INFURIATED HUSDAND!

Horowhenua Chronicle, 17 June 1936, Page 7

INFURIATED HUSDAND!

1 SHOOTING OF INSPECTOR BROPHV J SUGGESTION BY NEWSPAPER COUNSEL. (By Telegraph-Press Assn.-Copyright) Received Tuesday, 8.20 p.m, MELBOURNE, June 10. At the police inquiry into the shooting of Inspector Brophy, Detective O’Keefe, resuming his evidence, said that after seeing Mrs Orr he realised that the shooting was not accidental. Witness made no attempt to question the car driver Maher nor Mrs Phillips. He was convinced from what Mrs Orr told him that crime had been committed. The Royal Commissioner, Judge Maeindoe, asked Mr Ham, K.C., w.here his cross-examination was leading. Mr Ham, who was appearing for the Herald and Hun, replied that it was very necessary to ibid out whether the police officers had some motive for falsifying the reports handed to the Press. Judge Macindoc; Your suggestion to date is that Inspector Brophy may have been shot by an infuriated husband. Mr Ham: That’s what we are hero for. Brophy was in circumstances which could be regarded as indiscreet, therefore he had something to hide and gave a false account of the manner in which he received his injuries. While anybody with ordinary intelligence would suspect his account to be false, his colleagues shared that suspicion and the senior detectives lent them-

selves to a falsification of the facts. Frederick Millard, of West Coburgh, gave evidence that he was stopped on his way home in his car and was asked to drive Brophy to the hospital. Brophy told him he had been - shot at Royal Park. Witness was under the impression that the shooting was accidental. , Dr. Stanley O’Loughlin, of St. Vincent’s Hospital, said Brophy ivas his patient. On the night of the shooting Brophy told him ho had been shot and witness had gained the impression that it occurred while he was on duty. Next day Brophy asked witness to keep the Pressmen away. ‘Dr. O’Loughlin added that Sir Thomas Blarney also asked him to keep the Press away from Brophy, as he wanted to prepare an official statement for release to the Press. Dr. A. Carroll, medical superintendent of St. Vincent’s Hospital, said Brophy told him within a quarter of an hour of his admission that he (Brophy) received a telephone message to investigate a case at Royal Park. He went there with a friend and two masked men fired at him. Douglas Gillison, reporter on the Argus, when shown a slip of paper relating to Brophy’s ease, declared it certainly was not the one placed before the reporters by Detective Sloan. He and the other reporters asked whether the detectives were engaged on the affair, to which Sir Thomas Blarney replied: “What can we dol The men were masked and a torch was flashed in Brophy’s face.” Sir Thomas Blarney also said he did not know where the first Press statement about Brophy had originated. The inquiry was adjourned.