MAGISTRATE'S COURT

Chronicle (Levin), 6 September 1946, Page 2

MAGISTRATE'S COURT

MONTHLY SITTING AT OTAKI The monthly sitting of the Otaki Magistrate's Court was held yesterday when Mr. A. M. Goulding, S.M.. dealt with the following cases: — Excessive Speeding James? Prudent Willson was charged 'with exceeding tiie speed limit and was fined £5, costs 10s. Inspector Peters stated that he was at the Raiiway intersection when he not.iced defendant travelling at high speed in a car. He signalled the driver to stop, but it took him a distance of 37 feet before he could pull up. He estimated the speed at 45 m.p.h. In answer to a question defendant stated that he did not realise the speed that he was travelling at. He was in no hurry. William N. Scotland, on a charge of speeding, was stated by Inspector Peters to be doing 45 m.p.h. He was advised to reduce his speed, but later defendant accelerated, and on being followed was found to be doing 55 m.p.h. Fined £5, costs 10s. George Ernest Barlow, Ronald George Briant, Frederick Howett, Lawrence Anthony Verrall, Cecil Berry Wake and Nick Yiannantsos talso chargcd with having do driv-1 er's license ) , were - oach charged with exceeding the speed limit on the main highways, travelling at 40 m.pJh. Defendants failed to put in an appearance. Inspector Peters, who gave evidenee in oach casc, stated that he was in the vicinity of Waikanae when he saw Barlow travelling at an approximate speed of 45 m.p.h. Fined £4, costs 10s. It was stated that Briant was driving a taxi going north at ap'' estimated speed of 50 m.ph. and was taking a passenger to Taihape and desired to rcach his destination bei'ore dark. There was not mueh trafflc on the road at the oime. — Fined £2 10s, costs 10s. Inspector Peters stated that the case of Howett was a similar one, but his speed at. Otaki Railway was approximately 50 m.p.h. Defendant stated that he had a sick child on board and was in a hurry to resch his destination — Waipukurau. — Fined £2 10s, costs 12s. Inspector Peters stated that he saw Verrall's car travelling at Otaki Railway at over 40 m.p.h. He also travelled at an excessive . speed over the bridge. — Fined £3, ! costs 10s. j In the case of Wake, Inspector

Peters stated that he estimated the speed of the car at 55 m.p.h. and that he accelerated up to 60 m.p.h. when going up the hiJl from the Railway. Defendant stated that he was in no particular hurry although he had a sick boy with him. Further, he thought the speed limit was 45 m.p.h. Mr. Atmore, who appealed for the defendant, stated that Verrall was not driving in a dangerous manner, that the car was m nrst-elass condition, and that his client had been driving for many years and had never been prosecuted or involved in an accident. Fined £3, costs 10s. Yiannantsos was accused of driving past Otaki Railway at 40 m.p.h. He had stated that he was in the restaurant business and in a hurry to get back to Wellington- - Fined £2 10s on the first charge, £1 on the second. Costs totalled 10s in each case. Lindsay Simpson, Owen Rowland Skyrme, R. S. . Tonks and Leiiton Hood Williamson were also charged with exceeding the speed limit. Inspector Peters stated that Simpson's speed at the Railway intersection was approximately 45 m.p.h. Defendant was anxious to reach Auckland with a" passenger. Fined £4, costs 10s. Skyrme's speed was estimated at 10 m.p.h. Defendant stated that he was not aware of the restricted speed. Fined £2 10s, .costs 10s. Tonks' speed was estimated at 45 m.p.li. in a restricted area. It was a Wet day and there was a good deal of traffic on the road. He hact stated that he was not aware of the spoed limit in the restricted area. — Fin'ed £3 10s, costs 10s. Willianison's speed was estimated at 45 m.p.h. He had stated that he was not aware of the speed limit. — Fined £3, costs 10s. No Drlver's License Thomas Francis Hastings was charged with having no driver \s license and paid a penalty. of £1 10s, costs 10s. Constable Calwell" stated that defendant was driving a car from the Palmerston races. He had stated that he was in the driver's seat relieving the driver who was tired. As a result of an accident to the car two men were injured and taken to hospital, and whetner it was due to inexperience in driving or not he could not say. The j accident was reported to him but ' when he got to the scene there was I no one present. Bottles were found smashed on the bridge and the driver had never had a license. Defective Lights Ossian William D'Ath was charged with operating a motor vehicle at niglit while having no prescribed light; and (2) with having 110 warrant of fitness. Inspector Peters stated that the incident was during the early hours of morning while the , defendant was taking his milk in a truck tc ihe factorv. The defendant admitted that he had no wayr of fitness and that when the lights were on tliey were very dim. Fined £1 10s on the first charge .and 15s on the second, costs 10s in each case. Improper Spot Light James Soteros was charged with using a spot light, thus interfering wi-h tlic vision of other users of the road. Inspector Peters stated that he had occasion to stop defendant on ihe main road. near Te Horo. It was a dark night and the lights were not deflected. Defendant had >tated that he had put his lights •jn to make others dip. Fined £1, costs 10s. Defective Lights William Hodges was charged with using a motor vehic.le at nigh without having a properly equippec

light. Reginald James aua David Steplien Hartley were similarly charged. Inspector Peters stated that Hodges was driving on a dark uiahc with badly equipped lights. Fined £1, costs 10s. James was in the vicinity of the Otaki .bridge. He stopped the car uid ascertained tiiai the lights had olown out at Levin. He advised him to return to Otaki and have .hem attendecl to but this lie failed t,o do. — Fined £2, costs 12s. In regard to Hartley, the inspecor stated that the lights were most unsuitable. — Fined £i. costs 12s. Civil Business Judgment was glven by default in the following cases, Mr. Rnoaes , appearing for complainants : — E. A. 1 Fogclen v. R. Swinburne, claim £3 ! 10s 6d. costs 23s; J. E. Southgate,! Ltd., v. C. A. Krogh, claim £4 12s 6d, j losts 23s Gd; E. A. Fogden v. P. ' Cootes. claim £3 10s, costs 28s 6d.