NOT PROVED

Evening Post, Volume CXII, Issue 3, 3 July 1926, Page 12

NOT PROVED

CASE AGAINST A MOTORIST.

A plea of not guilty was entered in the Magistrate's Court yesterday in a case in which Reginald George Horace Blow was charged with being in charge of a motor-car while in a state of intoxication. Dr. Ptout said that, hearing a crash outside his house on Wellington terrace about 7.25 on the night of 17th May, he went outside and found a motor-car against a lamp-post. He saw Blow in the car, and witness judged,. from his siow movements and slurred speech, that he was not in a fit state to drive a car. He had not examined Blow as a medical man. Mr. H. F. O'Leary (for Blow): "I suggest to you that these indications of slow speech and movements were insufficient to prove that he was in a state of intoxication?" —"I am not saying he was in a state of intoxication." Thomas Cockburn said that he was walking up The Terrace when a car flew past him, ran into a post, which it broke, and then continued down the hill, eventually stopping against another post. The .accused then came along and got into the car. Witness did not ,think Blow was in a fit state to be in a car. He could smell liquor. Mr. O'Leary: "Have you not been here several times before, witness?" —"Yea." "For a series of false pretences, wasn't it?"—" Yes." Mr. O'Leary: "I am sorry to have to bring this out, but you understand it will be your evidence against that of others who will be called, and who will say that Blow was perfectly sober." Robert Fernandez, another witness of tho accident, said that he could not smell liquor about Blow, but he would say that Blow's actions seemed to point to his having, had a few drinks. Blow insisted on driving the car away, without examining it to see whether it was damaged. Mr. O'Leary: "And you conclude because he insisted on this that he was under tho influence of liquor 1" — "No, but I could see his flushed face." "How could you see his face? The lights were out, weren't theyf"—"l could see it by moonlight." "I suggest yon are exaggerating, witness, if you could see his face under the shadow of tho hood."—"No, there was plenty of light to see by." Constable Hayhursl said that he saw Blow after the accident, and was told that he (Blow) had had one drink prior to the accident. Mr. O'Leary, before calling Blow, said that his client had had one glass of wine and a whisky and water before the accident. When he and his passenger went out to the car, which was standing on the crest of Wellington terraco, they found the benzine level too low to start the car, and they pushed it^round to start off down the hill. TJnfortunr'ely the car ran away. ' Judge Gilfedder, of the Native Land Court, corroborated Mr. O'Leary's statement. Blow had been at his house and had had the two drinks mentioned,.* then he and witness went out to the car to drive to town. Witness described how the car got away down the hill. The accused, in the box, garl a similar statement. Mr. O'Leary: "Are you always clear in your speech?"—"As a rule, but sometimes the words do not flow." Mr. E. Page, S.M., said that after hearing the evidence for the defence, In did not think it had been established that Blow was in a state of intoxication, and ho proposed to dismiss the charge.