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.

You don’t think civilians should be stopped and searched, in any circumstances?

" I dont think that police officers should be doing routine searches of civilians at all". Should they never search anybody?

The law seems right to me - they need reasonable suspicion. They cannot do routine searches.

It doesn't matter WHY they stopped them, your son is a kid who has now repeatedly sworn at a police officer. It's not a good look. They weren't cooperative.

It clearly does matter why they stopped him! They need to have reasonable suspicion, as above. The fact that he is young or black or rude or gay or whatever is not enough.

@Cailleachian

Absolutely not, of course I don't. It's horrible every time and my heart goes out to him when it happens and people walk past to take a second look etc. Which isn't just the once, in the evening like it was for your sons.

BUT we are also keen to be part of the solution by saying I'm a civil way "mate I've been stopped a few times this week around here and I'm just a regular guy going about his business" instead of swearing at the police. It's a ridiculous thing to do when they've asked non violently for you to comply.

What good does it do to swear at them? We are very active politically and participate in actively encouraging change both within the police force and the wider community.

Are your sons active participants in campaigns related to stop and search? Or just don't like it because it's happened to them once?

Kids swearing at police officers so the officers have to waste their time visiting the parents home is not helping anyone. At all.

All my "nightly walks" at 17 involved smoking a spliff . Maybe that's why your son got a bit paranoid and hyper? He had just witnessed your other son be safely searched so the excuse of him doubting the police cant be used.
You wouldnt be kicking off like this if it was YOUR house that just had an attempted break in. You would be relieved of the extra patrolling.
I am also mind boggled that you have never once ever taught your son the golden rule of how to speak to police DO NOT SWEAR AT THEM!!!!! You can certainly have a conversation with them to ask why they are stopping but just keep it respectful. You dont expect to be swore at while doing your job do you?
I think you really need to have a word with yourself about your innocent darling boys(s). Im sure they are lovely lads and everything but they will be upto far more than what they let on to you. Not saying that's wrong but just dont be so naive. Sorry, but at their age i was going to raves and getting off my face ....

@Wavescrashingonthebeach

You are bang on! They can't do wrong for doing right! Stop the "good" people and they are in trouble... but you don't know who the "bad" people are until you stop them - can't win!

They stopped them to talk to them. Police stop people for many reasons, matching descriptions, seeking witnesses, to check their welfare it’s not unreasonable.

The female officer approached on her own, this is likely to maintain a friendlier approach, she identified herself.

The male officer noted the hands in pockets, not unreasonable to ask him to remove them, 17 year old refused, backed up and swore repeatedly at the officers.

Should they have jumped back in their car and left at that point, or is it inconceivable It raised a reasonable suspicion the lads were potentially up to no good, in a high burglary area, possibly going equipped, hiding a knife or drugs.

The two lads are an unknown risk to the officers.

In that scenario which choice would you have made in their shoes?

@FAQs I agree with you 100% - you articulated my opinion much better than me! This is a case of basic police work being complicated by some kids swearing and being difficult. Their job is tough enough already FFS.

@ThatCurlyGirl

You are bang on the mark with all your posts. Sorry your bf keeps getting stopped- hope that doesnt continue. At least he is rising above it and helping to educate the police by his manner.

Imagine the boys really were burglars. Undercover officers deployed to combat repeated burglary in an area see them wandering the streets night after night for no good reason, but never ever speak to them? What would be public opinion then?

Burglars don't walk about in stripey jumpers, eye masks and a sack labelled SWAG.

They've not been told they can't walk about late at night again as far as I can see. They've been told off about their conduct towards the Police.

And I cannot believe that the OP referred to the fact that her son has his hands in his pockets as 'minutae'. It quite clearly was the crux of the matter and the reason why the officer took responsive action. Police are attacked on a daily basis.
There are a vast plethora of reality programs (24 hours in police custody, brit cops, traffic cops etc) which follow police for the night and show some of the shit they have to put up with. OP please watch some of it cause you clearly seem to know nothing about the police.
And yes i will never dispute that SOME police are arseholes and that a small minority are bent. But most are just trying to do a very dangerous job to serve our communitys.

@ThatCurlyGirl you articulated very well I understood your points.

Thank you so much for understanding @Wavescrashingonthebeach I appreciate your words

Daughter of a white policeman and partner of a black man who is regularly stopped and searched. Lived in various places including pretty tough parts of Hackney but also nice bits of the Home Counties so I've seen a big old cross section of both criminal and non criminal activity in both.

Sometimes I feel bad for people who live in such a bubble that police dramas of this level worth getting riled up about and believe it warrants the extra paperwork for the force!

Meanwhile in the real world / Swearing at an officer is being a gobshite, you'll get bollocked by then and taken home so you feel embarrassed and your parents will tell you off (or reassure you in this case) and get on with your shift... it's not worth taking police time to follow this up in any way shape or form.

Some very odd replies here. So many people missed the fact that ds1 was compliant and very reasonable to mention ds2 being 17 so did that mean an adult had to be called.

I live in the naive suburbs of a town and have an 18yo son who would be out at 11pm on a non-school night from age 16 with legitimate excuses like

1. he was walking back from the Coop (with sweets or fizzy drinks) which shuts at 11pm
2. He was waking back from his girlfriend's house. He wasn't allowed to stay the night but allowed to stay until 11pm
3. Walking back from work
4. Wanting to chat with gf on phone without nosy siblings listening
5. Probably smoking his secret e-cig that he thinks I don't know about.

He's white and has been questioned by police when out at that time. He's sullen and awkward with me but has been honest and helpful with officers who have walked him home. Ds accepts that some people will be spooked by a lone Male at night dressed in black and sat on a bench so isn't angry when he suspects a certain local dog walker reported him to the police hence being questioned. Luckily talking calmly and honestly led to the police leaving him alone quickly. This has happened a handful of times to him.

What does your ds2 think about his actions today? Does he accept that putting his hands in his pockets could be interpreted at him getting a knife out of his pocket and walking backwards could be seen as a sign that he's about to bolt? Some people in the police are dicks who are police officers for the wrong reasons but in this case I think that ds2 could have helped diffuse the situation by not appearing shifty with his actions. What does ds2 think about how ds1 handled things? Is your son white? I understand that if he's not then he might be extra cautious of incidents involving the police.

While I understand the shock of your sons being stopped and searched, I think that you are unreasonable to be angrier at the police than ds2. Nobody wants to be searched but hands in pocket is understandably going to be seen by police as an aggressive act. If he'd been 18 then he could have caused ds1 stress and bother by escalating the situation.

I think there's some confusion here over whether we're discussing if the police were right based on what the law is, or what we would like it to be.

The posts based on what people think the law should say (frankly most of them!) are not really much use though!

(In fact there might be some confusion from people who don't realise that the police are subject to the law at all!)

The police were doing their job by checking your sons did not have tools on them that could be used in a burglary, as they were out late without purpose.
Your DS17 was in the wrong.

The police were doing their job by checking your sons did not have tools on them that could be used in a burglary, as they were out late without purpose.

This is simply wrong

They're either:
A. Kids who are out at night and need help. Or
B. Someone up to no good

Most people don't wander around in the middle of the night. If my child was prone to doing so, I'd prep them for the fact they will be stopped.

I don't get why people on the thread are complaining about the male officer. Either the female officer who initiated the search was conducting a legit search, in which case it's bleeding obvious that the other guy getting out of the same car flashing a similar badge is also a plod and also searching legitimately, or the female officer didn't have grounds to start searching and is the one at fault. Back-up guy appears to have been supporting her.

I'm not one to defend the police in all circs - I've met and heard about some who bring the force in disrepute - but I figure whatever caused two plods to be undercover late at night is likely to be sufficient reason to stop anyone and search.

OP, I will apologise, like a few other posters I am guilty of focussing on what I know, i.e. E&W, I checked here www.gov.scot/publications/guide-stop-search-scotland/
and yes they are supposed to give you a written receipt post search.

I will say that there is nothing wrong with them not giving their name though, in some roles they are forbidden to do so, and a lot of others discouraged, also unlike names shoulder numbers are unique. And some do have odd ones e.g I know someone who's nickname was PC Bargain because they were 241!

This thread just highlights beautiful why the police are fighting a losing battle trying to keep crime under control and order in society. I do not envy their job at all.

OP take the chip of your shoulder and teach your little darlings how to behave around authority figures or their adult lives will be very difficult indeed

I started reading this thread this morning and have just returned to it

I see the majority of reasonable posts. Have fallen on deaf ears with the OP

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.

Dear goodness. You hear some comedy gold on here but this

Grumplestilkin So its ok for them to be suspicious that these lads MAY have been smoking a joint and sesrch them accordingly.

Yet when many posters have started threads on here where they KNOW there are drugs because the stink of weed comes right inside our flats we get replies like get a life the police are too busy etc etc.

*They're either:
A. Kids who are out at night and need help. Or
B. Someone up to no good

Most people don't wander around in the middle of the night. If my child was prone to doing so, I'd prep them for the fact they will be stopped.*

They are 17 and 18 and it was 11pm. Never stayed in a pub until closing at 18yo?

DP occasionally gets stopped when he's on the way back from gigs. Mainly because he wears all black and a hat/hoodie (he's a mostly bald ageing Goth) and is the height of your average 15 year old.

He just hands over his ID, answers their questions and they say thank you, he comes home.

Because that's what happens when you aren't a fucking dick to coppers.