CRIMINAL SESSIONS.

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXVI, Issue 20402, 2 November 1929, Page 16

CRIMINAL SESSIONS.

• AF OXiD MAN'S DEATH.

CAR-DRIVER ON TRIAL. i ! QUESTION OF NEGLIGENCE. VERDICT OF ACQUITTAL. Charged, -with negligently driving a motor-car so as to cause the death of Henry Haskett, aged 73, Frederick Ernest Yog will, dairyman (Mr. R. J. Coates), stood trial before Mr. Justice Smith in the Supreme Court yesterday. The accident occurred in Mount Albert Road at the intersection of Allendale Road, on the evening of July 20, and the victim died in the' Auckland Hospital on the following morning. Mr. Hubble,, for the Crown, said that the only point for the jury to consider was whether accused, in all the circumstances, had' been negligent in driving the car. If he. failed to take the care which the ordinary prudent careful driver would take, then he was guilty of negligence. The standard of care required in the community was largely set by juries.

Counsel said that two lads who were •witnesses in tho case had just gone out of the Mount Albert Presbyterian Church at the time of the accident. It was dark and had been raining. A car passed them travelling at about 30 miles an hour, and they heard a thud. When they went up and saw that an old man had been struck they noticed that the lights of the car were out. There would be evidence by experts who tested the car next day and said the brakes were useless. The accused explained that he was travelling about 15 or 16 miles an hour. The windscreen was damp and blurred and he kept looking past it. The lights were not in very good condition and neither wero the brakes. How the Accident Occurred. / Accused thought the accident occurred through the man stepping out into the road without hearing the car. The Crown could not prove absolutely that the lamps ■were out at' the time of the impact, but no ons seemed to have seen them and they were out immediately afterwards. The nature of Haskett's injuries was described by Dr. A. L. Noakes, of the Auckland Hospital staff, who said that Haskeit died of shock and loss of blood about one o'clock on the morning after his - admission. Surveyors' plans of the locality were put in by /Norman J. Till, registered surveyor. George Arthur Ross, aged 18, who went rut of the Mount Albert Presbyterian Church just before the accident, said that be could not be positive whether the car as it passed was lighted or not. He estimated its speed at 30 miles, an hour. After hearing a bump he went along and found an old m?.n sitting by the side of the road, and another man propping him up. The car had been backed toward the in- ,> jured man and a man was taking milkcans out of it. He did not notice if the car was lighted. , In cross-examination, witness said, that he made his estimate of the speed about 150 yds. from the scene of the accident. He could not contradict a witness who said that the car was travelling at 12 or 15 miles an hour at the time of the accident. ! Similar evidence was given by Edmund J. H. Harris, a companion of the previous witness. The car was travelling about 30 m'iles an hour, and he did not think its lights were on. He was pretty certain that there were no lights on the car after the accident. Evidence of Low Speed. Evidence' that he noticed a motor-cycle passing. a motor-car at excessive speed about the time of" the accident was given by Robert Bums, carpenter, of Papatoetoe. He estimated the speed of the car just before the accident at 12 to 14 miles an hour, and said that it pulled up in 14 paces. The driver told witness that he could not go for the doctor as his lights had gone out. Another witness who heard the sound of the accident was Peter Barrett, taxidriver. Th£ previous witness and he carried the old man on to the footpath. He estimated the speed of the car at eight to ten miles an hour. The driver said that he could not go to the hospital as his Rights were out. Victor Stephen. Croeornbe, garage foreman, described the result of an examination he had made of the car the accused was driving. It was an old model and he was not able to start it on the morning after the- accident. The braking effect was practically nothing, and two detectives pushed the car along easily with the brakes full on. The reverse pedal could be used as a brake. The car seemed neglected mechanically, and the lights might have,' gone off at any time. The P brakesi were in a dangerous condition. George Samuel Sampson, mechanic, gave evidence that' the hand-brake was out of order; Mr. Coate's said that the defence was a denial of. all-the" allegations of negligence. Vogwill was going quietly home at a reasonable pace. . His lights were functioning well and his brakes were good. He kept an average lookout, but the old man s;uc[denly sprang out at the side of him, and an accident happened which could not have been avoided by any reasonable care. Negligiance Denied. The accused gave evidence on his own behalf, and stated that, he was 23 years old. His brakes were in good order, and the lights were functioning satisfactorily on the day of the accident. At the time he was travelling at about 15 miles an hour. The deceased was about 4ft. away when witness first saw him. t Witness admitted to Mr. Hubble that the hantl-brake would not hold. He thought that the old man stepped out of shadows cast by the moon. He did not sound his horn "at the crossing. Evidence that the brakes of the car ■were in good order on the de.y of the accident was given by Sidney Franklin, ■who drove round for an hour with the accused. Expert evidence that sudden application of the brakes might strain and break Various parts was given by Stanley Arthur Andrews, motor service manager. George Mitchell, a resident of Gladstone Road, isaid that, the deceased was very hard of hearing, and his sight was not, good. Several other witnesses were called to show that ihe. lights and brakes of the car were in /good order. Arthur William Page, employer of the deceased, said that deceased's hearing and sight were poor, and he. usually walked about with his head down. In addressing the jury. Mr. Hubble said that he doubted if there was sufficient evidence of excessive speed to satisfy the jury beyond reasonable doubt. It did not appear, however, that accused had been keeping a proper lookout. His Honor said that the question of brakes was only incidental, and the main Question was tho kind of lookout the drive* was keeping. . After a lirief retirement the jury returned with a verdict of not. guilty.