asked the Minister for Justice (a) the number of hit and run accidents from 1st January, 1969 to the latest available date, (b) the number of deaths arising out of these accidents, (c) the number of prosecutions, (d) the number of convictions, (e) the number of people sent to jail and (f) if he is satisfied that the penalties imposed are a sufficient deterrent.
Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Hit and Run Accidents.
12.
The available statistics are not quite on the lines sought in the question. I am giving the available statistics in a tabular statement which, with your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, will be circulated with the Official report.
I have no reason to think that the penalties imposed are inadequate but I am not to be taken as accepting that the main deterrent against this kind of offence is the penalty likely to be imposed. I agree with those who say that the main deterrent, as far as the law is concerned, is the fear of being caught.
Following is the statement:
STATISTICS of "hit and run" accidents for the period 1st January to 30th September, 1969.
|
Type |
||||
|
Total |
Fatal |
Personal Injury |
Material Damage |
|
|
1. Number of accidents known to the Gardaí |
893 |
9 |
65 |
819 |
|
2. Court Proceedings taken |
496 |
6 |
30 |
460 |
|
3. Offenders known but outside the jurisdiction |
32 |
Nil |
4 |
28 |
|
4. Offenders still unknown |
365 |
3 |
31 |
331 |
Is the Minister aware that on 5th April last a road hog mowed down a young girl of seven years of age, that he failed to stop after the accident, that he failed to report the accident, despite the fact that there were two lady passengers screaming to be let out of the car? This road hog was fined £40 in the district court and was suspended from driving for seven years. On appeal, however, the judge allowed him off with a fine of £2 and he lifted the driving disqualification. Does the Minister not regard that as a disgrace, as bringing the law into disrepute?
Deputies may not discuss judicial decisions.
I do not think it is proper here to canvass decisions of judges one way or the other, but for the record, from what I know of the case the Deputy has certainly given a wrong version of it. Number one, there were indictable proceedings against this man in respect of which there were penalties imposed in the circuit court, including, I understand, disqualification from driving for two years. On the other charges, the accused was brought before the district court which imposed certain penalties and there were appeals against these to the circuit court. The misconception is that the appeals or any ruling on them did not affect the original disqualification of this driver for the period set out.
Surely the Minister is well aware that the judge lifted the disqualification and imposed a fine of £2?
What the judge did on the appeals in the second case did not raise the original disqualification which he himself had imposed. This is what I am trying to get across to the Deputy.
On the general question raised by Deputy L'Estrange, has not the Minister let the cat out of the bag by declaring his intimate knowledge of a particular case? May I inquire from the Minister, in view of the fact that he has let the cat out of the bag by giving the full details of a particular case which was not specifically referred to in the question, if he can tell us the circumstances in which the charge of manslaughter was reduced to careless driving or dangerous driving, bearing in mind the fact that the driver drove on to the footpath at speed, killed the girl, failed to stop and failed to report the accident when challenged by the gardaí?
May I point out that this is entirely out of order? The Deputy is discussing a judicial decision and that is not allowed in the Dáil.
Surely you would not call that a judicial decision?
For the record, my only intimate knowledge of the case is what I read in the public press.
This is Fianna Fáil justice, Taca justice.
There will be no further discussion on this matter.
Subscribers to Taca. There is one law for the rich, for the Fianna Fáil rich, and one for the poor. A man would have been fined more than £2 for having a bald tyre on his car.
I cannot allow any further discussion on this.
When an unfortunate girl was killed——
I am calling Question No. 13. Will Deputy Flanagan please resume his seat or I shall have to ask him to leave the House? I am allowing no further discussion on this question. This is entirely out of order. Will Deputy Flanagan please resume his seat and allow questions to continue?
Is it not right that we should get a reply from the Minister?
A little girl has been killed and justice has not been meted out.
As the Deputy is refusing to obey the Chair, I shall have to ask him to leave the House.
There is a law for the rich and a law for the poor.
There is also a law in this House.
She was the daughter of poor parents.
This is most disorderly.
I want to protest in the strongest way I possibly can.
Deputy Flanagan should remember he is not at the crossroads. He is in the national Parliament.
And I appreciate that this is the place to raise it.
Deputies
Order, order.
I ask Deputy Flanagan to leave the House. The Deputy has been here long enough to know the rules of the House. I ask him to leave.
I regret any inconvenience caused to the Chair but I feel extremely agitated on this matter because I am aware that this is one case in which justice has not been done and I demand to hear from the Minister as to why justice was not done.
I ask Deputy Flanagan to leave the House.
Will the Ceann Comhairle ask the Minister why justice was not done? As a protest against one law for the rich and one for the poor, I will leave the House. It is disgraceful justice and a bad law.
The Deputy can go home now to his business.