The main findings of the research pertain to stop and search; entry, search, and seizure; arrest and detention; treatment of suspects; legal advice; interviews with suspects; right of silence; juveniles; the mentally disordered and mentally handicapped; supervision and accountability; complaints; and police community consultative committees. This review concludes that PACE has introduced a greater element of fairness into pre- charge procedures, in that suspects are now more aware of their rights and given the chance to exercise them, although there remain areas in which improvement is required; however, both police and suspect may suffer from the lack of clarity in relation to powers outside the station, particularly stop, search, and entry powers; and at the station, the suspect may be at a disadvantage due to the lack of clear delineation of what interview tactics are permissible. Regarding the legal regulation of policing, police behavior is apparently more strongly influenced by PACE rules inside the police station than out; the reason for this difference is probably that insufficient account was taken of the strong informal working rules that determine how the police behave on the street. Regarding balance in the investigative process, this review concludes that PACE has not yet produced a system in balance, in the sense that police powers and safeguards for the suspect are generally well matched in key areas. In relation to the exercise of stop-and-search and entry- and-search powers as well as the treatment of at-risk groups, suspects may be at a relative disadvantage. 190 references