BROPHY'S CONDUCT

Evening Post, Issue 156, 3 July 1936, Page 9

BROPHY'S CONDUCT

MELBOURNE POLICE INQUIRY

OFFICIAL FINDING

United l'rcss Association--liy Klcrtrii: Tolo srapli—CopyrlKlit. j MELBOURNE. July 2. The report of Judge Macindoe, who inquired into the shootliii; of Superintendent Brophy at Royal Park on May 22. was tabled in Parliament today. The report found no impropriety on the ( part of Brophy in taking two women when he went to meet the informer. There was nothing immoral! or improper in Brophy's conduct. Dealing with the evidence of. Sir Thomas Blarney, Chief Commissioner of Police, the Judge said that, having j regard to the nature and number of the wounds,* he could not accept Sir Thomas Blarney's statement that he believed the shooting was an accident when it was first reported to him. "I am forced to the conclusion that Sir Thomas Blarney was told the truth that Brophy was held up and shot, and I believe that, being jealous of the reputation of the Force he commands, he thought that its reputation might be endangered if the whole truth were disclosed." Judge Macindoe commented upon contradictions in the evidence ox reporters on interviews at which information regarding the shooting was sought. He did not believe Sir Thomas Blamev ever said that no steps were being taken to investigate the shooting. The police were in possession of very few facts which would lead to the identification of the criminal. Hoi was satisfied that Brophy's original story of the accident was prompted by his desire to safeguard the reputations of the two women who were with him I when he was shot. j SHADOWING OF JOURNALIST. Just before the report was submitted to Parliament today, Mr. W. G. McKenzie (Labour) made a statement in which he referred to the vendetta between the Melbourne Press and the police. He said that since the inquiry certain Melbourne journalists were heing shadowed by police officers. Mr. McKenzie said that Sir Thomas Blarney, in reply to a question earlier in the week, admitted that one journal-1 ist who was suspected of a certain olience had been placed under surveillance. "It is obvious," said Mr. MclCenzie, "that the suspicion was that the journalist was obtaining information from certain members of the Police Force. Police have been camping on the tail of the journalist's car and following it all over the suburbs. When the journalist became aware of' 'the procedure, he led the police on a hide-and-seek expedition all over Melbourne. It is a sinful waste o£ public money to take the police from their regular work for this sort of thing" said Mr. McKenzie.