Avalanche hazard charges dismissed

Ruapehu Bulletin, Volume 12, Issue 567, 20 December 1994, Page 6

Avalanche hazard charges dismissed

A man charged with criminal nuisance after snowboarding in an area deemed an avalanche hazard was found not guilty in the Ohakune District Court last Thursday . He was found guilty of riding the ski lifts with no intention of paying. Alan Spencer Joslin, 21 , unemployed of Ohakune, appeared on two charges involving an incident on the Turoa Skifield on Monday 3 October. To one charge — that of committing a criminal nuisance by snowboarding in a closed avalanche area thereby endangering the li ves of the public — he had earlier pleaded not guilty and was. appearing for a defended hearing. To the

second charge - obtaining credit by fraud by riding the Jumbo T-bar without any intention to pay for the $46 day-pass — he pleaded guilty. The prosecution produced three witnesses to give evidence in the first charge. They were: Alan Lewis Mathieson, Turoa snow safety officer; Murray Kenneth Brown, senior ski patroller on Turoa and; police constable Stuart Ngatai stationed at Ohakune. After detailing his training, qualifications and experience (largely in Canada) the first witness said that, having examined the Gliding Gladys area above the skifield the day before (Sunday 2 October) he was con-

cerned about the potential avalanche hazard which, if triggered could have impacted on the chairlifts and T-bars below. Safety of 300 concern In his opinion the hazard still existed the following day after a still cold night and, as he was concerned for the safety of the 300 or so skiers using the upperfield on Monday 3 October, his snow safety crew placed signs and ropes around the potential avalanche area warning skiers and snowboarders of the danger. At about 1 pm he saw two snowboarders climbing up the 'glacier ridge line' to the east of the Gliding

Gladys area. He instructed the second witness, Murray Brown who was digging profiles at a higher level to check on the stability of the snow, to intercept the two snowboarders one of whom returned while the other continued to climb. He later saw this climber attach his snowboard and traverse straight across the Gliding Gladys area and out to the west where he disappeared from sight. The second witness, Murray Brown, told the Court that, in response to a request from Alan Mathieson, he had called out to both climbers but only one returned while the other ignored him and continued to climb.

He saw this climber taking a short rest at the very top of the glacier ridge line before snowboarding across the closed avalanche area and out to wards the bushline to the west of the skifield. Murray Brown said that he had no idea what the climber' s intentions were while on the glacier ridge line ... "I was hoping he'd climb to the summit and over to the other side rather than come back down through the avalanche area". Constable Stuart Ngati said that he interviewed the defendant, Alan Spencer Joslin, on Wednesday 5 He said that defendant had admitted entering the closed avalanche area but

claimed that the signs warning of danger had stated "proceed at own risk" and this he had done. The defendant admitted he hadn't considered the danger to others below in the skifield area had he triggered an avalanche. Avalanche prediction 'inexact science' In his summing up Judge Watson said that, for the prosecution to succeed, it must prove beyond reasonable doubt that the defendant had deliberately snowboarded across an avalanche area knowing it was so. Judge Watson said that avalanche prediction was still an "inexact science" despite all the research that has been carried out and, while there was a suspicion of a potential avalanche on the Gliding Gladys area that day, no-one could say with absolute certainty that there would have been one. However he said he was prepared to acknowledge that the possibility did exist and this was the reason why the first witness, Allan

Mathieson, was not prepared to order any member of the snow safety team to ski across Gliding Gladys in pursuit of the defendant. In this particular case however the Court must be certain beyond all reasonable doubt that an avalanche risk did exist and, if it had occurred, the public safety of those below would have been seriously compromised before deciding if the charge of "committing a criminal nuisance" was proven. In this case the prosecution had not proved the charge to the Court' s satisfaction and the charge was dismissed. He was remanded until 27 January on the charge of obtaining credit by fraud, to give defence counsel, Gary Johnson, an opportunity to inform the Court what effects a conviction would have on his client's future as a professional snowboarder both in terms of sponsorship and entry to compete in other countries through their respective immigration policies.