Murray2015.Pdf
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
This thesis has been submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for a postgraduate degree (e.g. PhD, MPhil, DClinPsychol) at the University of Edinburgh. Please note the following terms and conditions of use: This work is protected by copyright and other intellectual property rights, which are retained by the thesis author, unless otherwise stated. A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the author. When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. The Proactive Turn: Stop and Search in Scotland (A study in elite power) Katherine Murray Doctor of Philosophy, University of Edinburgh, 2014 Declaration I declare that this thesis is of my own composition, based on my own work, with acknowledgments of other sources, and has not been submitted for any other degree or professional qualification other than that for which it is presently submitted, which is for a PhD in the College of Humanities and Social Science at the University of Edinburgh. The interpretations and conclusions presented in the thesis are entirely my own, and do not necessarily represent the views of, and should not be attributed to, the Scottish Government, the Scottish Centre for Crime and Justice Research or the Scottish Institute for Policing Research. Katherine Murray 30th September 2014 ii iii Acknowledgements I’d like to thank my supervisors Professor Susan McVie, Professor Nick Fyfe, Dr Stuart King and Dr Liz Levy for all their guidance and support. In particular, special thanks go to Susan for her unfailing encouragement and moral support in what transpired to be an unusual, and at times, controversial project. I’d also like to say a thank you to those people whose discrete professional support has been both valuable and hugely reassuring in the last year. Very special thanks go to Gavin for all his love and support. And to Emily, Jamie and Sally for their remarkable patience. Also to Ruth, who has gracefully endured countless conversations on the subject. Finally, I’m very grateful to the many police officers who both facilitated and participated in the research, and to the ESRC and the Scottish Government for funding this research. iv v Abstract This study examines the development of police stop and search in Scotland from the post-war period onwards. The aim is to explain the remarkable scale of stop and search, the attendant lack of political or academic engagement prior to the formation of the single service in in April 2013, and to draw out the implications, both for policing and the public. The thesis takes a top-down perspective which seeks to explain the policing direction in terms of elite outlooks and decision-making over time. It is argued that search rates in contemporary Scotland can be explained in terms of an incremental shift in the way that the tactic has been conceptualized by political and policing elites. Specifically, it is argued that the post-war construct of stop and search as a reactive mechanism premised on investigation, detection and the disruption of crime, has been displaced by a proactive model, premised on intensive, risk-based stop and search activity. It is argued that this shift has partly attenuated the link between stop searches and suspicious behaviour by introducing non-detection as a measure of successful deterrence, alongside the traditional aim of detection. In short, it is argued that stop and search has been remodelled as a tactic that can be legitimated irrespective of the outcome. The thesis will show how this shift has progressively weighted the balance between crime control and individual freedom in favour of the state, and weakened the rights of the individual, with minimal regard for procedural protection and human rights. The thesis employs a wide range of data sources and methodologies to investigate the core argument, which is developed from three interrelated positions. First, taking a historical perspective, the thesis examines elite sensibilities and decision-making in relation to stop and search from the early 1950s, through to the early 2000s. Next, the thesis adopts an empirical position to investigate the use of stop and search between 2005 and 2010, and shows how search activity on the street reflected dominant outlooks higher up the ranks. Finally, the thesis adopts a normative perspective in order to assess the ethical implications of stop and search practice in Scotland, and to develop a series of informed recommendations for policy and practice. vi vii Prologue ‘I am not concerned with police investigations after a crime has been reported, or with circumstances which suggest that the individual who has been stopped may be doing something illegal. My problem is this: no crime has been reported, no suspect has been described, there is no visible sign of an offense, there is nothing whatever to direct police attention to this particular individual. I am concerned with what is called preventive police work.’ (Reich, 1966; 1162) “They know the story, they know the script. The people we deal with, no problem.” (Sergeant, Lothian and Borders) viii ix Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS IV ABSTRACT VI KEY DEFINITIONS XIV CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION 2 1.1 BACKGROUND 2 1.2 EXPLAINING STOP AND SEARCH IN SCOTLAND 5 1.3 CORE ARGUMENT: THE PROACTIVE TURN 17 1.4 RESEARCH AIMS AND METHODS 19 1.5 SUMMARY OF CHAPTERS 27 1.6 ORIGINAL CONTRIBUTION 29 PART ONE. ORIGINS 30 CHAPTER 2. POLICE POWERS IN POST-WAR BRITAIN 32 2.1 INTRODUCTION 32 2.2 POLICE POWERS IN 1950S BRITAIN: THE PREVENTION OF CRIME ACT 1953 35 2.3 POLICING AND CRIME CONTROL IN 1960S BRITAIN 49 2.4 SUMMARY: PREVENTATIVE SENSIBILITIES 63 CHAPTER 3. DEPOLITICIZATION: SCOTLAND 1967-1999 66 3.1 INTRODUCTION 66 3.2 SCOTTISH IDENTITY AND THE POLITICS OF CRIME CONTROL 69 3.3 SCOTTISH POLICING AND DEPOLITICIZATION 72 3.4 POLICING STRATHCLYDE: THE STOP AND SEARCH ‘CAMPAIGN’ 89 3.5 CULTIVATING CONSENT 96 3.6 SUMMARY: OUT OF SIGHT, OUT OF MIND 104 CHAPTER 4. ‘OTHER’ TO ENGLAND: THE STEPHEN LAWRENCE INQUIRY IN SCOTLAND 108 4.1 INTRODUCTION 108 4.2 STOP AND SEARCH IN POST-WAR ENGLAND 110 4.3 STOP AND SEARCH IN SCOTLAND: THE ABSENCE OF ‘RACE’ 113 4.4 THE STEPHEN LAWRENCE INQUIRY IN SCOTLAND: “THIS ISN’T ABOUT US” 117 4.5 SUMMARY: IF IT AIN’T BROKE 134 PART ONE. SUMMARY 138 PART TWO. THE PROACTIVE TURN 140 CHAPTER 5. THE DISTRIBUTION OF STOP AND SEARCH, 2005-2010 142 5.1 INTRODUCTION 143 5.2 EXPLAINING VARIATION: DEMOGRAPHICS, DEPTIVATION AND RECORDED OFFENDING 156 5.3 INCIDENCE 168 5.4 TRENDS ACROSS TIME 172 5.5 POLICE POWERS 178 x 5.6 THE AGE DISTRIBUTION OF STOP AND SEARCH 181 5.7 REASON FOR SEARCH 192 5.8 DETECTION AND NON-DETECTION: STOP AND SEARCH OUTCOMES 200 5.9 SUMMARY: THE PROACTIVE TURN 212 CHAPTER 6. RULES, REGULATIONS AND THE PROACTIVE TURN 216 6.1 INTRODUCTION 217 6.2 POLICE ACCOUNTABILITY AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF STOP AND SEARCH 220 6.3 FLEXIBLE FRIENDS: NON-STATUTORY STOP AND SEARCH 233 6.4 SUMMARY 242 CHAPTER 7. KEEPING UP WITH THE KPIS: POLICY, POLITICS AND THE PROACTIVE TURN 244 7.1 INTRODUCTION 244 7.2 PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT AND SCOTTISH POLICING 246 7.3 HOLYROOD COMPANIONS 257 7.4 SUMMARY 261 PART TWO. SUMMARY 264 PART THREE. SOCIAL JUSTICE 270 CHAPTER 8. DETERRENCE 272 8.1 INTRODUCTION 272 8.2 DOES DETERRENCE WORK? 273 8.3 IS DETERRENCE FAIR? 279 8.4 SUMMARY 286 CHAPTER NINE. CONCLUSION 288 9.1 REVISISTING THE RESEARCH AIMS 289 9.2 STOP AND SEARCH IN THE POST-REFORM ERA 296 9.3 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POLICY AND PRACTICE 323 9.4 CONCLUDING OBSERVATIONS AND POLICY IMPLICATIONS 331 RESEARCHING CONTROVERSIAL SUBJECTS 332 POSTSCRIPT 334 BIBLIOGRAPHY 336 POLICY PUBLICATIONS, REPORTS AND ONLINE REFERENCES 355 APPENDICES 360 xi List of Tables Table 1.1 Interviewees and correspondents .......................................................................25 Table 5.1 Example of disaggregated stop and search data ................................................146 Table 5.2 Proactive stop and search: predicted distribution of key variables.....................153 Table 5.3 Reactive stop and search: predicted distribution of key variables ......................153 Table 5.4 Proactive and reactive stop and search by legacy force, 2010 ............................154 Table 5.5 Population, police strength, % stop searches by legacy force, 2010 ...................159 Table 5.6 National and local share of 15% most deprived data zones (2009): stop and search % (2010) by legacy force and Local Authority ............................................................161 Table 5.7 National and local share of 15% most deprived crime zones by legacy force .....163 Table 5.8 Stop and search (%) drugs and weapon offences (%) by legacy force, 2010 .......166 Table 5.9 Stop and search per 1000 population, England & Wales, Scotland, 20101 ..........168 Table 5.10 Stop and search per 1000 population in mainland forces, 2010 .......................169 Table 5.11 Stop and search per 1000 people, excluding/including alcohol searches..........170 Table 5.12 Statutory and non-statutory stop searches (%) 5 legacy forces, 2010 ..............178 Table 5.13 Stop search by age-group (%) Central Belt and non-Central Belt forces, 2010 ..185 Table 5.14 Stop and search per 1000 sixteen