KILLED BY MOTOR

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXX, Issue 21562, 5 August 1933, Page 13

KILLED BY MOTOR

TAKAPUNA FATALITY YOUNG DRIVER SENTENCED SIX MONTHS' HARD LABOUR COMMENTS BY THE JUDGE "The destruction of human life by persons who disregard traffic rules and their duty to the public cannot be passed over lightly," said Mr. Justice Herdman in the Supreme Court yesterday, when passing sentence on a young man who had been found guilty of negligently driving a motor-car so as to cause death. The prisoner was Noel William McColl, aged 23, stationer, of Otorohanga, who was held responsible for a street accident at Takapuna on May 7, as ft result of which David Percival Ellis, aged 17, lost his life. Prisoner's counsel, Mr. Dickson, said prisoner was not a criminal within the true meaning of the word. There was no suggestion that he intended to commit the offence of which he had been convicted. In all these cases the Judge was given a wide discretion in the matter of punishment, and counsel trusted prisoner would not be prejudiced by any talk "about "hit. and run." The prisoner was charged only with negligence, and not with the offence of failing to render assistance. In this case there was no suggestion of drink or of any improper conduct. Special Legislation Counsel said prisoner's wife, who urged him to proceed, was to a great extent responsible for what happened, and she had frankly admitted that. The jury had strongly recommended the young man to mercy, and counsel suggested that mercy would not mean imprisonment. He pleaded that the prisoner should be treated as a first offender. His Honor pointed out that before special legislation was passed enabling that Court to try a man for the offence of negligent driving causing death, it would hav« been the duty of the police and the Crown to have instituted a prosecution for manslaughter in this case. Special legislation of recent years enabled the Crown to institute proceedings under an Act which prescribed a penalty less serious than that for manslaughter. "In imposing punishment in this case I wish it to be definitely and clearly understood that .this young man is being punished only because a jury has found him to be guilty of causing death by driving a car recklessly," said His Honor. Nature of the Oflence "That is the offence he has committed, and for that alone he can be punished. There is no reason, however, why I should not refer to events that happened on that night, although, as I have said, he can be punished for negligent driving and for nothing else. "If I accept the statement made by your counsel, it would seem that in every instance when a citizen of New Zealand was killed on a public highway by a. person who recklessly drove a motor-car he should be treated not as one liable to imprisonment, but admitted to probation or fined. I do not accept that view. In cases of this kind people forget the circumstances. A plea is made sometimes on behalf of the family or of the wife of the accused, but the grief and sorrow that relatives of the person who has been killed have to suffer are in these criminal trials forgotten. "I look upon this case as a serious one. On a dark night, driving along a rain-swept road, you struck a boy and left him lying in a dying condition on the road. There was evidence which afforded the jury ample justification for deciding that you drove negligently and in a manner that was dangerous to the public. With the verdict of the jury I am in complete agreement. "Callous Behaviour" "Your behaviour was callous; and you and your wife before you left for Auckland by a ferry agreed upon a plan of deception. 1 am prepared to believe that you are not a criminal in the strict sense, although 1 note that you have already been convicted of some minor theft." His Honor said that in many cases of this kind he had fined the offender, but there were features about this case which seemed to point to the necessity of a more exemplary punishment. He gave due heed to the recommendation of the jury, and he had not overlooked the fact that prisoner's behaviour might to some extent have been influenced by his wife. He would sentence him to six.months' imprisonment, with hard labour, and expressed the hope that this case would be a warning to other motor drivers who might be disposed to be careless. His Honor further made an order under the Motor Regulations Act that prisoner's licence be suspended and that he be debarred from a period of five j-ears from holding a licence to drive a motor vehicle. "But for the jury's recommendation, the punishment I would have imposed would have been greater," said His Honor.