New legislation, watch out!
Discussion
POLICE REFORM ACT 2002
This is relevant to everyone and is a significant change in the law relating to powers of arrest.
I would hope that no one on PH (except possibly outlaw
) will be affected but I think you should all be aware of the implications of the changes.
First I have to describe briefly what an arrestable offence is.
There are two types of arrestable offence.
1. Offences that carry on first conviction maximum sentences of 5 years imprisonment or more
2. Those deemed by Section 24(2) of P.A.C.E. 1984.
These are offences which do not attract such long sentences but are deemed serious enough by parliament to give Police the power to take your liberty. There are about 20 such offences
3. There are also offences to which parliament have attached statutory powers of arrest ( arrest with conditions of when and how the are applicable)
Much of this new stuff is aimed at criminal offences but some at motoring ones. IT CAME INTO EFFECT ON 1ST OCTOBER 2002
Three additional offences have now been included under Section 24(2) P.A.C.E. 1984
a) Making off without payment Sect 3 Theft Act 1978.(Bilking), commonly done when motorists fail to pay for petrol, leave a taxi after the journey without paying or leaving a restaurant without paying.
Previous to 1/10/02 there was a power of arrest which could only be excercised if the offender was in the process of making off (i.e. immediately the person left the premises where the payment was due)
(b) Driving whilst disqualified Sect 103 (1)(b) Road Traffic Act 1988.
This also had a power of arrest attached to it and it could only be excerised if the offender was actually driving and the Officer had to be in uniform.
From 1/10/02 the power has been extended so that any Police officer can arrest (in uniform or not) and also it can be excersised after the event (days ,weeks years, later) Therefore it relates to a person who has driven whilst disqualified
c) Assaulting a Police Officer in execution of his duty Sect 89(1) Police act 1996.
This is now an arrestable offence. Prior to that date there was no power of arrest. The offender had to be reported for summons ( Or was usually arrested under provisions of Section 25 P.A.C.E or for assaulting an officer in a manner likely to cause a breach of the peace)
This also applies to any person that is assisting a constable with an arrest if they are assaulted.
The creation of these new arrestable offences does not apply to those offences committed before 1/10/02
Secondly. Sect 24(3)(b) P.A.C.E. has been ammended to clarify attempts, inciting, aiding and abetting, counsel or procuring to commit any offence under Sect 24(2) P.A.C.E.
These will now constitute arrestable offences in their own right without prejudice to the Criminal attempts act 1981
**VERY IMPORTANT**
Sect 49 Police Reform Act 2002
Creates a specific statutory power of arrest for Sect 163(4) Road Traffic Act 1988 Failure to Stop a Vehicle for Police on requirement. It provides a constable in uniform with the power to arrest without warrant, a person whom he has reasonable cause to suspect has committed that offence.
This section has a further power to enter and search premises for the purpose of effecting an arrest for the above offence. It has been included under Section 17(1)(c) P.A.C.E. which gives Police powers to enter and search for offenders (anywhere without warrant, except a foriegn embassy).
There are other changes which affect the taking of (Drink drive) bloods samples for testing without consent under certain circumstances which I will post if any one is desperate to know but it will make this one a long one post
The most important part about this is that all the above offences are now arrestable without warrant and Police can enter anywhere they reasonably believe the offender to be at any time after the offence to affect the arrest. They are major changes to the law and to you if you are not aware of how it has changed.
As far as I can see this will be a huge change where Police pursuit tactics are concerned as there will no longer be a need to engage a pursuit for fail to stop a making off without payment offence or disqualified driver (catching him in the act is no longer necessary)
Be careful out there guys (and girls)
mad
>>> Edited by madcop on Sunday 6th October 19:39
This is relevant to everyone and is a significant change in the law relating to powers of arrest.
I would hope that no one on PH (except possibly outlaw
) will be affected but I think you should all be aware of the implications of the changes. First I have to describe briefly what an arrestable offence is.
There are two types of arrestable offence.
1. Offences that carry on first conviction maximum sentences of 5 years imprisonment or more
2. Those deemed by Section 24(2) of P.A.C.E. 1984.
These are offences which do not attract such long sentences but are deemed serious enough by parliament to give Police the power to take your liberty. There are about 20 such offences
3. There are also offences to which parliament have attached statutory powers of arrest ( arrest with conditions of when and how the are applicable)
Much of this new stuff is aimed at criminal offences but some at motoring ones. IT CAME INTO EFFECT ON 1ST OCTOBER 2002
Three additional offences have now been included under Section 24(2) P.A.C.E. 1984
a) Making off without payment Sect 3 Theft Act 1978.(Bilking), commonly done when motorists fail to pay for petrol, leave a taxi after the journey without paying or leaving a restaurant without paying.
Previous to 1/10/02 there was a power of arrest which could only be excercised if the offender was in the process of making off (i.e. immediately the person left the premises where the payment was due)
(b) Driving whilst disqualified Sect 103 (1)(b) Road Traffic Act 1988.
This also had a power of arrest attached to it and it could only be excerised if the offender was actually driving and the Officer had to be in uniform.
From 1/10/02 the power has been extended so that any Police officer can arrest (in uniform or not) and also it can be excersised after the event (days ,weeks years, later) Therefore it relates to a person who has driven whilst disqualified
c) Assaulting a Police Officer in execution of his duty Sect 89(1) Police act 1996.
This is now an arrestable offence. Prior to that date there was no power of arrest. The offender had to be reported for summons ( Or was usually arrested under provisions of Section 25 P.A.C.E or for assaulting an officer in a manner likely to cause a breach of the peace)
This also applies to any person that is assisting a constable with an arrest if they are assaulted.
The creation of these new arrestable offences does not apply to those offences committed before 1/10/02
Secondly. Sect 24(3)(b) P.A.C.E. has been ammended to clarify attempts, inciting, aiding and abetting, counsel or procuring to commit any offence under Sect 24(2) P.A.C.E.
These will now constitute arrestable offences in their own right without prejudice to the Criminal attempts act 1981
**VERY IMPORTANT**
Sect 49 Police Reform Act 2002
Creates a specific statutory power of arrest for Sect 163(4) Road Traffic Act 1988 Failure to Stop a Vehicle for Police on requirement. It provides a constable in uniform with the power to arrest without warrant, a person whom he has reasonable cause to suspect has committed that offence.
This section has a further power to enter and search premises for the purpose of effecting an arrest for the above offence. It has been included under Section 17(1)(c) P.A.C.E. which gives Police powers to enter and search for offenders (anywhere without warrant, except a foriegn embassy).
There are other changes which affect the taking of (Drink drive) bloods samples for testing without consent under certain circumstances which I will post if any one is desperate to know but it will make this one a long one post
The most important part about this is that all the above offences are now arrestable without warrant and Police can enter anywhere they reasonably believe the offender to be at any time after the offence to affect the arrest. They are major changes to the law and to you if you are not aware of how it has changed.
As far as I can see this will be a huge change where Police pursuit tactics are concerned as there will no longer be a need to engage a pursuit for fail to stop a making off without payment offence or disqualified driver (catching him in the act is no longer necessary)
Be careful out there guys (and girls)
mad
>>> Edited by madcop on Sunday 6th October 19:39
quote:
POLICE REFORM ACT 2002
...
It provides a constable in uniform with the power to arrest without warrant, a person whom he has reasonable cause to suspect has committed that offence.
...
And how did this get past the European Court of Human Rights? What does 'Reasonable cause to suspect' mean exactly? The criminal drove a red car so they can arrest anyone driving a red car?
quote:
quote:
POLICE REFORM ACT 2002
...
It provides a constable in uniform with the power to arrest without warrant, a person whom he has reasonable cause to suspect has committed that offence.
...
All UK law has to be compliant with that of human rights. It has therefore been looked at by the relevant authority before it became law. The only way to challenge it is to bring a breach of the act before the courts on HR issues. This however will now be heard in a UK domestic court and not Strasbourg
Reasonable cause to suspect is exactly what it says. It would be for a court to decide if the reasonable cause was in fact reasonable cause.
Just because someone was driving a red car would obviously not be reasonable, but a red car, make xxxx, model xxxx, part index RE02 XXX would probably be reasonable cause that it was the specific car. Would it be reasonable to arrest anyone who may at the time it is stopped be driving it, or later on, the registered owner?
Just because they were the registered owner, may not in fact be reasonable.
The police do not arrest cars.( well nearly never)
There would have to be some reasonable cause to suspect it was the person to be arrested,
Knowledge of that person or a descrption of them or possibly information from some else that knows them would, I assume, be reasonable.
"And how did this get past the European Court of Human Rights? What does 'Reasonable cause to suspect' mean exactly? The criminal drove a red car so they can arrest anyone driving a red car?"
Ok but don't forget that it goes both ways, you get falsly arrested, you sue the police.
The BIB will be well aware of that.
Thanx Madcop.
>> Edited by MoJocvh on Sunday 6th October 22:53
Ok but don't forget that it goes both ways, you get falsly arrested, you sue the police.
The BIB will be well aware of that.
Thanx Madcop.
>> Edited by MoJocvh on Sunday 6th October 22:53
quote:
Cheers Steve
My concern is the situation where someone is listening to loud music and not looking in their mirror when they are being signalled to stop or, when a constable performing traffic duty indicates you should stop and you misinterpret that it was you that in fact was being required to stop.
The spirit of the legislation I think is to deal with those who intend not to stop and actively get away.
However the Act does not actually say that. All it says is the power is activated if the driver fails to stop on the requirement of a constable (That also includes every rank from P.C. to Chief Constable).
I would imagine that common sense would prevail when excersising this particular power but it is, I think open to a wide interpretation and could apply to somone that genuinely makes a mistake.
quote:
As far as I can see this will be a huge change where Police pursuit tactics are concerned as there will no longer be a need to engage a pursuit for fail to stop a making off without payment offence or disqualified driver (catching him in the act is no longer necessary)
This will therefore mean that police will stop killing innocent people in pursuits (and so too will the villains).
*holding breath...*
quote:
This will therefore mean that police will stop killing innocent people in pursuits (and so too will the villains).
*holding breath...*
I would hope that it would certainly have an effect on a number of pursuits that will now be unecessary.
However, villains do not have any regard or tactics for driving situations. They will still continue to drive lke idiots just like they do now when there is not a Police vehicle in sight.
So that occassion when "someone I know " went past a parked up motorway car at 150+, locked eyes with plod as he spilt his coffee, and then took the instant decision that at 150 they could put a fair distance between them before the Volvo was even in gear. So went for it, bolted to "someone else I knows" house, locked the bike in the garage and stood in the front garden chatting and looking innocent, might not be so easy to get away with anymore then ?????
All names and locations omitted to protect the guilty.
" went past a parked up motorway car at 150+, locked eyes with plod as he spilt his coffee, and then took the instant decision that at 150 they could put a fair distance between them before the Volvo was even in gear. So went for it, bolted to "someone else I knows" house, locked the bike in the garage and stood in the front garden chatting and looking innocent, might not be so easy to get away with anymore then ????? All names and locations omitted to protect the guilty.
quote:
...... bolted to "someone else I knows" house, locked the bike in the garage and stood in the front garden chatting and looking innocent, might not be so easy to get away with anymore then ?????
All names and locations omitted to protect the guilty.
In theory, they may well have to stand around looking innocent for a great deal of time and sleep light as well.
In practice, the Police will have to have reasonable suspicion that the door they crash at 0600 a.m. was in fact the driver at the time of the 'failure to stop' not just the registered keeper ( somewhat difficult if they are wearing a crash helmet and have a small number plate at that kind of speed). In any case the offender would have to be given a signal to stop and ignore that signal. Having been stationary on the hard shoulder and recovering from 3rd degree burns to the wedding tackle,I would imagine that any signal to the offending rider to stop, would have been so delayed as to have been unnoticed by him.
quote:
but a red car, make xxxx, model xxxx, part index RE02 XXX would probably be reasonable cause that it was the specific car.
So thats why there are so many TVR's with a TVR registration
the fact it was a tvr and the reg started tvr carnt be a reasonable cause cos there are at least 3 tvrs near me with that as part of the reg...
cool
quote:
But does the fact that the signal is not noticed by the offender have any relevance , if the officer has given the signal then he/she has done their part.
My point entirely. If the driver is unsure that the signal was meant for him/her and continues then it may have relevance. Especially if the officer is on foot or point duty.
I think though that for a signal from behind that is ignored and the driver then attempts to get away rather than not understand, then it would be more relevant
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff