SENT FOR TRIAL.

Gisborne Times, Volume LXVII, Issue 10510, 14 February 1928, Page 3

SENT FOR TRIAL.

LORRY DRIVER INDICTED

ALLEGED NEGLIGENT DRIVING

SEQUEL TO TEI ARAL'FATALITY

The fatality on the Te Al*ai bridge on the afternoon of Xmas Eve, when a Maori youth, George Rikirangi, riding across the structure on horseback, fell off and was killed whilst passing a lorry, was again before tlio Police Court before Mr E. O. Levvey, S.M., yesterday. The charge against the lorry driver, Allan O’Neill, of negligently driving a motor lorry thereby causing death, was part heard on February 1 and the case was tlieu adjourned, the hearing of the remaining evidence for the prosecution ana the ease for the defence proceeding yesterday. Senior-Sergeant McLean prosecuted and Mr J. S. Wauchop appeared for the defendant.

Tbr the prosecution Sergeant Dempsey gave evidence that on arrival at the scene of the fatality he saw a stain of blood 4ft from the left hand side of the bridge going from town. At the spot were marks indicating that the horse had slipped on the bridge. The lorry was then standing on the side of the bridge. The defendant was present when witness ran a tape-mea-sure over the load on the lorry, finding that the maximum width was Sit 7in. He found no marks on the left hand side of the lorry, hut there were marks on the spare tyre on the right-hand side of the driving seat, but the defendant explained that these were caused by the chains used to fasten the tyres. Witness accepted this explanation and still believed it to he true. In any ease the load projected beyond the spare tyre. On the end of an iron cleat on the side of the lorry, however, was fresh blood and a small piece of skin, which appeared to have come from the horse. There was a smear of blood from tin. iron toward® the rear of the lorry. Between the iron and the front of the lorry they found no indication of the horse having been grazed or rubbed On the hoy’s chest there was a superficial wound, about lin in length-' it had bled and there was blood on the horse’s front hoofs. On tlm lorry with the defendant was a Mr Henry. Cross-examined Tiy Mr Wauchop, witness stated that the lorry wa.loaded in the usual way. The end of the bales bulged, and this bulging would more than account for the 7ir over Bft in the width of the load. L was a smaller load than those frequently seen on lorries going ove, the town and country roads. The iron cleat could in no way hart caused the accident, because it was protected by the bale above it. On the night of the accident O’Neill was very much upset, and the remarks then made tallied with the statement made bv him the following day. When O’Neill made his statement and when he was discussing the accident he was perfectly fra.nk, and did not appear to be trying to hide anything. Witness did not put a question to him as. to who was on the bridge first. Seeing that the load on the lorry weighed Sitons, O’Neill must have been travelling very slowly to have pulled up within about three or four yards of the pool of blood. Witness had not. taken particular notice of the bridle of the horse and could not say whether there was a bit attached or not. Thomas Henry, a Maori, who was riding on the iorry beside O’Neill, stated that they were on the. bridge when they first saw Rikirnngi. After giving this information witness refused to answer any questions. Mr Wauchop : Have you Iteen told that the Maoris out at Manutukc are going to deal with you because of the evidence you gave at the inquest : Witness : Yes.

Witness added that he was nor afraid of the Maoris, and continuir.;under cross-examination lie said that before they reached the bridge they stopped at Williamson’s store and had a soft drink each. O’Neill kept to the left-hand side as they were coining on to the bridge, and witness, who was looking straight ahead, saw no one else on the bridge when the lorry first went on to it, the bridge being quite el,ear; be was sure this was correct. Then when the lorry was on the bridge Rikirangi came on to it, his horse proceeding at a jogging pace. The lorry kept to the left-hand side all the time. As the lorry and the horse approached one another the boy made no signal for the lorry, which was travelling very slowly, to stop. In witness’ opinion the Maori boy was going a bit faster than the lorry, and ho went on to pass the vehicle. There was plenty of room for the boy to pass the lorry on the bridge. Witness heard a noise like a horse slipping, and O’Neill stopped the lorry and they jumped out, going round to the back of the lorry together. Witness went round the front of the lorry as there was not enough room for him to get past the load on the left-hand side. To the magistrate witness said the lorry was. on the bridge about a lorry length when the Maori boy appeared. The magistrate: The two girls contradict you about the lorry being on the bridge first. Are they wrong? Wintess: No; the lorry was on the bridge first. This concluded the case for the prosecution. On behalf of the defence, Fredcrisk Small Bowen, of Muriwai, gave evidence that oil Christinas Eve accompanied by his family, and also Hugh Chrisp and Arthur Bright, was motoring to town. Some six or. seven chains from the Manutukc road in Bisection they noticed a lorry ahead of them with a load of wool, and it was too near the bridge for them to attempt to pass it before they reached the bridge, so witness slowed down to allow it to keep on ahead of them. When witness came round the bend on to the bridge the first thing that attracted his attention was a little girl sitting on the rails of the wings of the bridge, and she appeared to be looking in rather a startled manner along the bridge as witness turned to go on to it. At that moment the horse ridden by the deceased was in the act of falling. While the boy was underneath the horse, the animal made an attempt to gel urn. At the first attempt it failed and fell partly hack on to the boy again. At the second attempt the horse put its right foot somewhere on the boy a’tout his neck or face. When tlffiv picked up - deceased the blood was streaming from him, and witness told them to leave him on the bridge He then went to Mr Clark and told him to ring for a doctor and an ambulance. When he came hack they had carried the body off the bridge. When it approached The bridge the lorry was travelling very slowly, and when it pulled up oh the bridge' witness was about 40. yards behind it and .hist on the floor of the Bridge. The three young men with witness were the first to reach the body, the accused being next. The' lorry was < as far over to the left-hand side as it was possible for it to. go without the wool coming in contact with the side of the bridge, and on the other side there was sufficient room for" a horse to pass.; he had no doubt whateve* about'that. Witness saw that O’Nei/i was using extreme care, arid there was not .an element of carelessness or recklessness a® to the speed or the manner in which he was driving. To the senior-sergeant witness said he did not see the hor.se until it was actually falling.'When it was entering the Bridge the lorry, could not have been travelling at more > than live miles an hour, and he could hare ’Milled up in a very short distance.' Tt would have been easier, for the bi>y to have given wav to the lorry than

the lorry to the horse. Witness would himself guarantee to ride a horse past a loaded lorry on .the bridge every day without having any trouble. To Mr Wauchop, witness_ said be sent word to Constable Harrison that he would he able to tell him all about the accident but no questions had then or since been asked him. Henry Ernest Ricards, chauffeur for John Clark, residing near the bridge where the fatality occurred, stated that he was on the bridge just after the accident, and there were then no people on it, the body having been removed to Mr Clark's property. Witness crossed over the bridge. He saw a heavy hack horse with a tear at the junction of the neck and shoulder. The horse was saddled, hut there was no bridle oil its heatl, simply a halter and reins tied with string. Witness himself was a horseman, and in his opinion a rider with such a halter would have no control over the, horse in ease of emergency. Witness later drove the lorry into town, and found that it was in excellent order as far as the brakes, etc., were concerned. He had frequently seen O’Neill cross the bridge, and to negotiate the bridge he always changed gears of the lorry down into low just as he was making the turn at the approach. This was not usual with lorry drivers, and it was this that drew his attention to O’Neill’s driving. O’Neill’s lorry appeared to be under-loaded. Witness drove over the bridge twice a day, and on one occasion when driving a big car be passed another car' on the bridge without any trouble whatever, neither vehicle stopping. If the lorry with its load of wool were kept well to the correct side of the bridge there would be any amount of room for a horseman to pass. O’Neill usually crossed the bridge at from four to live miles an hour. When witness drove the lorry into town lie found the steering gear in very good condition. William Baintridge stated that on Christmas Eve he was keeping a store on the town side of the Te Arai bridge. He did not know the accused personally, but hail seen him several times driving a lorry past tin? store'. He knew the . boy. Rikirangi well, and had seen him riding every day. He was a very good rider and a very game boy. About a week before the" accident witness saw the deceased and another boy race their horses round the bend on to the bridge, and witness told him he ought to be reported to the police for his dangerous riding. Had a car come round the corner a had accident would have occurred, and this was the third tin..* witnessed had warned, him. The girl Tikitiki, in an hysterical condition, '-ame to him on Christmas Eve and cried that George had been killed on the 1 fridge. Witness rushed down to the bridge and saw the lorry there on its correct side. There was plenty of room for the boy on his horse to have passed the lorry. Judging from the distance frm the spot where the boy was lying to the place where the lorry stopped, the lorry must have been travelling at about live miles an hour not more.

Hugh R. Chrisp, a passenger with Mr. lioweu, stated he had been sitting on the dickey seat, and had an unrestricted view of the road. When he first saw the lorry it was stopped at Williamson’s store, and when it left the store it was travelling .very slowly, and they had to slow down considerably. When it went on to the bridge their ear was about a chain or a. little more behind the lorrv. When they arrived on the bridge the horse, which was facing towards them, was in the act of falling. It seemed to fall on its right shoulder towards the lorry, and as a matter of fact, the lorry was past when it fell. At the time the horse fell the lorry could not have been travelling more than three or four miles an hour. Directly Mr Bowen pulled the car up witness jumped out of the car and ran over to the boy with Roy Bowen and Arthur Bright, witness being the first to reach the boy. Witness and Bowen carried the boy off the Bridge. The lorry was standing parallel to the walls of the bridge on the left-hand side, and there was quite sufficient -room for a horse to have passed. Mr Wauchop: Did Constable Harrison speak to you ? The Magistrate: That is not necessary. Mr Wauchop. You are only asking that for my benefit. T take it. Mi* Wauchop: Your Worship has not heard what the witness is going to sav.

The magistrate: You are only going to attack the constable’s evidence, are you not?

Mr Wauchop: I submit that it is of the utmost importance. Continuing, witness said he spoke to Constable Harrison, and told him that he had seen the accident, but the constable told him that lie would not be wanted, and added that he was satisfied it was an absolute accident., or words to that effect. Similar evidence was given by Roy Bowen and Arthur Bright. The accused Allan O’Neill said that about 2 p.m. he left Waingake in company with a native, Thomas Henry, with a lorrv toad of wool, bound lor town. He did not drink and had no liquor on the way beyond a soft drink at Williamson’s store. On the bridge at Manutuke be saw the Maori youth on horseback riding towards the structure, keeping well to the left. He was driving slowly as the bridge was narrow, whilst the Maori boy was jogging along. There seemed to be ample room for the horseman to pass, and the horse, a half draught, showed no signs of timidity. As the horse passed the driver’s" seat of the lorry, the rider seemed to he all right, and his first indication that anything was amjss was when the horse was passing the rear of the lorry, when he heard a scrambling of hoofs. Stopping the lorry immediately, lie alighted to see the horse regaining ite feet and the I*>y lying on the bridge. There was no mark showing that the horse had struck the lorry until near the rear where on a projecting piece of iron, which was well protectee! by projecting bales of wool, there was blood, horse-hair, and tissue. The boy was five yards behind the lorry and when approaching gave no signal to witness to stop. The Magistrate declined to accept the responsibility of deciding the case and committed O’Neill to the Supreme Court for trial.