Officer said M ran light on bike. Tried to pull him over. M wouldn’t pull over.
Charged with obstructing justice s. 129 (b) – omission to help a public officer in the execution of his duty
**He could have arrested him and used - s.495(2)(d) – can arrest to establish the identity of the person – this a less serious option
Is M guilty of obstructing a police officer?
Omission to act in a particular way will give rise to criminal liability only where a duty to act arises at common law or is imposed by statute, or by contract.
Narrow View: A person obstructs justice that satisfies s.129 (b) if he fails to indentify himself to an officer, when he was seen committing a crime.
Broader View: A person can obstruct justice, in the terms of s.129(b), if he fails to act in a way convenient to an officer.
**Under the Motor Vehicle Act – every driver of a vehicle and every pedestrian shall obey the instructions of an applicable traffic-control device.
**Say it is a major inconvenience (not in public interest to inconvenience the police) – this is absurd – but is the law
**Any duty to identify oneself must be found in common law or by statute.
**The fact that a police officer has a duty to identify a person suspected of an offence says nothing about whether the person has the duty to indentify himself on being asked
***They are entirely independent
**Criminal law is no place within which to introduce implied duties, unknown to statute and common law, breach which subjects a person to arrest and imprisonment
M had a duty to give S his name, he was obstructing S’s performance