This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/law/2014/feb/04/stop-and-search-ruling-due

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Stop and search ruling due Stop and search ruling due
(7 months later)
The court of appeal is due to rule on a challenge over the The court of appeal is due to rule on a challenge over the legality of random stop-and-search powers aimed at tackling street violence.
legality of random stop-and-search powers aimed at tackling street The Metropolitan police have been accused of breaching human rights laws by using the controversial powers against a disproportionately high number of black Londoners. Ann Juliette Roberts, 39, of Upper Edmonton, north London, claims that the powers allowing "searches without justification" were discriminatory on the grounds of race and incompatible with the European human rights convention.
violence. She became involved in a row with police on September 2010 after a ticket inspector discovered there were insufficient funds on her Oystercard to pay her fare after she boarded a number 149 bus. According to the police she lied about her details, was unco-operative and behaved in a suspicious manner.
The Metropolitan police have been accused of breaching human rights A police officer called to the scene thought she might be concealing a knife in her bag and she was subjected to a search under section 60 of the 1994 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act.
laws by using the controversial powers against a disproportionately high Roberts was arrested after obstructing the search and handcuffed but had to be taken to the ground when she continued to resist. No weapons were found.
number of black Londoners.
Ann Juliette Roberts, 39, of Upper Edmonton, north London, claims
that the powers allowing "searches without justification" were
discriminatory on the grounds of race and incompatible with the European human rights convention.
She became involved in a row with police on September 2010 after a
ticket inspector discovered there were insufficient funds on her Oystercard
to pay her fare after she boarded a number 149 bus. According to the police she lied about her details, was unco-operative and behaved in a suspicious manner.
A police officer called to the scene thought she might be concealing
a knife in her bag and she was subjected to a search under section 60
of the 1994 Criminal Justice and Public Order Act.
Roberts was arrested after obstructing the search and handcuffed but had
to be taken to the ground when she continued to resist. No weapons were
found.
Roberts was found to be of good character. She received a caution that was later quashed.Roberts was found to be of good character. She received a caution that was later quashed.
The police had been authorised to use section 60 powers, which allow random searches, in the Haringey area because of gangland violence The police had been authorised to use section 60 powers, which allow random searches, in the Haringey area because of gangland violence involving the use of weapons.
involving the use of weapons. Roberts, a black woman with an African-Caribbean heritage and a grown-up son, applied for a judicial review but two high court judges ruled the police had acted lawfully and section 60 did not breach human rights.
Roberts, a black woman with an African-Caribbean heritage and a She asked Lord Justice Maurice Kay, Lady Justice Rafferty and Lady Justice Macur to rule the high court has gone wrong in law. Their decision is due on Tuesday.
grown-up son, applied for a judicial review but two high court judges
ruled the police had acted lawfully and section 60 did not breach human
rights.
She asked Lord Justice Maurice Kay, Lady Justice Rafferty
and Lady Justice Macur to rule the high court has gone wrong in law. Their decision is due on Tuesday.