DANGEROUS MOTORING

Dominion, Volume 26, Issue 219, 12 June 1933, Page 10

DANGEROUS MOTORING

“Drivers Must be Taught” CONVICTION TO STAND Dominion Special Service. Auckland, June 10. Evidence of speeding up to GO miles an hour at night ou the Great South Road was given by a traffic inspector in an appeal case heard by the Chief Justice, Sir .Michael Myers, in the Supreme Court yesterday. The appellant was John Charles Carroll, of Te Arolia, who on February 15 was convicted in the Papakura Police Court by Mr. F. H. Levien, S.M., on a charge of driving a motor-car on the road between Wiri and Papakura on December 15 at a speed dangerous to the public. Defendant was then fined £3. and disqualified from holding a license until April IS last. Against this penalty Carroll appealed. Frederick Jones, traffic Inspector, said that about 5.40 pan. on December 15 defendant passed him at Wiri travelling at a very rapid speed. Witness followed him for five miles. II speed at first was 46 miles an hour, decreasing to 36 in the main street of Manurewa. After passing Manurewa the tail light went out and the rear blind was pulled down. Appellant increased his speed, and crossed a bridge at 45 miles an hour on the wrong side. The speed, increased to 52 and 53 miles an hour, and on a down grade passing a store it reached 60 miles an hour. Stopped by Inspector. Witness stopped him at Papakura. Carrell said be was in a hurry. He had children in the car whom he wanted to get to bed. He failed to produce his driving license. He said his rear light had been quite in order when he left Auckland. Answering his Honour, witness said that if a car had come out of a side road there might have been a fatal accident. Mr. Holinden, for appellant, said his client was a staid family man, and would absolutely deny travelling at anything like the speed deposed to by Mr. Jones. At the time, he was driving his own children and two others home from boarding school. His Honour: You are going to ask me to find that Mr. Jones has given evidence which is not true? Counsel: I am certainly suggesting that he is exaggerating. His Honour: You must go further than that. If he has given evidence that is untrue it must be deliberately untrue. There can be no mincing matters, you know., Caught in Speed Traps. Appellant said be was a solicitor with considerable interests in the Waikato, and was constantly travelling in a car. He would average over 200 miles a week for the past three years. He had been convicted three times after being caught in speed traps. After 35 miles an hour the car he, was driving on December 15 became noisy. “Drivers of motor-cars must be taught to respect the public safety,” said his Honour, in dismissing the appeal. He saw no reason for disagreeing with the magistrate’s finding that appellant was driving at a speed dangerous to the public. "I am asked,” his Honour continued, “really to say that the inspector gave evidence which is untrue and which if untrue is deliberately untrue. I decline so to hold. On the contrary, I accept Mr. Jones’s evidence as being true. If that evidence is true then clearly appellant was properly convicted. If a person choo’ses to drive in such a manner as to be dangerous to himself and to those he is carrying in his car, the law. must protect them, and in any case the law will not allow a person to drive a motor vehicle in a manner dangerous to the public.”-