TEST OF DRUNKENNESS

Greymouth Evening Star, 17 December 1934, Page 7

TEST OF DRUNKENNESS

POLICE v. DOCTORS [PER PRESS ASSOCIATION.] CHRISTCHURCH, December 17. In a. case heard at the Police Court, this morning, Sub-Inspector McLean held that medical evidence concerning the condition of men charged with drunkenness held no greater weight than that of experienced laymen. “Apart from taking, the pulse, I’ll back my own judgment. I know as well as any doctor when a man is in a drunken condition,” he said. George Mainfold Wilton, dental mechanic, pleaded guilty to a charge of drunkenness while in charge of a motor cycle on December 15. The Sub-Inspector said that accused had been seen by a constable coming out o fa hotel. He was under the influence of alcohol. Accused started up a motor cycle, but went only a few yards when he stalled the machine. When the man was brought t» the police station, he was considerably more th*.n intoxicated. A doctor examined Wilton, and said he did not think the man was in a condition where he should be detained. However, in the Sub-Inspector’s opinion, Wilton was drunk. He had admitted having eleven long beers during the afternoon. He had a partly consumed bottle of liquor, and a flask of gin in his possession. Wilton was convicted and fined £5, in default twenty-one days’ imprisonment.