A Falmouth farm manager who struck a woman with his utility when she was standing on the side of the Tasman Highway in 2018 lost his appeal to the Supreme Court.
Subscribe now for unlimited access.
$0/
(min cost $0)
or signup to continue reading
A series of three photographs taken by the complainant of Brendan John Jordan's car coming towards her were critical evidence in the case.
Jordan 44, appealed against his conviction by magistrate Sharon Cure in the Launceston Magistrates Court for assaulting Sharon Louise McLay of Gray.
IN OTHER NEWS:
He was also guilty of being a driver involved in a crash and failing to stop to give assistance.
Jordan was disqualified from driving for six months, fined $2000 and had a 12-month restraining order imposed by Ms Cure as a result of the conviction. The sentence was delayed while the appeal was heard.
Justice Michael Brett dismissed the appeal saying that Ms Cure's finding was reasonably open on the evidence.
During the March hearings, the court heard that the woman was attempting to carry a lamb to her car from the farm managed by Jordan believing that it was in poor health and was being attacked by ravens.
Jordan approached the woman and a verbal confrontation occurred before he grabbed the lamb away from her and carried it to his utility.
Justice Brett said Jordan had then done a U-turn and driven back towards the woman who was on the gravel at the side of the road seeking to take photographs with her phone so that she had a record of Jordan's number plate.
Rather than veer back onto the road, he continued straight ahead causing the bullbar of his utility to strike her left leg causing a fracture.
A witness, Toni Jones, gave evidence that she was "driving and I noticed a car take off from the side of the road at speed and woman went flying when hit by that vehicle."
"She actually left the ground and went flying down the ditch on the side."
Justice Brett said Ms McLay's photographs provided support for a factual conclusion that the complainant was stationary well off the road while the three photographs are taken.
"As the photos were taken in quick succession up to the point of impact the only reasonable inference is that she was in this position when the vehicle collided with her," he said.
"From the position of the applicant's vehicle [Jordan] in the first photograph, there was ample room to return his vehicle to the road before reaching the complainant's location."
Justice Brett said the Magistrate was correct to conclude that Jordan was responsible for the application of force and had a reckless state of mind.
"In my view the learned Magistrates reasoning is unimpeachable. There is no question that the photographs and the evidence of Ms Jones support the complainant's version that she was standing on the verge, well off the bitumen at the time that the applicant's vehicle collided with her.
"Further it is obvious from the photographs that the applicant had ample time and room in which to drive back onto the bitumen."
Justice Brett said Ms Cure was justified in rejecting the applicant's evidence that the complainant had stepped in front of his vehicle.
He ordered that costs of the appeal by paid by Jordan.
Nick Clark
I am the Supreme and Magistrates Court reporter for the Examiner for the past 18 months. My journalism career has clicked over 30 years and encompasses four different spells at Tasmanian newspapers.
I am the Supreme and Magistrates Court reporter for the Examiner for the past 18 months. My journalism career has clicked over 30 years and encompasses four different spells at Tasmanian newspapers.
