STATEMENTS DISPUTED

Press, Volume XCVIII, Issue 28980, 22 August 1959, Page 13

STATEMENTS DISPUTED

Stuart’s Counsel Walks Out

(Sew teaiana Press Association) ADELAIDE, August 21. Mr J. W. Shand, Q.C., walked out of the Stuart Royal Commission today, after saying: “We think that this Commission as estab* lished, is unable properly to consider the problems before it, and therefore w withdraw.”

Mr Shand rose, and walked out of the room, followed by Miss Helen Devaney (Rupert Max Stuart’s solicitor) and Mr G. Villeneuve Smith (junior counsel). . The Commission adjourned “until proper representation can be found for Stuart.”

When the commission resumed this morning. Mr Shand claimed that reported versions of what he said yesterday were inaccurate. He said: “We have considered the position, and' wish to make this statement:

“My instructing solicitor and myself considered after yesterday that we have not yet been given nor will be given a thorough investigation into this matter. “We consider that our continued association with this Commission will not in any way help Stuart, but will in fact hamper him.

"We think that this Commission as established, is unable properly to consider the problems before it, and we therefore withdraw.”

Before he read his statement. Mr Shand said: “Something appeared in the morning paper. It is there suggested I asked an adjournment to consider my position on account of mentioning a certain statement. Of course I did not do that. Cross-examina-tion came up as I asked for the adjournment. “It is further said certain statements are not quite as strong as I indicated. That is not what I said. The statements are stronger than was indicated by me.” Mr Justice Reed: That is my recollection of what you did say. Mr Shand: We have had inquiries made since, and actually the verbal statements of these witnesses were made, as I said, on the Friday afternoon, but apparently were not transcribed until that Monday. "That is the ‘glaring inaccuracy’ —that my information was apparently verbal on Friday and not in writing.” Mr Shand said he had never in his career been stopped in crossexamination before. He then read his statement and led Miss Devaney and Mr Villeneuve Smith out of the room.

As they left, Mr J. F. Brazel, Q.C., assisting the Commission said: "In fairness to the interests of truth, my learned friend is again in error in what he said this morning.”

Mr Brazel said that of the three witnesses whose statements* had been handed to Mr Shand yesterday, one only had given a brief note on the Friday of what he might be able to say. The other two had not been seen “as Mr Shand continues to allege in defiance of the truth.” Mr Brazel said they had been seen on August 17. Referring to the fact that Stuart was now not represented. Mr Brazel said: “It does seem to me that justice could not be done to someone who seems to be momentarily overlooked, without adequate representation for him. “I would like to make some representations to the Law Society to see if some legal assistance can be made available to Stuart.” Mr Brazel said he would let the Commission know the moment something could be done about counsel for Stuart. The Commission then adjourned. Thousands of words of testimony have been taken by the Commission. Legal authorities said that they did not think any counsel would be able to be ready to go before the Commission at least until the middle of next week.

Appeals up to and including the Privy Council having failed, Rupert Max Stuart, a partaborigine, is in gaol awaiting execution, having been found guilty of and sentenced to death for the sex murder of Mary Hattarn, aged nine, near Ceduna. South Australia, last December 20.

The Royal Commission was appointed to inquire into “all aspects” of the case.