ENGINEER ARRESTED.

Otago Witness, Issue 3958, 21 January 1930, Page 74

ENGINEER ARRESTED.

CHARGED WITH DRUNKENNESS. MEDICAL EVIDENCE DISREGARDED. WELLINGTON, January 16. Despite the evidence of two doctors, who examined the defendant some time after he was arrested and who declared that he was in a fit state to drive a car. Mr T. B. M‘Ncil, S.M., in the Magistrate’s Court to-day, convicted the chief engineer of the Texas Oil Company, Fred Ahlinger, aged 31, of being drunk while in charge of a cir early last Sunday morning.

Sub-inspector Lander said that at 1.30 a.m. on January 12, when a constable was on beat duty, he examined the defendant's car, which was parked in Johnston street, and found the defendant huddled over the wheel asleep.

Constable George said in evidence that when he got the defendant out of the car the defendant was unsteady on his feet, and his breath smelt of liquor. The defendant would not speak, so witness could not judge what the defendant's speech was like. When they were in the watch house, and the defendant was told what he was being- charged with, he said that he had been to the cabaret that night, and had had some liquor there, while before going to the cabaret he had had four whiskies at the Midland Hotel.

Dr Wright produced his certificate, in which he stated that in his opinion the defendant was not drunk in. the ordinary sense of the term, although it was obvious that he had had some drink. Witness said that although it was obvious that the defendant had been indulging in alcoholic liquor, in view of the definition of the B.M.A. for guidance in cases of this kind, in witness’s opinion the defendant would have been quite safe in charge of a car.

This (dosed the case for the prosecution. and the defendant's counsel submitted that there was no case to answer, but the magistrate said that he would like to hear some more evidence. Dr Corkill said that he could say without question that he had never examined a man under similar circumstances when there had been less doubt in his mind as to the man's sobriety. It was his considered opinion that the defendant was quite sober and in a fit state to drive a car. He had examined the defendant at 2.18 a.m., Dr Wright being called some time later. In giving his decision. Mr M’Neil sail he was of the opinion that at the time he was found by the constable asleep in the car the defendant was not in a lit state to drive.

Mr J. D. Willis, who appeared for the accused, said that if the magistrate was basing his decision on the fact that the defendant was found asleep he would like to put the defendant in the box, as the defendant had an explanation for this. To this the magistrate assented. In evidence. Aldinger said that he had come to New Zealand about IS months ago, and since his arrival he had been working very long hours on his company's business. At the time of his arrest he had been waiting for someone, and. tired out. he had fallen asleep. He denied that he had had any liquor at the cabaret. In convicting the defendant, the magistrate made it clear that his decision was based upon his opinion that the defendant was under the influence of drink when the constable found him. Mr M’Neil referred to the period which had elapsed from the time of the defendant's arrest until he was examined by the doctors. “The defendant will be fined £20," continued the magistrate. “I I have been considering whether I will endorse his license or not. I do not j propose to do so. for the reason that 1 I think the punishment is severe enough for a man of his standing, and I also take into consideration, as I have done in other cases, that the defendant was asleep at the wheel. He was not moving and he was not actually a menace to the people on t he road.” Air Willis stated that probably his i client would appeal.