SIX MONTHS' GAOL

Evening Post, Volume CXVIII, Issue 31, 6 August 1934, Page 10

SIX MONTHS' GAOL

NEGLIGENT DRIVING

LORRY DRIVER SENTENCED

TAWA PLAT CASE

Six months' imprisonment with hard labour was the punishment imposed by the Chief Justice (Sir Michael Myers) today upon Cyril John Steer, who was convicted last Thursday of negligently driving a lorry and causing bodily injury to George Kcrinode near Tawa Flat; on January. 13. The jury mado "a strong recommendation for .mercy on account of accused's unblemished record as a driver." Steer's lieenco was not interfered with. Further evidence of Steer's very good reputation was given by Henry James Knight, organising secretary for the White Star Company. . There were really four things which disturbed him, said his Honour in reply to Mr. ,W. E. Leicester, who appeared for the. prisoner. Firstly, the accident happened in broad daylight on a straight, wide road; secondly, the accused had had-liquor; thirdly, there had been a failure to stop (a separato event, but still part of the res gestae); fourthly, interference with witnesses. A comparison of the statements made to the police by three witnesses who had ridden with the ..prisoner (produced at the 'inquest) with statements made in the Supreme Court did show modification or toning down, said counsel. An inference could bo drawn that the prisoner was concerned, but that was not the only inference; there were others and to exclude them might mean inflicting a grave injustice on the prisoner. "I express to the Court my own grave personal doubt for whatever it is worth, that prisoner departed from my instructions to keep . away from the other witnesses," said Mr. Leicester. The Chief Justice: Eut you see he said in the box he had seen them. "In the second place I have interviewed prisoner's wife, who said all three witnesses saw her and expressed regret for what they had said, said not to worry, and they would do all they could to help her husband," said counsel. "It may be they took upon themselves to tone down the evidence apart from the influence of prisoner. NO PROOF OF INFLUENCE. "There is no legal proof that prisoner approaches them," continued counsel, "and I feel your Honour would be the last to punish prisoner for something he may not have done." The prisoner. had had two children ill at the time of the accident, and his wife had been distracted. He was .entirely reliant upon his job and on the day thought . the whole world was tumbling about his ears. He should have stopped, but,' whatever the reason, the Legislature had not thought fit to impose imprisonment for not stopping. Liquor had been consumed admittedly. The . prisoner had been assisted in his work of shifting his furniture and he wished to. "shout" for those who had helped him. The Chief Justice: All I can say. is this: If a man on a journey chooses to take liquor, he does so at his own risk and to tho risk of everybody else using the road. Tho case was an isolated one, said counsel. Tho prisoner observed the company's rule. At best it was only an assumption that drink affected his driving. There was no evidence of reckless driving. There might have been some slight error of judgment. The Chief Justice: If ho had said so it might have been different. He knew very well he hit that car; you can't persuade mo he didn't know that. Two friends mado modified statements and prisoner iu the box said they were liars. I .am satisfied ho did know .and did not stop for the reason they indicated in their first statements. "Because he had a wife and four children to consider," said Mr. Leicester, Steer, was charged with negligence and convicted, and tho case should be considered on that as negligent driving. Counsel read a letter from. Steer's employers saying the suspense of tho last few months had been great for Steer, but if the Court enabled them to do so they would continue him in their service. Prisoner was the typo who would never bo in the dock again. HIS HONOUR'S COMMENT. "I wish, not so much for your sake, as for the sake of those dependent upon you, I could treat this case as one such as was dealt with at the current sittings of the Court," said his Honour to the prisoner. "Unfortunately I cannot. There are circumstances which call- for special reference. That you. are an excellent driver I do not doubt, but from that point of view it makes this case worse." It was daylight, there was no other traffic and prisoner had two-thirds of the road; nevertheless the lorry had struck the car. If that was all it would show tho most culpable negligence. It should not happen without. explanation. His Honour did not say for amoment Steer was intoxicated, but he had'no doubt that his driving was affected. His Honour said he did not like the manner iu which the other men gave evidence. He had a strong suspicion that their evdence was modified; however, it was not proved that' the prisoner intervened. He would not make the sentence- a severe one.' It was a case for a short term of imprisonment, but. not for interference with tho prisoner's licence. Ho would assume that it was a case of isolated negligence and isolated drinking. A sentence of six months' imprisonment with hard labour was imposed.