WILLIAMS ACQUITTED

Dominion, Volume 13, Issue 119, 13 February 1920, Page 3

WILLIAMS ACQUITTED

$ . MANSLAUGHTER CHARGE COURTENAY PLACE TRAGEDY The hearing of tho charge of manslaughter preferred against u taxi driver named Benet Barker Williams was concluded in the Supremo Court -yesterday before His Honour Mr. Justice Edwards. , Hv. ,P. S. K. Mncassey appeared for the Crown, and Mr. T. Neavc for accused. Mr. Albert Crosby was foreman of the jury. The fact. l ! that gave rise to the case were, briefly, thnt on November 6, while accused was driving his taxi down Kent Terrace into Courtenay Place Mrs. Mabel Black, who had come from the directionof Majoribanks Street, and was walking towards the-tramway sheds, was knocked over by the taxi and killed. On the previous day Mr. Ncave had opened the case for the defence, and hud called one witness, a lady, who was a passenger in the tnxi. At the conclusion 'of her evidence the jurymen had been t*ken out to view tho scene of the fatal'<ty. Accused in evidence sa'd that he obtained a taxi license in Juno,'l!H9. On November C he went down Kent Terrace at tho regulation speed of 15 miles per hour. At the bottom of Kent Terrace, before turning into Courtenay Place, he saw a lady crossing the. intersection, and going towards the tramsheds. Witness reduced speed to 12i miles, and soon after to 8 miles per hour—the regulation speed. There was no other traffic in the street nt the timo. Witness Hew.the horn and the lady momentarily stopped and looked in the direction of the taxi, and then went on. The lady was at least 30 yards nway when the first warning was given. Witness again sounded the horn, when he was about 20 yards away from tho lady. On this warning* she stopped and went back and went forward again. Witness tliPii sounded the horn for the third time. Deeming his conrso clear, witness drove on, and when ho was about 6 feet from Mrs. Black she made a run in front of the car. The speed of the car at, the time was about 8 miles per hour. The right front mudguard struck her. Seeing it was impossible to prevent the front wheels going over her, witness swung tho car round sharply to the left in an. endeavour to get tho back wheels to miss her, and this was attempted. in' preference to stopping the car. The car was a heavy one, and witness could have locked the'wheels, but that would have meant doing more injury to the -body. Itjnight havo resulted in the car resting on the body. The car was run on a length to clear the body, when the vehicle was pulled up, facing the plantation.' When the ladv stonped before running there was nothing in front to prevent him going past her. Immediately the car ped witness ran Irack without saying a, word to his passenger, and finding thnt ho could not help Mrs. Black he brought Dr. Smythe to the woman's assistance. Witness then went back to his car, turned his passenger out, got the car going, and removed the body. Witness was porfectlv sober at the time.'' He had bad some of M'Gavin's invalid stout that morning. lie had had a fair amount .of sickness and the stout had been prescribed for him. After he turned his passenger out of the car he.did not see her again until the following dav at her house, and, np to that time witness did not kpow that the lady lived .next door to him. Ho saw- her again at- the inquest.. . '...•, To Mr. Macasser "Vitness stated that he took stout for the sake of his health. He denied telling Detective Scott that bo took linuor and would always take it. Witness had lived twelve months in Kent Terrace. He had seen Mrs. Powell before she became his passenger, but he did not know that she lived next door. Ho knew that a Mrs. Powell lived next door. Witness picked up Mrs. Powell on the footbath outside her house, when ho took her as a nassenger. Witness knew tho morning after the accident who was tho passenger in the car. Mr. Mncassoy: When yon were, as yon Fay. 20 vards from Mrs. Black, when you tooted your..horn, and she stonped,' then van on. why didn't vou ston your car or ,ro behind her?—"To have gone behind h>r would have put me on the■ wrong sidoof the Toad." Witness said he was positive that Mrs. Black stopped and then ran on. When tho. car struck Mrs. Black it was travelling, about eight miles per x hour. She was not carried ,15ft. as stated by the wit-; ness Evans. He did not think the back wheels "of the car went oyer the body; . To.Mr. Neavo: The accident was inheritable, and witness did not put on thebrakes until after it. ■ , . :' This closed the case for the defence. Mr. Neavo, in addressing the jury, said that two versions had been put. before them, as to the manner' of accused's driving. Counsel submitted with . confidnce that if they accepted the evidenco given by accused and Mrs. Powell ' they must believe that accused had not driven negligently, and must acquit him. .Mrs.' Powell, the passenger, ' had told ' them that she heard the-horn sounded twice, and that the speed of the car was reduced 'so much that she Was afraid she; would not get to her destination in' time to keep her appointment. Williams did not see Airs. Powell, had not heard of what ehe knew, or what elm was going to say until she was called to give evidence at the inquest. The fact that tho car travelled 4flft. from the moment it struck Mrs. Black to the time it was pulled up, would bo iised to suggest excessive speed. There was no attempt made by Williams to pull up until he felt that the danger to Mrs. Black from the back wheels had passed, and after they had passed there was no reason for him to pull npi suddenly. The important matter was not what took place after the accident, but what took placo beforo the collision. Counsel thought that they would not have any hesitation in accepting without f|iialificntiun the version of (ho melancholy business given by accused, mnrt in this case tho burden of proof was on the Crown. Could they - say that the Crown had produced clear and convincing evidence of the negligfence of Williams? The crime was a serious one and in the proportion of its seriousnpss tlie jury must insist upon fulness of proof. Mr. Macassey replied. His Honour, in summing up, said Hint tho crime of manslaughter did not. necessarily involve any evil intent. In such ft case as the present there was no intent to do harm. The whole point was: Had accused managed his car with Teas-, onable care and reasonable prudence? The jury, afteT a retirement of little more than an hour, brought in a verdict of not guilty, and the prisoner was discharged.