The Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) has upheld Mani Arthur’s complaint that he was stopped and searched without reasonable grounds in November last year. The Black Cyclists Network (BCN) founder described it as a “degrading and humiliating experience” to be searched by the Metropolitan Police officer, who claimed to have smelled marijuana.
The incident occurred at the junction of Woburn Place and Euston Road on the afternoon of November 17.
Posting the video to Instagram, Arthur said: “I was detained and searched by a police officer under the suspicion of ‘smelling’ of marijuana. I was harassed and humiliated in a public space.
“To say that I am pissed off is an understatement. Luckily for me, fellow BCN members Aaron and Hugo were present and recorded the incident.”
Arthur said the situation came about while he was waiting for a green light when an officer told him to move his bike back behind the white line.
Explaining his positioning, Arthur said: “I was not blocking the pedestrian crossing. I told the officer that I would be putting myself in danger if I reversed because a small HGV was sitting directly behind me and I would end up in the driver's blind spot if I followed his instructions.
“I explained to the officer that usually there are cycle box lanes ahead of vehicle stop lines to protect cyclists and because there is a lack of one, I was using my common sense to avoid putting myself in danger.
“The officer tried again but I resisted and he turned around to join his colleagues as they were walking away. The lights changed to green.”
As Arthur was riding away, he heard a call to turn back from the officer.
“He asked for my ID and informed me that he smelled cannabis on me during our exchange. As a result he needed to search me for possession. He searched me by the side of the road.
“Before the search, I asked him and his colleagues if they smelled cannabis on me. They said yes. After the search, they conveniently said they did not smell cannabis on me.”
Official figures show that in London, if you are black, you are four times more likely to be stopped and searched.
The IOPC found the Metropolitan Police officer's grounds for the search, under Section 23 of the Misuse of Drugs Act, were not reasonable.
However, Arthur's complaint that he was racially profiled was not upheld because a review of a year of the officer's stop and search records found he had used the reason of smelling cannabis to stop and search 'people of all ethnicities and genders.'
IOPC regional director Sal Naseem told the BBC that the officer responsible did not understand that Mani felt he had been racially profiled. “So we recommended as part of the officer’s reflective learning practice here that he understood the wider context of stop and search and the disproportionate impact it actually has within black communities.”
Naseem said: “Stopping someone on the single ground of a suspicion of the smell of cannabis is not good practice and it's right that the officer will have to reflect on this.
“Our investigation found the officer had used the same approach on other occasions, but with people of all sexes and ethnicities.
“However, it's still important to acknowledge that Mr Arthur felt racially profiled. The importance of police officers recognising, and being aware of, the disproportionate impact stop and search has on black communities in particular cannot be understated.”
Add new comment
13 comments
I think this is one of those incidents common with the police force in this country. The officer challenged someone who answered back with a reasonable and polite explanation showing that the officer was in fact wrong to have challanged him in the first place. Thus having been embrassed, the officer then proceeded to hassle Mani Arthur with a made up reason for a further search. Racism may well have been an initial motivating factor but Mani's true crime was to be more intelligent and knowledgeable than the police officer.
"a year of the officer's stop and search records found he had used the reason of smelling cannabis to stop and search 'people of all ethnicities and genders.'"
I would like to see some numbers on his success rate.
It is irrelevant that "a review of a year of the officer's stop and search records found he had used the reason of smelling cannabis to stop and search 'people of all ethnicities and genders.'" Firstly, gender is irrelevant, but the main question is what proportion of people that he stopped for this reason were black, what proportion were white, and how does this compare to the population as a whole.
The biggest issue is where the copper thought the cyclist (Mr Arthur) was hiding his spliff? Especially if it was a 'camberwell carrot'.
There's not many places to hide stuff discretely when you are in lycra
"a review of a year of the officer's stop and search records found he had used the reason of smelling cannabis to stop and search 'people of all ethnicities and genders' "
It does not say whether he found any on any of those occasions. And I doubt he has searched people of ALL ethnicities - I mean, precisely how many ethnicities are there?! Perhaps this officer has an olefactory impairment - or some cannabis under his hat?
Seriously though, how can the Met expect to have any credibility when officers routinely let the force down...
Credibility takes time to build and effort to maintain. No great fan of the police (though all coppers I have met have come across as decent), but my take-away from this is that the complaints process appears to have worked.
Just like any customer service organisation the Police should be judged both on how often they get it right AND what they do when it goes wrong. On balance that appears to have happened in this case.
Presumably by saying he smelled cannabis, it justifies the stop'n'search?
If he doesn't find anything then, well, he was mistaken, no problem, sorry about that sir.
If he does find something, he feels that it justifies his "little white lie"
I think that sums up the unofficial policy for some officers. Which is of course (one of ) the underlying problem....
If a BAME policeman had stopped and searched a white cyclist for the same reason would there be the same level of fuss ? The truth that dare not speak its name when it comes to the race issue is that although it's completely unacceptable for white people* to be racist against those who are not white, it's perfectly acceptable for those who are not white to be racist against those who are.
* or should that now be "persons of non-colour" ?
Probably not, however as Black people are disporportionatly targetted, shouldn't they raise it when it looks like it might be racially motivated.
Were you one of the ones arguing about "what was she doing driving around in a nice vehicle when she is labour" when the Black Labour MP was stopped with her friend because "people were coming into the area".
No I wasn't. The point is that such incidents are not exactly on the same scale as the appalling death of George Floyd in the US. I concur with the greatest anti-racist in living memory; Dr Martin Luther King Jr when he said that the colour of a person's skin should be irrelevant.
From the Gov.uk, Ethnicity facts and figures on stop and search-
"...between April 2018 and March 2019, there were 4 stop and searches for every 1,000 White people, compared with 38 for every 1,000 Black people..."
It would seem to the police, especially those of the Met, the colour of a persons skin seems very relevant.
And just because it wasn't kneeling on a handcuffed man's neck until he died, it doesn't make it racist or wrong. I mean, there was no lynching of George Floyd, no rope, noose or tree was involved, let alone a burning cross or white hooded robes...
"..