AIBU to think the police were out of order?

[Cailleachian]

DS1 (18) has chronic insomnia. A about 6 month back, he started taking nightwalks as a way of wearing himself out and clearing his mind. Sometimes DS2 (17) keeps him company, Tonight, they went out for a walk about 11pm and about 1/2hour later DS2 came bolting in the door, shouting "Mum, Mum, its the police". My first thought was that one of them had got in a fight or been hurt.

I answered the door and a male and female police officer are standing there with DS1. The man asks to come in, telling me that he is here to charge DS2 with breach of the peace.

It transpires that they were stopped by the woman, who was questioning them about why they were walking about and whether they were from a "unit"(?!) when the man came over and started shouting at them and demanding to search them. DS1 was searched, but when DS2 was searched apparently he kept backing away, at which point the man grabbed his hands and pinned him against a wall. DS2 then swore at him repeatedly. Thoughout being told this DS2 is very upset, keeps interrupting the man over minutiae (and at times I felt like was trying to sort out DS1 and DS2's squabbles), but ultimately both of them agree that this is what happened.

In the end he didnt charge him, but to be honest, I'm a bit outraged that he even considered it. I dont know why my sons were stopped (acting suspiciously, out late at night while under 18, area where breakins happen were all reasons I was given). I dont know why he wasnt able to de-escalate a stop and search without physical aggression. And above all I dont understand why he thought it was a child protection issue, given that the only person that assaulted him in the street at night was the policeman himself.

Go-on Mumsnet, give me your best pearl clutching.

This thread shows that so many people have no idea about their own civil liberties/anyone else's. PACE 84's codes are useful for the general public not just police for purposes of being informed if nothing else.

Christ, who would want to be a copper nowadays....

Because they might not actually have anything to apologise for.......

Let's see. The receipt is key here. The fact it's not been produced so far is ... intriguing. Although I'm sure it exists.

If it doesn't, with the OP insisting on proceeding, they're on shaky ground. And rightly so.

It's a shame we don't reach more people to question authority ahead of respecting it. It's only the dishonest and untrustworthy that have anything to fear then.

Christ, who would want to be a copper nowadays....

(looks at recruitment figures)

plenty of people it seems. Including some who really, really shouldn't

The police have a hard enough job without the public making complaints about them. They sometimes make mistakes by arresting people who they think might be a threat to public safety but I rather they did that then let some serial killer slip through the net.

I was recently watching a programme about the murder of Molly Mclaren - I can only imagine the pain her parents are going through because the police didn't take his stalking seriously.

I forgot to post this link about Molly

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-48520057

professor The op’s son is at liberty to decline accepting it and may well have done so. And it can be issued retrospectively.

And let’s face it, even if it is retrospectively issued, it isn’t going to change many posters opinion.

It’s just a small slip of paper, takes seconds to fill in.

Anecdotally, from someone I know who was an officer, I've been told the job attracts two broad groups of people:

1. nice people like you or I, who just want to do a good job at whatever they do
2. egotists who want to bully people (maybe their parents didn't love them enough, maybe they got bullied at school - now it's payback time)

They said the type 1s would often deal with difficult situations incredibly skillfully and just generally made the city a better place.
The type 2s would go around looking for trouble, seeing who they could wind up, hoping to find the next member of the public to humiliate.

I've no real evidence for it. But psychologically, it does makes sense. Are you a petty, inadequate, sadistic man looking to exact revenge on society for a difficult childhood? Join the police!

Which is a shame, because they said the good ones were really, really good.

When I was in my late teens, I regularly used to wander around at night. I was stopped a few times and asked what I was doing, probably because as a lone female they were concerned about my welfare. To be honest it annoyed the hell out of me at the time but I can now see why it happens.

You need to tell your sons to be polite and co-operative with the police, even if the police are rude (I was pulled over driving once for something minor and the policeman was an arsehole so I know they don't always act 100% professionally.) Remember the police have the power in these situations.

@Blistory still the same? They introduced themselves, searched and when DS2 “repeatedly swore at the Police Officer and backed away” they took their names and addresses and bought them home to their parent.

If he acted as the OP has stated then very well couldn’t have allowed them in the car without establishing they had no weapon or drugs on them. In some cases deaths in custody are contributed to by Police Officers not searching properly and the person hiding and swallowing drugs on route to the station, hospital etc.

Hopefully (if she wants to) the OP will update when she receives the receipt so she has more information.

The police have a hard enough job without the public making complaints about them.

The retort to that is the police shouldn't go around acting in a way to attract complaints.

Or would you rather we scrapped the police complaints procedure completely, and just ignore any and all wrongdoing by officers ?

Since we do have a police complaints procedure (and it's by no means certain the OP is actually embarking on that journey) why should someone not use it, if their feel aggrieved ?

(re caution)
professor The op’s son is at liberty to decline accepting it and may well have done so. And it can be issued retrospectively.

It can only be "issued" if the suspect admits guilt.

@MrsBethel I actually agree with you on the post relating to types.

2. are not usually tolerated by their colleagues for long and with hope fall on their swords.

Unfortunately they bring down the hard work and reputation or type 1. Difficult to weed them out during the recruitment process though.

professor What are you talking about re “”guilt”? I’m talking about the search receipt, that’s not an admission of any guilt or wrong doing.

This thread contains a lot of useful information.

Not lest, I had always wondered how those parents of teenagers who got up to "stuff" when not at home could justify it.

@Cailleachian
Not once have you accepted your sons behaviour was unneccessary.
You live on another planet; his discomfort? Is that before or after he could have stabbed them? Holding his wrist isn’t getting physical, I’d be mortified if my son behaved like such an arse and I’m mortified by you and your entitled attitude, wake up to your two little princes, 17/18 guys aren’t out for the night air, it’s laughable you’re so gullible & believe the stories they tell you.

professor What are you talking about re “”guilt”? I’m talking about the search receipt, that’s not an admission of any guilt or wrong doing.

Apologies, I read it that you suggested a caution could be issued retrospectively in response to my asking why the OPs son wasn't charged with resisting arrest.

Quite agree a receipt can be issued retrospectively in the sense that there are often operational pressures that prevent it being issued at the time or as soon after as practically possible.

It may be valid, it may not. But either way it is a legal document issued by the police explaining their actions and as such is open to challenge, and the laws of perjury.

I'm sorry, but do you not read the papers? Do you not see the news?
Do you not know about the mass of knife crime? Or County lines?
Those officers weren't wrong in stopping to question and search two young men walking the streets late on a week night.

Your son kept putting his hand in his pocket whilst he was being questioned by the female officer, hence the Male officer getting involved and asking to search them.

They were bang out of order.in their reaction to two police officers who had already shown their badges. They should have complied in a respectful manner.
Dont act guilty if you're not and all that.

I think you need to talk to your kids. Teach them when swearing is appropriate or not because all they did was escalate the situation.

professor We also don’t have cautions in Scotland.

professor We also don’t have cautions in Scotland.

Argh ! I drifted back into E&W again.

Bloody hell Bookworm, what sort of weird world do you live in where people don’t nightwalk for pleasure?
How else do you starwatch, engage with foxes and bats, enjoy the solitude and the cool and the difference that night brings? The phases of the moon, the shadows and the lights?
DS has loved the night for a couple of decades, been walking alone since he was 14 or so.
But people like you are why I taught him his script, and how to respond.

I’d agree that I don’t the police have reasonable grounds to search in this scenario. I guess unless a crime had just happened in the near vicinity and they were looking for someone, but they’d surely have said that.

There’s a lot of interesting YouTube videos of people (who know their rights) being stopped by the police and politely declining to give their name or be searched. The police don’t like it but when the person repeatedly asks them (while filming) to state what crime they’re suspected of committing and the police can’t think of anything then it’s pointed out that you don’t have to comply.

Now whether you should choose to or not just to make the police’s job easier is a different story.

@november
I actually praised you further back.
The OP lives in an urban, high crime area so not the best for wandering for two young guys. Yes I do go out at night with my dogs we live in a very quiet semi rural small town but if I lived elsewhere I’d rethink my habits.
I think you’re looking at this through rose tinted specs here. I doubt these guys are star gazing 🙄

But swearing at the police is normally the quickest way to be arrested for a breach of the peace/public order offence going.

If that was me then I wouldn’t want to be randomly searched either! Some police officers have let the power go to their heads honestly

There’s a lot of interesting YouTube videos of people (who know their rights) being stopped by the police and politely declining to give their name or be searched.

There's an excellent US one with a lawyer (who looks a little too much like Jimmy McGill/Saul Goodman) who explains clinically why talking to the police without a lawyer is a Bad Idea. It's then followed up with an interview with a policeman that confirms it. (Best bit: Q: Officer, has anything anyone ever said to you in your 30 years on the force when being questioned caused you to change your mind about arresting them. A: No.)

Admittedly US and E&W law aren't comparable (except in agreeing Freeman of the Land is bollocks). But the underlying principles are valid.

Going back to E&W photographers used to carry a card (occasionally issued by a local police force) explaining their rights to the police, since someone somewhere seemed to invent the crime of "taking photos in public". I think the repeated re-education (and lawsuits) finally sunk in.