Advertisement

Policies for Police-Minority Relations

  • M. P. Banton
Conference paper
Part of the Life Sciences Research Reports book series (DAHLEM, volume 27)

Abstract

The criminal law, with very few exceptions, imposes the same obligations and confers the same rights upon all persons living within the state’s boundaries. In practice, apparently respectable, rich, or powerful persons may be treated better when offenses are being investigated, but such differences arise in the implementation of the rules and are not authorized by them. Only in restricted circumstances are special rights conferred upon minorities. In England and Wales, special instructions are issued to the police concerning procedures for interviewing children and young persons, mentally handicapped persons, deaf persons, and those unable to speak English. Failure to comply with the directions may lead to the resulting evidence being declared inadmissible and excluded from the trial process, so members of these minorities have special rights. Not surprisingly, judges sometimes have difficulty determining whether the police have complied with these directions. I suggest, therefore, that in our discussions we should concentrate upon matters arising from the implementation of laws phrased in universalistic terms.

Keywords

Police Officer Crime Prevention Police Chief Foreign Population Minority Member 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. (1).
    Banton, M. 1973. Police-Community Relations. London: Collins.Google Scholar
  2. (2).
    Banton, M. 1978. Crime prevention in the context of criminal policy. Police Studies 1: 3–9.Google Scholar
  3. (3).
    Banton, M. 1983. Categorical and statistical discrimination. Ethn. Racial 6 (3): 269 — 283.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. (4).
    Bayley,D.H. 1982. Accountabilty and Control of Police: Lessons for Britain. Paper presented at Cropwood Conference, Cambridge, England, December 1982.Google Scholar
  5. (5).
    Butler, A.J.P. 1982. An Examination of the Influences of Training and Experience on the Attitudes and Perceptions of Police Constables. West Midlands Police, Birmingham.Google Scholar
  6. (6).
    Field, S., and Southgate, P. 1982. Public Disorder: a review of research and a study in one inner city area. Home Office Research Study No. 72. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
  7. (7).
    Holdaway, S., ed. 1979. The British Police. London: Arnold.Google Scholar
  8. (8).
    Hübner, K. 1982. Integrationsprobleme der Ausländer und ihre Aus-wirkungen auf die Polizei. Kriminalist.(Mai): 283–290.Google Scholar
  9. (9).
    Jacobs, J.B., and Cohen, J. 1978. The Impact of Racial Integration on the Police. J. Polic. Sei. 6: 168–183.Google Scholar
  10. (10).
    Kettle, M., and Hodges, L. 1982. Uprising: The Police, the People and the Riots in Britain’s Cities. London: Pan Books.Google Scholar
  11. (11).
    Scarman, Lord. 1981. The Brixton Disorders 10–12 April 1981. Cmnd 8427. London.Google Scholar
  12. (12).
    Southgate, P. 1982. Police Probationer Training in Race Relations. Home Office Research and Planning Unit Paper No. 8. London: Home Office.Google Scholar
  13. (13).
    Teahan, J.E.; Adams, M.; and Podany, C. 1980. A comparison of the value structure of British and U.S. police. Int. J. Soc. P. 26: 246–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. (14).
    Tuck, M., and Southgate, P. 1981. Ethnic Minorities, Crime and Policing: a survey of the experiences of West Indians and whites. Home Office Research Study No. 70. London: Home Office.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Dr. S. Bernhard, Dahlem Konferenzen, Berlin 1983

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. P. Banton
    • 1
  1. 1.Dept. of SociologyUniversity of BristolBristolEngland

Personalised recommendations