POLICE COURT

Evening Star, Issue 23354, 25 August 1939, Page 5

POLICE COURT

FRIDAY, AUGUST 25. (Before Mr H. W. Bnudle, S.M.) DRUNKENNESS. Lewis Fullerton Matliieson, a statutory first offender, was convicted and discharged. UNLTGHTED CYCLE. Gilbert Blue, who rode an unlightcd cycle at night, was fined 10s and costs. DANGEROUS DOG. George Lewis Brooks, who was previously charged with being the owner of a dangerous dog, was convicted and ordered to pay costs of 10s, the police stating that the dog had now been destroyed. UNLAWFULLY ON PREMISES. Charged with being unlawfully on hotel promises after hours, Arthur Reynolds was fined 10s and costs. CHIMNEY FIRE. William Self was convicted and discharged for allowing a chimney to catch fire. UNLICENSED RADIO. Alister Muni-o was fined 18s 9d for being in. possession of an unlicensed radio. MOTORISTS’ OFENCES. Thomas Scott appeared voluntarily to admit a charge of exceeding the speed limit in his truck in Anderson’s Bay road, and was fined 30s and costs. An excessive speed in. George street resulted in Eric Munro Bringans being fined £1 5s and costs. Michael Francis O’Sullivan (Mr J. P. Ward) was ordered to pay court costs (10s) for parking his car too near the Stuart street-Octagon corner. Ernest John Buttar, charged with failing to yield the right of way to pedestrians on a crossing in George street, was fined £2 and costs. He was convicted and discharged for not having a certificate of fitness. Eric Douglas Cockburn was convicted and discharged on a charge of using a ear with defective brakes. Percy Herman Urquhart was fined 25s and costs for exceeding the speed limit at Waitati, and convicted and discharged for not having a license. George Petrie, who parked his car in the wrong manner in Rattray street (facing the wrong way), was ordered to pay costs (10s). Thomas Stark Russell, who had been attending motor classes as the result of charges of driving without a license and of operating a truck without a hand brake, was convicted and discharged. INTERESTING POINT.

Thomas Walter King (Mr R. _A. King) defended a charge of. driving without due care and attention—the sequel to on accident in which his truck, which was left unattended in the Octagon, moved off down the slope, careered into Stuart street, collided with two parked cars, and finally came to rest against a telegraph pole. Senior-sergeant Claasen said that King left the trudk in reverse gear, but was not sure whether the hand brake was on or off. For some reason, possibly the vibration from passing traffic,’ it moved off. It was contended that his failure to see that the truck was properly held catne juuder the charge preferred, against him. Mr King argued that the charge could not be sustained as the defendant was not driving at all. After he left the truck there. was no act of driving. But even if the court accepted the proposition that the charge embraced such an occurrence, it would be clearly shown that the truck was left securely parked and that it could not have sprung the gear and moved off without outside interference. It was possible that children entered the truck and moved the gear lever, but it was more probable that some other car or truck driver put the gear into neutral in order to shift the vehicle. The Magistrate remarked that the question at issue was this: Did the facts clearly show that the defendant, in putting his truck in the position he did and leaving it there was 11 driving without due care and attention ? His Worship pointed out that the only facts proved were in the evidence of the defendant—that he drove the truck to the Octagon, put it in re-, verse, and left it there for three-quar-ters of an hour, when for some mysterious and inexplicable reason it moved off. There was no evidence as to how or why it did move, and His Worship was unable to find that he was driving without due care and attention. The charge was dismissed.