DRIVING OF A CAR

Evening Post, Volume CXXIV, Issue 58, 6 September 1937, Page 11

DRIVING OF A CAR

FINED FOR NEGLIGENCE INTOXICATION CHARGE FAILS A plea of not guilty was entered by John Boyd, a middle-aged man em-j , ploy.cd as a caretaker in the. Wellington Town Hall, when he appeared before Mr. H. P. Lawry.i S.M.. ,in the Lower Hutt Court today cnarged witii being intoxicated in charge of a car. . Sergeant J. W. McHolm prosecuted. Mr. W. G. Mellish appeared for the ', defendant. Dr. B. J. Dudley said he examined . the defendant at 6.20 p.m. on August 31 and found him in an excitable and , tremulous state. He smelt distinctly of liquor and distinctly reeled when asked to walk' a line. Witness was of the opinion that he was slightly '. under tlm influence of liquor. Under cross-examination, Dr. Dud- / 'ley said that dizziness ' brought about ', by high blood pressure: might have 1 been the cause of the defendant's reel- [ ing, but he had known numbers of ; cases where high blood pressure' diet ' not cause dizziness. ' Want of sleep 1 might have caused the trouble, but he considered that under the stimulus ! of the. circumstances of his examination want of sleep would not cause ' him to reel. ' J. H\ Sherwin, a clerk, stated that he i was driving to Lower Hutt when he | overtook the defendant's car,, whicn | ! was zig-zagging along the road. As witness attempted to pass the car, it \ pulled over to the wrong side of the i road. ' When witness arrived at Lower , Hutt he stopped his car and was standing" in a doorway- when he saw the defendant's car pass, still zig-zagging. Immediately afterwards he heard a . slight impact and saw the defendant's car drawing away from a stationary '. truck which apparently it had hit ! Later he saw the defendant in charge I of a constable, and when .close to him - noticed a distinct ;smell of liquor. Cross-examined! witness said that ', the zig-zagging was not very bad. j E.-N: Davys said that he came from , Wellington behind the defendant's car. •■ When he was passing, it .the defendant pulled out and forced witness over "to his wrong side. Through his rear window he, saw the defendant zigzagging along the road. At the Petpnc [ railway crossing witness stopped ana i saw the defendant take the corner perfectly, but afterwards he resumed bis 1 zig-zagging and almost went into the - gutter on his wrong side. Later, in ■ Lower Hutt, he heard a collision and .informed the police. He did not notice if the defendant had a ..fiat, , tyre. ■ ' i Constable C. E. Tanner said that he j saw the defendant travelling in the - centre of the road between Laing's an<l ', Queen's Toads. As a result of. in.. • formation received, he stopped the dei fendant, who smelt quite distinctly, ot liquor, and ordered him out of the car. > When halfway out the defendant would ', have fallen to the ground if witness '- had not caught him. The- defendant. E denied that he had had anything to drink. Witness drove defendant's car i to the station and there was nothing " wrong with the steering. . i Cross-examined, witness said that the I defendant spoke haltingly and.his. ' speech came thickly. He could-not ex-, " plain clearly where the self-starter.was located. ■' • .".,-■ Constable R. G. Jones gave similar. 3 evidence to Constable Tanner's,. He t saw the defendant walking, he, said, » and there was no sign of a limp. I :. ' ' \CASE FOR DEFENCE.; ■;'■■ \;. ; Mr. Mellish said Ijhe defence, would be that the defendant? had worked all Sunday, night,' all day Monday; on " Monday night, and all day Tuesday, , up to the time of coming into contact "with the police, with only, two brief snatches of sleep. He was suffer- ' ing from blood pressure, which, caused I dizziness, and also from an., ulcer on his leg, which caused him to limp. The ! only drink the defendant had was a

handle of beer with his lunch at midi day on Tuesday. , \ ■ 1 Dr. R. Welton Hogg stated that he 3 was called by , the defendant and * examined him at the police station at J 6.40 p.m. He was of thn opinion that 5 the defendant was not in : ar, state of J intoxication. His speech was Slurred, I but that-was- normal .with, .the , defendant. He had successfully walked ' on a straight line; The defendant was being attended to by witness for high : blood pressure and a sceptic ulcer on 5 his leg, which caused him to limp. .The '. blood pressure was very high, being 130 per cent, above normal. This would 3 'affect his pulse rate and cause. dizzi--5 ness. If the defendant had worked for f two days and nights, this, with the • high, blood pressure, would definitely cause dizziness. He would have, been f quite prepared to let the defendant 1 drive him.. The defendant was ex- ? cited, but that might have been caused ' by the circumstances.

by the circumstances. Ernest Kemsley, who is in charge of the caretaking staff at the Town-Hall,; stated that the defendant was on, night duty from 10 p.m. to 6 a.m. daily. In! addition to his ordinary work he had on Monday been erecting a wrestling ring at Petone, and on Tuesday was engaged in dismantling it. :■■■■'■■ The defendant said that his failure to drive in a straight line v was caused by dizziness brought on by long hours and by the state of his health. ;He was liable to sudden attacks of dizziness. The only liquor he had had was a handle of beer with his lunch on Tuesday. ' Cross-examined, the defendant said he had been ordered by,the doctor not to drink liquor. , Mr. Lawry said there was not sufficient evidence to sustain a-charge "of 'intoxication, but it was evidently a case of negligent driving. . . . '. Boyd pleaded guilty ;to negligent driving and was fined £3.