Licence gone :-(

[The Stranger:Me]

So what about searching a vehicle?
Is probable cause required there?

For some strange reason many is the time I had a vehicle searched. Never really cared because I always had my shit well stashed and without a dog, they weren't going to find it in a roadside search.

But we would regularly get pulled over, names and addresses taken and the vehicle searched. Never charged or nothing.

What do they do with all those names and addresses anyway? They took mine dozens of times, duly wasting their time writing it down then what? Nothing.

[Ixion]

Ah, search. That's a bit different.

Several acts give police authority to search a vehicle without warrant. Misuse of Drugs and Arms Acts notably. But they must tell you if they are relying on those acts, and must have reasonable grounds (though "reasonable grounds" may be that Officer Bumblebee swears that he has a very sensitive nose and smelled cannabis).

Under certain cincumstances police may search a vehicle without warrant, if they have reasonable grounds to believe it contains stolen property.

In general the police will be cautious of making a search without authority because it may taint any evidence they do find and make it inadmissable.

However, if you give permission, even tacit permission, then anything goes. "Open the boot please, thanks" . Unless you specifically object, you've agreed.

All assuming they don't have a search warrant of course. If they have one of those they can search within its terms until their little toes turn up.

There are some other special cases, under Terrorism Laws and such. and some old ones form the 30s and 50s but they are unlikely to be relevant unless you are a Trade Union official.

And they don't need any authority for anything they can see - so if the back seat is full of VCRs they are certainly going to ask you about them.

In general, you can *probably* successfully object to having a vehicle searched. But, of course, such an objection is really going to make Officer Bumblebee sure that you have something to hide. And make his sensitive nose even more sensitive. And any subsequent search under the Misuse of drugs Act wil be *very* thorough. So it may not be a good idea.

[marty]

Well done, Ixion - very well explained.

[davereid]

Thanks Ixion, would give you more bling but can't !
What about passengers in the car ? Are they obliged to identify themselves ?

[Ixion]

A constable can require ANY person , in a car or not, to supply name and address. You don't actually have to provide any form of ID, but giving false information is a serious offence (driver or passenger).

Bear in mind that if a constable has reasonable grounds to suspect an offence has been committed he has a LOT more power. And PC Bumblebee can be quite "creative" in discovering possible offences if people get up his nose.

Also, matters are more complex if the passengers are under age. Or if the driver does not have a full licence.

[spudchucka]

So what about searching a vehicle?
Is probable cause required there?

The Land Transport Act has no power of search.

This comes from other Acts,

Misuse of Drugs Act, Section 18(2)
Arms Act, Section 60, 60(A) & 61
Crimes Act, Sction 202(B), 225, 314(A) - (D), 317(A), 317(AA)

These are the main ones.

Probable cause, (if we have to insist on using this seppo bulshit), in the case of the misuse of drugs act usually comes from the overwhelming stench of cannabis wafting out of the piece of shit car the cop has just stopped. Once the piggies nose gets involved he / she will invoke the statutory power of search under section 18(2).

Probable cause in matters relating to the arms act or crimes act, (stolen goods in transit, persons wanted for arrest etc), will usually come from information received.

For instance a shoplifter has been followed by store security and has been seen leaving in a particular vehicle, vehicle is located by cops and stoppped for the purpuse of searching the vehicle for the goods stolen.

Or, some young street urchins are seen driving around town shooting at people with one of those soft pellet air guns, the rego and vehicle description are given to police comms who pass the description onto patrols. Patrols locate the vehicle and stop it to search for the air gun.

In both of these last instances the vehicle has not been stopped under the provisions of the land transport act but rather the crimes act power to stop vehicles for the purpose of exercising a statutory power of search, (Crimes Act, Section 314(B)).

If you read the sections of these acts that give police the power to search without warrant you will see that the common factor is "Reasonable Grounds to Believe", which is the appropiate term under NZ law, not probable cause.

[spudchucka]

However, if you give permission, even tacit permission, then anything goes. "Open the boot please, thanks" . Unless you specifically object, you've agreed.

Search by consent has to by informed consent, otherwise the evidence will not be allowed.

So, "open the boot please, thanks" would have to be followed by, "You realise that anything illegal I find in there will result in you being charged", in order for the resulting evidence to be admissible in court.

Don't forget the common law right of search pursuant to arrest either. If you get locked up on the roadside your vehicle may well be searched as well as you.

[marty]

Don't forget the common law right of search pursuant to arrest either. If you get locked up on the roadside your vehicle may well be searched as well as you.

spud already knows this but, for as long as, or until, the evidence for which you have been arrested for, has been secured.