COLLISION ON OTAKI BRIDGE

Chronicle (Levin), 5 September 1947, Page 2

COLLISION ON OTAKI BRIDGE

At the sitting of the Magistrate's Court on Thursday, before Messrs. H J. Jepson and F: H. Critchley, j;P.'s, Yee King, of Manakau, was charged with (a) driving a truck without due care and attention, and (b) driving without a license. His employer, Tee Yam, Chinese market gardener, was also charged with operating a motor vehicle without a warrant of fitness. Mr. C. F. Atmore, who appeared for both defendants, pleaded guilty to driving without a license but not guilty to these other two charges. ' Inspector Davis, for the prosecution, said that the proceedings arose out of a collision on the Otaki river bridge. Several cars in a chain were crossing the bridge proceeding northwards when the front car stopped suddenly and the truck, which was the last in the line, collided with the next car, which was a taxi. He had visited the scene 15 minutes afterwards and the truck did not have a warrant of fitness nor did the driver have a license, The taxi driver, Victor Potter, stated that when the front car pulled up he gave all the necessary signals and had stopped before the truck collided with his car. He admitted that the bridge surface was wet and slippery and denied that he ever drove too fast or that he took risks. For the- defence, Mr. Atmore stated that aithough the truck did not possess a warrant of fitness it was in good mechanical condition, having recently been overhauled when all that was required was rewiring. The brakes were in good condition. The truck driver's evidpriGP wnnld he that, the taxi driver

had passed him at the approach to fche bridge and that he gave no signals when stopping suddenly. Each of the vehicles hit the one in front. As to the charge for operating a vehicle without a warrant of fitness, this charge was "against the owner, who • was in Wellington at the time of the collision, and he fiad expressly forbidden the employee to take the truck on to the road without a warrant of fitness. The charge could therefore not succeed ' against the owner. King was driving the truck to Otaki to renew his own *" driver's license and admitted that he did not have a license. As to the charge of driving without due care and attention, there , was a direct eonflict of evidenee between the two drivers and the evidenee should be beyond reasonable doubt before the truek driver should 'be conv'icted. After. he&ring the evidenee of Mr. Southgate, and the defendants, the Justices dismissed the charges of driving without due care and attention and without a warrant of fitness; and fined defendant (•King) £3 and costs 10s for driving without a license.