GUILTY OF NEGLIGENCE.

Otago Witness, Issue 3842, 1 November 1927, Page 75

GUILTY OF NEGLIGENCE.

WELL-KNOWN JOCKEY CONVICTED. SEQUEL TO FATAL ACCIDENT. AUCKLAND, October 26. The well-known jockey, Walter Scott stood his trial in the Suprernp Court this morning, before Mr Justice Reed, on charges of manslaughter and negligently driving a motor car on the Manukau road on September 26 last. The ‘charges arose out of a fatal accident m the Manak.au road, in which Mrs Sarah Elizabeth Short was knocked down by a motor car and killed. Her grandson, Leslie Howard Hosking, who accompanied her was injured. Mr V. N. Hubble prosecuted, and the" accused, who pleaded not guilty, was represented by Mr Allan Moody.

Mr Hubble said the question the jury would have to determine was whether or not the accused exercised reasonable precaution while in charge of a motor car. Juries, by their decisions in cases of tho nature before the court, set the standard of care in th e community. Counsel said that when the accident happened tho deceased and her grandson had tepped off the pavement in Manukau road in order to board a traincar which was pulling up. Tlie little boy, who just missed jumping clear of the accused’s car, said he expected the latter to stop, but it did not. The evidence indicated that the accused checked his speed while Mrs Short was being dragged by the car, but when she was clear he seemed to accelerate and literally “ went for his life.” Subsequently the accused went to the police station and tried to create the impression that some person had removed his car and was responsible for the accident. However, a subsequent statement by him showed that there was no question that he was the driver of the car. “No doubt you have read newspaper reports of the case,” said Mr Hubble to the jury, “ and it is necessary for you to free your minds from all prejudices unwittingly, raised on this accoupt. It may be that you feel some indignation for the callous way in which the accused continued on, but you should not consider that as any more an act of' negligence or the accused’s own feeling at the time.” Evidence was then given on the lines of that of the witnesses in the lower court. No evidence was called for the defence, but Mr Moody addressed the jury at some length. “ You have before you a boy of 20, and you must not expect of him the standard of care and judgment looked ' for in a man of mature years,” said/ counsel. The Judge objected to the form of that statement, whereupon Mr Moody continued his address with reference to the general standard of care in such cases. The accused, he reminded the jury, had just concluded his term of apprenticeship as a-jockey and was given a good character by the police. “I make no ad misericordiam appeal,” continued counsel. The onus was on the Crown, he said, to prove three things—that the accused failed to keep a proper look-out, that he passed a standing tramcar, and that he drove at an excessive speed; but the evidence went to show that the tramcar had not stopped when he came abreast of it, and there was no suggestion, that Bagby was racing. This, said the Judge, was an important case in a day when it was common knowledge that motoring accidents throughout the Dominion wore on the increase, and at least half of them, he believed, were due to negligence. It was merely necessary to walk the streets of Auckland, as of other cities, to witness many examples of motorists’ recklessness, where accidents were averted purely by good luck. “ If,” his Honor continued, “ juries say, ‘ This rnan is of good character, a decent chap, the poor beggar didn’t mean to do it, give him a show and let him off,’ then a casual standard of driving will be set.” In 99 cases out of 100, the Judge said, the motorists involved in accidents were “ decent fellows,” but their conduct at the wheel of a car had to be governed. Before the court was a case in which there was no conflict of evidence except what was customary in respect of speed. His Honor asked the jury i- setting a standard of care for ' driving in the city of Auckland to consider whether the accused had acted rightly. The jury returned with a verdict of guilty of negligent driving of a motor car, thereby causing the death of Mrs Short. Bagby was fined £lOO and his driving license was -cancelled for two years. He ras allowed a month in which to pay. He was acquitted on the manslaughter charge.