CAR DRIVER CHARGED AT WESTPORT

Grey River Argus, 12 October 1949, Page 8

CAR DRIVER CHARGED AT WESTPORT

Before Mr Thompson, S.M., at the Magistrate's Court at Westport yesterday, Charles Eric Betts was charged with driving a motor vehicle down Palmerston Street, Westport, on the night of July 22, 1949, whereby he did strike three pedestrians on the intersection of Wakefield and Palmerston Streets.

Evidence was given by Constable H. Williams, who stated that he had visited the scene of the accident, and saw three cars on the roadway, one with the lights out. He also saw three injured people on the roadway. He immediately notified the ambulance, which took some time to arrive. In th e meantime, the injured were attended to by the Red Cross and Dr Foote. On returning to the scene of the accident he was approached by Betts, who said: “Let’s get mobile!” He appeared very agitated, but was in a sober condition. Witness was also approached by John Basil Wilsoncroft, who indicated that he had witnessed the accident, and pointed out the point of impact. Constable Williams presented a plan of the scene, and had fixed the spot where the victims were lying prior to their removal to the hospital. Mi- Walshe was lying at right angles to the curb, about six feet out on the roadway, and approximately 16 feet from point of impact. Edward Walshe was lying behind a parked car, which was situated ahead, against the lefthand curb of Palmerston Street. His head was immediately behind the rear bumper bar of this vehicle, about five feet six inches from the curb, and about 40 feet from the scene of the impact. Witness said that Mrs Susanna Walshe was situated nine fedt from the curb and about 60 feet from the point of impact. The point of impact had been fixed as being about the centre of the roadway, where no pedestrian crossing exists, and which was in accordance with existing traffic regulations. At the time of the accident it was not raining. The roadway was very wet, and visibility was very poor. The visibility was not helped, he said, by the street light in the centre of the intersection, which gave a very deceptive blue haze. This light had since been removed.

Mr Scully emphasised this point for the defence. He pointed out that all the victims had been dressed in dark clothes on the night of the accident. William Stanley Lamont stated he was a witness of the misha> He had accompanied John Wilsoncroft up Palmerston Street as far as the Club Hotel, and was about to leave Wilsoncroft and go off on his bicycle from the intersection. He noticed three people on the other corner. They appeared to be ready just to step across the road. He also noticed a car approaching from the south end of Palmerston Street about opposite the main entrance to the Hotel Buller. He had just bent down to fasten his trouser clips when he heard a lound bang. On looking up he saw two men being thrown clear from a car, and a woman who appeared to be bumped along the engine radiator, and to be thrown forward when the car stopped. The night was very dark. The road was wet. It was not raining at the time. He did not point out any marks to Constable Williams.

John Basil Wilsoncroft said he had accompanied Lamont up Palmerston Street at 10.45, and saw three people on the other side of the street walking on the footpath. He had stood talking on the corner, and had noticed three people crossing the street. He had also seen a car approaching from the south with its headlights going. The pedestrians had continued on across the street. The car was travelling at a reasonable speed. The three pedestrians were only a few feet from the Club Hotel side of the street when the first man was struck by the car. Ronald Walshe was thrown clear towards the footpath. The second man had been struck and pushed ahead of the car. The woman appeared to be struck by the engine bonnet and thrown clear when the car had stopped. The car stopped dead. There had been no obstructions on the right, side of the road. Visibility was very poor.

Mr Scully: You say the car pulled up almost dead? —Witnes: Yes, it did.

Ronald Walshe stated he was a coal miner, residing at Birchfield, and he was in the company of Mr and Mrs Walshe, of Ngakawau. They had previously endeavoured to catch the bus home, bqt Edmond Walshe had been drinking and was not allowed to travel. They had decided to take a taxi home, and were walking in Palmerston Street, partly supporting Edmond Walshe. He was on the inside and Mrs Walshe on the outside. They had proceeded to cross the roadway towards the Club Hotel. He had noticed the lights of a car approaching, which, he thought, would be about opposite the front door of the Hotel Buller. He imagined they had plenty of time to cross. He never looked up again until Mrs Walshe cried out, and the car was right upon him. They were about in the centre of the roadway. That was the impression he gained. He had suffered a fractured left leg and cuts and bruises. His brother, Edmond Walshe, had received serious head injuries, from which he was still suffering. Mr.s Walshe had suffered shock. The night was very dark, and the roadway wet, and both he and his brother wore dark clothes on the night of the accident. Mrs Walsh e had on a light fawn overcoat.

Mr Scully: You were assisting Edmond to cross the street?—Witness: No, we were not assisting him. Mr Scully: You first saw the car near the Hotel Buller, and you didn’t look up again?—Witness: That is so. Constable P. Condon gave evidence that on July 22 he had been informed that a motor accident had occurred on the corner of Wakefield and Palmerston Streets. He was accompanied by Constable Williams. He heard the defendant tell Constable Williams that he was the driver of the car involved, which was practically in the centre of the road. He had heard Betts say to Williams: “Lt’s over to you now—get mobile!” He assisted Constable Williams to take measurements and interviewed Betts on August 5. Betts stated that, accompanied by two friends, both of whom sat in the front seat, he had turned into Palmerston Street from Fontblanque Street, and proceeded along Palmers-

ton Street in a northerly direction. Visibility was bad, and he had not engaged in conversation, but had concentrated on the driving. His first glimpse of th e pedestrians had been right in front of the car. With regard to liquor, he had only consumed four or live medium beers earlj' in the day. ’ The light in the centre of the intersection made the visibility worse. Mr Scully said that there had been many complaints about the light. It had since been changed. There was no doubt, he said, that Betts was perfectly sober, and that visibility was very bad.

Inspector Allerby said that at 10.15 a.m. on Monday morning he had tested the brakes on Betts’ car. On a flat level surface, travelling at 20 miles per hour, he had stopped in 16 feet, using the foot brake, and there were no variations in other tests. In using the hand brake, and travelling at the same speed, he had stopped in 40 feet. In his opinion both the brakes and the car in general were in excellent condition.

Mr Scully questioned accused as to whether his statement to the police was true. Betts said it was a true statement.

Mr Scully stated the accident occurred where there was no pedestrian crossing. The car’s speed had been only 20 to 2'5 m.p.h., and it was in first class order, and visibility was very bad.

In connection with the headlamps, Betts said that in Palmerston Street, owing to the glare from the street lights, one did not derive much assistance from the he'adlamps of the car. He said that on approaching the crossing the road had looked all clear. He had looked left and right for vehicular traffic. When he had seen the pedestrians in front, he had immediately applied the brakes, and stopped very quickly. He was not engaged in conversation coming to the intersection.

Sergeant Davis: You knew there was no pedestrian crossing. Does that guarantee that there will be no pedestrians?—Witness: Definitely not. Joseph Rodgers, driver of th e car immediately behind Betts, was asked to give evidence. He stated that he corroborated all the evidence. He had seen Betts slow down for the intersection, and then pull up dead. He said the speed would be between 20 and 25 miles an hour.

Sergeant Davis: How do you know he slowed down?—Witness:! saw his tail light, flicker as he applied the foot brake.

Mr Thompson, summing the case up, said it was a matter primarily of whether the accused should have seen the people or not. Taking into consideration that he was sober, that his car was in first-class condition, and that there was no skylarking, he was of the opinion that ‘it was very strange the accused did not see three people in the centre of a main thoroughfare, even if visibility was bad and the pedestrians had on dark clothes. He was liable to some extent. In his mind, he added, the driver must have suffered some distraction while crossing the intersection, and, under the circumstances, he must be convicted. Betts was lined 30s with costs.