythical belief in its efficacy’. Some research
from the USA suggested a possible deterrent effect from ‘stop, question and frisk’ strate-
gies (Weisburd et al., 2016) although the data used had their limitations (Apel, 2016),
and the policy implications remain problematic (Sweeten, 2016). On the other hand,
evidence of the harms caused by such tactics is well established. The costs include dam-
aged police/community relations, undermining cooperation and police-legitimacy, and a
reduction in public trust and confidence, (Delsol, 2015). In addition to low arrest rates
(discussed further below), research into police decision-making around the use of stop
and search found that officers are often unclear about what constitutes ‘reasonable
grounds’ and often fail to meet this requirement in practice (FitzGerald, 1999; Quinton
et al., 2000; Shiner, 2006).
Bradford (2015) suggests that stop and search may in fact encourage offending
through processes of deviancy amplification and labelling. Evidence suggests that low-
level offending among young people is fairly typical, and that they normally grow out of
it (Farrington, 1986; Gottfredson and Hirschi, 1990; Moffitt, 1993). Researchers have
thus emphasized the importance of avoiding labelling or criminalizing young people
through, for example, strategies of ‘radical non-intervention’ (Schur, 1973; see also
Goldson, 2005). A self-report study on young people’s offending in Scotland found that
once individuals had been warned or charged they were much more likely to be arrested
again than those who had committed similar offences, but were still unknown to the
police (McAra and McVie, 2005). This is supported by recent research from the USA...
To continue reading
Request your trial