Stacks Law Firm is a leading Australian legal service provider with more than 250 people operating locally in many Australian communities.
We are committed to supporting the legal needs of everyday Australians and businesses across every stage of life.
A man was riding a motorcycle along a road when he was stopped
by police for not having his helmet strap done up. The man appeared
to be nervous. The police officer made enquiries and found out that
the man had previous charges of drug possession and was on bail for
manufacturing a prohibited drug. The police officer also observed
"ice sores" on the man's face.
Accordingly, the police officer formed the view that the
motorcyclist might be in possession of drugs and decided to search
him. In searching the man, the police officer conducted a frisk
search and also put his hand inside the man's jeans and into
his genital area.
The man resisted and said: "You can't do that". He
was then handcuffed and a strip search was performed. The strip
search was conducted in public on the roadside in front of other
officers. A plastic bag containing methamphetamine was found in the
man's genital area.
case a - The case for the police
case b - The case for the motorcyclist
This man was known to police for drug related activities, had
"ice sores" on his face and was acting in a nervous
manner after he was pulled over.
There were therefore reasonable grounds for the police officer
to suspect that the man was in possession of a prohibited drug and
so he was entitled to detain the man and perform a frisk
search.
While being frisk searched, the man pulled away and
resisted.
This was a serious matter and there was the possibility that
the man might dispose of any evidence unless the officer took
immediate action. In these circumstances it was reasonable for the
officer also to conduct a strip search.
The actions of the police officer were reasonable and lawful
and the location of the drugs in the man's underwear should be
admitted as evidence in the prosecution against him.
The outside of my jeans around the genital area was never
frisked by the officer. I was asked to unbuckle my belt so that the
officer could check there was nothing behind it, but then without
any warning he put his hands down into my pants.
Of course I objected to the officer doing this – this was
totally out of line and far more invasive than what's allowed
as part of an ordinary frisk search.
But for the officer putting his hands down my pants, there
would have been no reasonable grounds to proceed to a full strip
search.
The law requires that, where reasonably practicable, a strip
search should be conducted in a private area and not in view of any
person not necessary for the search. In my case, the strip search
was performed in full view of the public and no efforts were made
to provide me with reasonable privacy.
The police acted unlawfully and any evidence about them finding
a bag containing methamphetamine in my possession should not be
allowed.
So, which case won?
Cast your judgment below to find out
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.