DISQUALIFIED DRIVER

Press, Volume XCI, Issue 27641, 23 April 1955, Page 9

DISQUALIFIED DRIVER

PENALTY UPHELD BY JUDGE UCENCE SUSPENDED FOR THREE YEARS a horse trainer, aged « (Mr A. K. Archer), appealed against the length of time for which his driver’s licence had been suspended on his conviction for being in charge of a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol. After hearing submissions by Mr Archer and the Crown Prosecutor (Mr A. W. Brown), his Honour upheld the Magistrafe’s decision to disqualify Doyle from holding a licence for three years. Doyle had visited Storey’s Hotel with a nephew he had not seen for 18 years, said Mr Archer. They stayed at the hotel for a short period. Doyle had been convicted on November 20. 1952, of driving a motor vehicle while under the influence of drink, and had only had his licence restored about six months previously. He had handed ms car keys to his nephew on entering the hotel. It was raining when he left the hotel Mter 6 o’clock and Doyle waited in < * r i. ver ’ s se at while his nephew—who still had the keys—was changing ms clothes. A constable approached the car just after his nephew got into the car. The appellant denied that he had made any effort to start the car., “I must admit that the nephew was in no better state to drive a car,” said Mr Archer. w as convicted on the charge of being in charge of a car, not drivtog u- lor *hi.s charge no minimum penqd of dis-' ,;R ration was specified. .Jt is obviou.- -t the Magistrate thought he had notion but to impose disqualification 'or three years. ■But this provision in the Transport Amendment Act applied only to second offenders for driving.' Merely being in charge of a vehicle' was a le^L er offence, Mr Archer submitted. ' Mr Brown said he was informed by S? 16 the policemen who was in the Court when the Magistrate sentenced Doyle that the Magistrate did not say ne was bound by the Act to impose niguahfication for three years. e submitted it could not be considered that the Magistrate misdirected himself and that he was entitled to ex ercise his discretion. Doyle had a well-spaced record of offences involving drunkenness, said Mr Brown. It might well be that the Magistrate deWted merely to double the period of imposed on him on the »ast occasion.

It may be that being in charge of a motor vehicle while in a state of intoxication is a lesser offence than driving the car.” said his Honour. “But in this case Doyfe was in the driver’s

seat and ’'ere had been a single or a joint attempt to start the car. “The view I take is that disqualification is the greatest penalty that can be imposed in these cases. I cannot hold that the Magistrate was wrong in imposing a sentence of disqualification for three years.”

Remanded for Sentence John Gordon Anthony Shanks, a forestry worker, aged 26, was remanded until Tuesday morning for sentence. He had pleaded guilty in the Magistrate’s Court at Invercargill to six charges of theft, two of shopbreaking and one of conversion of a bicycle.

The prisoner had a vdry long list of convictions, said the Crown Prosecutor (Mr A. W. Brown). He had stolen gelignite—which he now admitted he would have used—and a rifle. “It looks as if he was preparing for a full-scale onslaught on society.”

“You realise that you have qualified for preventive detention?” asked his Honour. “Yes, sir,” replied the prisoner. He added that he took the rifle to go pig-shooting, not to use it against society. His Honour said he would take time to consider what the sentence should be.