PERJURY CLAIM.

Auckland Star, Volume LXVII, Issue 292, 9 December 1936, Page 5

PERJURY CLAIM.

ACCIDENT CASE. WITNESSES QUESTIONED. PLAINTIFF ASKS NEW TRIAD. Allegations that fraud and perjury on the part of witnesses for the defendant in a motor collision case had been mainly instrumental in obtaining a verdict for defendant when a damages claim was made last February; questions asked by counsel for the defendant regarding interviews with the police in connection with crimes; and questions concerning the connection between a man named Taylor and witnesses for the plaintiff gave varied interest to a case heard in the Supreme Court by Mr. Justice Callan yesterday. It concerned an accident at the intersection of Campbell Road and Great South Road on September 10, 1934, and on behalf of the plaintiff. Peter Percy Hurlstone, Mr. Noble asked that the verdict on behalf of defendant. Harold Oscar Steadman, jriven in February last, be set aside and a new trial granted. The plaintiff alleged that the original verdict had been obtained by fraud arid perjury on the part*of John Heffernan, the driver of the car, defendant's agent. It was alleged the fraud consisted in Heffernan pushing the ear back off the concrete strip on to the bitumen, and afterward swearing to two constables that the car had not been moved. It was further alleged that both Heffernan and Mrs. Steadman, who was a passenger in the car, committed per- ( jury on this matter during the trial. The defence (represented by Mr. Gold- ( stine) denied that Heffernan was Ste&drnan's agent, that the car was shifted back on to the bitumen, or that Heffernan or Mrs. Steadman had given perjured evidence.

Witnesses' Statements. Various witnesses said that plaintiff, Hurlstone, was riding his motor cycle on the concrete on the correct side of the road when the accident happened. The car, they said, was turning into Campbell Road when it crashed into the cycle, and was on the concrete after the accident. Louis IJernard Mendelssohn, a butc-her, of Elierslie, said the ear stopped on the concrete in the way of traffic, and a man asked him to push it back. He helped the man to push the whole car back on to the bitumen. He saw no police at the time. Witness Identified Heffernan in Court as the man who had asked him to push back the ear. Jn answer to Mr. Goldstine, witness said he had been interviewed by the police over a certain matter. Mr. Goldstine: Have you been asked to account for your movements in connection with an armed hold-up at a garage in Khvfoer Pass?— Yes. Mr. Goldstine: A man was shot in the arm and the till robbed? —Yes. Mr. Coldstine: You were in the viciI nitv on that occasion?— So. Mr. Coldstine: You were told by the police that you were suspected?— So. Police Interviews. Arthur Green said he saw the car on j the concrete, and Mendelssohn and an-j other man pushing it back on to the! bitumen. He concluded that the impact occurred on t?je concrete. 3lr. Goldstine: You have been interviewed in respect of crimes? Witness: One. Mr. Goldstine: You were interviewed in connect ion with a burglary at Ellerslie?—Yes, at a tobacconist's. Mr. Goldstine: You were in the vicinity on the night it was broken into?— I was in Ellerslie. | I Mr. Goldstiijw: Did the police not come j and take a statement from you?— They J never took a statement from me in my 1 life. To Mr. Noble witness said that Con-i stable O'Donnell had asked him on j -Saturday how much money he was getting for this case through Mr. Taylor. Witness told him he was doing Hurlstone a good turn in giving evidence. A St. John ambulance driver, Hugh Francis Hyan, said he had been summoned to the accident and found the carl about 4f\ on the concrete. Three further witnesses said the front) of the car was about 4ix on to the concrete. One of them said a Mr. Tayloj left -with hinj. on .Saturday a copy /<f hi' previous evidence and told him to "chcii it over during the week-end."" 31r. Goldstine applied for a nonsuit on two grounds. He said there had been no evidence brought to show that Hfffernan was the defendant's authorised or that be had been acting in the course of his employment. Further, a verdict could not be t-et aside on the ground of fnaittd unless it was shown that the principal in the case had been a party lp the fraudA iter Sir. Xoble had replied his Honor reserved his decision.

A report «u thn aiwunit# for i}j<? v«ar *a.d<sd September W, JU3O. prmented at a mveiiag of lie JiarWnr Board. ebwed a wedh balance of £607, a* £493 for the prerws* year, AdtmhiUir&tvm and »iai»l«aaa«e totalled £5825 and Interest <-liar«e« £13.17. l"}je Included £2401 from general sargso <Jw.