FIT TO DRIVE?

Evening Star, Issue 19464, 24 January 1927, Page 4

FIT TO DRIVE?

HOLDER'S ELEVEN DRINKS WAS HE INTOXICATED 7 POLICE BOOED AT MORNINGTON. At the City Police Court this morning, before Mr H. W. Bundle, S.M., a Southland runliolder, named Oswald Leonard Edie, was charged with being intoxicated while in charge of a car Jn Eglinton road. Defendant was arrested in Mornington by Constables Macartney and Walliamson on Saturday afternoon, and, according to the statements made by the police, a large crowd forgathered and gave the constables an unpleasant time. Edie pleaded not guilty, being represented by Mr B. S. Irwin. Defendant admitted having had “ eleven drinks at most ” on Saturday, but the doctor who attended him in the watch-house claimed that Edie was not drunk when he saw him, about half an hour later; but he pointed out that the man might have been intoxicated when he was arrested. Defendant astonished the court by stating that he did not think twenty or thirty drinks would have made any difference to his capacity to drive a car. Another wetness, who stated he had had “very little experience,” considered the consumption of twenty drinks would not have made him drunk-.

Sub-inspector Fahey said that at 6.15 p.m. on Saturday the Mornington police received ’a telephone message to the effect that three men in charge of a car in Eglinton road were drunk. Constable Williamson saw defendant’s car drawn up outside a house, and shortly afterwards defendant put in an appearance. The constable told him to return to the house, but Edie refused to do so. He got into an argument with the constable, and had to be handcuffed. A big crowd gathered, and the police were booed.

Constable Williamson, relieving-con-stable at Mornington, said he saw the car standing in Eglinton road. Witness told accused that he had better not get into the car, but he persisted in wanting to drive. There was a big crow’d round the Mornington car shed, and they booed and jeered the police. Two bottles of beer had been found in the back of the car, but accused would not say whether they belonged to him or not.

To Mr Irwin: He did not immediately arrest defendant, as he wanted to be fair to him by getting the opinion of Constable Macartney. Defendant later admitted having two drinks at St. Clair and two shandies, and a w'hisky later. He resisted arrest. and had to be thrown and handcuffed.

Constable George Macartney said he was called to Eglinton road and there found Constable' Williamson and defendant. The constable asked witness what his opinion was regarding defendant’s condition, and witness replied that he was practically drunk. Constable Williamson then said he would place defendant under arrest, and this was done with difficulty. At the police station defendant asked that Dr Jenkins be summoned, and the doctor arrived about an hour later and examined him. He admitted having five drinks—beer and whisky. Two other men near the car were under the influence of liquor, and a man named Sligo so interfered with the arrest that ho had to he told to go about his business, else he would be prosecuted for obstruction.

To Mr Irwin; Witness did not speak to defendant before he concluded that he was drunk. He judged that from the fact that Edie was swaying about and smelt strongly of liquor. Witness understood that it was from Sligo’s house that tho three men in the car had come; he was not sure that Sligo’s son was one of the men. Defendant offered to drive the car to the police station, but Constable Williamson took charge of it and drove it away. Defendant may have advised him how to start it.

Constable Shannon said that defendant appeared to be slightly under the influence of liquor when brought into the watchhouse. He considered ho was not in a fit condition to drive a car. He asked for a doctor, and Dr Jenkins arrived at about 7.10. To Mr Irwin: Defendant’s eyes were bloodshot, and he smelt of liquor. He also appeared to be very excited. Re-examined by the sub-inspector: Witness stated that EJie admitted that he had had five drinks that afternoon. Dr Jenkins said he attended defendant in the watchhouse. There was an odor of alcohol, but other than that there were no signs of drunkenness. He talked quite rationally, although slightly excited. His muscular coordination and control were normal. He told witness that he had had three drinks before witness saw him. When witness saw him ho considered defendant was in a fit state to drive a car through tho Dunedin streets. lie did not remember seeing defendant before.

To Mr Irwin: Tho man was slightly excited, but he would not like to say whether defendant had been incapable of driving a car half an hour previously. A man might sober up suddenly. It was not impossible that a man might be swaying about and obviously drunk, and then appear to be sober half an hour later. He would, however, like to know what counsel meant by the expression “ obviously drunk.”

The Sub-inspector: Two constables stated that three-quarters of an hour before you saw him they considered he Was unfit to driyo_ n car. Is that possiblcj in your opinion? Witness: Yes.

Mr Irwin said it did not take half an hour to take defendant to the watchhouse, and he objected to the form of the question. To tho Magistrate: Witness said it was a matter of opinion, and it was impossible to lay down a hard-and-fast rule. Defendant was in a fit state to drive when he saw him, but he could not say what condition he would have been in half an hour previously.

Mr Irwin said that it seemed as if Constable Williamson was not sure that defendant was drunk, so he sent for Constable Macartney. It was a fact that defendant had some liquor, but it was not very much, and it was obvious that tho men in the car had not drawn attention to themselves, as they were in a house for some time. Counsel contended that it was incorrect to state, as the police had clone, that threequarters of an hour had elapsed between the time defendant was arrested and when the doctor put in an appearance. as defendant did not leave the Carlton Hotel until 6 p.m. The defendant, in evidence, said he was in Dunedin on holiday. The men with him that evening were Sligo and Thomas. They had lunch at St. Clair, and later called at Anderson’s Bay, where they had a whisky each. Then they went to another house and had afternoon tea, and another drink of whisky. At the Kensington Hotel they had three or four medium shandies, and finally witness had z pony shandy at the Carlton, where he also bought a couple of bottles of beer to take home to his station in Southland. They went to Sligo’s place in Eglinton road, and coming out the three of them were joking with Mr and Mrs Sligo, the latter an elderly lady. The constable came ’across and said witness was unable to drive, not accepting his offer to give a test. A boy was sent for Constable Macartney, who soon arrived, and without asking witness anything at all started to handcuff witness, who resisted arrest. He was not asked to go with them before tho handcuffs were produced. They would not have him drive the car, but he told Constable Williamson how to start it. Witness was certain he was quite able to drive.

To the Sub-inspector: Witness refused to go back into the house, and refused to come out of the car. He did not know why Mrs Sligo asked him to go inside, unless it was that she wanted no disturbance at her front gate. They had some drink before lunch that day. He was not arguing the point with his friends when Constable Macartney arrived. On the way to Anderson’s Bay they had two shandies at the Bay View Hotel, so that was ten drinks all told. The Magistrate pointed out that according to his list defendant must have had eleven drinks. Defendant: Eleven at most. 8 The Magistrate: No. You particularised these, so it must be eleven at least. Defendant: Yes. To the Sub-inspector: He considered he was in a fit state to drive- a car. The two bottles he had might have been drunk that night, but most likely they would have been kept for the long motor journey on the .Sunday. The Magistrate questioned defendant closely as to how drink affected him, and finally elicited an answer that he had found himself quite capable to drive a car _ after having between twenty and thirty drinks. John, Laing Thomas, a school teacher, said he was not an “ experienced drinker,” but the eleven drinks he consumed had not affected him. He considered that even twenty would not do him any harm. He was quite sober. Alexander Sligo, a school teacher, said he was with the defendant that day, and detailed the movements of the party. He was sure that defendant was well able to drive the car. He corroborated the evidence of his two companions. To the magistrate witness admitted that he was not, perhaps, in a condition to exercise normal judgment. His Worship; Then your opinion as to the condition of another man is valueless. That will do. William Woodcock, a baker, said ho was near the tram sheds at Mornington on Saturday, and noticed the defendant. He was surprised at the “funny way” in which defendant was arrested by Constable Macartney. The constable tried to “ throw Edie, or something.” To the Sub-inspector: He would not say that defendant was under the in fluence of liquor. Constable Macart ney had always been a good friend_ to him. He did not hoot the police, though he might have said “ something to my cobbers.” _ < The Magistrate (to witness): Do you suggest that Constable Macartney, without making inquiry at all, flung the man down and put his knee on his face? Would any sensible man do that? Witness said he didn’t exactly mean that. The case was then adjourned until the afternoon.