SENT FOR TRIAL

Evening Post, Volume CXVII, Issue 103, 3 May 1934, Page 6

SENT FOR TRIAL

v- ... , ■» - LORRY DRIVER'CHARGED

"-ALLEGED NEGLIGENCE;

♦ ACCIDENT AT GLMSIDE' "i - ',

> Despite an eloquent plea by his v counsel that the ease- should b6 aiV * missed because,thejpolice evidence was * insufficient/Cyril John Steer, of Tawa .J. Flat, w«g" committed to- the Supremo ~ Court f<sr trial by Messrs.-P. D, Hosltina * and D,.EC.Edgar, J.P.B/-yeßtorday'on a £ charge of • negligently driving a mo'tofi ', lorry, therfeby causing"* the death of j i Kermode. The case, arosovftomj <an accident;at Glcnside on* January 13 $ \- when a car driven by ]£ennodo wen£ j * 5 over a bank ,and Kormaclo received 1 injuries; which' necessitated" his 'removal \ tG hospital, where, according to ' the % niedieal evidence, lie l died of pneu*, ; njonia on January 31. ' ; iSteer,. who pleaded not guilty, was 1 allowed, bail in tho sum of £100 an^ ' r one surety of £100. He was rer>re-' « sflntad by.^jlr. AW E. Leicester. " ".' ; Chiei-Deteetive Carroll proseouted. The beginning of the pioceedings was » reported in. yesterday's "Post." * A trip with Steer's furniture to Tawa Plat from Louver Hutt on the afterJ- . noon of the accident was described by * Henry Toner,, who said he mado the j trip in a dark- red lorry with Steer and * a man named Frandi. jThey stopped at ■. a hotel in Lower Hutt and at another I . one in Pototie and had drinks at both. J In 'flic ISTgaliauranga"Gorge they picked * '.up a man named Ell 'and an Alsatian « dog he had with him. At Tawa Mat * they unloaded 'the lorry aud drank the I contents Of a jar of beer. They then ! set out on tho return journey to Lower * Untf. Steer was driving, and Frandi I anrl the witness were- with him in the j ca,b_ Ell and the dog were on the back * of-the lorry. *« The.witness said ho remembered com- ; ing up to a car between Tawa Flat and * JohnsonviHe, but he could "not remem- * ber having passed that car. He did not % feel anything on ,the way and did not I know what became of the eai\ S The Chief-Detective read from ; ..Toner's evidence at tho inquest on * Kermode. ','As we went to pass the J car," Toner's evidence ran, "I heard * a bit of a knock as of two things •j grinding together." J Sir. Leicester objected that as Toner 5 , was •a, police-witness'he could not be J "_ cross-examined', by them' unless tho * • ; Court declared him' hostile. ' ■ "I am entitled to refresh his * ' memory," said the Chief-Detective. * The Chicf-Deteetive again read the % above sentenc&~?rom Toner's evidence J ' at the inquest, and Toner said it was. *■ correct. Ho said ho suggested1 to" Steer i to stop, but they did'not atop. - '""' * Cross-examined by Mr. Leicester, 4 Toner said that he had had. moTe drinks y( than Steer and so was feeling di'6*?sy * on the journey back to Lower Hutt. * In addition his hearing was rather poor. * Mr. Leicester: Do you reinembor sayi ing at the inquest, >"I am not at'all * certain that I said anything tb the * driver"?— Yes. j Is that still the position?— Pretty i well. I am not absolutely certain. r Toner said that* tho -knock might ■$ hafe been caused by tho lorry touching j the bank. There was nothing to mdi*- * .ca'te that Steer heard any knock. \ ' ' "A CLANKING- SOTJND." 'I Peter TV. Me A. H. Ell said that on * the'trip back from Tawa -Plat he was •* lying on the back of the lorry and had I his dog with. him. He could not rccol- > lect whether anything attracted 'his ; attention. v~ J Chief-Detective Carroll read as fol- * lows from his statement at the inquest: » "I heard a clanking sound. I do nofc know what caused it. . . Tho lorry ; swerved a little- to tho right." 1 Ell said he might have heard a clankJ ing sound,' but he could not recall it * to.memory now. * "Do yoUI,recall saying that at the * inquest?'' asked the Chief-Detective. *t \'X remember I did mention sonio- *. thing about it at-the inquest," replied Ji., If yofl said it at the r inquest would it i-ifi, not-be true? —I supposo it must havo i -i-- . been, otherwise I would not havo said \ lts It would also b'e.truo about tho lotry i swerving to the right, said Ell. ..> - \ > To Mr.'Leiftester; the'witness said he J " did not remember any jolts' 'or bumps < on The Way in/ - , • . ;. x Arthur - gameroii. Prandi said he t6membered the lorry overtaking • and « passing a car on the journey back from Ta.wa I'lat.' lie thought he .heard a J faifltt metallic click but 'he was liot sure. 3 He,nientioned at the timo'that ho had J heard a'noise but he had no recollection * of anyone "teplying. It was on tho j r straight stretch 'of road where the acci- » deiit happened that they passed the car, <. which was in the middle of the load, " forcing the lorry to pull out to , the *~ right to pass it._ ■j , A STATEMENT COBBECTED. « Frandi said he made a statement to a detective after January 13, but N it bad * fto be corrected at,the inquest because * he was sick at the time he made the J statement and he probably agreed with ; anything the detective suggested. J To Mr.' 'Leicester the wibteks said ■ that Steer had the reputation of being ' . the "crack" driver of' ithe- company » which employe^.,them, both. Steer was I completely sober op the journey from J Tawa Flat to Lowe,r Hutt. The witness j felt no bump. ; Arthur John Syder, who arrived in « his ear at the sftens of the accident i sooy. after it had happened, said that prior to arriving at the accident he had ; passed a dark blue or black two-seater » car. and, approximately 500 yards on ; the Wellington side of the accident, a * ~ motor-lorry. Both 'vehicles were going * towards Wellington. The witness 1 thought the lorry was .a,large; Tcd>one. ; He met only those two vehicles between ; tlfe Ngahauranga, Gorge and tho sceno ; of 'the accident. » STATEKCENT TO DETECTIVE. I a, dtatement' made to Detective P. N.-Kobinsoa and Vead \>y him in Court, SteVr said that he did not btttsh a car on the return journey and knock it into ■^ the stream. He did not recollect feeling any bump. Steer said ho may havo brushed the car, but if ho did hp was not aware of it. Had ho been awaro of it he woald have pulled up immediately and rendered assistance, but he -j, ielt eonfideat ho would have felt the i°." impact if the lorry had hit tho car. s£,* Tho detective- • said he interviewed t? Tosier and Frandi and then obtained a £~ Second statement from Steer. He Tead tho statement. In it Steer saia that he ■& had been informed that Toner and «, Frandi had told the police ,thafc his 2,'-; lorry had struck the car when passing «-".it and that they had both told him he & llaa tetter stop. He had also been injj^ formed that Frandi and Ell had told j«^ the poli«s that he had requested them £Z t6 ce P quiet about the accident. Steer :they were-not speaking the truth •£ to. saying those things. He was not «j. drunk or under the influence of liquor »* ,at the time of the trip back to Lower *^-2utt. . Dstsctira Bobinson produced the * riglit'li*nd front mudguard of Ker"- ---'% car and said that on it were -r ~ jwdjjnarif*,., »i- i'ln."reply to Mr. Leicester the detec«s? .tlve said-that he had had no oppor-of-exftminlng the lorry driven by 1 "*" Steer.' He had inquired from the com-i

jany which owned it and had been told it was in Palmeraton North. It was examined by tho polico there, but ha porsonalty could not, say that any marks had bean found on it to indicate a collision. . Corroborative ovidence was given by Detective 11. B. Campin. SUBMISSIONS FOR THE DEFENCE. Addressing the Bench, Mr. Leicester said that tho charge ,ivas tho most serious one thnt fcould bo proforrod against any motorist. It rendered tho accused liable to five years' imprisonment or a fine of £500, or both. Counsel mentioned .the strain that would fall upon the accused and'his family during the three' months till the next session of the Supreme Court if ho were sent on for trial, and said that if thoro was any doubt-it'should bo, resolved now in favour .of. tho accused.--Mr. f Leicester submitted flrst, that it "hatliMst bden established that thero was negligent driving* on; tho "part of the accused, and second,'if "iiogligcnco hnd been ps'tttblished, that ;tfiat ,was not tho causVbf ihd death of Kerm,ode. Reviewing tho facts of „ the case, c6unsel''said .that 'the ' evidence of negligence,against Steer was oi',B vaguo and nebulous sort. It was a matter of doubt,.whether the vehicles met, but assuming: they tlid brush" tlicro was notKihg to show that that had prccipitaied'jho car over,tho bank. The de j ■ceas'od was 65 years of'ago when he first began to drive a, car and he had" had an accident previous to tho ono at Glenside. It might well havo been that the car went on'for somo distance after tho lorry had passed it, that the driver lost his head, and that that caused tho ,car to go over the bank. , Counsel submitted'that, tho ovidenco foil short of establishing that tlio car went over the bank because of "the negligent driving of the accused. "Assuming that theie was negligence, dro you satisfied thnt that .was the cause of death?" Mr. „ Leicester asked'tho Justices. Doctors had stated that it was not likely, though possible, that tho pneumonia had arisen from tho immersion in -tho stream. After an operation soon,after the accident, the deceased was in a good condition, and he remained like that for ten days until ho .developed pneumonia. None of the doctors had- eliminated tho possibility of spontaneous pneumonia, and counsel submitted that the jjrosceution had not eliminated tho possibility of the man having tt*iecl, not-fram. his injuries,' but from pneumonia contracted while in hospital. THE. JUSTICES' DUTY. "Counsel is asking you to tiy this case. That is not your duty," ChiefDetectivo Carroll told the Justices. Ho said that where Justices or a Magistrate were in doubt it was their duty to commit tho accused to tho Supreme Court. Only when they had no doubt that a jury would not convict, were they justified in dismissing,tho charge. Further, it did not matter whether the charge was one of negligent diiving causing death, or negligent driving causing bodily injury. The.penalty was tho same for both offences, and as long as ,the evidence disclosed anything indictable, tho caso should go to tho Supreme Court.. Any evidence that the depositions disclosed could be put into the charges to bo made there. The Chief'Dotectivo mentioned tho possibility of is. charge.being laid against Steer of equbing bodily injury to Mrs. Legge. ' ■ ~