Search

Co-authored with Lambros Fatsis, Jonathan Ilan, Habib Kadiri, Abenaa Owusu-Bempah, Eithne Quinn, Michael Shiner, Peter Squires

Police stops, including stop and search, vehicle stops, and identity checks, are one of the most common forms of adversarial contact between police and public. These encounters are notoriously asymmetric and have profound implications for police and community relations The Reasonable Grounds Panel developed by the Northamptonshire Police in England is an innovative approach to regulating police use of their stop and search powers. The Panel engages members of the public directly in determining whether individual officers have met the legal requirements for ‘reasonable grounds’ when using their powers, and provides the basis for follow-up action where it is deemed that this requirement has not been met. The Panel consists of two police officers and a minimum of five community members who assess the grounds or reasons given by officers for stopping and searching a member of the public. When the Panel decides that officers have not met the legal standard of conduct during stop and searches, officers are subject to an escalating scale of corrective actions, including training, coaching, and professional development. If an officer’s use of the powers does not improve, they are instructed not to conduct further stop-searches until they have completed a professional development plan. This report and corresponding fact sheet, led by researchers at Open Society Justice Initiative and London School of Economics and Political Science, found: the number of stop-searches fell more sharply in Northamptonshire than other forces, including its most similar forces. the quality of the grounds for stop and search improved markedly. the percentage of stop and searches resulting in arrests doubled, climbing above the national average. police officers and community members who participated in the Panel spoke positively about the experience and indicated that it had improved their levels of trust and confidence in one another.

The unequal enforcement of drug laws is a source of profound racial injustice. The Numbers in Black and White, published in 2013 by Release & LSE, showed how drug policing, particularly the use of stop and search, was driving ethnic disparities throughout the criminal justice system in England and Wales. The Colour of Injustice: ‘Race’, drugs and law enforcement in England and Wales updates and extends this earlier analysis, highlighting important areas of continuity and change. The policy context has changed dramatically, with central government paying much greater attention to ethnic disparities in criminal justice and the use of stop and search. Despite the avowed commitment to tackling discrimination, however, the underlying problem remains and, in some respects, has been magnified. Once again our research shows that drug law enforcement is driving racial disparities in the criminal justice system.

Background: ‘New’ deviancy theories came to prominence during the 1960s and presented a significant challenge to established ways of thinking about crime, delinquency and other forms of rule-breaking. These theories dismissed the idea that there is a distinct, unambiguously deviant minority whose behavior can be explained as a result of individual pathology or social dysfunction. Instead, it was argued that deviance involves meaningful and goal-oriented behavior, which can only be understood through an appreciative stance that is committed to faithful understanding of the world as seen by the subject. Methods and Aims: This paper focuses on the application of ‘new’ deviancy theories to the progression from medically appropriate prescription drug use to extra-medical ‘abuse’. Special consideration is given to the role of the prescribing physician and the medical institution. Conclusions: ‘New’ deviancy theories lend valuable insights into contemporary patterns of unauthorized prescription drug use. They bring to light the role of the physician-patient interaction as a mechanism to diagnose ‘misuse’ by searching for use of neutralization techniques, and for its function in facilitating future ‘abuse’ by guiding a patient through the learned steps to become a regular user. They highlight the importance of values in a patient’s choice to accept medications with psychoactive side effects, and they reinforce the subjectivity in diagnosis and labeling misuse. These theories illustrate the complexities of the interplay between social welfare support, disability, societal norms and self-identity, which are all critical parts of the patient experience. Finally, these concepts help generate hypothesis about the development of meaningful subcultural groups based around this type of behavior. An appreciation of drug ‘abuse’ through this historical framework can inform new approaches for drug policy aimed at reducing narcotic drug abuse.

This research revisits the contested issue of ethnic minority access to higher education. It is well established that candidates from black and minority ethnic groups go to university in good numbers, but we also know that candidates from some minority groups tend to be concentrated in less prestigious institutions. Access to high status institutions is important for several reasons, not least because it is likely to affect candidates’ subsequent destinations and their ability to access elite professions.