CHARGE OF DRUNKEN DRIVING DISMISSED

Manawatu Times, Volume LIV, Issue 6857, 12 March 1929, Page 5

CHARGE OF DRUNKEN DRIVING DISMISSED

COMPLAINTS FROM BOURKE ST. EVIDENCE FAILS TO BRING DEFENDANT UNDER CHARGE. A drainlayer named Benedicks Olio Christensen,"appeared in the Palmerston North Magistrate’s Court yesterday morning charged with being intoxicated while in charge of a motor lorry in Cuba Street on March 4. "After hearing the evidence in the case, Mr J. L. Stout, S.M., dismissed the charge on the grounds that the evidence had not shown that defendant.i had actually beon.4n charge of a lorry in Cuba street on the date in question. Mr Ongley appeared for defendant and Senior Sergeant Whitchouse conducted the case for the "police. John Thomas Burrell, in evidence, stated that at about 4.30 p.m. on March 4, his wife had drawn his attention to tho behaviour of a man who had been endeavouring to start a lorry in Bourke street. This man had been behaving in a very wild manner and had been throwing his arms about in a way which made him appear either drunk or demented. Witness identified defendant as the man in question and stated that from his behaviour in Bourke street ho had obviously been unlit to be in charge of a motor vehicle. In reply to Mr Ongley, witness admitted that he had not spoken to defendant, but had judged his condition from his behaviour. A married woman, also residing in Bourke street, corroborated the evidence of this witness as regarded defendant’s condition. The man had been staggering and behaving generally as though he had had too much liquor. Constable Beaton, in tho box, stated that in response to complaints received from Bourke street regarding the condition of a man in charge of a lorry, he had proceeded to Feath'erston street via Rangitikoi street in which direction the lorry had been reported to have been driven." Later he had found a lorry parked in Cuba street near the E.S.A. club. This lorry corresponded to the description given of the machine being driven by a man about whom complaints had been received. Witness

had found defendant on the opposite, side of the street and in view of his condition had taken Mm to the police station and laid a charge against him. Defendant was quite obviously the worse for liquor, and was not, in a lit state to be in charge of a motor vehicle although he might not have been in a bad enough conditiqn to have been arrested as a pedestrian. WhCn witness had searched defendant at the police station he had found a bottle of beer in his pocket. He had also been in possession of the keys of the lorry. Constable Gillard, in evidence, stated that he had been in the watch-house when defendant had been brought in. He had been present when defendant had been searched and a bottle of beer had been taken out of his coat. Two bottles of beer and one of stout had also been found in the lorry. Senior Sergeant Whitehouse then went into the box and stated that v/hen defendant had been brought to the police station he had been quit® unfit to be in charge of a motor vehicle. Mr Ongley for defendant, submitted that the information must be dismissed on the grounds that there was no direct evidence to show that defendant had been in charge of a lorry in Cuba street. Complaints had been received from Bourke street, but when next the lorry was seen, it had been parked in Cuba street and defendant had been walking about on the other side of the street. As a matter of fact, had the police not interfered, the machine was to have been driven home by defendant’s grandson. The fact that defendant had had the keys of the lorry in his possession did not convict him of being in charge of the machine. The Magistrate upheld Mr Ongley’s submission and dismissed the case.