MANSLAUGHTER CHARGE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXV, Issue 20061, 26 September 1928, Page 15

MANSLAUGHTER CHARGE

DEATH OF MOTOR-CYCLIST. WIRE ROPE ACROSS ROAD. DISMISSAL OF INFORMATION. [BY TELEGRAPH.—OWN' COIUtESPON dent. ] PUKEKOHE, Tuesday. A charge of manslaughter was preferred against George Edwin Fausett in the Pukckohe Police Court, to-day, before Messrs. D. McCrcady Armstrong and A. P. Davsh, J.P. s. '1 he charge arose from the death on May 31. of Ernest William Allcock, aged 19 years, through colliding, while riding a motor-cycle, with a. wire ropo suspended between the Franklin County Council's traction engine and a metal-crushing plant, at the junction of Hermiiago Road and the Waiuku-Aka Aka Road, about three miles from Waiuku. Evidence was given that Fausett was in charge of the traction engine, which was across the middle of the Aka Aka-Waiuku Road hauling the crushing plant out from Hermitage Road. Deceased left his father's farm about 8.30 a.m. on his motor-cycle. He had travelled about a quarter-of-a-milc along the road when ho reached the intersection. He swerved to his left to pass behind the engine, but struck the wire rope, wliich was taut, with such force that ho sustained fatal injuries. 'I ho essence of the charge against Fausett was that ho drove a traction engine over the road without it being accompanied by two men, part of whose duty it was to keep a careful look-out, and that he placed an obstruction on the road, a traction engine with wire rope attached, whereby life and limb was endangered. It was stated that two men who were working with Fausett were engaged in the hauling operations. There were no danger signals or guards out on cither side of the traction engine, which was in full view of any approaching traffic. Deceased had stated after the accident that he did not see the wire rope, and his brother, who came along a few minutes later, said that steam was being emitted from tho rear of tho engine when he arrived. This might have hidden tho rope. It was stated in evidence that the men assisting Fausett had run out the wire rope. For Fausett, Mr. Grierson submitted that, as the traction engine was not travelling along the road, there was no responsibility on Fausett to have two men with the engine as guards. Also, it could not be claimed that the stationary traction engine constituted an obstruction on the road endangering life and limb. This charge related to the. wire rope, which, however, had not been stretched across the road by Fausett, but by the men working with him. The fatality constituted a very regrettable accident, but, counsel submitted, did not come within the definition of a case of manslaughter. After retiring (o consider the case, the justices dismissed the charge.