POLICE AND DOCTOR CANNOT AGREE AS TO MAN’S INTOXICATION

Manawatu Times, Volume LIII, Issue 6671, 26 July 1928, Page 6

POLICE AND DOCTOR CANNOT AGREE AS TO MAN’S INTOXICATION

Charge Against Motorist Dismissed J In Magistrate’s Court Mr J. L. Stout, S.M., was engaged during the majority of yesterday morning, in sifting the evidence in connection with a charge against a motor mechanic named Leonard Holies, who was charged with being intoxicated while the driver of a motor car, at Whakarongo, on July 20, A further charge that, on the same occasion, ho was without the required motor drivers license, was also preferred against Hellos. Defondaht, who was represented by Hr Cooper, pleaded not guilty to the first charge, but acknowledged his culpability in thb second. The first charge, said Senior Sergeant Whitehouse, in outlining the case for thd police, had arisen over a car being found in a ditch near Whakarongo when a constable, had' discovered tbo defendant, Hellos,j in Such a conditionthat he had arrested him. Aquatic Carnival in Ditch. The first police witness was Constable Thillipps, stationed at Takapau, - who had been proceeding back to his station via Woodville, when ho had discovered .Melles’ car oyer a bank near Whakarongo. ■ , r ■' • The constable then proceeded to describe how he had investigated, to find belles leaning up against a telephone pole, with a Small child standing nearby and another ;man, sta'ging an impromptu swimming carnival in the nearby ditch. '‘'Defendant,”, said the witness, "tried to get: him out, but nearly fell -In'-himself in the. attempt. He was swaying, smelt strongly of liquor, and took no notice of what I said to him. I saw he was not fit to drive a car, so I rang up the station; to find that two constables were already on their way out;” ! ", ■ ■■■ * ■- •

The remainder of the constable evidence dealt with the subsequent arrest of the two man and their removal to the Palmerston North lock-up. While witness had been away communicating with the station, the swimming enthus-iast-had got out of the water and was lying asleep on the bank beside the car, when he returned. /\ ' Mr Cooper: There was’no question of his being drowned, of course. Witness: Oh, no, there was hot sufficient water to drown him.

Tho Bench: But not enough, apparently toucher him. ].-f Sir Cooper'ipi'd people 'stop to see what was wrong h '''' • Witness; Tea several people stopped, had a look, laughed,’ and went away again. ' ’ >• Mind Your Own Business.

Coistablo Compton told the Court that,ou the 20tb. inst. in company with a) brother officer, he had proceeded to Whakarongo to investigate an accident there. Ho had seen a car in the ditch near the second new concrete bridge bn the Ashhurst side of Whakarongo settlement.; The nose of the car was in the'ditch 1 and the rear of it up the bank; while' a man named Murphy was lying* beside it, drunk.' Melles was leaning against a post, and when asked what had;happened told witness “to .wind, his own business.", The, constables had cventualy decided to'arrest the two men and bring them back to Palmerston North. ■ When ' asked to get into tho ear, Melles refused," 1 said witness.. *,He said that he was quite capable of looking. after himself. : In the end wo had to throw him and handcuff him, to get him into the car," Cross-examined by Mr Cooper, tho constable stated .that ho, had been present when a doctor had later ex-, amined Melles at tho station. Defendant was then in about, the same condition as when he had. been arrested. . Ho had been a i/ftle more steady on. his feet,.-perhaps, but had talked about "loving the wheels of his car.” Constable Walt, who gave corroborative evidence As to the 1 arrest of Melles and- Murphy, admitted, when cross-ex-amined by ■ Mr Cooper ,that ; he might have expected to find' a drunk man when he arrived at the scene of the accident. Constable Beadle stated from the box, that he had seen Melles brought into the station, and although witness had not taken much notice at the time he was” of the opinion that defendant, at the time, was under the influence of liquor. Very Truculent. Senior Sergeant Whitehouso then went into ■ the witness-box. • On the date in question, he stated, he had been in the station yard when Melles and Murphy had been brought in handcuffed. Murphy was very drunk, while Melles was unsteady on • his feet and very truculent and over-bearing in his manner; Ho had later asked for Hr Bctt and as ho had sufficient money'to pay‘for the visit, the medical man was summoned.. Defendant had then asked’ for another doctor, but as he had not sufficient money to pay for a second yihit, his request had been refused. Mr Cooper:, The police, then, did not take the responsibility of ringing up Dr. Barnett whom Melles asked for, and, asking him whether he, knew the man ,and was willing to 'give him ‘"tick." •• ■. ;The Senior Sergeant: The police do hot do things on " tick, V Mr Cooper. My experience of doctors has been that il they are asked to come to the station and the prisoner has not sufficient money to pay fojr their services, they hold the police responsible for the fee. > Mr Cooper; How about solicitors? Witness: Wo do not invite solici-

tors to tho station. (Carefully modulated laughter from tho court). This, concluded tho-evidence for the Afy Forced Into Ditch. Addressing tho 'court, Mr Cooper stated -that defendant, ‘who was well known ia Palmerston N(ir„n, wj.fi re ho led carried on business as a motor engineer, had decided to sot up in business in Masterton, , He had boon on his way there, when the accident hud occurred. Hq was driving a car which ho had made himself and was accompanied by his sin ml sou, and a companion named Murphy. This companion had been undeniably “tight*' on this Occasion, but Holies had bad no more than tivo ,drinks. ) Ho was a man accustomed to liquor sfnd they would not have affected Him. He was a man of a very excitable nature, however. The accidfiat.jp. the car.had been brought about by a second car which had forced Holies into the ditch in order to avoid a collision; Tho only comment he wished to make upon the police evidence- was that they had been informed that they Would And a drunk man at the scene of tho accident; their minds, therefore, had been probably influenced in. this direction before they arrived. Defendant -was not Drunk. Tho first witness called by Mr Cooper was' Dr. Bett, ’ nie'dioal practitioner, of Palmerston North. Ho’ stated that ho had examined Melles at tho police station about 4.15 pm. on 20th. July. Ho had found him somewhat excited, very, talkative, and labouring under a strong sense of injury. He had bqen perfectly . coherent,: ,however, and had had /fiill control' of-his muscular powers. : • ■ . '■! f fiwbtta I , saw him, Melles was by no means drunk,” said the doc- , tor.He adipitted that be had had somedrinks.buthewent through several teats I put him under. ’ f ■Cross-examined' tno witness stated that he could not say what defendant's condition should have been an hour befopfi bjs, examination. Ho admitted that hbiiiaf « ai d Would not like to drive in’Wear With Melles, but be wished,to qualify this statement somo-what. Ho would .not care to drive in a car With any man who bad had one or two drinks.. ....A. ..- man in this condition Would not have normal judgment in a tight corner. , Accused Had told‘witness that the 1 gravel rash oyer hir right • eye was caused by the rough handling ho had received from the constables.

Another Witness Testifies to Sobriety. Frederick John Tasker, a resident of Palmerston in .that, while’ fetufning i f rom' AsKhhrsf last Friday,, .he. hadarrived at the scone of an accident near Whakarongo. He had seen Mcll.es, with another man beside, a car in the ditch. He had' asked defendant if. he was in need of help .and Had received a negative reply. Witness was of the opinion that Melies was'sober at the time. Witness Had had some years of experience with liquor, as ho had. onco kept a public house, and would therefore be able to judge of .Melies’: condition. He had. not spoken to defendant's companion. Not aPHniing Man.% Kenneth McDonald, lan’d agent, of Palmerston North; In 1, evidence, stated that he had ’known Melies for some years past, and had always regarded him as a noa-drinkoh .i Lust Friday, he had been mptpnng Whakarongo with a companion;' They had noticed ! a ear in-the-ditch on the side of the .road' and had decided to ‘investigate. . They had found a man lying beside the car, whpm they had at jfirst thought ym jajbreft ;t>7 the accident. They had picked the man up, and formed the opinion then, that ho was not hurt, but drunk: 1 At this stage Melies hadarrived on the scene and had addressed the drunk by bis Christian name. / • • Come Down to Earth. “The man waswaving his arms about and was very abusive,” said witness. “There were several ladies near-by, but his languago was not of the choicest; Melies took him by the shoulders and- shoofc him, telling him to come down to earth and sober up. ■ Melies had not 1 been drunk, said witness. To his knowledge he was a very excitable mangaud was in this nervous condition, when witness saw him. j Two Whiskies and Soda*. , Mr Cooper theu'called the defendant, Melies, After giving his reasons for: proceeding,.to Mastefton, witness stated that the total sum of his drinks on the day in question had been two whiskies and sodas. He was not a drinking man, and only took whisky occasionally when he felt cold. He had picked up Murphy, who was drunk, just before, be left town, in order as much as anything to get. him, out of. the way. Going through, Whakarongo, while negotiating a bend at 25 m.p.b. he had been forced to ; bank his machine in order to avoid a collision' with another car coming from- Ashhurst and ‘-'driving all over the road.,’ ’ “When X saw the uniform of the policeman,” said witness, “and realised that I had smashed up the car, and that Murphy had made a scene, t got so d— excited that I refused ;to get into the car with the police. I am s very peacable man as a rule and 1 would not resist anybody, but I was very excited at the time. I was uoi drunk.” Case Dismissed. “This case is not quite clear,” said His Worship in delivering his decision, because Dr Bett , says that he tried several tests on Melies and that defendant responded to them, and had hi; full muscular, powers. The great difficulty it to know just what “a state of intoxication” means. In England there is a similar position and there have been no less than four different decisions from those of ■ the Appeal Court to those of a magistrate. Some hold that intoxication varies according to whether the person is in a car or on 1 foot, but I do not think New Zealand Courts have yet cone as far as that.

I myself think that it is reasonable to give a man as drunk ip charge of • car when ho Would be drunk as a pedestrian,, , • i “The police say defendant was drunk in this case, while Dr Bett says that bo was not. Wo must, I think accept tho medical evidence, although I do not suggest that the police wore wrong ia bringing the case. At the same tinic, if they went out to tho accident expecting to find a man drunk they were more likely to come to that conclusion on arrival. “This is a border lino case. Id* not think that Melles was drunk enough to come within the meaning of the Act, therefore I will, give him the benefit of tho doubt,: I have got to take tho doctor’s evidence, but at the samo time, the police were quite right to bring tho caso forward. ”

On a charge of having no driver’s license, Holies was fined* £1 and . costa 10s. '