POLICE INQUIRY

Grey River Argus, 17 June 1936, Page 6

POLICE INQUIRY

LAWYER’S CLAIM

False Report to Press

(Aust. & N.Z. Cable Assn.) (Received June 16 at 8.5 p.m.) MELBOURNE, June 16. At the police inquiry to-day Detective O’Keefe, resuming his evidence said that after seeing Mrs. Orr, ho realised that the shooting of Superintendent Brophy was not accidental. Witness made no attempt to question the car driver, William Maher, nor Mrs. Phillips. He was convinced, from what Mrs. Orr told him, that a crime had been committed. The Roval Commissioner, Judge MacIndoc. then asked Mr. Ham. K.C. (representing the “Herald" and “Sun") where his (Mr. Ham’s) cross-examina-tion was leading. Mr. Ham replied that it was very necessary to find out whether or not police officers had some motive for falsifying reports handed to the press. Judge Maclndoe: Your suggestion, to date, is that Superintendent Brophy may have been shot by an infuriated husband?

Mr. Ham: That’s what we are here for. Superintendent Brophy was in circumstances which could be regarded as indiscreet, and, therefore, he had something to hide, and gave a false account of the manner in which ho received his injuries, while anybody of ordinary intelligence would suspect his account false. His colleagues shared in that suspicion, and senior detectives lent themselves to a falsification of the facts.

Frederick Millard, of West Coburgh gave evidence that he was stopped on his way home in his ear and ho was asked to drive Superintendent Brophy to hospital. Superintendent Brophytold him that he had been shot at. Royal Park. Witness was under an impression that the shooting was accidental.

Doctor Stanley O’Loughlin, of St. Vincent’s Hospital, said that Superintendent Brophy was his patient on the night of the shooting. Superintendent Brophy told him that he had been shot, and witness gained the impression that the shooting had occurred while Supt. Brophy was on duty. Next day, Supt. Brophy asked witness to keep pressmen away. Doctor O’Loughlin added that S-r Thomas Blarney had also asked him to keep"'the press away from Superintendent Brophy, art he wanted to prepare an official statement for release t'o the press. Doctor A. Carroll, Medical Superintendent at St. Vincent’s Hospital, said that Superintendent. Brophy told him, within a,quarter of an hour of hl's admission, tha: he (Brophy; had received a telephone message to investigate a case at Royal Park, and that he went there ui'.h a friend, when two masked men fired at him. Douglas Gillison, a reporter on the “Argus," when shciwn a slip of paper relating to Superintendent Brophy’s case, declared ft certainly was not the one placed before the reporter,-, by Detective Sloan. He and other re porters asked whe/ther de ect'vcs wore engaged on the affair, to which Sir Thos. Blarney replied: “What can we do? The men (were masked, and a torch was flashed in Brophy’s face." Sitr Thos. Blarney also said that he did not know where the first press statement about Superin.enen-t Bi"pii.v had originated. The inquiry Was adjourned.