I was flicking through Freeview channels last night and came across a programme called Road Wars on Sky 3. It’s a reality TV type thing that follows Thames Valley Police’s “proactive squad”. Here’s a transcript of the bit that got my heckles up [with comments].
Titles: Andy and Chris; Slough; Thursday 20:32
Narrator: Andy and Chris pull alongside a red car in Slough. They take a long look inside, and decide to speak to the occupants.
Andy and Chris: [Inaudible. I think they are finishing the conversation about whether or not to stop the car. The programme gives no indication of why they decide to stop the car.]
Andy or Chris:: We’ll have them here then.
Narrator: It’s all fairly routine, and once the blue lights come on the driver quickly pulls over to the side of the road.
Chris or Andy: Too easy.
Andy or Chris: It is. [Inaudible. Something about "clocked 'em"?]
Narrator: Andy keeps it friendly as he checks out the driver.
Andy (to the driver): Good night? Where you going then?
Driver: Going to a party. [This is very civil. At this point I'd already be on the defensive. I don't generally tell strangers about my movements.]
Andy: You’re going to a party? Nice one, whereabouts is that? (To a passenger): How you doing mate? [He's just pretending to be friendly. Really he's looking for an excuse to arrest the driver.]
Driver: Stoke Poges [sp? A place in Slough, presumably.]
Andy: Stoke Poges. Do you live round there do you?
Passenger: [Inaudible.]
Andy (to passenger): Oh you do? Okay. [Again, when people I don't know accost me in the street and ask where I live, I generally don't tell them.]
Narrator: In a well worn routine, Chris, Lester to his friends, talks to the passengers.
Andy: Do you mind being on TV?
Driver (now out of the car): No, no.
Andy: What have you got, let’s have a look.
Driver: [Inaudible. Something about a cash card. It looks like the driver has offered this for identification.]
Andy: Okay, let’s just take some details from you.
Chris (to passengers): Is that yours? Very nice!
Andy (to Chris): What’s that, the dog in the front?
Chris: [Inaudible. Laughs. More fake friendliness.]
Driver: I’m not trying to be funny but how come I’ve been stopped, man?
Andy: Because you…
Chris: You car was all steamed up, we couldn’t see who was in it. [This is a reason to stop someone?]
Narrator: But when Chris asks for names, the friendliness starts to evaporate.
Chris: Who else is in the car with you, Calvin?
Driver: Ask them.
Chris: They go something to hide? [Yes -- they have a legitimate desire to be wary of strangers, especially strangers who might want to be violent towards them (i.e. throw them in jail).]
Driver: It’s up to them, isn’t it? [This is the right thing to do. I wouldn't give my friends' details to the police either, without their permission, in the same way I don't put my friends' details on this blog.]
Chris (to passengers): He doesn’t want to tell us your names, boys.
Passenger: I’m not telling you my name.
Chris: Why not? [Because I don't know you and I don't know why you want to know my name and I am suspicious of your intentions toward me?]
Passenger: Why should I fucking tell you my name?
Chris: Because I’d like to meet you. Introduce you: “I’m Chris, who are you?”
Passenger: Why do you want to know?
Chris: Why not? What have you got to hide then? [Plenty of things that are none of your business.]
Passenger: [Inaudible.]
Chris: Don’t swear at me. I’m just chatting to you.
Passenger: [Inaudible.]
Chris: Why not?
Passenger: Because I’m not. Simple as. Are you going to arrest me for not telling you my name?
Chris: I’m not going to arrest you no. Who said I’m going to arrest you?
There’s an edit here. It looks like Chris has handed the passenger his warrant card.
Chris: Well look at it.
Passenger: [Inaudible.]
Chris: Well I tell you what, you swear at me one more time –
Passenger: I’m not swearing at you.
Chris: You’ve sworn at me three times.
Passenger: [Inaudible.]
Chris: Listen, if you swear at me one more time you’re gonna be arrested section five of the public order act. [So much for "I'm just chatting to you" and "who said I'm going to arrest you?". It seems that simply saying certain words is enough excuse for Chris to threaten violence against someone who is just trying to get to a party without being harassed.]
Passenger: [Inaudible].
Chris: Yeah, you might have heard it. One more time, you’re coming in, mate.
Passenger: [Inaudible...] section five is about. If I don’t swear — (referring to the torch) Don’t point that in my face, man.
Chris: Is that pointed at your face?
Passenger It was that time, it was.
Chris I told you — oi! I told you to stop swearing.
There is another edit. The passenger appears to have relented.
Passenger: That’s my ID.
Chris: Let’s have a look then, please.
Passenger: No, I’ll hold it myself.
[Chris closes the door and walks off.]
Passenger: Aw, don’t slam the door.
Narrator: And now Andy has discovered the driver doesn’t appear on the driving license database. Oh dear.
Andy: I need to have a word Calvin. [Andy takes the driver by the arm and walks him towards the car.] You’re under arrest, mate.
Driver: Whoah, why?
Andy: You’re under arrest because I’ve just checked you on two different databases, and they’re not showing that you exist.
Now we’ve got to the heart of the matter! If you’re not on the database, you don’t exist! You need to be arrested and questioned, because clearly if you’re not on the database you have something to hide and need to be dealt with.
Driver: Whoah, whoah, whoah, you’re joking!
Andy: No, mate, I’m not. Sit in the car.
Driver: Come on. Can I get my keys?
Andy: Sit in the car.
Driver: [Inaudible...] I don’t exist or something?
Andy: Sit in the car.
Driver: [Inaudible...] Wait, wait, wait [he appears confused and wants to try and reason with Andy. But Andy just threatens violence.]
Andy: I’ll ask you nicely one more time, sit in the car. Sit in the car.
Driver: Oh, come on. Nooooooooo.
Andy: Sit in the car. I ain’t going to ask you again.
Driver: All right, all right.
Narrator: Finally in the car, the driver insists the database is wrong. [But Andy and Chris know that the database is never wrong.] It’s all getting a bit heated.
Driver: I’m giving you genuine details. I am Calvin Stuart. And you’re telling me I’m not?
Andy: No.
Driver: What do you mean? What do you want me to be? Don’t be silly, man. Come on now.
Andy: Calvin, have you quite finished?
Driver: No I’m not having it. Go on, what have you got to say? All right, take me to the station, come on. [That was the wrong thing to say. He should be making it clear that this all very inconvenient and that he would like to be allowed to continue on his way.]
Andy: All right.
Outside, Chris is talking to the passenger but we can’t hear what he is saying.
Passenger: Get out of my face, man.
Chris: You’re not going to listen to me, are you?
Passenger: No, just not in my face.
Chris: Right, go away, then. [He goes away.]
Narrator: Andy decides the confusion can only be sorted out at the police station, and arrests the driver. [You're not on the database, therefore you have to be abducted and questioned.]
Andy: He’s not going to listen to reason, so we’ll do it back at the nick. [I don't know what other option the driver was given.]
Narrator: [Ready for this?] Safely back at the nick, it turns out the driver has given a slightly different spelling of his name to the one on his license, and is released without charge. But by that time, his mates had gone to the party — in his car.
So there you have it. You can be stopped while going about your lawful business for no apparent reason (the car didn’t look steamed up to me and there was no suggestion that the car or the driving was unsafe) and arrested for no other reason than your details don’t match the database.
Welcome to the database state.
It appears to me from reading that transcript that the police officers were doing their job perfectly professionally – trying to keep things as good humoured as possible. If they suspect a driver has given false details, they are entirely within their rights to arrest that driver for the purpose of confirming identity. This is just basic police work and the example you have given could have happened anywhere in the world – except that, in most countries, the police would have been far less patient.
Except that these officers never once stated what offence they suspected had been committed which occasioned them to stop the vehicle. And they simply persistently aggravated the occupants in order to get them heated up so that they could be threatened with a trumped-up public order charge. If this is what “Stu” thinks is “professional” then these are professional bullies.
Assuming UK Police still need “due cause” to stop a vehicle and question the occupants, the officers here were bang out of order. Car windows steamed up falls into the category of “half an excuse is better than none”. I would have demanded they disclose their “due cause” and not let them move on to identity until they produced a legitimate reason for the “stop and search”. Never a good lawyer when you really need one.
Of course, with being linked to from Samizdata things could get quite busy here for a while…
Give nothing to the paramilitary wing of the Labour party without it being qualified. And nothing that they are not entitled to. AFAIR it is an offence not to identify yourself if you are the driver of a vehicle; the passengers are not required to.
Remember folks – professional only means you get paid to do it.
blah blah yawn typical anti-police rubbish
if you lot had put any thought into what a copper deals with day in day out I would have some time for you but as it is you seem to just want to complain…you really have no idea what you’re talking about do you?
I’d be very careful about the assumptions you make.
What is that supposed to mean? You’re just waffling making anti-police complaints…I hope you never find yourself in a position where you have to ring for boys in blue to come to your aid, and if you do, that those officers you ask to risk their lives for your sake haven’t actually read the anti-police comments you made here. Did something like this once happen to you and that’s why you’re so against the police?
They had no good reason to pull them over in the first place so spare us the “Oh they are just doing their job, God bless the Boys in Blue” crap. A pure quota filling fishing expedition.
sorry but I am getting sick of this and your insistence that the police pick on people for no reason. They do not ergo if your mates were stopped it was with good cause i.e. the officers had good reason to be suspicious. Once again I must ask whether you have yourself been caught doing something naughty and that is where your anti-police attitudes stem from? It seems highly, highly likely to me.
Lets face it police are dump fucking wankers, who often don’t know the law themselves. Once you turn the other foot on to them and you start asking questions they usally become quite “DUMB” stuck.
Yes thank you for showing us what ignorant, unintelligent sods anti-police sods are. I wonder if you would like to repeat your comments to an actual police officer. Somehow I doubt it.
Whilst I am fully aware that the job is difficult, that doesn’t excuse the complete lack of professionalism shown by – in my experience – the vast majority of police in the UK now. Living beside a police training college, the behaviour & language exhibited by the uniformed individuals wandering around the area can only be described as utterly disgusting. Oh, and let’s not forget arrestable if mere members of the public were to behave like that.
As is usual, you want to turn it around in the usual fashion – if you’re “against” the police you must therefore be smeared as being a criminal in some way; this then justifies your attitude in dismissing any complaints against you. A fairly classic technique for trying to undermine individuals, frequently used by bullies. I am, of course, assuming from your attitude/persecution complex that you are in, and probably under around 35ish.
Let’s face it – the only good police officer now is the one who has quit in disgust at what the service has become. Those who are closer to their retirement (again, IME) are merely hanging on until they can get their pension.
Funny you should say that, TPO: a very good friend of mine is about to quit the Met due to being so disgusted at how it is run. A story for another day…
I cannot understand why you are all being so anti-Police. Look at it from the other angle. If they had not stopped this car and it went on to be involved in a fatal accident, everyone would be jumping about demanding to know why the Police hadn’t stopped them before. If this guy had been upfront with them from the beginning, then none of this would have happened. The old saying is true: if you have nothing to hide then you shouldn’t have a problem giving people the information they want. The police aren’t strangers, they are The Police.
“everyone would be jumping about demanding to know why the Police hadn’t stopped them before”
And the answer would be, “because we had no reason to stop them as they had committed no crime.”
“If this guy had been upfront with them from the beginning, then none of this would have happened.”
As it happened, he didn’t hide anything. He told the police his name and they didn’t believe him because the database was wrong.
“if you have nothing to hide then you shouldn’t have a problem giving people the information they want”
What is your annual income?