In a recent review of my 2011 book on police custody, the eminent policing scholar, Robert Reiner,
noted how fascinating it was to learn about how much (or rather how little) had changed since his own study of police
custody practices in the early years of the Police and Criminal Evidence Act.
This is in spite of the “seemingly
massive changes in the policing world, not to speak of wider society, in the
intervening decades”, he says. In this review, he later notes that “[t]he overall feeling conveyed by [the book] is that
for all the superficial changes at the routine operational level, plus ça
change is the main theme. For all the ceaseless fashion parade of new
discourses and initiatives, the everyday practice of policing is structured by
macro political-economic and cultural processes that have changed in ways that
intensify the patterns observed by the classic police ethnographies of the
1960s and 1970s.”
His insightful comments about the
overall direction of the book through the notion of plus ça change (i.e.
the idea that everything changes, yet it all stays the same), was the focus of
a talk that I gave on Friday 1 November 2014 as part of the Innocence Network
UK annual conference. What I argued was that aspects of policing (of relevance to police custody) have fundamentally
altered for the better through the improved regulation of police custody,
particularly through the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984 and the
associated Codes of Practice, but also through ECHR/ECtHR and the UK’s
signature of the UN Optional Protocol
to the Convention against Torture and other Cruel, Inhumane or Degrading
Treatment or Punishment (known as OPCAT), which as has led to a
programme of inspections of police custody facilities by HMIP and HMIC.
Improvements have also been made to the custody environment and to the kind of
people who work there, which all have the potential to provide a more humane
experience for suspect in the police station, through civilianization and
privatization, as well as through technology such as CCTV.
However, various aspects of policing have remained
unchanged including the existence of considerable amounts of police
discretion which, in combination with the inherent permissibility of the law (McBarnet,
1979), enables the occupational cultures of the police to exert significant influence
over police decision-making and actions. What has also remained unchanged is
the role that the police occupy in society. In relatively consensual and
peaceful democratic societies, this role concerns the exercise of authority
backed up by the capacity (i.e. the possibility) of using force. That is, the
police have at their disposal discretion about the deployment of legitimate force to control 'something-that-ought-not-to-be-happening-and-about-which-someone-had-better-do-something-now!'
(Bittner, 1974).
These ‘new’ and the ‘old’ aspects
of policing co-exist alongside and conflict with each other. Moreover, the clash between the new and the old has been
intensified as a result of social, political and economic changes in the
post-war period, which have left the police in a precarious position, as
evidenced by declining trust in the police and as the police have struggled to
adapt to the changing world around them.
Together this is what is meant by plus ça change and it is all
manifest in police custody, a micro-cosm of policing. This was the main
focus of my talk, evidenced with reference to the data that I collected in my ESRC-funded
police custody study in 2006/7. In sum, custody environments are much improved, but they are still concerned
with asserting power and control,
as well as with the deprivation of
liberty, meaning that suspects are still at risk from what I have called
the ‘pains of police detention’ and are likely to experience police custody as like
a ‘miniature prison’. Suspects generally
have better access to rights and entitlements (such as to legal advice),
but the conditions of police detention and the pressure put on them by the
police and others can still lead them to waive these rights so as to ‘get it over with’ as quickly as possible.
Suspects form positive relationships
particularly with civilian police staff, but these can be undermined by the
largely coercive relationships that they continue to have with police
officers, backed up by their capacity to use force.