Black men and children face higher likelihood of strip-search in police custody, new research finds

Black detainees, particularly Black men and children, are significantly more likely to be strip-searched in police custody than their White counterparts, even when differences in offence type, vulnerability and other circumstances are taken into account. These are the findings from a new study co-authored by Amal Ali, a PhD candidate in Social Research Methods in the Department of Methodology.

Strip-Searches in Police Custody and their association with Ethnicity/Race, published in Criminology & Criminal Justice, analyses more than 25,000 custody records collected between 2018 and 2022 from a police force in England and is one of the most detailed statistical examinations of strip‑searching in custody to date.

Focusing on strip-searching under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, it sheds new light on a relatively under-examined area of policing. While public debate has largely centred on strip-searches in public settings, far less attention has been paid to their use behind closed doors in custody suites.

Around one in four detainees in the dataset were strip-searched. However, researchers found that people who self‑identify as Black were more than twice as likely to be strip‑searched compared with White detainees. Racial differences persisted even after accounting for important situational factors, raising questions about how decisions are made in custody and whether existing safeguards are sufficient.

Crucially, these racial disparities were compounded by age and gender with Black men and Black children, each facing significantly higher odds of being strip searched above and beyond what would be expected from either characteristic alone.

Strip searches were also more likely where individuals disclosed mental health concerns, a history of self‑harm, or substance use, raising concerns about how vulnerability is managed in custody settings. Arrests involving drug offences and the use of force were strongly associated with higher odds of strip‑searching.

The findings have important implications for policy and practice. While strip-searching is often justified as a necessary tool for detecting concealed items or preventing harm, the results suggest that its use is shaped by a combination of factors that extend beyond these rationales. Furthermore, the persistence of racial disparities, alongside the increased likelihood of strip-searching among vulnerable individuals, raises concerns about proportionality and fairness.

The study concludes that while strip-searching may in some cases be linked to legitimate policing objectives its uneven application means that its use cannot be understood without considering the role of race and its interaction with other characteristics.

Co-author Amal Ali, a PhD candidate in Social Research Methods commented: “These results reveal a deeply troubling pattern that are difficult to ignore. Our data suggest that race shapes who is strip-searched in ways that cannot be explained by the circumstances of arrest alone. If the language of risk and care consistently produces worse outcomes for Black men and Black children, we have to confront what that says about the exercise of police power itself. Ultimately the responsibility for managing risk cannot be divorced from the responsibility for inflicting harm.”

Read Strip-Searches in Police Custody and their association with Ethnicity/Race here.