MOTOR-CAR CASE.

Stratford Evening Post, Volume XXXII, Issue 76, 26 March 1912, Page 5

MOTOR-CAR CASE.

ALLEGED FURIOUS DRIVING. At the Magistrate’s Court, Hawera, 1 before Mr. W. G. Kenrick,, S.M., on Monday-last, Frank Rhodes, of Stratford, was charged on the ! information of the police that on February Bth last ‘onthe second day of the Hawerfi races, •he did drive'a motor-car oh j the WaidiDßohd,- neafithfe’ Hawera Racecourse, recklessly or ! negligently ■, or' ,l afd 'spo'cd or 1 manner j dangerous j to the • public, sudder section ft of, the, Mptor, Regulation Act of 1908. Mr. Sellar, of Hawera, conducted the case for the police, and Mr. R. Spence, of Stratford, for the defendant. , , , : , . Counsel for the police explained that the charge arose out of a most unfortunate accident which happened on the second night of the Hawera races. Defendant was driving his car from the Ha.worn. Racecourse towards Sti-atford, just behind a"car owned by Mr. Phillips, of New- Plymouth.’ 1 . would be'brought to show that the speed was from thirty to forty miles per hour; that a cyclist coming, in the opposite direction passed the first car (.Phillips’s), but was unable to avoid the second car (defendant’s), and was run into, the result being a severe injury necessitating his removal to the Hawera Hospital. The first witness called by the,prosecution was Christian Andresen, of Waihi Road, who gave evidence that, on the evening in question he was going along from Normanby, that he was wheeling his bicycle after passing Phillips’s car, that he was well off the metal and on the soft portion of the roal. He was on his correct side. He saw defendant’s car about a chain behind the first car. He dropped his bicycle on the road and ran towards the fence. He had only about three steps to take to reach the fence, but before he could do this defendant’s car hit him, rendering him unconscious. He reckoned that Rhodes’ car was travelling, at a speed between thirty and forty miles per hour. Hugh McKoy, of Normanby, butcher, deposed that on the evening in question these two cars passed him just outside the gates of the Hawera Racecourse, and they were being driven exceedingly fast. His attention was drawn to them by the speed at which they were travelling. He considered they were driven at a speed ranging from thirty to forty miles per hdur. Walter William Wood, of Normanby, blacksmith, corroborated Mr. MeKoy’s evidence. i Constable Flannagan gave evidence of having visited the spot where the accident occurred on the night of the accident and measured the distances. The defendant’s car had evidently gone right up on the bank before being stopped. Walter Dowman gave evidence to the effect that while walking from the Hawera Racecourse numbers of cars had passed him, and that the slowest of them was going at thirty-five miles per hour. He saw defendant’s car, and it was travelling at a very high rate of speed. Albert Rhodes, of New Plymouth, horse trainer, deposed that ho was in Phillips’s car, and that they were travelling from fifteen to twenty miles per hour, that defendant’s car had followed behind for some distance, and that Andresen was riding his bicycle when he passed Phillips’s car. He was ,on the wheel mark of the metal, and not on the soft. When he was at the rear of Phillips’s car he jumped off the machine and dropped the bicycle on the road, and then ran towards the hedge 1 , on his (Andresen’s) left-hand side. The back car (defendant’s) got out as it would do to pass Phillips’s car, leaving Andresen a clear run on the metal between the two cars, but Andresen apparently lost his head, and ran out towards the hedge, right in front of defendant’s car. In answer to Mr. Spence witness considered that defendant was not in the slightest to blame, and had done everything he could to avoid colliding with Andresen. In the opinion of witness the accident was due to Andreson losing his head. The evidence given by the previous witness was substantially corroborated by M. Matheson, chauffeur to Mr. Phillips. According to the speedometer on his car he was travelling at a speed of fifteen miles per hour at the time of the accident. Defendant’s car must have been travelling behind his car for some distance. AY. C. Phillips, the owner of the

car that preceded Mr Frank Rhodes’s machine, gave evidence in accordance with that of the two witnesses previously mentioned, namely, Albert Rhodes and Matheson. He stated emphatically that in bis opinion, defendant was not guilty of reckless or negligent driving, but that the accident was duo to Andresen becoming flustered. When Mr. Spence commenced to address for the defence, his Worship said that so far as speed was concerned he was satisfied that, and the police evidence itself proved this, that the speed of defendant’s car was approximately fifteen miles per hour, and that therefore tho question of excessive speed was disposed of. T!u remaining question was whether defendant had acted negligently or recklessly when tho accident happened. Mr. Spence said that the evidence for tne defence would be the same evidence as was given by the lust three witnesses for the prosecution—namely, that Andresen was riding bis bicycle and not wheeling it, that he was riding on the metal after passing Phillips’s car, and not on the soft, and that Andresen could have ridden on uninterrupted but that, instead of doing this, he became flurried and droppcc; his bicycle and ran for the hedge, a distance of some twenty feet. Immediately defendant saw him running he applied his brakes to his car, and pulled up in about twelve yards. He would only say that if defendant’s car hac been travelling at only twenty miles per hour at the time the actual collision occurred, let alone thirty or fort} miles per hour, and the mudguard Inn struck Andresen in his ribs as it did. Andresen would not have been there ti give evidence that day. Defendant gave evidence in suppor: of his counsel's opening address, and consistent with the three last witnesses for the prosecution. Defendant stated that at tho time of the accident Ik was driving his car on her second gear, and tnat on th.s gear it was impossible to get her beyond twent;, miles an hour. The car had foui speeds. Witness was then cross-ex-amined at length by Mr. Sellar. F. Dunlop, agent, of Stratford, being duly sworn, said that he was .a passenger, in Frank Rhodes’ car. Hi saw the whole accident, and was quite satisfied that defendant was driving at a perfectly safe ---speed, and die everything he could to avoid an accident. Had Andresen even stopped 01 the road where he was after jumping off his bicycle, no accident would have occurred. "Furthermore, that in going on to the “soft” on the side of the road defendant was taking the wors’ part of the road, because it would have, been quite impossible for Andre sen to have ridden his bicycle on this portion. When Andresen passed tin front car, defendant’s car was slightly off tho metal on the right-hand sid. (that would be defendant’s left-banc side) in order to avoid the dust from the front car. It was therefore more natural for defendant to pull off on to that side, which would be the correct side in passing Phillips’s car. Moreover, it was; practically impossible foi Rhodes to pull round to the left-hand side of, Phillips’s car, because all tin Vehicular.' traffic from the racecoum, was running along that side. . His' Worship, in l giving his decision said; that in his opinion Andresen had lost a good .deal of his recollection oi what’ took place on the evening ir. question.’ The shock of the accident had eansedi this. ItiiwaS 'qiiitet cleal .that Andiiesen was riding bis.Jbicycb when he met Phillips’/* car, that then was practically no traffic ahead oi Phillips’s car, that if defendant’s cai was behind Phillips’s car and bearing slightly to the right to.avoid the dusi from the front car, or preparatory tc passing the front car, it seemed perfectly natural, the road being wide, that when the bicycle bad passed tin first car, for defendant’s car to drav puttQiUie.Tijghfc- In his Worship’s opimi. •lop Ajiiuresein had lost, his head, and im| riinhihg in iffoht of defendant’s’ c.qr broiight ivboUt the’accident. This wash criminal charge,’and he was bound tx be , satisfied; beyond any reasonable doubt. All surrounding circumstance!, corroborated ’the defendant’s version of the accident, particularly the faci that the spot where defendant’s cai collided with Andresen was only a yard or two from the fence. In his opinion defendant was not driving at a big) rate of spefed, or recklessly or negligently. Having regard to all the circumstances,’ the information would be dismissed.