Differing views on fatal court case

THE frontpage article (ODT, 6.9.17) reports a court case regarding an accident with tragic consequences that occurred in February this year. The judge described the tragedy as a terrible accident and the family of the pedestrian, Mrs Herbert, who died after being hit by a car driven by Roger TrotterJohnson said they did not feel any animosity towards him. This article, which includes a photo of Mr TrotterJohnson, is like a public shaming of an apparently gentle soul who has been involved in an awful accident. And why report that he’s a 71yearold Dunedin vegetarian, who says a prayer for plants before he eats them? So what? That comment adds an unnecessary mocking tone to an article about a very sad event.

Mary Hammonds

Broad Bay [There was no intention to mock the defendant. The comments you object to were all read out in court and were reported, as we would usually do. — Ed]

THE ninemonth driving ban handed out to Roger TrotterJohnson, who killed a pedestrian on the back of a prior conviction for careless driving causing injury, raises a couple of interesting questions. The first is, was his practice of praying to plants before eating them a mitigating factor in the sentencing? The second is, how many pedestrians will he have to kill before he’s banned from driving for life?

Lynley Hood

Kew