MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 2, Issue 134, 11 March 1940, Page 5

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

SEQUEL TO CAR COLLISION TRAFFIC BREACHES As a result of his motor car col- ; liding with a car driven, by Mr V. ; Hughes, of Rotorua, on the Roto-rua-Te Puke highway a few weeks ago, Edwin Carter King* of Cambridge Road, Tauranga, was con- ; victecl and lined £1 and costs on a ; charge of negligent driving at the monthly sitting of the Te Puke Magistrate's Court, before Mr E. L. Walton,, S.M. No appearance was made by the defendant, but in a statement read by Constable G. Roberts* who prosecuted for the police, he admitted that he appeared to lose control of the car for some unknown reason when rounding the bend about 14 miles on the Rotorua side of Te Puke. He stated he had observed tlie other car approaching, but had no recollection of applying his brakes or any reason Avny he should have been on the wrong side of the road when the collision occurred. It was stated that King had been driving for seven years, and this was his first accident. Technical Breaches. Two breaches of transport regulations were brought by the county .traffic inspector, 11. S. Gardiner, who prosecuted Lionel Freeman of jpongakawa, for conducting a goods' service in a controlled area otherwise than in conformity with terms of the license. Giving evidence, Inspector Gardiner stated that he asked to see the inspection certificate which it was necessary to carry and display on the truck, but this could not be produced by the driver. . Freeman, who pleaded not guilty, stated that the driver had given the inspector the wrong certificate; the one which was required had laeen in the truck all the time. The inspector pointed out to the Bench, however, that he had given the driver sufficient time to find the certificate if it had been in the truck. In ordering the defendant to pay costs only, the Magistrate point ed out that this constituted a technical breach only. A similar charge was preferred against Mabel Isabel Guy, of Rangiuru, when it was stated by Inspector Gardiner that these certificates were the only check the departmen had, and in this particular case, the certificate had been produced later in the day of the of- ; fence, in To Puke. The defendant ■ was fined £1 and costs amounting to 10s. Tlic other business of the Court ; consisted of a long list of debt L :.u!!ii:ionses which were either struck i -nit as Ihey came before the Court. r or we re adjourned until the next silting.