FROM PROTECT THE WILD. A VERY SERIOUS POST WHICH DESERVES COMMENT

	Forwarded this email? Subscribe here for more 'Stop and search' of monitor at Boxing Day parade raises serious questions the hunt' CHARLIE MOORES FEB 2   READ IN APP   At the Abergavenny Boxing Day Parade of the Monmouth Hunt, Gwent Police made a formal 'stop and search' of a monitor. Helen was standing quietly on the side of a busy high street that at the time was almost empty but would soon be filled with people. The police claimed to be acting on 'information and intelligence' that she might 'intentionally or recklessly cause public nuisance' by using a personal alarm to 'disrupt the hunt' and 'scare' the hunt's horses. Helen has spoken to Protect the Wild at length about the incident. She has been left upset and shaken, angry that she could be accused of doing anything that would put an animal at risk, and fearing that the police might target her in the future. All of what follows below is based on mobile phone footage recorded at the time and subsequent emails to Helen from Gwent Police. We should stress here that we're posting this article to try to understand more about stop and search powers and how they were used in this case. We see this discussion primarily as a precautionary example and a demonstration of why we need to know our rights - not as a complaint about the police. We don't agree with their actions, but Gwent Police behaved (to use their own words) "lawfully and professionally". The officers were courteous, they identified themselves, they described the legislation under which the search was being carried out, a female officer 'patted down' Helen, and she was advised that a copy of a police report would be made available - in other words, the correct procedures were followed. That's as it should be, but while we are not lawyers here at Protect the Wild, it seems only right to ask why in this specific case police officers used stop and search powers on someone who was doing absolutely nothing wrong solely because a hunt (which one we don't know, as we explain below) provided 'intelligence' (which is something of an oxymoron) in what was in all likelihood an attempt by that hunt to stop (or at least, hamper) legal protest. Note that the header image shows the protests at the Boxing Day parade sent to us by Helen. It shows her talking with a different group of officers long after the stop and search was carried out. We asked Helen if she was concerned she could be identified but typically she said the hunt knows who she is and that 'anger overcomes my fear'. Upgrade to paid Stop and Search Few of us probably have much interaction with the police, and it's likely that even fewer people reading this will have ever been through a “stop and search”. So what is it? One of the most controversial and most criticised police powers “stop and search” is a power given to the police by the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 (PACE) to stop people and detain them to search them. It is not an arrest, but it is also not voluntary (you can't simply refuse and walk away without risking arrest). Certain protocols which protect the public must be followed by police officers conducting a stop and search, but if you're not used to interacting with the police it can be extremely intimidating to suddenly find yourself being frisked by a police officer. Stop and search is renowned for its use to target young Black men (especially by the Metropolitan Police in London). It would be ridiculous to suggest it is being used on the same scale against hunt protestors, but aligning with the government's fixation on penalising 'disruptive protests' by climate and fuel activists it does appear (at least anecdotally) that 'stop and search' is increasingly being used to intimidate hunt monitors and sabs. Upgrade to paid Suspicion-based and suspicion-less searches What can trigger a stop and search? To keep this article relatively short, what follows is necessarily a very basic overview (for more detailed information see our Protectors of the Wild page on Stop and search and the Law) but police officers have the power to stop and search if they have ‘reasonable grounds’ (‘suspicion-based stop and search’) to suspect an individual is carrying: illegal drugs; a weapon; stolen property; something which could be used to commit a crime, such as a crowbar. Section 60 of the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 makes it legal to stop and search someone without reasonable grounds (a ‘suspicion-less stop and search’) if it has been approved by a senior police officer and if it is suspected that: serious violence could take place; you’re carrying a weapon or have used one; you’re in a specific location or area. So why was Helen stopped and searched? None of the above would seem to apply to Helen (unless the police are defining a hunt parade as 'a specific location or area'), so she requested a review of why she was stopped and searched. According to emails sent by Gwent Police "with all public order operations the police rely on information and intelligence which forms a public order policing plan" and they wrote specifically that "Gwent police received intelligence that you may be in possession of an alarm with an intention of disrupting the hunt." [Not 'hunt parade' or the public, but 'the hunt'.] They go on to say that: "From reviewing the Body Worn Video of the officers [police officers should always activate their BWV bodycams during a stop and search] you stated that you were involved in a hunt a few days prior where you had been in possession of an alarm and had it stolen from you although at that point you had not reported the theft to police. This therefore provided the officer with enough suspicion and grounds to carry out the stop/search". [Note especially that last sentence.] And that Helen was being searched under section 78 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 which says that: "1(7) An article is prohibited for the purposes of this part of this Act if it is - (g) an offence under section 78 of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Act 2022 (intentionally or recklessly causing public nuisance). Stills from video footage of Helen's stop and search by Gwent Police (note how quiet the street is) Upgrade to paid Let's look at the incident in more detail Firstly, it's important to note that Helen is well-known to the Curre and Llangibby Hunt - but she doesn't monitor the Monmouth Hunt who were 'parading' that day. Gwent police haven't confirmed where the 'intelligence' that led them to stop and search a 70-year-old activist with no criminal record standing on the pavement of a public highway in the middle of the day had come from. But given that no one but the Curre and Llangibby Hunt knew that Helen had carried a personal alarm to their meet the week before (Helen hadn't yet reported the theft of her alarm to the police), it had to be either the Curre and Llangibby providing 'intelligence' prior to a parade they weren't even at, or the Monmouth who had made allegations at the 'parade' using information provided by the Curre and Llangibby. Secondly, as the composite of images above show, when the stop and search took place Helen was not standing in the road (which had been barriered in advance of the parade), she was not obstructing the pavement (the stop and search took place before crowds built up), nor was she causing anything that could be remotely described as a 'public nuisance'. This stop and search, then, appears to be 'suspicion-based' even though police (using the criteria usually used for that type of stop and search) had no reason to suspect Helen had committed a crime, was in possession of illegal drugs, or was carrying a weapon. In their own words, 'intelligence' that she had been carrying a personal alarm was the sole reason the police had to search her. Fortunately, most of the stop and search was recorded by a fellow activist. 'Most' because understandably no one knew what was about to happen and the recording starts after the police have begun talking with Helen. Some information about what the officers said as they walked up - crucially did they know who Helen was from the outset -  was therefore missed. (Helen has asked for a copy of footage from the officers' own bodycams). Helen had previously liaised with Gwent Police's Rural Crime Team (she'd actually offered to meet up with them before the 'parade' had begun) so thought that perhaps they'd come to talk to her about the parade. She is clearly surprised to be told she is to be stopped and searched, but throughout the interaction Helen can be seen to be non-aggressive, standing still, and while flustered she is expressing her unhappiness with being singled out politely. Helen can also be heard saying several times that she doesn't have a personal alarm on her because it was stolen from her the week before at a meet of the Curre and Llangibby Hunt. Disturbingly, at the start of the stop and search the male police officer can be heard on video saying Helen won't be handcuffed because she's not attempting to get away! He may have been ‘joking’, but surely uniformed officers know that even mentioning handcuffs as they stand over a slightly-built woman who hasn't committed a crime and is showing no signs of resisting or running off smacks of overkill and deliberate intimidation. We think Helen deserves an apology. Upgrade to paid Is potentially using a personal alarm justification for a stop and search? Gwent police appear to have used controversial and unusual powers to stop Helen because a hunt provided 'intelligence' about her carrying a personal alarm. A Curre and Llangibby Hunt supporter previously unknown to Helen who threatened her. Helen has never denied owning a personal alarm. She had been carrying one because of genuine concerns about her safety. The month before a hunt terrierman from the Curre had had to sign a Community Resolution Order and had his firearms taken away by police because of death threats he made towards her. The alarm was stolen three days before the parade when Helen had been using it to protect herself from (in her words) Curre and Llangibby "hunt thugs who were driving their horses at me and backing their horses into me and a friend who were monitoring the hunt to ensure they didn't go into any Natural Resources Wales woods from which they are banned".  The day ended with the huntsman threatening to follow Helen home. Video evidence of all of this has been shown to the police. Curre and Llangibby Hunt supporters in a wood belonging to Natural Resources Wales a few weeks before the Monmouth Hunt 'parade' - perhaps the very men on whose 'intelligence' Gwent Police were acting. Ironically, as part of a Safer Streets campaign Gwent Police themselves "have given out free home and vehicle security packs containing window alert alarms, lighting timers and personal attack alarms" to local residents. Other forces have advised women to carry alarms. While it should be a given that no one should feel so unsafe that they feel the need to carry an alarm, violence (especially against women) is endemic across society - and as recent reports on the notorious Cottesmore Hunt demonstrate is used against female hunt protestors. We think most reasonable people would agree therefore that Helen had a good reason to carry an alarm. Enthusiasts of 'countryside sports' will no doubt argue that if Helen hadn't been out in the countryside monitoring the hunt nothing would have happened to her, but assault is against the law and we all have the right to defend ourselves. Carrying a personal alarm is perfectly legal in the UK. They are not classified as weapons, and there are no laws prohibiting their use. They do though now appear to be cause for a 'stop and search' if they might 'disrupt the hunt'... What did the stop and search find? Nothing more (as Helen put it) than 'a lace handkerchief'. As she repeatedly told the officers her only personal alarm - her possession of which was the reason she was being searched, remember - had been stolen from her by a terrierman (and as we'll point out yet again, oddly not from the same hunt now getting ready to ride down a specially-closed high street). Upgrade to paid We have our own questions As we said above. carrying a personal alarm is perfectly legal in the UK and there are no laws prohibiting their use. But there is a caveat - using an alarm to intentionally cause harm or distress to another person is illegal and could result in criminal charges. That caveat is no doubt how Gwent Police justify their stop and search of Helen. The core duty of the police service "is to protect the public by detecting and preventing crime" and of course ‘prevention’ is pre-emptive, but both Helen and us think there are several troubling and outstanding questions that need answering: When was the ‘intelligence’ received which led to the stop and search? The timing is important because it would show that either Helen was being targeted in advance, or a decision was made on the day - meaning the ‘intelligence’ was only received that morning at the parade. Who actually 'reported' Helen? There was no evidence of an alarm on the day of the stop and search (there couldn’t be, Helen wasn’t carrying one) and if the 'intelligence' was entirely based on the say-so of a hunt referencing a prior incident the police neither witnessed nor had reported to them, why did the police not consider it 'anecdotal'? Given that Helen's alarm had been stolen at a Curre and Llangibby Hunt meet and that particular hunt wasn't even in Abergavenny at the time, that 'intelligence' may have even been secondhand rather than firsthand. With reference to the timing of the stop and search again, it's not clear from the complaint assessor’s email we quoted above - "This therefore provided the officer with enough suspicion and grounds to carry out the stop/search" - whether the police already knew about the alarm or it was Helen's confirmation that she had carried one that then triggered the stop and search. Video footage suggests police had already advised Helen that a stop and search was about to take place before she discussed her alarm being stolen, so was this a simple error on the assessor’s part or something more - a post hoc attempt to justify the search perhaps? Surely Gwent Police didn't need to use strongarm tactics on an 'elderly woman' (Helen's words, not ours) who was not using an alarm, didn't have an alarm visible, and was not committing a crime or causing a nuisance at the time of the stop and search. Yes, of course, until a search is done the police don't know what they will find - but it still seems like an over-reaction. Why didn't police tell Helen - politely - that concerns had been raised instead, tell her by whom, and ask her if she planned to 'disrupt the hunt'? She could have told them she would be protesting but would do so legally. That would surely have been a more proportionate response. Many people carry personal alarms. What would police have done if they'd found one: would Helen have been arrested or had the alarm taken off her? Are police now saying to the general public that in certain circumstances carrying a fully legal alarm is 'reasonable grounds' for a stop and search? Given the noise being made in the street when the parade was taking place, could a personal alarm really have caused a 'public nuisance' anyway?  What happened to common sense? In the video the officers say they are 'neutral' and just doing their jobs and we aren't in a position to dispute that, but the police are fully aware of the antagonism between pro-hunt supporters and pro-wildlife activists (the number of police on the streets during the parade proves that). Gwent Police must have known this was an attempt to intimidate a local activist (and perhaps have her escorted out of the area) and surely understand how it looks to the rest of us to use stop and search powers on an activist entirely on the unproven/anecdotal 'intelligence' of a fox hunt...