New Policy: Written Consent for Vehicle Searches

             Writtenconsent to search is progress was published on Monday, July 23, 2012. The editorial informs Austinites that beginning next month, “Austin police will have to obtain written permission before searching a vehicle.” At the moment, officers “ask verbal permission before conducting a search.” The editorial then introduces a racial issue by stating that “Austin Police Chief Art Acevedo announced the new policy after a report by the Office of Police Monitor that black and Hispanic drivers were searched more often than whites.” According to American-Statesman Patrick George, “one in eight traffic stops involving a black driver resulted in a search” and 1 of 10 traffic stops involving Hispanic drivers were searched. “White drivers were searched in 1 of 28 traffic stops according to the police monitor’s report.”

             I have pulled the previous statements straight from the editorial in order to put a summary together. However, the statements I chose also add credibility to the editorial because they illustrate that the author is not only throwing statements at us but has provided us with sources for his/her information. The statement with numerical data really grasps the reader’s attention and shows that the author took the time to do research, which again adds credibility to the editorial.

            In response to the racial issue, Austin Police Chief Art “was quick to wave away any suggestions that the results could be indicative of racial profiling. Stepped up police work in high-crime areas means more activity in neighborhoods with high concentrations of minorities.” Unfortunately, the author introduced the racial issue but failed to provide any further details or opinions which left me very unsatisfied. I feel as though the editorial is incomplete because he/she didn’t address this issue.  

            One of the only opinions that the author offers is that “The new policy is not radical because officers can ask for a signature authorizing a search as easily as they now ask verbal permission.” The author has failed to see the importance of the new policy which is not to make searching a vehicle more difficult but to protect the ambiguous nature of verbal consent from negatively affecting law enforcement or the citizen. For example, my uncle is in law enforcement and has had several complaints filed against him claiming that he searched vehicles without permission. Fortunately, he has been able to defend these claims with video and audio surveillance. Written consent will hopefully convey the importance of the issue at hand by grasping the attention of the citizen and will reinforce citizens’ rights because the form will remind them that they have the right to refuse the search unless there is probable cause. I am aware that written consent won’t get citizens off the hook for vehicle searches, which I wouldn’t support anyway, but I am glad that the game will no longer be played as he-said-she-said as it has been for my uncle.