Guy Fawkes Night Motor Accident

Manawatu Times, Volume 61, Issue 47, 26 February 1936, Page 3

Guy Fawkes Night Motor Accident

FEILDING MOTORIST PROSECUTED . INFORMATION DISMISSED An echo of the motor accident which occurred during tho particularly heavy rain that fell on November 5 Inst (Guy Fawkes night) when a youth named James Trevor Finch was knocked off his bicycle in Duke street, Feilding, and received injuries to his head, w T as heard in the -Feilding Magistrate’s Court yesterday before Mr. R. M. Watson, S.M., when Charles Hepburn Robson, clerk, was charged with failing to keep as near as practicable to the left centre of the road. He pleaded not guilty. Sergeant Angland prosecuted and Mr. J. Graham appeared for the defendant. Tho circumstances were that on the particular night Finch, in company with another youth named Nottle, who had been attending night classes at the Feilding Agricultural High School, departed from the school at about 9 p.m. They were on bicycles and it was raining heavily at the time. Finch held an electric torch which he used as a light but Nottle did not have a iignt. moth proceeded along Duke street together but Finch, who did not have a coat, left Nottle to cycle on ahead to meet with the accident. Finch had since been dealt with by the Juvenile Court for not having a proper light on his bicycle. Finch gave evidence to tho effect that he was cycling along Duke street on his correct side when ho saw the lights of a car come over the bridge from Derby street and enter Duke street. The car was on its correct side or in the centre of the road but then appeared to swerve across to witness who was struck and remembered nothing more. He held an electric torch in his right hand. It was raining very heavily at the time. To Mr. Graham: He agreed it was a filthy night with visibility very bad. Tho Magistrate: It is agreed, I think, it was a disappointing night for a certain celebration. To Mr. Graham: Witness left the school with Nottle but as Nottle had an overcoat witness rode on ahead to get shelter. He rode as quickly as he could and admitted that he had told someone that he was “in a hang of a hurry.” He had no idea how far Nottle was behind him when the collision occurred. He would not dispute that Robson was on his correct side when he turned from Derby street into Duke street. His head was not down; ho was looking ahead about a chain but could not see for that distance owing to poor visibility. The car seemed to come over to witness who was about two feet out from the grass on his correct side. The bicycle was produced and witness demonstrated how he held the torch and the handle grip with the right hand. It was not difficult and his hand did not ache. He admitted that he was peddling hard but that did not interfere with his balance or cause the electric torch to alter its position and the light it gave out. The car, in hih opinion- was travelling at a greater speed than 12 or 15 miles per hour although ho could not tell at what speed it was travelling.

Constable Euddle said that ho visited the scene of the accident at 10.20 p.m. and at a spot two and a-half chains from Derby street he found marks on the grass which had evidently been made by a bicycle. He could not see any marks on the road. It had been raining heavily all the evening and was raining steadily while he was making his examination of the road and the grass.

Constable Johnston said that he visited the locality next morning and took measurements. The defendant had called at the police station at 8.30 that morning, stating that he had seen a report of an accident in the “Times.” He gave a statement setting out that he was taking children to their homes after a Guy Fawkes party and when entering Duke street he felt the car go over something as though it had hit a twig. The presence of trees on the roadside gave him that impression. He did not see any light of a bicycle approaching him. Next morning on read ing ,the “Times" he realised that he must have been, responsible for the accident to Finch and straight away reported to the police. • .

To Mr. Graham: Defendant came straight to the polico on reading the report of the accident in the "Times.” Reginald Nottle said that he was with Finch when they left the High School. He did not have a light on his bicycle and when the car passed him it was travelling slowly. • Proceeding on he saw a light in the grass and stopped to find Finch lying on the grass with his bicycle on top of him. To Mr. Graham: He was too far off when he first saw the lights, of the car to say which side of the road i it was on. Quite 2-JO yards in front of him the car was on its correct side.

To the Magistrate: After first seeing the lights.of the car he did not give the vehicle any attention until it got closer to him. When the car came round the corner and over the bridge it appeared from his position to be in the middle of the bridge. He wa3 not absolutely certain that Finch was on the left hand side of the road when he saw him in the car lights. In answer to further questions by the Magistrate, witness said that, he was certain.-that Finch was on the left hand side of the road.

Re-examined by Mr. Graham, witness said that he had not made a statement on this question to tne insurftnee company assessor when questioned after

i'T'HE Feilding: Miniature Rifle Club • will hold its first shoot of the season at the Drill Hall on Tuesday, March 3rd, at 7 p.m; the accident. He agreed that it was an important question and one that would have a bearing on deciding whether .Finch was in the right or wrong. He. had talked with Finch about tho accident and he could not account for not telling tho insurance assessor that ho had seen Finch silhouetted in the lights of the car and on the left hand side of the road. Allan Bramweff, aged 13 years, who was a passenger in the defendant's car at the time of the accident, said that soon after crossing the bridge ho saw a flash ahead but thought no more of it. Almost at the same time he heard a sound of something scraping tho car. To Mr. Graham: He was seated in the back of the car and the flash of light was on his right hand side. Addressing the Court, Mr. Graham said that tho evidence showed that the car was travelling slowly and that it was either on its correct side or in the middle of the road. Nottle had said that the car was travelling slowly and that he was on the look-out, having no light, but he passed the car without concern. Finch had admitted that he was in a hurry to get iiorne owing to tho heavy rain and the fact that he had no coat. He was handicapped in his control of the bicycle by having to hold a thick torch in his hand and steer as well. This, counsel claimed, would impair the steering of his machine. Although the torch was found alight no evidence had been called to show that it was alight so that Robson could sco it.

The defendant gave evidence that his car had good lights and on turning into Duke street he had looked out of the side window to see whether the road was clear. He was travelling very slowly owing to visibility being bad. As far as he could judge he was towards the left hand side of the road. He proceeded on slowly in the direction of the boy Bramweff’s home. He did not see any light and when he felt the scraping sound ho thought it was the branch of a tree. Arriving at Bramweff’s house he let the boy Bramweff out and proceeded on his way and knew nothing of an accident until he read it in the “Times” next morning. To Sergeant Angland: He did not pass another car in Derby street nor did lie see any cyclists. To the Magistrate: He did not see Nottle. To Sergeant Angland: There wrns a slight fog on the windscreen but this cleared when the window was opened. He was driving slowly at the time and the only thing he heard at the time was the scraping noise. He denied that he ran into Finen.

The Magistrate: How can you say such an absurd thing? Why do people always try to avoid giving a direct answer?

Defendant: I did not know then that I had hit Finch but I know now that I did.

The Magistrate: You side-stepped the question very adroitly and all you did was to make me lose confidence in you. Victoria I. McKenzie, of the staff oi the Peildiug Agricultural High .School, said that she was on duty at the school on tho night ol the accident and at about 9 o’clock when the pupils were leaving she had stood on the school porch looking down Duke street. She saw the lights of a car approaching up Duke street and the veiiicle appeared clearly to be on its correct side of the road. It was travelling very slowly. It was raining heavily and witness formed the opinion that the driver was travelling slowly in appreciation of the dangers of the road on such a night. The car stopped on the left haud side of the road and then moved on again. Later witness proceeded down Duke street on her bicycle and passed wdiat appeared to be a light lying in the grass. She thought it was the remains of a Guy Fawkes fire.

To tho Magistrate: She was quite certain that the car came along Duke street on the left side of the road.

Tho Magistrate said that there was only one point for the Court to decide and that was on which side of the road the defendant’s car was at the time of, and immediately prior to, the accident. The evidence of the prosecution sustained a prime facia case against defendant particularly that of the witness Nottle who had stated conclusively that the car had come on the middle of the bridge when turning into Duke street. For the defence the evidence was also definite indeed but tvie Magistrate proposed to rule out tnat of'the derendant Robson and be guided by the very positive evidence of Miss McKenzie. She had been standing on the porch of the High School, which looked straight down Duke street, and had taken a very definite interest in the car in as much as she thought it was someone coming for her. Her evidence as to the course of the car was so positiev that it could not be overlooked. To the Magistrate the matter looked to be one for a civil action and he proposed to dismiss the information.