Institutional Racism in our policing - Dawn Butler MP

[AuntyPasta]

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/09/labour-mp-dawn-butler-stopped-by-police-in-london

The police stopped the car being driven by her friend (she was a passenger.) Unlike the elite athletes stopped with their 3 month old baby in the car www.theguardian.com/law/2020/jul/06/why-did-police-stop-and-search-bianca-williams-and-ricardo-dos-santos she’s had an apology.

AIBU to think that if she wasn’t an MP the police would be sticking by their ‘reasonable suspicion’? Is that what it takes to be dealt with fairly by the police?

@chomalungma - thanks for posting that article and putting to rest the right wing trolls’ comments identified by Butler about driver being white / flipping the video !

@SimonJT

Wrong. “Police lying about their name” doesn’t make a stop unlawful.

In the example you provide, the stop may still be entirely lawful (ie following a proper legal basis).

The failure of officers to properly identify themselves would, of course, be entirely inappropriate, but to suggest the stop itself is unlawful on that basis is legally just plain wrong.

[quote Balhammom]@SimonJT

Wrong. “Police lying about their name” doesn’t make a stop unlawful.

In the example you provide, the stop may still be entirely lawful (ie following a proper legal basis).

The failure of officers to properly identify themselves would, of course, be entirely inappropriate, but to suggest the stop itself is unlawful on that basis is legally just plain wrong.[/quote]
I am pretty certain SimonJT is well aware how the system is rigged works. Probably better than the officers that stop them. Certainly after you've been stopped 50 times in 10 years, you can give the next officers some pointers on where they could improve themselves.

This suggests they have to identify themselves

I’ve attached a screenshot for ease.

@SmileEachDay

This suggests they have to identify themselves

I’ve attached a screenshot for ease.

The problem is, the answer to all that is "so what" ? Serious question. What happens when the police don't follow the rules ?

ProfessorSlocombe

That is indeed a good question.

Another good question is why Balhammom
is so sure Simon is wrong. Bal would you deny that you are far more likely to get stopped and searched if you’re black?

[quote Balhammom]@SimonJT

Wrong. “Police lying about their name” doesn’t make a stop unlawful.

In the example you provide, the stop may still be entirely lawful (ie following a proper legal basis).

The failure of officers to properly identify themselves would, of course, be entirely inappropriate, but to suggest the stop itself is unlawful on that basis is legally just plain wrong.[/quote]
It does become unlawful when officers fail to follow the criteria for stop and search, hence people successfully going to court.

It does become unlawful when officers fail to follow the criteria for stop and search, hence people successfully going to court.

Where "good faith" suddenly becomes law. As long as the police were acting "in good faith" then any transgression of the rules is permitted. After all, who amongst us hasn't made a mistake at work ?

@ProfessorSlocombe

It does become unlawful when officers fail to follow the criteria for stop and search, hence people successfully going to court.

Where "good faith" suddenly becomes law. As long as the police were acting "in good faith" then any transgression of the rules is permitted. After all, who amongst us hasn't made a mistake at work ?

So you think lying about your name is done in good faith and simply a mistake? If someone is so incompetent that they don’t even know they’re own name they wouldn’t be capable of doing any paid employment. I guess they were also acting in good faith when they racially abused me.

So you think lying about your name is done in good faith and simply a mistake?

It's matters not a jot what I think. It's what the courts think. And that was what I was highlighting.

Personally I have very little time for the police, but that's just because I have been around a bit and grew up amongst them. So I tend to reverse Hanlons Razor where they are concerned.

If the UK subscribed to the fruit of the poison tree doctrine, a lot of criminal cases would fail at the first hurdle. Luckily the idea that the police should obey the law is a distressingly foreign concept in England. To the relief of some posters here, I can see.

Police have issued more details
www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/aug/12/senior-met-officer-defends-police-who-stopped-dawn-butler

House said: “The officers who undertook the stop were from the violent crime taskforce and were in the area as part of our proactive work to protect communities from violence.
“Criminals often use vehicles to travel in and to commit crime, therefore officers will often check cars to see if there is anything that requires them to stop it and do further checks.”

House continued: “The officers ran a number plate check on the vehicle. At this stage, the officers still didn’t know who the occupants of the car were, including their ethnicity because the car windows were tinted.
“As a result of an officer making a human error as he inputted the car registration, the Police National Computer returned details of a car from another part of the UK.”

So a fuck up then. And officers NOT realising that the make and model of the car the computer was telling them was different from the car in front of them.

House continued: “The officers ran a number plate check on the vehicle. At this stage, the officers still didn’t know who the occupants of the car were, including their ethnicity because the car windows were tinted.

most police officers seeing a car with tinted windows damn well know who they think is driving. That's part of the problem.

Criminals often use vehicles to travel in and to commit crime

Ah well, that’s ok then

@BlooperReel

A friend of mine was stopped years ago in Hackney, at night, both white males, the windows were tinted, when he asked the police why they pulled him over they responded 'this is a nice car, how do you afford it?' he replied 'because I have a job'. They got really shirty, searched the car, found nothing, checked his licence etc, they asked again why they'd been pulled over as a nice car isnt a reason, the police mumbled and fumbled for a decent response, and the friend said 'it's because you thought we were black at first, isnt it?', the police didn't deny it.

Spot on.

most police officers seeing a car with tinted windows damn well know who they think is driving. That's part of the problem.

Tinted front windows are illegal. Are you saying that the police shouldn’t stop a car with an illegal
modification in case it is being driven by a BAME person? Dawn Butler was a passenger in a vehicle with an illegal modification but doesn’t believe that the car should have been stopped because they are black?

You can call me a right wing racist troll all you like but it doesn’t change the fact that there was something illegal about the car.

@BoogieLowenstein

most police officers seeing a car with tinted windows damn well know who they think is driving. That's part of the problem.

Tinted front windows are illegal. Are you saying that the police shouldn’t stop a car with an illegal
modification in case it is being driven by a BAME person? Dawn Butler was a passenger in a vehicle with an illegal modification but doesn’t believe that the car should have been stopped because they are black?

You can call me a right wing racist troll all you like but it doesn’t change the fact that there was something illegal about the car.

What illegal modification do you think the car had that she was travelling in?

@BoogieLowenstein

You can call me a right wing racist troll all you like but it doesn’t change the fact that there was something illegal about the car

What was illegal about the car? Was they issued with a penalty or prohibition notice for the tinted windows?

Erm...Tinted front windows as per the police report. And I’m going to make a strong assumption that the tinted windows weren’t allowing 75 percent of light into the vehicle (as specified by law) as the police couldn’t see who was driving and had no idea of their ethnicity.

“The officers ran a number plate check on the vehicle. At this stage, the officers still didn’t know who the occupants of the car were, including their ethnicity because the car windows were tinted.”

[quote Jangirl2018]@BoogieLowenstein

You can call me a right wing racist troll all you like but it doesn’t change the fact that there was something illegal about the car

What was illegal about the car? Was they issued with a penalty or prohibition notice for the tinted windows?[/quote]
I’m assuming not as Dawn Butler wouldn’t let the policeman get a word in edgeways and then threw around the “I am a member of Parliament.” Probably frightened him to death.
Anyway I’ll await the police bodycam footage before making any other assertions.

You can call me a right wing racist troll all you like

Why ? Are you ? From your posting there are things that could be said, but that doesn't spring to mind.

Just for anyone else who has problems thinking, my comment:

most police officers seeing a car with tinted windows damn well know who they think is driving.

referred to cars with legally tinted windows. Only someone with very low brainpower would assume I was suggesting the police do not stop illegally tinted cars. After all that is their job.

I await official confirmation the car in question was stopped (and presumably the driver charged) for having illegal tinted windows.

referred to cars with legally tinted windows. Only someone with very low brainpower would assume I was suggesting the police do not stop illegally tinted cars. After all that is their job.

Ah yes, because you made that perfectly clear in your previous post.

@BoogieLowenstein

Erm...Tinted front windows as per the police report. And I’m going to make a strong assumption that the tinted windows weren’t allowing 75 percent of light into the vehicle (as specified by law) as the police couldn’t see who was driving and had no idea of their ethnicity.

“The officers ran a number plate check on the vehicle. At this stage, the officers still didn’t know who the occupants of the car were, including their ethnicity because the car windows were tinted.”

Ah, so you’re ignoring the fact that the tinted windows were the rear windows which are perfectly legal, and the front windows were perfectly legal non-tinted windows.

So again, what was illegal about the car she was in?

@BoogieLowenstein

referred to cars with legally tinted windows. Only someone with very low brainpower would assume I was suggesting the police do not stop illegally tinted cars. After all that is their job.

Ah yes, because you made that perfectly clear in your previous post.

If you want to misunderstand for effect, that's fine. After all, I took

You can call me a right wing racist troll all you like but it doesn’t change the fact that there was something illegal about the car.

To suggest you would tell us what was illegal about the car. And why the police subsequently did not charge the driver ? But I was wrong about that.

Ah, so you’re ignoring the fact that the tinted windows were the rear windows which are perfectly legal, and the front windows were perfectly legal non-tinted windows.

Show me a reliable source for that

@BoogieLowenstein

Ah, so you’re ignoring the fact that the tinted windows were the rear windows which are perfectly legal, and the front windows were perfectly legal non-tinted windows.

Show me a reliable source for that

“Two other officers had asked the MP where she lived and where she was going, and then wrongly said the tinted windows in the back of the car were illegal”.