TWO INTOXICATED DRIVERS

Press, Volume LXXII, Issue 21907, 7 October 1936, Page 7

TWO INTOXICATED DRIVERS

HEAVY FINES IMPOSED

SAFETY ZONE LEVELLED

Two motorists, who were convicted of being intoxicated .while in charge of motor-vehicles were each fined £SO by Mr E. C. Levyey, S.M., in the Magistrate's Com yesterday. ■ They were Robert Alexander Johnston and Robert Herbert Peat Default was fixed lor the former at 30 days’ Imprisonment • -

Johnston, for whom Mr F. R. Dacfe appeared, came into court with his head swathed in bandages. He pleaded hot guilty. Dr. F. U Soott gave his evidence previously. : Sub-Inspector MacLean said that Johnston was driving a motortruck, jvhich struck and levelled the safety tone, near the Bridge of Remembrance on- September 0, . about 1 a.m, He was taken to hospital, but after receiving treatment for a wound on the back of the head he Was taken Into custody. When examined at the police station he admitted having had six glasses of beer during the evening, the last being a short time before his arrest.

Evidence was given by Sergeant A. Barnes that Johnston smelt strongly of liquor and was unsteady on his feet. Dr. Scott had given a certificate of his unfitness to drive a car.

To Mr Dacre, witness said he saw the wound, but did not regard it as very serious. “When asked to put big finger to his nose he could not get near it,” said witness. He was also very talkative. Constable G. Alty said that when he went to the scene of the accident he found one end of the tone levelled. Johnston told him he had been at a party in Somerset street and had had six drinks there. He said he was travelling at between 20 and 25 miles an hour in Oxford terrace, and that it was raining very hard at the time. Witness told Mr Dacre that he did not take a statement as It was not usual with Intoxicated persons. “I will have evidence that he had had no drinks at all,” said Mr Dacre. “Ne had had them before 3 p.m,” “He said he had had a drink five

•minutes before the accident,” said Constable H. A. Sayer, in evidence. Johnston asked at the police station for another doctor. Witness rang four, but none could come. “He had a small cut on the head, but nothing to apeak of,” said witness to Mr Dacre. “Our defence,” said Mr Dacre, “is that he was suffering from definite concussion received in the accident. He adniits that he had had a fair amount of beer before 8 p.m.” The symptoms of concussion and intoxication were very similar. “It is a most unfair thing for the police to call medical evidence and that the accused should be unable to get independent medical evidence.” , A taxi driver, Arnold Proffitt, who discovered the accused lying at the side of the truck after the accident, said that Johnston denied to him having had any drink. The zone, said witness, was very dangerous for anyone who did not know the locality. It had small domes at each end, but carried no light. Mrs Edith Smith, owner of the truck, said that Johnston had been at her place during the evening, having called for money owing to him. She had no drink at her premises and Johnston took none with him. "He came into my home and he was -'old sober,” she said. If she had thought he was drunk she would hot have asked him to drive her friends home in her truck. Witness admitted to Sub-Inspector MacLeen that he left in the truck at 9 p,m, to take the friends home and to buy some pies, but he did net return. Giving evidence, Johnston said ne had had e few drinks before 3 p.m. He rod® His bicycle home and then to Mrs Smith’s house. He traced his' movements and the trouble he said ha had had with the engine of the truck. The windscreen was dirty and this, with the rain, made it almost impossible to see. He did not see the zone until four or five feet away from it. He was treated at the hospital and was operated on a few days later. “I was very much shaken and sort of demented for a couple of days after the accident,” he said. “I think I had concussion. Two days later I could not hear people.” Dr. William Bates said it was possible that the symptoms were those of concussion and shock. ; The last to see Johnston before the accident was Theo Frank Meyer, of the Moorhouse pie stall, who described the accused as “perfectly sober.” “The weight of evidence is against the accused,” said the magistrate. “He is convicted hnd fined £SO, in default 30 days, and is ordered to pay costs, Witnesses’ expenses and medical expenses. His license is cancelled and endorsed and he is prohibited from obtaining another for two yparj" Johnston was also charged with failing to pay trolley-bus fares. He was convicted and ordered to pay the fares, 2s lOd, and costs. . . Mr J. D. Hutchinson, for the Christchurch Tramways Board, said Johnston was on relief and had been paid during the period over-which ha had not paid the fares. “This is one of those cases we have to bring forward, he said.

Accident in Ferry Road

An accident in Ferry road, involve ine the injury of a small girl, aged six years, led to the charges against Robert Herbert Peat. Through Mr F. D. Sargent he pleaded guilty to driving without a license, and not guilty to negligent driving, and being intoxicated while in charge of a car On the first charge h' was convicted and discharged, the second was withdrawn bv leave of the court, and on the third he was fined £ 50, his license was cancelled and endorsed, and he wss prohibited from obtaining another fdf two years. He was also ordered to oay court costs, witness expenses, and medical expenses. Mr R. Twyneham appeared for fhe parents of two children involved in the accident. Sub-Inspector D. A. Mac Lean said that on September 5. when approaching St. John street in Ferry road, the accused struck a bicycle ridden by two small girls. One was itill lh hospital. Dr. W. H. "'ates, who was summoned to the Woolston police station, said he was told that ere had been an accident. He examined the accused and found him not in a fit state to be in charge of a car, because of the effects of beer. He gave Peat the opportunity of calling another doctor, but he said that he was quite satisfied. Witness told Mr Sargent that while Peat was net drunk, he was not in a fit state to drive a car. His movements were slow, and alcoholic slowness to accidents. .. . . Dr Bates gave evidence that he found the girl, Beverly Clara Fox, on the pavement. He did not examine the driver, but smelt alcohol on him. His gait and general manner did not appear to indicate intoxication. xhe girl who was riding the bicycle, Zella Marian Martin, said she stopped at the corner and waited for' two cars to so past. The road was then clear except for Peat’s car some distance away. She went straight across Ferry road 7 before turning, but the car struck the back wheel of the bicycle. John Crtckshaw said that the bicyc -■ was oh the side of the road when it W WiiHam l Hall Turner, aTostman.sald he informed the police of the accident. There was a Strong smell of liquor ab Whefi h the driver for hPlicense, he fumbled in his pockets ,® l |4 then said he d not renewed lt sa d Thomas Swan. Dr. Sheffield arrived BO minutes after the aceident S certified Peat unfit to drive. In a Statement he Said he had three glasses of beer and one of gin at the Heaihpote Hotel. ■ . . ... *Mr Sargdht protested against the constable taking a «t from a man after he had decided to an Sesh He said that in the Supreme

Court judges had strongly condemned the practice. The constable replied that circumstances altered cases, and in similar circumstances he would do it again. Peat had been driving for many years and had not had a previous accident, said Mr Sargent. He admitted having taken some liquor, but he had refused more, knowing that he had to drive his car. “It is undesirable for children of this age to be on bicycles at all,” he said. “If you solve that problem, Mr Sargent, you deserve the Nobel prize," replied the magistrate. “The problem of children double-banking is a terror to every driver.” , , When asked by the magistrate, Mr Sargent said that the practice of taking statements from persons to be arrested later was condemned by the Court of Appeal. In theft cases it was never done, and it was so much more unfair if a man was thought to be intoxicated and therefore not entirely responsible for his actions. “The practice ii a reprehensible one for the police to say a man is drunk and then get a statement from him when he may be drunk.” Constable Swan’s evidence was slightly coloured and prejudiced against the accused. “The constable has made a mistake whether he admits it or not, and he should not have taken the statement,” said Sub-Inspector Mac Lean. On the other hand, the evidence was in no way coloured, and he offered Mr Sargent the constable’s report to his seniors, this being almost identical with his evidence. Accused, in evidence, said that he had been driving for eight years. He admitted having taken a little liquor, but he said that the girls took a wobbly course and turned in the centre of the road. A bottle of beer in the car t- ’"nged to his passenger, who was fairly drunk. . ... To the sub-inspector, the accused said that he had not drunk as much liquor as his passenger as he knew he had to drive his car. He personally was perfectly sober, and had driven through the city thousands of times in that condition. "On the evidence he will be convicted,” said the magistrate. “If he was as sober as that hundreds of times when he has driven round the town he h&s bedn very lucky indeed. 1 *