Thanks for your question. My name is XXXXX XXXXX I will try to help with this.
I do completely see why you are aggrieved about this but ultimately we are all hampered by the law.
I know this isn’t going to be the answer you want to hear, and it’s certainly not what I want to tell you. However, I wish to be completely honest with you, so I feel obligated to not give you false hope.
I'm afraid you are describing thing that are fairly standard in the course of any stop and search and officers are entitled to take these measures.
He is police officer so doesn't need consent to search to this level.
He was perfectly entitled to ask about your criminal background and check your answers.
Its fair to say that officers wouldn't do it for every roadside NIP but that doesn't mean that it was unlawful in this particular case.
Can you respond? I'm not sure whether you are seeing any of this?
Can you respond?
yes but doesn't he have to give me some sort of proof of search so i have a record of what happened?
I see you can.
No, there's no need for a body search record unless items are actually seized and then its noted on the custody record at the police station.
They need to make seizure documents but obviously that only arises if something is seized.
so any police officer can just search me whenever he/she wants and i don't have a say in it?
On your original point, you probably would have been arrested if you had given incorrect details for obstructing a police officer. It happens all the time.
Yes, he does need reasonable suspicion of an offence but clearly there was one here.
but why am i obliged to give my details?
Because he is a police officer and a person in authority who asked you to account for your movement.s
how was there reasonable suspicion? i didn't speed up when i saw them ?
No, but you accept speeding away and that is a crime.
I'm sorry and I do appreciate that sometimes police officers are rude and objectionable and some of them use their powers to bully others.
That doesn't make it unlawful I'm afraid.
No, i did not say that, i said i was travelling a slightly faster pace than a casual pace on a cycle and there was no deliberate change in my speed
i was going on a straight path, no changes in direction or speed
Its difficult to say why you were stopped from these facts then but they are probably saying you gave rise to suspicion in some way.
I'm really sorry but the fact that the officer was fairly aggressive does not mean his actions were unlawful.
but all they said was that i looked suspicious? and that i sped up when i saw them but this was not the case so the search was carried out on a false accusation
No, as I've said.
It was not a false allegation.
They only need the barest suspicion to stop and search a person under S1 PACE.
so i'm obliged to tell the truth but they aren't? yet they've taken an oath and still lied? I don't know what any of this pace rubbish is but what kind of suspicion did i cause to arise in them ? other than that i am a dark coloured youth? because i seriously see no other cause for suspicion
Yes, you are to a police officer. No they have not lied or taken an oath here.
I cannot really comment on the basis for the suspicion here. I haven't seen the officers notes or heard their account. Knowing officers they have likely covered that in some way or another as generally they do know they need to do that to bring themselves within PACE.
PACE was actually a huge improvement on the old law.
In the days before PACE people were arrested for no reason at all and went into police stations without coming out literally for weeks.
I mean the oath they took to do their job. But from the account i have given you, was there anything suspicious that i did?
excuse me, are you still here?
Sorry, I really cannot comment on what was in their mind at the time they stopped you.
I really don't think I can add more to this. Opting out.
well you were a great help
wouldn't be surprised if said you were police officer