AFFECTING MOTORISTS

Hokitika Guardian, 8 September 1932, Page 6

AFFECTING MOTORISTS

< taking of evidence

WELLINGTON, Sept 6. j JnJhis report toj the North Island; Motor Union the president, Mr W. A. j O’Callaghan, expresses his regret at| the factj ’that successive Ministers of' Justice -have failed'‘to agree to evi- • dence being taken on commission in motor traffic cases. He states that 'the - position is that - a ‘motorist in Auckland for instance, may ha guilty of a - breach of •• a ..by-law?,,.At 'Rotorua, and if ■ to defend the case ’tu, mu3s|ftltend- the 'cduipLab' RotoFua ' b-r'', ' ‘‘All our requests to right the ano-m----'aly have,'been turned down,” says Mr O’Callaghan. “There is ho 'principle •at stake in the granting'of our application; There is, however; - a ''principle at stake in the nefusal'of the-Govern-ment to' allow evidence to be -taken elsewhere in’motor'cases than at the court of . hearing, because /it results :in ‘a very -large tiurtiher of cases, -in preventing fhe; defendaut from liaviug .his case heard at all.' •• ' .. y “One of the points? thatmave been entirely ‘overlooked by -successive Ministers of Justice and their advise Tis is' that the f -lAw'must' grow, mpd in' this ■particular instance' the law ’has failed to grow to keep up- with -the developments of motor transport. Various cases could'''be cited " ' instancing the fact that 'the'; law. must grow to’meet chauging conditions.

AT A DISADVANTAGE. * ;? At the present time, many travelling: motorists are placed at a distinctdisadvantage owing to the expense they would be 'puit.' to in transporting themselves and their witnesses to the place of hearing, and in a great number of instances they allow a conviction to go against them when, in fact, if there were some reasonable method of placing their case before the court, no conviction would be entered. In \ cases in which the .police are prosecuting it - would easily he arranged for the loca'l .police at.»the,place where the evidence is being taken to have the file. sent 1 to .them, -so that they- could, if -desired/ cross-examine witnesses. -As to the argument- that .the hocused should be confronted by his accusers —that does'? not apply in this case. If 'the accused; -owing to the exigencies of the case, personally waives his right to be- confronted by his accusers that is his affair. Moreover/ if the accused has his ; evidence taken elsewhere, -that 4s to gome -extent to his detriment, as ' evidence' taken on commission cannot' have the-sarnie weight, with-the magistrate as that .given in his .presence.- ‘ f ' | A'Otir request- 'that this .procedure I HihttUP: Jje^simplifiedAit ..’so? -that it- is-tb f ',he hoped, that the-present Minister of Justice -will, in due course accede to our repeated requests,” Mr O’Callaghan concluded.