At Fault

Hawke's Bay Tribune, Volume XV, Issue 202, 25 November 1925, Page 5

At Fault

Car or Man? RECKLESS DRIVING CASE. BEFORE MAGISTRATE AT HASTINGS. A charge that ho did drive a motorcar recklessly between Napier and Hastings on October 12 was preferred against John William Buckingham at tho Hastings Magistrate’s Court this morning. Sergeant Hogan conducted the prosecution and Mr. E. J. W. Hallett represented defendant who pleaded hot guilty. H. H. McDougall, journalist, of Napier, said that on the dav in question he was driving from Napier, to Hastings when, on the road near Whakatu he saw a man who closely resembled the tiefondant accompanied bv another man, driving in a reckless manner swerving from one side of the road to the other. Witness had. to exercise great caution in passing him. Witnessed stopped further on and .the car again passed him. He passed it a second time and as it was still swerving about very dangerously he again had to exercise great caution. On arrival in Hastings witness informed the police- , . \ J. G. McLean, journalist, of Napier, who was accompanying the previous witness on the occasion in question, gave confirmatory evidence, definitely identifying the defendant as the man who was driving the rar. Constable Ryan said that in consequence of receiving a complaint he watched for the arrival of the defendant in Hastings on the day in question, and finding him under the influence of liquor he advised him not to drive the ca r any further. Someone then took the car away. Tho defence was that the car was a small one and very difficult to control, being narrower than the usual track and worn in the steering. 'l'he defendant gave evidence that he had great difficulty in managing the car in loose shingle. * Mr. Hallett explained that the defence was unable to call .the man who was with the defendant in the car ns he had absconded and was being sought bv tho police on a charge of forgery. Evidence was given for the defence hv Bertram Ogilw. motor mechanic,'of Hastings, West Stanley, carpenter of Hastings and William John field, labourer, of Hastings, in confirmation of the contention that defendant s car was a difficult one to drive. . His Worship said that on the evidence he was going to convict the defendant of driving recklessly He did not wish to say that he disbelieved the evidence for the defence, hut it apnea red that the defendant had certainly been a menace on the road. A fine of £3 and £1 16/10 costs was impose* I-