AN OPEN VERDICT

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXX, 2 October 1936, Page 4

AN OPEN VERDICT

AUCKLAND POINT FATALITY CORONER’S COMMENT ON THE EVIDENCE PROTECTION BY FENCE OR OTHERWISE An open verdict was returned this morning' by the Coroner, Mr T. E. Maunsell. in the inquest into the death of Hera Rora Hemi, aged three years, who was killed at Auckland Point as a result of being struck by a train. In giving his reserved decision the Coroner remarked that if it was to be assumed that this tragedy could not have been avoided by the exercise of reasonable care then the trains were a continual source o'f potential danger and some protection by fencing or otherwise seemed necessary. “The death of the deceased child is due either to the engine driver failing to keep a proper lookout and taking prompt steps to stop the train or else to some other cause not attributable to his failure to exerc \ e reasonable care,” said the Coroner. “I do not intend to find that there was negligence on the driver’s part, but, in my opinion his evidence is open to criticism. The train was travelling at 20 m.p.h. and yet on Abraham’s own evidence it was not brought to a standstill until the engine was 60 or 70 yards past where the child was. According to the witness Lane and also Constable Lake "it was 110 yards. He says he applied the brake and shut off steam 20 yards before reaching the child. Accordingly the train travelled 80 or 90 yards on Abraham’s evidence and 130 yards according to Lake and Lane before being stopped. The brakes were of the Westinghouse type and were in good order. Although he saw the child in obvious dan-: .ger 50 yards away he. did not apply the brakes until 20 yards away, when it was impossible to stop. If he were on the look ouf’he could and should have seen the child several hundred yards away. One explanation he gives is that there were some other children on the footpath adjacent to the line and he was watching them. But when he sounded the whistle they ran away in the direction of the school. It is difficult to see how this can account for his failing to notice that there were two other small children till in danger of being run over. He was then 100 yards away. His statement that his attention was diverted by these children when running away is inconsistent with his evidence that when he sounded the whistle the deceased and her sister were not in sight. “Ht advances the theory that they may have climbed up the embankment after the other children ran away. Whether two tiny children respectively 3 and 4 years could climb that bank I cannot say though I doubt it. In any case if Abraham were on the lookout he would have seen them clambering over the top. He did not do so. When he saw them they were standing together holding hands. A further suggestion Abraham makes is that he. may not have s’een them because they were sitting down. But upon a visit to the locality I find that a hand bag can be seen a considerable distance away without allowing for the elevated position in which Abraham was. He says children are so frequently on the line that he had. drawn attentioirto'the matter. He realised, therefore, the necessity for vigilance. “The guard, Kerr, says that the train travelling at 20 m.p.h. should be pulled up in its own length. The length was roughly 40 yards, but the driver and fireman disagree with him. If it is to be assumed that the tragedy could not be avoided by the exercise of reasonable care then the trains are a continual source of potential danger and some protection by fencing or otherwise seems necessary but, of course, I am not concerned with that. f .

“An open verdict will be returned. Deceased died from a fractured base of the skull and extensive brain injuries sustained by being struck by a railway engine driven by Henry Leopold Abraham.”