MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21886, 12 September 1936, Page 20

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

FRIDAY (Before Mr E. C. Lewey, S.M.) / CHARGE DISMISSED A charge of being intoxicated while in charge of a motor-car against Richard Henhaxn (Mr F. D. Sargent) •was dismissed, and on a charge of failing to give way he was fined 20s and ordered to pay coats. Senior-Sergeant D. L. Calwell conducted the case for the police, and said that Henham’s car, while being driven on Colombo street, had collided with another shortly before 6 pun. on August 12, at the intersection of Colombo street and .Oxford terrace. Mr Sargent’s main contentions for the defence on the major charge were that Henham had been drinking at his home between the time of the accident and his medical examination at the police station, and that his condition at the time of the accident and generally was the effect of a serious war disability and recent illness. Dr. F. L. Scott said he had examined Henham about 7.38 p.m., and had considered that he was unfit to drive. Mark Armstrong, the driver of the other car, said that his car had been hit on the left wing. At the time Henham’s speech was normal, but several bystanders had suggested that he was drunk. Henham, after moving his car from the tram tracks, had driven away. Ronald Langford, who was present at the collision, said that the car on Oxford terrace had hit that on Colombo street. Henham had seemed unsteady, but his speech was clear. • Mason Samuel Branch, another witness, said that the car on-Oxford terrace had hit that on Colombo street. Henham had smelt of liquor, and in the opinion of the witness was under the influence of liquor. Constable D. M. Whillans said he had interviewed Henham at his home in Dean street after the accident, and invited him to come to the police station to make a statement. He had been unsteady on his feet, his breath smelled of liquor, and his eyes were bloodshot. Henham was later taken to the scene of the accident. When the constable had read a statement by Henham, Mr Sargent said: “Do you not know the ruling of the judge that when you are determined to charge a man you must not ask him questions? You considered the man intoxicated, and yet you asked him to make a statement. Why did you take him to the scene of the accident? Do you mean to say that the officers of the police force have not been instructed in the judge’s ruling?” Witness: That is correct. Constable T. W. Sayer said that Henham’s breath smelled strongly of liquor _ at the station, and he was impatient. . • Mr Sargent called Dr. J. D. Marks, who said that Henham had suffered a sprained ankle previously. He had also had influenza, and had eaten very little for a week. His nervous strain was likely to have certain bad effects on him. Called later, he said that Henham was always to a certain extent unsteady. To Senior-Sergeant Calwell, he said that a small amount of- drink would be good for Henham mentally. A large amount would be harmful. Frederick . Dry said that Henham had been sober when he had left him at 5J.0 pan, Henry St. Aubyn Murray said that he had met Henham at about 5.30 pan. and they had .had two medium beers. Henham had left him at about 5.45 pan. perfectly sober, and had taken home a bottle of beer. Henham gave evidence of having drunk a bottle of beer on bis return home. He said that the corner concerned was a sharp one, and he was looking out for bicycles at the time. To the senior-sergeant, he said he was not told he would be charged when he was interviewed by the police. • The magistrate said that there was i no doubt that accused had been suffiL ' ciezitly - intoxicated to be unable to V‘To* onwards; but

the court could not be directly satisfied as to his condition at the time of the accident. THREE CHARGES Charles Marlin De Bazin was charged with drunkenness and with casting offensive matter. He also appeared for sentence on a charge of being idle and disorderly. x Senior-Sergeant Calwell said that th accused had wandered away from the Salvation Army Home, where he had been detained. On the first charge the accused was fined 10s, on the second 20s, and on the third was convicted and discharged. ADMITTED TO PROBATION Josephine McKnight (Mr D. W. Russell) appeared for-sentence on charges of false pretences. Chief-Detective Dunlop said that restitution of £52 12s 6d was due from the accused. Stating that the report on the accused was a bad one, the magistrate admitted her to probation for three years and made an order for restitutl°n‘ CASE ADJOURNED George Hughes (Mr J. Bretherton) was charged with failing to comply with the terms of his probation. The probation officer, Mr W. H. Darby, said that Hughes had failed to make restitution of the full amount due by him. The case was adjourned till September 18 to give Hughes an opportunity to pay the amount due. TRAFFIC CASES For breaches of the traffic regulations the following were fined and ordered to pay costs, or ordered to pay costs only:— Failure xo give way; Mary Lynch. 20s. Cycling without light; Stanley Trevor Kircher, 10s; Morris Ellis Price, 10s. „ , Parking wrong side of road: Frank Hotson Farthing, 10s. Negligent driving; Norman Caldwell, £5: Allan Leicester Matson, 20s. Cycling on footpath; Arnold Cook, No driver’s licence: William Gutram Kearns, 20s. % . Insufficient motor-car lights: Albert Henry, George Smith, 20s. CHILDREN’S COURT (Before Mr E. C. Lewey, S.M.) A youth, aged 15, appeared on a charge of unlawful conversion of a motor-car. He was remanded in custody until Sepiember 19.