(Bedford Assizes – (Crown Side)) Constable Herbert complained that the defendant had not assisted him when called on to do so when he tried to halt a riot.
Held: Baron Alderson said: ‘The offence imputed to the defendant consists in this – that Herbert being a constable, and there being a breach of the peace actually committing under his own view, he called upon the defendant to assist him in putting an end to it, and that he without lawful excuse refused so to do. It is no unimportant matter that the Queen’s subjects should assist the officers of the law, when duly required to do so, in preserving the public peace and it is right that the state of the law should be known, and that all parties violating the duty which the law casts upon them should be fully aware of the very serious risk they ran in case of refusal. It is necessary you should be satisfied of three particulars -first, that the constable actually saw a breach of the peace committed by two or more persons. It is clear that ail prize-fights are illegal, and that all persons engaging in them are punishable by law. The constable, therefore, saw parties breaking the law ; and if a breach of the peace is in the act of being committed in the presence of a constable, that constable is not only justified but bound to prevent it, or put a stop to it if it has begun, and he is bound to do so without a warrant. Secondly, you must be satisfied that there was a reasonable necessity for the constable Herbert calling upon other persons for their assistance and support; and in this case there is no doubt that the constable could not by his own unaided exertions have put an end to the combat. Lastly, the prosecutor must prove that the defendant was duly called upon to render his assistance, and that, without any physical impossibility or lawful excuse, he refused to give it. Whether the aid of the defendant, if given, would have proved sufficient or useful is not the question or the criterion. Every man might make that excuse, and say that his individual aid would have done no good; but the defendant’s refusal may have been and perhaps was the cause of that of many others. Every man is bound to set a good example to others by doing his duty in preserving the public peace.
Judges:
Alderson Baron
Citations:
(1841) C and Mar 314, [1841] EngR 932, (1841) Car and M 314, (1841) 174 ER 522
Links:
Jurisdiction:
England and Wales
Cited by:
Cited – Laporte, Regina (on the application of ) v Chief Constable of Gloucestershire HL 13-Dec-2006
The claimants had been in coaches being driven to take part in a demonstration at an air base. The defendant police officers stopped the coaches en route, and, without allowing any number of the claimants to get off, returned the coaches to London. . .
Lists of cited by and citing cases may be incomplete.
Police, Crime
Updated: 19 November 2022; Ref: scu.247477