Failure to Agree in Negligent Driving Charge

Manawatu Times, Volume 70, Issue 45, 22 February 1945, Page 4

Failure to Agree in Negligent Driving Charge

NEW TRIAL ORDERED IN JAFFRAY CASE (Per Press Association.) WELLINGTON, Feb. 21. After a retirement of more than four hours the jury iu the Supreme Court to-night announced that they could reach no decision iu the case in which Hugh Alexander Jaffray, aged 48, Military Secretary to the Governor-General, was charged with negligently driving a motor-car at Heretaunga on December 31 thereby causing the death of Robert Morrison. On tho application of the Crown Prosecutor, Mr. Justice Blair ordered a neAv trial to begin on February 2S. Addressing the jury Mr. Watson, for accused, said the essence of the offence charged Was that accused consciously drove in a manner below the standard of the ordinary motorist. The whole period of time the jury would have to consider was five seconds before the accident when accused was plunged into shadows. In that time did they think accused consciously drove in a manner below the standard of the ordinary motorist when, as a doctor had said in evidence, he was deprived of his night vision? Before the five seconds accused drove at a reasonable speed with his full headlights on. He drove on or near the centre of the road —a thing any motorist would do on that road under the same conditions. That there were shadows across the road Avas proved and there Avas no Avliite line down the centre of the road. Un tho doetdr’s evidence accused Was driving on day vision till lie ran into the shadow. He needed a minimum of ten minutes to regain his night vision, but the actual time he had was live seconds. Under those conditions he Ayent on without any knowledge that he was doing wrong. The Crown Prosecutor (Mr. Cunningham) said there was no evidence at all that the other car avhs shifted by the accident. If it was not, then Jaffray’s car was on tho wrong side of the road. The two allegations of negligence tvero driving on the wrong side of the road and failure to keep a proper lookout. Summing up, his Honour said it was common ground that Morrison was killed by Jaffray j B car. The Crown contended that there was no occasion for Jaffray’s car to be near the centre of the road. It could have been further away on its correct ’•side. Tho defence produced a witness who said it could quite easily happen that accused could actually misjudge llis position on the road. Assuming they came to the conclusion that Jaffray was on his wrong side of the road because of momentarily impaired vision and circumstances beyoud his control, then that would be a suffleieut answer to the Crown’s case. Any evidence of excessive speed could not be relied upon aud the Crown did not allege that.