INTOXICATED DRIVER

Dominion, Volume 27, Issue 109, 1 February 1934, Page 16

INTOXICATED DRIVER

Crash Into Electric Light Pole FINE OF £lO IMPOSED

a r,np of £lO was imposed by j G ” Hewitt, S.M.. ta tl.o Polite Court yesterday »n L.lour.l • Pherson, clerk, on a cba X ,n n st'ite charge of a motor-car while in a state of intoxication. On a further .charge of failing to report an accident which discharged. Represented by Mr. A. JMazengarb, defendant pleaded not guilty on the first charge and guilty on tie second. Senior-Sergeant. C. E. Roach conducted the prosecution for Roach said that the charge was laid as a result of an cident on the Hutt Road November 18. Defendant was alleged to hate been' unfit to drive, Wilfred Hyde, custodian, said that hearing a crash, he went on to the road, and saw a motor-car against • ' electric light pole. Defendant s <lt strongly of drink, and seemed thick in speech. He did not think he was in a fit condition to drive a car.

Considered Defendant was Drunk. Edmund Ryan, labourer, said he was attracted to the accident by a <* asb ' He opened the car door, and saw the man on the left with his head hanging down. The man at the wheel said. “What’s wrong. Whats the matter. Witness assisted him to straighten th car, and the driver walked in front of him to his house, where his companion was receiving attention. He did not walk too steadily. He wanted to drive his car home, but witness considered that he was not in a fit condition. Witness considered that he was drunk. He smelt of drink, which witness took to be whisky, and his walk was unsteady. Constable A. L. Downes said he interviewed defendant on November -3He admitted being the driver of the car involved in the accident, but refused to make a statement. Regarding the charge to which a plea of guilty was entered, Mr. Mazengarb said that defendant’s passenger bled profusely from his nose, but this was soon stopped by a doctor. Defendant had taken the view, prevalent among motorists, that unless . serious injury was received in an accident, it was iiot necessary to report it to the police. ~ In the witness box, McPherson said that he had two drinks when he ceased work at 5 p.m. He did not have the car with him when he did so, and he did not have any drinks afterward. About 7 p.m. he went to FralU’s house, where he refused a drink because he had his employer's car. He drove around Oriental Bay, where the Confidence Carnival was in full swing, and left about 9.49 p.m. to go and see a friend at Petone. Coming to the Petone level crossing, a tire blew out, and the car hit an electric light post, breaking the windscreen on the passenger’s side. Details of his movements with defendant after 7.15 p.m. were given by William Patrick Frail!, Government messenger. McPherson, he said, was perfectly sober when he came to his house. On the Hutt Road he heard a noise like a tire bursting, and he did not remember much after the car hit the post. Statements Disagree. Senior-Sergeant Roach read a statement made by Fraill to the police, in which he stated, that after passing the railway crossing at Petone the car got into a patch of loose gravel and McPherson tried to change gears. They did not act at once, and the car skidded into the pole. It was certainly not a blow-out. He had no drink after G p.m. Cross-examined by Senior-Sergeant Roach, Fraill said he could not account for the discrepancies in his evidence and his statement to the police. Alexander Hay McKenzie, apprentice, said he drove McPherson and Fraill to a doctor in a friend’s car, while his friend drove defendant’s car. He considered defendant to be sober. A garage attendant who saw McPherson at midnight said he also considered him to be sober. The magistrate observed that he was satisfied that McPherson was under the influence of liquor at the time of the accident.