Thank you for correcting the text in this article. Your corrections improve Papers Past searches for everyone. See the latest corrections.

This article contains searchable text which was automatically generated and may contain errors. Join the community and correct any errors you spot to help us improve Papers Past.

Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image
Article image

ALLEGED MANSLAUGHTER

THE DUNEDIN HARBOUR COLLISION.

VERDICT OF "NOT GUILTY.','

■ (BI TELEGEAPII.—STECIiI< CORRESPONDENT.)'^ Dunedi'n, May. 29. The trial of Joseph Coddoi, on a charg® of manslaughter iii .connection with tho Otjago - Hoads oollision, was resumed to-day. , Mr. Solomon, K.C., in tho. course of his defending address, said: What,were.tho real facts of the case P Captain Cashman was coming up the channel dead, on, his wron^,, . side. Every point of reliable evidence 'showea * that the Lady Roberts was' not in' ,imdv.,, . channel, but. on the wrong side. The. caso . . had been presented as if tho Matakana, the Lady. Roberts, down. As a fact itjwas,.:. tho Lady Roberts that ran the Matakajia down, and caused the death of these peoplo. n , , Ho (Mr. Solomon) did not suggest that would bo a proper caso to prosecute, but - |7( what sort of a caso "would tho Crown. n , cutor have mado out, if he had been VI outing Captain , Cashman? Ho would, havo shown that the Lady Roberts was on j wrong side. How could these, vessels get ond ( . ir>R G , on, if steering parallel courses? He (Mr.Solomon) argued that tho Lady Roberts waa .. .; blundering up tho channel on her wrong , sido, and that Coddoi tried his best to gol ■ into a position of safety by going .to, star. bond. Captain Cashman said that if hn toa had turned to starboard'.it, would not hav« avoided tho accident, but he did not givo a singlo reason iii support of that ' statement. Tho Matakana in seeking safety almost got past as it was, aiid if Captain Cashman bad put his vessel where she ought to have boar thoro would havo boon no oollision. Further, Coddoi was entitled to presume that the other vessel would havo done so. Moreover, when Captain Gardner and Coddoi mot immediately after tho collision, when all. tho parties would know who was in tho'.wring, and Coddoi said something about compensation, Captain Gardner made no answer ,to' it. ■ ' ■ :: ;r':H7 v The jury returned a vordict of _ "Not . guilty.'.' " ■ '• '

Permanent link to this item

https://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/newspapers/DOM19080530.2.50

Bibliographic details

Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 211, 30 May 1908, Page 6

Word Count
335

ALLEGED MANSLAUGHTER Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 211, 30 May 1908, Page 6

ALLEGED MANSLAUGHTER Dominion, Volume 1, Issue 211, 30 May 1908, Page 6

Help

Log in or create a Papers Past website account

Use your Papers Past website account to correct newspaper text.

By creating and using this account you agree to our terms of use.

Log in with RealMe®

If you’ve used a RealMe login somewhere else, you can use it here too. If you don’t already have a username and password, just click Log in and you can choose to create one.


Log in again to continue your work

Your session has expired.

Log in again with RealMe®


Alert