FINE IMPOSED

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 3, Issue 212, 13 September 1940, Page 5

FINE IMPOSED

WITNESS AS DEFENDANT ACCIDENT RECALLED An unusual set of circumstances resulted in the imposition oif a fine on William James Dougall Crawford in the Magistrate's Court. Defendant was in the public gallery while his brother-in-law, James Dempster Rivett, was defending' an action brought against him by the Borough Inspector for allowing a dog to be at large in the Strand. Rivett was asked by the magistrate if he would like to call witnesses when defendant protested that he was not the owner of the dog, and Rivett said he would call Crawford, the owner of the animal. Crawford, upon his admission of ownership, was fined 10s. Mr L/Buddle, for-the .Borough Inspector, said that a Mrs Bryanton was cycling along the Strand on the morning of August 3rd", and was knocked from her cycle when the dog ran into the front wheel; The injuries sustained by Mrs Bryantun necessitated her admission to hospital. Witnesses for the prosecution were Borough Inspector Moses Penny, and Traffic Inspector J. H. Delves, Transport Department, the latter describing how he had heard the crash and swung round in time to see the dog moving awaj' from the cycle. He saw the dog run into Rivett's premises and followed. Rivett gave witness his name and admitted responsibility for the dog. Voluntary Appearance. The last statement was denied by Rivett, who said that he had given his name but had not stated that he owned the dog. In fact, said defendant, his brother-in-law, Crawford, owned the dog. Defendant said he was not in charge of the animal, nor did he own it. At this stage the magistrate asked Rivett if he wisihed to call witnesses, and defendant intimated that he would call Crawford. The Magistrate: What? Is Crawford here? Crawford, who was in the public gallery, entered the court proper. "Your full name?" queried Mr Walton, and then, to the Clerk of Court: "Take a note of the particulars. There will be no need to lay an information. This can be treated as a voluntary appearance." The new defendant gave the particulars required and then, in answer to the magistrate, said he owned the dog and was in charge of the animal. He was not aware that the dog had run out into the street. Crawford was fined, as stated, with the addition of costs and £1 Is solicitor's fee.