JOY DRIVER'S VICTIM

NZ Truth, Issue 1043, 21 November 1925, Page 5

JOY DRIVER'S VICTIM

Clears Out But Returns

"NOT GUILTY OF MANSLAUGHTER " (From "Truth's" Special Auckland Representative.) Though he had no certificate of competency to drive a motor, William Sinclair, an engineer's apprentice, set out on the night of May 17, 1924, for a spin m a car. An old lady, Mrs. Dowding, was hit by the motor he was driving while m Karangahape Road, with fatal results.

Sinclair, who pulled up some little distance from the accident, hung about a few minutes; then, realising what he had done, got aboard the car and cleared. He went to Australia shortly after, and was brought back by the good sense of his relations to meet the charge of manslaughter. Having passed through^ the lower Court, Sinclair stoo.d, m the dock at the Supreme Court last week, charged with unlawfully killing Kate Dowding. Mr. Justice Herdman was on the bench, while Counsel Sellar defended the accused. Two interesting facts were brought out by the prosecution. Sinclair had no license, and no permission to use the car, and he was at the time only sixteen years old. ■ Negligence was also alleged. NO CARELESSNESS. Two witnesses for the defence, Charles Tucker and Charles T. Grayden, both swore that there was. no carelessness on the part of the accused; the old lady stepped off the footpath right into the way of the car. «. The car was pulled up m its own length. Sinclair went into the box, and among other things he stated that he did not see his" -victim, but felt the bump as she was hit. He helped to lift the car off her, and then, getting scared, he cleared off m the motor; he was frightened. A Crown witness, recalled, stated that the deceased did not appear to look along the road as she stepped towards the safety zone. Having conferred for about half an hour, the jury brought m a verdict of not guilty. Subsequently Sinclair made his appearance again, this time before the Magistrate's Court. THREE CHARGES. He was charged; (1) Being the driver of a motor-car without having obtained a certificate of competency. , (2) Being the driver of a motor-car which knocked down a woman m Karangahape Road on the night of May 17, 1924, he failed to stop and give his name and address. (3) That he drove m a negligent manner. Accused pleaded guilty to .the first two charges, and Mr. Sellar tsaid that he understood that the. third charge was to be withdrawn by the police. From the Bench .Mr. Hunt stated that he had heard the inquest, and he held the opinion that Sinclair was guilty of negligence. "Your Worship, he was acquitted of manslaughter by a Supreme Court jury," Counsel Sellar protested. "I know they did not convict him, but I am going to. He stole his employee's car and knocked down and killed this woman." On behalf of his client, counsel begged the Magistrate not to be . too severe. Accused had been acquitted of manslaughter, and had been punished sufficiently by having to pay the costs of the trial. Finally, Mr. Hunt convicted and discharged the unwise youth on the second charge. On the first he w.as fined ten shillings and costs. Though the Magistrate did not agree with the' withdrawal of the third charge, he •would order that no license be issued to Sinclair to drive a car for twelve months and that the charge be withdi'awn.