SPEEDING MOTORIST REBUKED

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 675, 29 May 1929, Page 9

SPEEDING MOTORIST REBUKED

No Licence for Five Years

ALIBI FAILS TO CONVINCE

CANCELLATION of his driving licence for five years was the penalty imposed in the Magistrate's Court this morning by Mr. E. C. Cutten, S.M., on Ffarrington Edward Lockhart Power who was convicted on a charge of dangerous driving. The magistrate said that he was not satisfied with the alibi brought forward by the defence.

DOWER, a young man, was prosecuted by the city traffic department on a charge of driving in a manner that, having regard to all the circumstances might be dangerous to the public. The offence was said to have been committed in Remuefa Road on April 29, about 5.15 in the evening. Mr. L. P. Leary appeared for .defendant and entered a plea of not guilty.

“Well over 60 miles an hour.” was the speed estimated by William Mac Murray, when a car passed him on the Remuera Road outside St. Mark’s Church on the evening of April 29.

“My attention was attracted by a noise like an airplane or a racing car,” continued witness. “I saw the car coming and went to the edge of the footpath to see if I could get the number. On account of the speed I was unable to catch sight of either the front or back numbers.” Mr. Mac Murray described the speeding vehicle as a red racing car. "I never thought it would round the corner into Newmarket without an accident,” he remarked. “I have never seen a car driven faster than that on a public road. There were two occupants and the driver did not sound his horn at the intersection of St. Mark’s Road. There was absolutely no traffic on the road.” It was only a few days later, according to witness, that he saw a car in Queen Street which he recognised as the one that had flashed past him in Remuera Road. He had taken the registration number of the car and had gone to the city traffic department with it.

In reply to Mr. Leary, Mr. Mac Murray admitted that he had done very little motoring. It was dark and the car in Remuera Road had both headlights burning. Mrs. Mildred Hesketh, who was accompanying the previous witness on the evening of April 29, corroborated that part of Mr. Mac Murray’s evidence relating to the car which had passed them in Remuera Road. “It just flashed past,” she declared. COURTESIES AT TOWN HALL “When I interviewed Power at my office on May 3, he told me so many untruths that I declared him to be a liar,” said Mr. G. Hogan, chief traffic officer. Mr. Leary: That is really quite gratuitous. I would ask that the amenities of debate be observed even though counsel is in the box. Mr. Hogan: He called me a big swab and asked me to step outside where he would "fix” me. Mr. Hogan said that he had ignored Power’s offer and asked him to remove himself from the office. In the course of the interview defendant had said that he might have been driving his car on the evening of April 29, but that several other people drove it on occasion. "Eventually he admitted that he was the only person to drive the car all that day,” continued Mr. Hogan. “He said that at 8.15 in the evening it was outside a house in Remuera Road. He refused to say who were the people he was visiting. He also denied that he was in Newmarket and asserted that he was home at seven o’clock. Almost in the same breath he said that he was in Newmarket at seven o’clock.” Mr. Hogan added that when further

questioned Power had said that at 5.15 he was at a certain garage getting a petrol refill. In answer to Mr. Leary, Mr. Hogan said that he was certain that Power had stated his car to be outside a house in Remuera Road and not just in Remuera. Mr. Hogan called a traffic officer to corroborate his story of what had transpired in the interview with Power at the Town Hall.

Mr. Leary objected to the witness because he had failed to leave the court when the magistrate had ordered all witnesses outside. Mr. Cutten was of the opinion that the witness would have to be heard. A CASE TO ANSWER

Counsel asked whether there was a case to answer. “Two people see a red car in a murky light,” he said. "One of them later sees a car which he considers to be the one he caught- sight of previously/ What evidence is there that it is the same car?” Mr. Cutten said that he was of the opinion that there was a case to answer and Mr. Leary said he would put up his defence rather than rely on the weakness of the prosecution. Counsel emphasised what he considered the weakness of the prosecution. “Were it not for the remarks passed between Mr. Hogan and defendant at the Town Hall there could be no case,” he said. "There was a certain amount of feeling as Mr. Hogan’s demeanour in the box shows.” Counsel said that it was quite possible that racing cars were about on the evening referred to. There were motor races on the next day and cars would be passing after tuning up on Shore Road which was regarded as an unofficial track for trying out racers. “Because defendant owns a Kissel car which has occasionally made a noise the conclusion is jumped to that it is his,” urged counsel. Put in the box by Mr. Leary, Power said that at 6.30 in the’ evening of April 29 he had left his home steering a Napier* car which was being towed by Mr. Steel to l}is motor-body building works in Great North Road. His Kissel car had been left outside his home in Burwood Crescent. It was after 8.30 when Mr. Steel had driven him home and it, was not until after that time that he was driving his own cal’.

Robert Steel corroborated Power’s story, agreeing that it would be after 8.30 when he arrived home with defendant. Witnesse’s story accounted for Power’s movements between 6.30 and 8.30. Ernest Keever recalled that be had seen Steel arrive in Burwood Crescent with Power in his car shortly after 8.30. “I am satisfied by the evidence of complainant that he succeeded in identifj’ing the car,” remarked Mr. Cutten. “The defence admits that Power was on the road that evening but says that it was later than when the car was seen. The alibi is a question of half an hour and I am not satisfied that it is sufficiently exact.” The magistrate said that he had had Power before him on a previous oceas- v ion when his licence had been cancelled for 12 months. “There is only one way to deal with him,” he observed.

Power was ordered to pay costs and witnesses’ expenses, in addition to the major penalty. •