FATAL MOTOR SMASH

Poverty Bay Herald, Volume LXIII, Issue 19025, 27 May 1936, Page 8

FATAL MOTOR SMASH

VERDICT OP NOT GUILTY A SHORT RETIREMENT After a retirement of only 18 minutes, the jury in the Mutawai motor latality case in the Supreme Court yesterday afternoon returned with a verdict ot not guilty. The accused, Jacob Ngatai, was charged with negligently driving a motor car on November 50 causing the death of Martin Moni and injury to Oke Mold. .Mr. East, Lipot.iki, appeared for the accused.

Following counsel's address, the Crown prosecutor, Mr. F. \V. Nolan, drew the jury's attention to the conflict.' of evidence regarding the amount of beer consumed. One witness spoke, of four bottles, another lour or five, and the accused of three bottles. It, was home brew beer, and the Government analyst’s certificate said it. was strong beer. It was consumed at:, an early hour in the morning, and alcohol would have a quicker ami easier effect on tlie men, particularly if they had had little food. The primary cause _of the accident was the speed with which the car was travelling, although it had been submitted that the immediate cause was the grabbing of the wheel by the passenger. Had the car gone into the river at. over 40 miles an hour, it would have been worse for the occupants. Mr. Nolan said that the accelerator of the car would not have, jammed at such a great speed if the accused had not depressed it so far as to produce such great speech His Honour, summing up, said that at the start of the proceedings it seemed as if it. would be a serious case, but the evidence considerably modified the position. It seemed quite probable that the keeping of beer in the bottle would increase its strength considerably, and they could not take it. that an analysis was any actual indication of its state when the accused drank it. It was bottled only the night before the, accident, and the iury had to consider whether it was at a potent strength. The constable did not see signs of liquor, and liquor was not thought of until some time after when it became known that beer was in the car at the time of the accident. The jury would have to consider whether the man’s driving powers were affected.

The court, added His Honour, had been told that it was a simple matter to adjust a jammed accelerator, but the jury had to consider whether a combination of circumstances of accelerator jamming and brakes not acting had caused the accident or whether it was due to his negligence. The jury also would have to consider whether the accused unduly accelerat'd his car. There was no evidence that a speed of 40 miles an hour was an unreasonable one on that road. The whole test was whether when he accelerated to 40 miles an hour tlie speed was a dangerous one. If the jury found, however, that the speed was caused by the amount of liquor consumed, then (lie car was driven negligently. The jury retired at. 3.25 p.m. and returned 18 minutes later with a verdict of not guilty.