asked the Minister for Justice if he will state (a) the number of car accidents involving deaths during the year 1969; (b) the number of prosecutions arising out of such accidents; (c) the number charged with dangerous driving causing death during 1969; (d) the number convicted under heading (c); (e) the number charged with careless driving; and (f) the number convicted under heading (e).
Ceisteanna — Questions. Oral Answers. - Car Accident Statistics.
42.
Traffic accident statistics are now compiled and published by An Foras Forbartha and any question relating to them should in future be addressed to the Minister for Local Government. I am, however, informed that the figures for 1969 are not yet quite ready for publication but that mechanically propelled vehicles were involved in approximately 390 out of a total of 438 fatal road accidents.
Figures for prosecutions and convictions are not available in the form sought. The available statistics are published in the annual report of the commissioner, Garda Síochána, on crime, which relates to the year ended 30th September. The report for the year ended 30th September, 1969, was published recently and, as usual, has been placed in the Library.
I would, however, state for the information of the House that the general picture is that, of those drivers who survive fatal accidents, the evidence justifies a prosecution for manslaughter or dangerous driving in only about one case in every six and that, of those so prosecuted, slightly more than three-quarters are acquitted of the charge brought against them. Put in another way, only about one driver out of every 26 who survive a fatal accident is convicted of manslaughter or dangerous driving. I should, perhaps, make it quite clear that the standard of proof required to sustain a charge of this nature is effectively set by juries, as most of these cases are jury cases.
The Minister said where the evidence justifies it they are generally charged with manslaughter. Is the Minister aware that on the 19th July, 1969 a man was killed——
This is a statistical question. The Deputy may not raise a specific question. The Deputy can put down a separate question.
I put down a question and it was ruled out of order.
The Deputy is abusing the privilege of the House.
In this particular case there was no solicitor from the State Solicitor's Office to prosecute——
The Deputy may not get around it in that fashion. The Deputy is raising a specific case not mentioned in the question. If he wants the information he may put down a question.
I put down a question and it was ruled out of order. A man was killed and there was sufficient evidence but when the case came up in court there was no solicitor from the State Solicitor's Office to prosecute and no garda officer. The man's son is picketing the Department of Justice. It is most unfair.
The Deputy is most disorderly. Will the Deputy please resume his seat?
There is no justice in this country at the present time. Why was he not charged with manslaughter? There was sufficient evidence and there were two independent witnesses.
The Deputy should not abuse the rules and regulations of the House. Will the Deputy please resume his seat? He is most disorderly.
There were two independent witnesses and the dead man's two sons. The man crossed the road and the charge was reduced to careless driving and he was fined £10. The justice even commented on it in court. There is no justice in this country. None whatsoever.