Re: Roadblocks - Your Rights and Powers of the Police.
No worries, and understandable. Yes, the authorization specifies the place, time, aprox duration, and object or purpose of the roadblock.
Also, wrt non-roadblock search and seizure, it is subject to reasonable suspicion if no warrant is issued. A warrant is the preferred method and should be strived for. You can only search and seize if you have reasonable suspicion, and if you reasonably believe that the time to get such warrant will defeat the object of the search. If these requirements are not met, the search will be unlawful, and thus grounds for legal recourse ito wrongful search and seizure.
Re: Roadblocks - Your Rights and Powers of the Police.
I assume the same applies if the road block is unlawfull ?
Can a current member describe your process for roadblocks these days in terms of permission ?
When I was working a few of us would decide to operate a roadblock, clear it with the big guy and off we'd go.
Best road block I did was in a SADF Oryx. A rolling road block. Chopper would land, we'd setup and operate for 30mins and then move. That was arranged though.
Re: Roadblocks - Your Rights and Powers of the Police.
From above...
e)For the purposes of exercising the powers conferred by paragraph (c) or (d), a member shall display, set up or erect on or next to the road or at the public place such sign, barrier or object as is reasonable in the circumstances to bring the order to stop to the attention of the driver of a vehicle approaching a roadblock so as to ensure that the vehicle will come to a stop or to the attention of a person approaching the checkpoint.
A few years back I was stopped at a very casual roadblock. One vehicle and two police members. It was on a rural road. The vehicle was off to the side, literally in the bush. The two officers were in civvies. They were searching for a stock theft suspect. When I saw them waving a torch, I was extremely nervous. I slowed to a crawl, deciding do I run over them or stop. I stopped, but could easily have made the descision to drive, resulting in me possibly being shot. From the above, it seems that everything was legal, but not the set up? There were no signs, barricades, uniforms etc. and only when you stopped could you see the vehicle decals. From the above was this road block "illegal"?
Re: Roadblocks - Your Rights and Powers of the Police.
I'll reply in detail on Monday. Farmer-el, initial impressions is that it was an unlawful roadblack. I will go into more detail later.
Re: Roadblocks - Your Rights and Powers of the Police.
Given that spur of the moment situations such as a hasty perimeter thrown up in a search where the suspect(s) could possibly be in the area are facts of Police life, I would be very surprised if there is not some legal exception in which 'exigent' traffic stops or check points were covered. ('reasonable suspicion' stretches it IMO but maybe in SA that fits?) Certainly I would not consider checking outgoing traffic for a suspicious person or maybe a truck hauling livestock at 3AM to be the same as a 'roadblock'. Of course such would have been better done by uniformed members, but sometimes they are not immediatey available.
No doubt that having only maybe a tiny blue light and a torch or two was not the best or safest manner in which to do this checkpoint however...for sure.
Re: Roadblocks - Your Rights and Powers of the Police.
And what of our Constitutional guarantee of privacy and the presumption of innocence before the law?
I suspect the entire raft of legislation we are discussing would fail Constitutional muster.
Re: Roadblocks - Your Rights and Powers of the Police.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Paul
And what of our Constitutional guarantee of privacy and the presumption of innocence before the law?
I suspect the entire raft of legislation we are discussing would fail Constitutional muster.
Legislation that allows search without consent absent at the least 'reasonable suspicion' of criminal activity that is articulated in a report and passes judicial muster, yes...and in general I think it should be...but there is the fact that a motor vehicle is, by nature, mobile and able to GTFO of the area quickly, and courts and legislatures know that, so I wouldn't expect LEOs not to get some slack cut in the law...just not as much as now.
More than once I have simply 'known' some guy was dirty with drugs, etc. and deliberately done a search I knew would not stand up in court, and the evidence would not be allowed...but also that the dirtbag would never get his contraband back either, so it may not save everyone from all such searches.
The example given of the farm road traffic check would no doubt be fine so long as...if they were searching for a person...no container or area that could not be considered to be able to hold a person was searched. Boot? Yes. Paper bag? Nope.
Generally they would no doubt also be allowed to do a Field Interrogation Report as well...pics taken with a Poloroid or digital, ID of the subjects on scene, particulars written down, etc...and anything in plain sight during that is fair game...like fresh blood on a skinning knife in the floorboard, etc.
Re: Roadblocks - Your Rights and Powers of the Police.
Thanks Ikor. For me that night it was a safety thing. I've never had an issue being stopped and searched by police. This has changed though for me, admittedly as our Democracy get's older I've become more "liberal" in my views to these things. Where before I accepted the greater good of these type of searches, now I believe they must be done per the book. Even if it is to protect me or my family from possible victimisatiom. Unfortunatley for me, some member's of the force no longer embelish "Protect and Serve". if that even is still the motto. These type of threads are brilliant in clearing issues, and getting different perspectives.
Re: Roadblocks - Your Rights and Powers of the Police.
It is always a 'battle' if you will, to walk the fine line between violation of constitutional rights and doing one's job as well as possible as a cop. (and that provided your motive is good) That is not necessarily a bad thing, as my personal belief is that it should not come down too much on one side or the other, but always, if it is a tie...or even close...constitutional rights must win. (There will always be more criminals)
I once did a search (where I absolutely just 'knew' from his look and reaction the SOB was dirty) that is still used as an example in law schools in my state of something called 'mere suspicion'...which actually does not exist in legal terms even now. The judge ruled I didn't have enough suspicion to justify the stop / search and the case was thrown out...but the 14 year old girl who was with the 23 year old boy smoking dope that night went home safe and sound, and I got a Thank You letter from her parents. I'm perfectly OK with that...and faced with the same circumstances, I'd do it again. (He didn't get his dope back either)
I am aware of the 'situation' in SA as the democracy grows older...I do, after all, live there half my year...but I know fine cops of all ages, sexes and races who do...really...bust their asses for shid pay trying to do the right thing. Of course, it is not 'news' if Officer X does their job well and goes off shift after violating no one's rights...
And FWIW I'd have also faced a dilemma in your shoes out in farmland at night alone.
