NEGLIGENT DRIVING.

Auckland Star, Volume LV, Issue 115, 16 May 1924, Page 10

NEGLIGENT DRIVING.

COLLISION AX INTERSECTION. ■ DEFENDANT TO PAY COSTS. ; Avisiiiff nut of a collision between two motor cars in Williamson Avenue, Grey Lynn, on ilie nifrln of March 22. Cyril Poturlns liusdeu {Mr. Xortlierofl) appeared in the I'olitc Court yesterday j afternoon mi :i charjre of <iungerou« j 'driving. Ili> pleaded not .uwiliy. I Senior Sergeant Hawle prosecuted, :iuitl .Mr. Wilson appeared for the insurance companies euneenietl, The driver i>t' i]i<- other our coneevnen in ilio collision, Hoy Collins, deposed jthut at, 11.2.1 p.m.. while returning from ] tile lluriwai races with livn passengers. :li(> saw ilio li.clit* of defendanfs <>:ir i turning into Williamson Avenue out Jof Surrey Street at a speed which wit- j j im\-s estimated tn be between :iO and :!■"' j miles per hour. Although ! swerved his car into Surrey Street to avoid a liead-on collision and applied His l>rakes, defendant's car struck his pushing it into tlie kerbinjr. As a roj suit the car was <la.ina;reil to the extent of about £200. Witness sustained a sprained wrist, lie did not lose con- i seiousnegs. When he looked round defendant's car had disappeared. His father. Mr. William Cnllins. who was in the rear seal, was rendered uneonsciniis. Cross-examined l>y Mr. Xorthcroft witness said the speed of his >-ar was j not more than 20 miles an hour. The car -was not overcrowded. Other witI nesses for the prosecution said « hat de- / ifendant. some days after the accident. I raid that he did not stop after tlu* colli- | sion because he 'iiatl the wind np." Mr. Nortlu-roft. for the defence, admit tod that defendant's action in proceeding on after the collision seemed suspicious, but it could be said in extenuation that the young man was in a panic. It was the other young man Collins win: was speeding and who failed to keep a proper look out. Mr. Poynton said that he was quite satisfied that Rtieden was <roinjr too last to have a chance of avoiding the accident. Then' was the question of contributory negligence. Both drivers were liable to prosecution. However, as the defendant would probably have to meet n claim for damages, the magistrate said that he would not indict a heavy penalty. Defendant was convicted and ordered to pay costs amounting to £S 3/.