Interfering Samaritan Obstructing a PC
| Published date | 01 October 1979 |
| Author | A.N. Khan |
| DOI | 10.1177/0032258X7905200405 |
| Date | 01 October 1979 |
| Subject Matter | Article |
A.N.KHAN,MA.,Dip.Ed.(EngI.);M.A.(Litt),LL.B(Pak.);F.I.L.;
A.F.A.I.M.
Lecturer in Law. Dep.
of
Management. The University
of
Western
Australia
INTERFERING
SAMARITAN
OBSTRUCTING
A PC
Section 51(3) of the Police Act, 1964 provides:
"Any
person who
resists or wilfully obstructs aconstable in theexecution of his duty or
aperson assisting a constable in the execution of his duty shall be
guilty of an offence
...
" An interesting case recently came before the
courts where a good samaritan, with honourable but misguided
intentions, interfered to resolve a dispute between a police officer and
the arrested citizen. The facts of Willmott -v-
Atack
«1976) 3 AER
794) as found by the Crown Court of Croydon are that PCs Atack,
Bell and Baskett were on duty in a police car. Before midnight they
met PC Zierninski, who was off-duty at the time, and, consequent
upon some information given by the latter, they went to chase a Ford
Capri, the driver of which was suspected of having alcohol in his
body. PC Zieminski was taken as a passenger in the police car. The
Capri was driven to and parked at the car park of Biggin Hill Manor
Country Club. The police car followed the Capriclose behind. When
eventually the driver of the Capri car was being arrested, he started
struggling and resisting arrest. At this point Willmott, who was the
proprietor and licensee of the country club, approached and told the
arresting policeman that the premises were private and the police
were 'acting out of order'. He attempted to' intervene to subdue the
motorist and thereby pushed the PC in the throat while holding and
restraining the arrested person. The motorist calmed down but when
taken to the police car refused to enter it. Thereupon Willmott
intervened again by pushing himself between the driver and the PC,
telling the arrested person not to be stupid and to get into the car.
While persauding him to get into the car, Willmott again pushed the
Pc.
Now he himself was arrested for obstructing a PC in the
execution of his duty and assault. He was convicted of obstruction
under section 51 (1) of the same Act. On appeal his conviction for
Assault was dismissed
but
the obstruction conviction was upheld.
The case went to the High Court on case-stated appeal, the question
of law being: "Whether upon a charge of willfully obstructing a
police officer in the execution of his duty it is sufficient for the
Prosecution to prove that the Defendant wilfully did an act which
obstructed the police officer in the execution of his duty, or must the
368 October 1979
To continue reading
Request your trial