FINED £50.

Press, Volume LXII, Issue 18690, 13 May 1926, Page 10

FINED £SO.

MOTORIST STANDS TRIAL.

ACQUITTED ON MANSLAUGHTER

CHARGE.

(press association telegram.)

AUCKLAND, May 12

At the last criminal session, Ronald George Frankham was to have stood his trial on a charge of manslaughter, hut the Grand Jury returned "no bill." At the direction of the AttorneyGeneral, the accused was re-indieted and to-day appeared before Mr Justice Stringer for trial. He was charged with, on November 12th, at Auckland, unlawfully killing Oscar Frederick Swans<«i, thereby committing manslaughter, and, further, with negligently driving a motor-car so as to cause the death of Swanson. Mr V. R. Meredith prosecuted and Mr McVeagh. appeared for accused, who pleaded not guilty. Mr Mereditli said that the 1924 Motor Regulation Ace provided for the protection of human life and put the onus on drivers of motor vehicles. A motor-car was an exceedingly dangerous vehicle for ieasons that were obvious. Its approach was silent, it was powerful, and it was heavy. In New Zealand many people had been killed or had suffered grievous bodily harm •through being knocked down by motorcars, and every owner of a motor-car was bound to exercise reasonable care. A motorist should have proper lights, control, and horn, and should keep a proper look-out. If he failed to do that he was not exercising that care which was required by law. On the night in question, said Mr Meredith, it was raining and visibility was bad. Because of that, however, a motorist was not entitled to excuse himself. It was necessary in such cases to be more careful than usual. Four men were making their way home and were going down Williamson's avenue. While they were crossing the avenue one of their number looked over his shoulder and saw a car about » yard away He shouted a warning to his companions, but the next moment they wore all on the ground. Deceased was dragged twelve yards and then released, and the car proceeded another eight yards. Ho was taken to the hospital and died the next night. The other men received only minor injuries. Until the warning shout, none of the men saw or heard the car approaching. They assumed they had nothing to fear, and walked across the street. It, was not disputed that the car had no lights and no horn. The occupants of the car were accused, a friend, and two women. They were returning home from a cabaret at Point. Chevalier. The car was a borrowed one. When accused came out of the cabaret, he found that'the electrical gear was out of order and that the lights and born were not working. He was aware that before he elected to drive off, that the car was not a safe vehicle to drive. The question was whether a person was justified in driving a ear under such circumstances. It was perfectly clear that an accident was more than likely to happen, and there were plenty of things to do when the accused found the car in the state he did, but/ he preferred to take the risk. Counsel. submitted that it was not a flagrant case of a man being in liquor. Accused had admitted having had, three drinks at the cabaret, but a constable would say he was quite sober. There was no suggestion that the accused had been 'speeding. It would be assumed that he had suffered for what he had done, but that had no bearing on the matter. Evidence in support of the case for the Crown, was,, then given.

The Defence. In addressing the jury, Mr McVeagh, for the defence, remarked jhat care or negligence must be estimated by the circumstances prevailing. He submitted that accused Had taken every care, and that the accident had been a fortuitous occurrence, brought about by an unfortunate combination of events at the last moment. Mr Meredith said that Frankham had agreed to undertake the journey without lights. The jury would be taking overmuch responsibility if it laid down that a man, by driving without lights, or horn, was acting in a reasonable manner. His Honour, in summing up, said that the argument that the people in a'car had kept a cautious look-out seemed to him doubtful. It might be that they were adopting a very risky course, and knew it.

After an hour's deliberation, the jury acquitted the accused of manslaughter, but convicted him on the other charge, with a very strong-recommendation to mercy.

Mr McVeagh mentioned that deceased's relatives had requested him to ask for leniency in the event of conviction.

His Honour concurred with the verdict, and stated that he would not send accused to gaol, but would fine him £SO. Hiß driver's license would be cancelled, and he would be disqualified from driving for two years.