CHARGES DISMISSED

Stratford Evening Post, Issue 16, 14 August 1928, Page 8

CHARGES DISMISSED

AfABBOADWAY COLLISION. . TRAFFIC FROM tflF/ RIOIJT. Albert O. Cixsey (Mr Weir) not guilty, at the Stratford ■ Gourtr yesterdkxy to a charge of Having, on July-21st, at the intersection of Regan Street aiid Broadway, failed to give way to traffic from the right, W. H. Paynter (Mr Moss) pleaded not guiltv tqj» charge of dangierons driving, ; *the v pb'frge arising from f the circumstances on whicix Casey was charged. : Tlic eases were heard together., ... | Robert ,Yhisen, hairdresser’s assistant, gave evidence that on the evening of tlic day in question be was standing at White’s corner and saw a car coning from the railwh y; It turned the silent policeman to the right. This way ' fl vansA|nr. Paynter’s jeathen came out of Regan Street W&t. Casey was proceeding south, and as Evans’ car got clear Casey and Paynter collided. ALMOST STOPPED. * ‘ To Mr Weir: After the .accident witness spoke to Casey and volunteered to give evidence on his behalt, ag. Casey was practically stopped when the collision occurred. . - Constable Huston gave evidence that when he arrived on the scene Payifter’s' car Was next in White fraud Casey’s next to Petrie's.

atJb'sMr. Moss ; . P-aynter’s V, car. was damaged o.p'tbe left in front. ■■ . To ;Mr Weir: Casey’s front buffer was torn .off,. /Ifr.Gasey’s dir bad struck head-on the buffer Would have been tent in. . ■ ’ On- jbebalf of Paynter, Mr Mess contended that he vyas entitled, to plead that he was absorbed in, cailying out his'obligation to give way to traffic on the right, find that lie W the right to expect traffic on-, fins' left to give way to him . So long as he watched his right and his front no more could be expected of him. The S.M. said he could not see that Paynter bad any charge to answer. At the same time, there could be an offence even though the regulation regarding traffic on the right was fully observed. The information lagainst Paynter would’be dismissed. INEVITABLE ACCIDENT. On behalf of Casey, Mr Weir sa d' the accident was caused through Casey not being able to see, through; Evans’ ear. There was such a thing, as an inevitable accident, and counsel thought ( the accident in question, was such a one, and that it was not right to invoke ’the regulation. Regulation 13 could, be attacked general-' ly on the ground that it was unreasonable. In the present ease there were three cars, “but if there bad , been tour cam, the position won! arise of each having - traffic on Its right arid being unable to move, and the four cars would have to stand,; still indefinitely. ■ Counsel asked for dismissal of the charge on the ground that the pol'ce evidence had failed to prove that the intersect ton was, iat, the tiinfc, not controlled) by the police or a- traffic inspector. , The charge, wa s .dikinissed as asked, ■ but the S.M. . said the dismissal did -not. mean that lie bold that no offence hdd been coimmitted.