“HIT AND RUN’’

Timaru Herald, Volume CXLI, Issue 20440, 10 June 1936, Page 6

“HIT AND RUN’’

THE WINCHESTER CASE MOTORIST PUNISHED The sequel to an accident at Winchester recently, when pedestrians coming from a dance were struck by a motorist at Langford’s corner and knocked down, the motorist involved continuing on his way without stopping, was heard at the Temuka Magisstrate’s Court yesterday, when Alfred James Shewan appeared before Mr C. R. Orr-Walker, S.M. Charges of negligent driving, failing to stop after an accident, failing to render assistance and failing to report an accident were brought by the police and the defendant, who was represented by Mr L. M. Inglis, pleaded not guilty. Sergeant M. E. Hill, who conducted the case for the police, said that the accident occurred on May 4, when four people were thrown off their feet by a car which swept around Langford’s comer, skidded and ran into them. The driver had not stopped, although it was stated by witnesses that he looked out through the rear window, and had reported to the police at Timaru the next morning. Evidence of Pedestrians. Robert Parker Register, of Timaru, said he was returning from a dance at Winchester and had joined three friends who were walking home. The four commenced to walk down the left hand side of the road towards Temuka. When witness heard the screech of the skidding tyres he swung a girl who was walking with them around out of the way, but he was struck by the bumper bar and, in falling back on the car, he broke a lamp glass with his elbow, the glass cutting a leather coat he was wearing. The defendant must have been travelling at 35 miles an hour and had tried to apply his brakes. He’had not stopped, taking no notice of people who called to him further down the road. The defendant must have known that he had hit the party for the girl, who was knocked unconscious, had screamed. The girl was taken away in a car and witness had returned to Timaru on his motor-cycle, reporting there to the police David Aker said he had been driving a car away from the dance when he noticed a car coming down the main north road towards Langford’s corner at a fast speed. There were four people walking south on their correct side and the defendant swung out too wide in rounding the corner, catching the pedestrians. The driver appeared to have seen the pedestrians almost as he was on them. He swung the car to the right and applied the brakes. The car had practically stopped when it speeded up and then went on, the driver taking no notice of people who called to him to stop.

To Mr Inglis witness said that he had attended to the people who were injured. They appeared to have been struck by the bumper bar of the vehicle.

Mary Horgan described how the pedestrians were walking on the side of the road. She did not know that there was a car coming. She had not been able to stand after the accident, from bruises on the legs, and had been in bed for a week.

Colin Mervyn Hewson, a shepherd at th: Pareora Freezing Works, said that he had been a member of a party in front of the group that was struck. There was a crash of glass and the car appeared to have only one light. He noted the make of the vehicle ar.J the number, the car going past for about 10 yards and looking as though It would stop. However the driver changed gears and went on. A member of the party that had been struck called out for the driver to be stopped, but witness did not call to him. After the car had passed him the driver looked back through the rear window. The Defence. Defendant said he had been to a dance on the Bay and had then gone to a dance at Woodbury. He had .i woman passenger and as they entered Winchester he had noticed several people apparently going from a dance. He had no knowledge at all of having hit anyone. At the corner where the accident occurred there was a ring of light that made it very hard to see going out into the darkness. He had passed a car before entering Winchester, had seen Aker’s car and had passed another car as he was leaving Winchester. He went to dip his lights and found them already dipped. On his arrival at Timaru he found a lamp out and the glass broken. He went to the police as a result of a workmate telling him that there had been an accident at Winchester and that the description of the car tallied with the one the defendant drove. The passenger in the defendant's car had no knowledge of an accident having occurred and had been surprised when the police questioned her about it. To Sergeant Hill witness said it was possible for one to see people walking on the road and yet fail to see them hit. He did not think it strange that the lights would not dip when he tried to operate them because he had dipped them only a short time before. He had taken care on approaching the corner, as he always did. He did not know the number of the car he drove. Defendant admitted to the Magistrate that he had had three beers at 9.30 at the Bay and had left at 10 o’clock to go to Woodbury. Continuing, defendant said he ti-.ught that the missing lamp glass might have dropped out. He did not think it peculiar that the nickel frame was bent inward. When he went to the place where the car was usually garaged he discovered the broken lamp. He went to his own garage and telephoned for an attendant at a third garage to repair the lamp so that it would not be garaged broken. A man he had spoken to at his own garage had been the one who informed him the next morning of the accident at Winchester.

T 3 Magistrate said that in the face of evidence to prove that two people were injured he was asked to believe that the defendant did not know there had been an accident. He could not accept the statement of the defendant. If the defendant had gone slowly round the corner the accident might not have occurred. The whole subsequent action of the defendant indicated that he knew of the accident. He was of the opinion that the defendant he-’, hoped to escape.

Mr Inglis said that the suspension of the license would deprive the defendant of his means of livelihood. If the Magistrate contemplated doing that he

hoped that the fine would be -:.’.uced proportionately. On the charge of failing to stop, the defendant was fined £lO with costs, his driving license was supended for three months on the charge of negligent driving and on the remaining two charges he was convicted and discharged.