CROSSING CASE

New Zealand Herald, Volume LXXII, Issue 22109, 15 May 1935, Page 14

CROSSING CASE

BUSINESS MAN'S DEATH ACQUITTAL OF CAR DRIVER COLLISION AT PAERATA RIDER ADDED TO VERDICT Further evidence in the case in which Walter Harry Rowe, aged 29, carpenter, was charged with negligent drivjng, thereby causing the death of Ernest Henry Cleave, of Auckland, as a result of a collision between a motorcar and a train at the Pukekohe-Pae-rata road level crossing on February 15, was heard before Mr. Justice Fair in the Supremo Court yesterday. The Crown Prosecutor, Mr. V. R. Meredith, conducted the prosecution, and Mr. Goldstino appeared for accused. Lawrence Brooks, locomotive fireman in the employ of the Railway Department, said he was keeping a sharp look-out all tho way down the hill toward the Pukekohe-Paerata road crossing on February 15. He saw a car approaching the crossing when the engine was half a mile away. The usual two long blasts were given on tho whistle. The car was 300 to 400 yards away from the crossing when the first blast was commenced. The engine was 200 to 300 yards away at that time Witness' said he expected the car to stop, but instead of doing so it came straight on into the side of the engine. Statement to Detective To Mr. Goldstine. witness said he watched the car until it was three lengths away, and then thinking it was going to stop, he turned his attention to the track ahead again. In his. statement to the police, produced by Detective Finlay, accused said the occupants of the car, in addition to himself, were Mr. and Mrs. Cleave and Miss Cleave. At the time of the accident it was raining heavily and the car was travelling at only a moderate pace. Accused said he did not see the train as he was approaching the crossing. He was just about on the crossing when he heard st whistle and the engine seemed to be practically on top of the car. He was certain the whistle had not been sounded until the engine was right on the crossing. The car was a touring model. Accused, in evidence, said he was travelling between 15 and £0 miles an hour, owing to the poor visibility and the amount of traffic on the road. He did not know he was approaching a crossing. To Mir. Meredith, accused said he did not see the crossing sign, and only saw the " Stop, Look Out " notice when he was abreast of it. The curtains were up on both sides. He had very little side view. Warning Device Urged To the foreman of the jury, accused said it was possible the noire made by liis own car prevented him from hearing an engine whistle. His car was an old model. After reviewing the evidence, His Honor said it was duty of the jury to determine whether the caTe exercised by accused was that that would have been taken in the circumstances by a reasonably prudent man. After a retirement of an hour and a-half, the-jury returned with a verdict of not guilty, arid added a rider that members were of the opinion that somq efScient warning device. should be installed on either side of the crossing,, as it was regarded as a dangerous one. His Honor said he would refer the recommendation to the proper quarters. Accused was discharged.