Army Rumour Service

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

The police farce.

That might be the case for certain things Grumpy.

But I can assure you that if a teacher thought they were going to stand in as a loco parentis whilst my daughter was strip searched by the Police without my knowledge or consent - That teacher would very quickly understand the meaning of going loco.

Early 00s DodEd issued a memo authorising teacher supervised searches, staff had to have appropriate training though. Take it up with your MP, I'm afraid, as it's already happened.
 
So if you can strip search a young girl without parental consent and them not being in attendance, where does this stop?

I can understand it , if its anything to do with looking for evidence of sexual abuse, but not for anything else.
 
What is the issue?

What part of the following is covered by PACE 1984 ?

But I can assure you that if a teacher thought they were going to stand in as a loco parentis whilst my daughter was strip searched by the Police without my knowledge or consent - That teacher would very quickly understand the meaning of going loco.

Oh, it doesn't - So why did you quote it ?

an unconnected same sex teacher could be an AA.

Sorry - I doubt that very much when it concerns a Police strip search. And it certainly wouldn't be, if it was my daughter and I had not been informed or given my consent that a teacher could be an AA, during a Police strip search.

If you cannot see that - It doesn't say much for your parenting skills.
 
Last edited:
So if you can strip search a young girl without parental consent and them not being in attendance, where does this stop?

I can understand it , if its anything to do with looking for evidence of sexual abuse, but not for anything else.

Police can’t strip search juveniles without an AA present. This case was a breach of PACE.

Equally a parent or guardian can’t stop that search. That would be ridiculous, some parents even good ones would refuse because of obvious loyalty to their child, that cannot be sensible.
 
What part of the following is covered by PACE 1948 ?



Oh, it doesn't - So why did you quote it ?



Sorry - I doubt that very much when it concerns a Police strip search. And it certainly wouldn't be, if it was my daughter and I had not been informed or given my consent that a teacher could be an AA, during a Police strip search.

If you cannot see that - It doesn't say much for your parenting skills.

You don’t get that say so. An AA system already exists that you have no say over.
 
In order to do it at the station, she would need to be transported back to the station, booked in and then searched, then returned to school. This could add several hours to the process and tie up officers.
Met policy was to that all strip searches were to be done back at a designated police station with the authority of the custody officer. That includes removel of any clothing that goes beyond that allowed in Section 1 PACE, which at one time was done in the back of a station van.
 
Can you quote or link me to the chapter & verse regarding the paragraphs that covers AA's in relation to Police strip searches in relation to minors ?

I'll wait..............


And wait.................


And wait.................
Your answers are all here:


The whole point is

2.3 The review is clear that the strip search of Child Q should never have happened and there was no reasonable justification for it.
 
Your answers are all here:


The whole point is

2.3 The review is clear that the strip search of Child Q should never have happened and there was no reasonable justification for it.

Apart from the fact that it was an illegal search according to PACE

This has been my bone of contention

1.5 No Appropriate Adult was in attendance, teachers remained outside the room and Child Q’s mother was not contacted in advance.

Had that been my daughter - Retribution would have swift and painful.

Of course, idiots like @wetsmonkey obviously know better than:

Jim Gamble QPM, Independent Child Safeguarding Commissioner Rory McCallum, Senior Professional Advisor
 
Top