Section 60 - Your Rights

[STAR Voice]

It's clear that Police Forces across the UK are attempting to exceed their powers of Stop and Search given to them under Section 60 of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1994 ("PACE"). These powers allow Police at major demonstrations and football matches to "stop and search in anticipation of violence" AND NOTHING ELSE.

The below is advice I have been given on what to do when you are stopped and searched - and what your rights are.

- Above all, stay calm at all times. Do not become abusive and/or excitable.

- Ask the police why you are being stopped and what their legal justification for the search is. If they say it is a PACE search, a Section 60 or a S60 Search, ask for the name and rank of the officer who authorised this. (Under the PACE Code : An authorisation under section 60 may only be given by an officer of the rank of inspector or
above, in writing, specifying the grounds on which it was given, the locality in which the powers may be exercised and the period of time for which they are in force.)

- Ask the officer for their name and warrant number, the station they're based at, and the reason for the search. If they don't provide this information the search will be illegal.

Remember the below restrictions :

- A PACE search gives the police the power to search you for "offensive weapons or dangerous instruments". They have no other powers under S60. They can only detain you "for as long as necessary to carry out a search".

- The police have no legal power to force you to give them your name and address. You do not have to give this to them - if you do it is liable to be kept on file for seven years.

- The police have no legal power to force you to have your photograph taken. If you allow this to be done this may also be kept on file for seven years.

- The police have no legal power to ask you to remove any item of clothing in public view, other than that which is concealing your identity. Any facial masking can be confiscated. If you are asked to remove coats/ jumpers etc you do not have to do so. NB A later amendment allows the police to force you to remove anything they reasonably suspect you are wearing wholly or mainly to conceal your identity.

- A S60 search allows a search for weapons or dangerous instruments ONLY. The police have no right to inspect any items such as personal documentation or personal possessions such as cash cards, student cards, diaries, phones, personal organisers, etc). This is not part of S60, although looking inside wallets and pockets for razor blades (which do count as "offensive weapons or dangerous instruments") is allowed.

- The police have the power to use "reasonable force" but ONLY if you do not submit to a search. No other force can be used for any other purpose.

[Row Z Royal]

Thanks for the clarification, SC.

We can confirm that Rowntree's Fruit Pastilles are offensive and dangerous weapons. Compo's Hat is merely offensive.

I was told to remove my belt because it would set the alarm off. Would this be a breach of this bit
"The police have no legal power to ask you to remove any item of clothing in public view, other than that which is concealing your identity"?

[bobby1413]

- A PACE search gives the police the power to search you for "offensive weapons or dangerous instruments". They have no other powers under S60. They can only detain you "for as long as necessary to carry out a search".

- The police have no legal power to force you to give them your name and address. You do not have to give this to them - if you do it is liable to be kept on file for seven years.

- The police have no legal power to ask you to remove any item of clothing in public view, other than that which is concealing your identity. Any facial masking can be confiscated. If you are asked to remove coats/ jumpers etc you do not have to do so. NB A later amendment allows the police to force you to remove anything they reasonably suspect you are wearing wholly or mainly to conceal your identity.

- A S60 search allows a search for weapons or dangerous instruments ONLY. The police have no right to inspect any items such as personal documentation or personal possessions such as cash cards, student cards, diaries, phones, personal organisers, etc). This is not part of S60, although looking inside wallets and pockets for razor blades (which do count as "offensive weapons or dangerous instruments") is allowed.

The police can search for other things, although as you point out not under S60. However the search they do under S60 is recorded on the exact same form as other searches, meaning that whilst searching for offensive weapons, it will also include the search for drugs/pointed & bladed articles, etc...


As for name/address. It's a dangerous game to play. Avoiding giving your name and address will obviously arouse suspiscion. Plus as you say remaining calm can be hard, and if you don't do so, you could be liable to demonstrating anti-social behaviour. If you do then the police can demand your name and address. If you refuse to give them your name and addres you can be arrested. Hence, as I say ,it is a dangerous game to play.

As for removing items of clothing. PACE says you can only remove outer items in public view. Hwoever, if they have a transit van or access to a police station (e.g. t he BTP one inside thes tation) you could be escorted there to be searched more thoroughly, in private and out of view of other people.




STAR CAMPAIGNS - your post seems to be quite defensive. I can understand your responsibility in making people aware of their rights, but it does seem to have an element of confrontation about it. S60 is as you say authorised by a senior officer as a pre-emptive piece of legislation to avoid any violence or disorder. It is there to protect the public. Whether you like it or not, this piece of legislation amongst a few others can be enforced, regardless of whether you are against it or in favour of it.

[Y21_Royal]

Does this mean that they have no legal power to make us go through the metal detector? Its not directly searching for an offensive weapon and therefore there is no reason for us to go through.

Also, I'd be intrigued to know what 'powers' (I use the term very loosely) the PCSOs actually have in those situations and how stopping people at a train station constitutes a 'football match' where they can 'stop and search in anticipation of violence'.

On a more general point, it really angers me how football fans are continually victimised like this. I have been following Reading home and away for over ten years and in all that time have encountered no problems. You get more trouble on a night out. I'd like to know exactly who it is that believes that we are still living in the 1980s where sets of football 'fans' go out to kill each other. Incredibly 99.9% of people who pay £35+ for tickets to a football match actually want to go and enjoy a football match.

Rant over.

[STAR Voice]

STAR CAMPAIGNS - your post seems to be quite defensive. I can understand your responsibility in making people aware of their rights, but it does seem to have an element of confrontation about it. S60 is as you say authorised by a senior officer as a pre-emptive piece of legislation to avoid any violence or disorder. It is there to protect the public. Whether you like it or not, this piece of legislation amongst a few others can be enforced, regardless of whether you are against it or in favour of it.

Sorry if it comes across like that - it's not the intention. Ditto the confrontational element - not my intention, just trying to point out to people what they legally have to do - and what they have the legal right to withstand.

It is there to protect the public.
Agree completely - I have nothing against this piece of legislation and agree that it's a valuable policing tool. BUT it has to be used properly, within its legal bounds and for the purposes it was intended for by the legislators.

Here it's clearly being used without intelligence (deliberate use of the word!) to unfairly target a particular group of society - and that's got to be unacceptable.

[bobby1413]

STAR CAMPAIGNS - your post seems to be quite defensive. I can understand your responsibility in making people aware of their rights, but it does seem to have an element of confrontation about it. S60 is as you say authorised by a senior officer as a pre-emptive piece of legislation to avoid any violence or disorder. It is there to protect the public. Whether you like it or not, this piece of legislation amongst a few others can be enforced, regardless of whether you are against it or in favour of it.

Sorry if it comes across like that - it's not the intention. Ditto the confrontational element - not my intention, just trying to point out to people what they legally have to do - and what they have the legal right to withstand.

It is there to protect the public.
Agree completely - I have nothing against this piece of legislation and agree that it's a valuable policing tool. BUT it has to be used properly, within its legal bounds and for the purposes it was intended for by the legislators.

Here it's clearly being used without intelligence (deliberate use of the word!) to unfairly target a particular group of society - and that's got to be unacceptable.

Thanks for the response, glad to hear you are posting for the reason I hoped you were.

It's hard to determine whether it is targetting the group unfairly, as there is legislation available which allows the police to search ANYONE without giving a reason. Granted it is used in extreme circumstances, but it is available, and therefore may not be necessarily covered by S60. If you do feel unfairly targetted, maybe it's a good idea to contact some of the chiefs from TVP to ask for a response, I'm sure they would be happy to respond with the reaons why it was necessary.

[The 17 Bus]

I believe that section 60 is used across london at underground stations to help prevent people carrying weapons, not at all surprised that it is used when there are football games going on as well, some folk searched wont even be football fans.

However having looked it up a bit i think perhaps SC might be a bit out of date with the info, looking here. http://www.urban75.org/mayday01/s60.html it appears that they can ask to have outer clothing removed during the search.

While performing a search they _can_ ask you to remove outer clothing, such as coats and jumpers in public. In addition, s60(4A) - inserted by s25 CDA 1998 - allows the police to force you to remove anything they reasonably suspect you are wearing wholly or mainly to conceal your identity. There is nothing to stop you putting something else on after you have taken off a mask or had it confiscated.

I would add that this advice could also be out of date

[bobby1413]

I believe that section 60 is used across london at underground stations to help prevent people carrying weapons, not at all surprised that it is used when there are football games going on as well, some folk searched wont even be football fans.

However having looked it up a bit i think perhaps SC might be a bit out of date with the info, looking here. http://www.urban75.org/mayday01/s60.html it appears that they can ask to have outer clothing removed during the search.

While performing a search they _can_ ask you to remove outer clothing, such as coats and jumpers in public. In addition, s60(4A) - inserted by s25 CDA 1998 - allows the police to force you to remove anything they reasonably suspect you are wearing wholly or mainly to conceal your identity. There is nothing to stop you putting something else on after you have taken off a mask or had it confiscated.

I would add that this advice could also be out of date

That is correct.

However, S60 is unique as it does allow the police the ability to demand you move facial coverings, and outer clothing. Where as S1 PACE does not allow the police to ask you to remove facial coverings.

They can ask you to remove footwear/hats/and some outer garments - providing you are in a private place and not in public view (therefore respecting your human rights).

[floyd__streete]

I think you might find that this was BTP operation rather than a TVP one.

It was a total joke - those of us at the back of the queue who questioned, grumbled and generally took the p*ss were ushered on our way by a nervous looking copper without having to go through the rigmarole of being searched. An absolute farce; either search us when you have stopped us or don't bother in the first place.

[Y21_Royal]

It was a total joke - those of us at the back of the queue who questioned, grumbled and generally took the p*ss were ushered on our way by a nervous looking copper without having to go through the rigmarole of being searched. An absolute farce; either search us when you have stopped us or don't bother in the first place.

Completely agree, I was actually in front of you fellas and it was quite clear that they couldn't be bothered with the hassle of searching you lot but me with my fruit pastiles and Mrs RZR, looking as intimidating as she does, were fair game.

Lets be honest, who's more likely to cause trouble, Mrs RZR the petit little primary school teacher who has been worn down by years of living with RZR or a beered up Compo?

[Turns8]

Being part of the newly formed Murko2008 Crew , I had no real problem with the search...however, it's one of those things that any justification for searching us went straight out of the window when the next group behind us were ushered through...then to have some PSCO tell us that we wouldn't be laughing if we got stabbed was just ridiculous...I would have LOL if we'd gone down onto the platform and then been stabbed by one of those who had just been ushered through...unlikely I know..but then until Saturday I wouldn't have been scared by a fruit pastile wielding thug...now I may have to think twice

Jokes aside, if the Police want to do this sort of thing and blatantly discriminate, which they were here then they should perform the search on absolutely everyone, no matter how long the queue is. Organise an hour slot and have 20 - 30 officers there to deal with it, a waste of police resources maybe...but I bet they didn't find a single knife on Saturday oh and the metal detector thing looked like something out of one of those gadget catalogues and looked about as sturdy as jimmy kebe...a gust of wind and it would have been all over...

Rant over

[bobby1413]

Turns8 - It's not discrimination. Half of the reasons they had S60 authorisation and officers there to search were for a visible presence, not just to try to find a knife. As well as this, it also leads to intelligence, as everyone they searched would have given their details for the form they fill in, e.g. name, address, date of birth, height, hair colour, plus they would have also recorded a description of what that supporter was wearing, and possibly who they were with.


Saying that, I do agree that a bit of better organisation around the intelligence and people searched could have been exercised. E.g. searching a timid primary school teacher instead of a beered up compo was a bit mis-guided.

[Royal Lady]

Can I just ask also, why it is that at every home game at the Mad Stad and at at every away game I have been to, female and male stewards have looked in my handbag, but I have never seen them body search a male supporter? Do I have the right to refuse them looking into my handbag if they are not looking in male supporters' pockets or anything?

[Turns8]

Turns8 - It's not discrimination. Half of the reasons they had S60 authorisation and officers there to search were for a visible presence, not just to try to find a knife. As well as this, it also leads to intelligence, as everyone they searched would have given their details for the form they fill in, e.g. name, address, date of birth, height, hair colour, plus they would have also recorded a description of what that supporter was wearing, and possibly who they were with.


Saying that, I do agree that a bit of better organisation around the intelligence and people searched could have been exercised. E.g. searching a timid primary school teacher instead of a beered up compo was a bit mis-guided.

They didn't gain any information as they didn't ask for any details...pointless exercise if you ask me...other than to annoy people...

[STAR Voice]

But the Home Office guidelines, updated after the Stephen Lawrence enquiry, explicitly state that stop and search must be intelligence based, and cannot be "based upon stereotyping."

So can someone please explain to me how this can be reconciled with an operation to stop and search as many football supporters - and only football supporters as possible.

Unless there is some clear evidence that football supporters wearing colours are more likely to carry weapons than the public in general then the policy to stop and search all identifiable football supporters drives a coach and horses through these guidelines.

For information, it turns out this was a national BTP campaign targeted only at football supporters :

Operation Shield, the mobile metal detecting arch aimed at cracking down on knife-carrying on the railways, was deployed at Manchester Victoria station. More than 460 people passed through the arch. One knife was found discarded and recovered by police. The arches were also deployed at Reading station.

I would suggest that a random search of any 460 people would turn up a similar number of weapons, so where is the intelligence behind this?

Some people may think this is a fatuous parallel, but I think the principle is exactly the same : What is the essential difference between the Police saying "Today we're going to randomly search all football supporters" and "Today we're going to randomly search all black people?" In my mind absolutely nothing - both are equally unacceptable; as they're both based upon unfair stereotypes and generalisations by the Police.

[STAR Voice]

Can I just ask also, why it is that at every home game at the Mad Stad and at at every away game I have been to, female and male stewards have looked in my handbag, but I have never seen them body search a male supporter? Do I have the right to refuse them looking into my handbag if they are not looking in male supporters' pockets or anything?

No- because that's down to ground regulations and is a condition of entry which you agree to as part of the civil contract when you purchase the ticket from RFC.

You do have the right to refuse them looking into your handbag - but they have the right to refuse you entry to their premises.

[Royal Lady]

Our two boys had football shirts on, but we didn't - and no-one stopped us at Reading station, even though, we were quite clearly going to the game. They certainly did appear, to me, to be targetting those in shirts and mainly young men, which is discriminatory. We should also have been searched shirley?

[Royal Lady]

Can I just ask also, why it is that at every home game at the Mad Stad and at at every away game I have been to, female and male stewards have looked in my handbag, but I have never seen them body search a male supporter? Do I have the right to refuse them looking into my handbag if they are not looking in male supporters' pockets or anything?

No- because that's down to ground regulations and is a condition of entry which you agree to as part of the civil contract when you purchase the ticket from RFC.

You do have the right to refuse them looking into your handbag - but they have the right to refuse you entry to their premises.

So why aren't male supporters all asked to submit to a body search and/or empty their pockets or bags that they are carrying??

[Row Z Royal]

Can I just ask also, why it is that at every home game at the Mad Stad and at at every away game I have been to, female and male stewards have looked in my handbag, but I have never seen them body search a male supporter? Do I have the right to refuse them looking into my handbag if they are not looking in male supporters' pockets or anything?

My visit to the Emirates was my first without being searched for bottle tops strapped to the inside of my calf. Never have I been asked to empty my pockets.

[cheeryoleary]

I'm not reading all this because quite frankly, after four pints of pre-match Stella, I'm not going to remember any of it.