BROPHY EXONERATED.

Horowhenua Chronicle, 3 July 1936, Page 5

BROPHY EXONERATED.

NO IMPROPRIETY IN TAKING TWO WOMEN OUT.

POLICE v. JOURNALISTS

(By Telegraph-Press Assn.-Cbpyright)

Received Thursday, 10.20 p.m. MELBOURNE, July 2

The report of Judge Macindoe, who inquired into the shooting of Superintendent Brophy at Royal Park on May 22, was tabled in Parliament to-day. The report found that there was no impropriety on the part of Brophy 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, the Judge said, having regard to the nature and number o.r wounds, lie could not accept Sir Thomas Blarney's statement that he believed it was an accident when it was first reported to him. "I am forced to tinconclusion that Sir Thomas Blarney wan told the truth that Brophy was held up and shot, and -I believe thai, being jealous of the reputation of the force he commands, he thought that its reputation might be endangered it the whole truth were disclosed."

Judge Macindoe commented upon the i contradictions in the evidence of the leporters at the interviews at which the information regarding the shooting was sought. He did not believe .-?ir Thomas Blarney ever said no steps were being taken to investigate I lie shooting. The police were in possession of vary few facts which would lead to the identification of the criminal. He was satisfied that Brophy's original story of the accident was prompted by his desire to safeguard the reputation of the two women with Dim when lie was shot.

Just before the police inquiry report was submitted to L'arliament to-day All'. McKenzie (Labour) made a statement in which he referred to the vendetta between the Melbourne Press and the police. He -said since the inquiry certain Mel'.ourne journalists were being shad' by police officers. Mr. McKenzie said Sir Thomas Blarney, in reply to a question earlier in the week, admi! ted that one journalist who was s'lvpt.--' n ■• certain offence had been

place i under surveillance. "It is obvious." said Mr. MeKenzie, "that the suspicion was that the journalist was obtaining information from certain members of the police force. The police had been camping on the tail of the journalist's car. following it all over the suburbs. When the journalist liecame aware of the procedure he led the police on a hide-and-seek expedition all over Melbourne, it is a sinful waste of pu' r ' money to take the police from their regular work for this sort of thing," concluded Mr. MeKenzie.