MOTOR FATALITY

Evening Star, Issue 19063, 5 October 1925, Page 12

MOTOR FATALITY

MANSLAUGHTER CHARGE [Per Dotted Press Association.] NELSON* October 4 » The hearing of the evidence in the ‘manslaughter charge against L. W. Field in connection with the Waimea road 1 motoring fatality was concluded before Mr T. E. Manns©!!, B_M., yesterday. The specific charge was driving at an excessive speed at a dangerous part of the road. All the witnesses who were on the scene of the accident stated that accused’s speed was not excessive, considering the circumstances. Charles Edward Parkinson, Nelson traffic inspector, said that, judging from a photograph of the damaged car, lie was of the opinion that the car, was travelling at an excessive rate of speed. When the case for the police was concluded, Mr Treadwell, for the accused, contended that it was not necessary to call evidence for the defence. He proposed to review the evidence. The Magistrate said that the evidence that-came from the bachelors’ ball was uniformly in favor of defendant. They could not have been more favorable if they had tried, so it was unnecessary for Mr Treadwell to outline the evidence. He did not int«nd to dismiss the case at this stage. Whatever he did bo would put his reasons into writing. evidence' for (ho accused was then called. William Lowrie, manager for the Wellington Motor Company, thought there was not the slightest doubt that when the two cars were coming down the hill, and when nearing the bottom, the car driven by accused attempted to pass, and, considering the width of the road, there was ample room. At that moment the other car evidently struck a wet patch on the road, and automatically slewed to the right, and the front wheel of this car struck the back wheel of accused’s car, which would cause the latter to kick O', er. To the magistrate witness said he had : < n a car driven at a reasonable speed bed up just as much as was acl’s car. It all depended where it struck. arrival Wood, car driver, gave corroborative evidence as to this theory. The previous witness had asked him to drive down into a mud hole. The car automatically swerved out, hut lie could not hold it. He did not know what was in the previous witness’s mind when he made the experiment. The Magistrate said he was not going to take his responsibility lightly. .He desired io consider the evidence, and was going to have another look at the scene of the accident. The case was adjourned. Accused was reelased on bail of £IOO on his own recognisance.