MELBOURNE SHOOTING INQUIRY

Northern Advocate, 17 June 1936, Page 7

MELBOURNE SHOOTING INQUIRY

COUNSEL’S SUGGES-

TION

C United Press Association.—By Electri Telegraph. — Copyright. ] (Received 10 a.m.)

MELBOURNE, June 16.

The Royal Commission which is inquiring into the shooting of Superintendent J. Brophy, of the Victorian Criminal Investigation Department, in Royal Park, near Parkville, on May 22, sat again today. Mr Justice Macindoe presided.

Detective O’Keefe stated that after he had seen Mrs Orr, one of the pas- ' sengers in the car with* Mr Brophy, he realised that the shooting of Mr Brophy had not been accidental. Witness said he made no attempt to question the driver of the car, Maher, nor Mrs Phillips, the other passenger. He was convinced from what Mrs Orr had told him that a crime had been committed. The commissioner asked Mr Wilber Ham, K.C., counsel for the “Herald” and “Sun” where his cross-examin-ation of witness was leading, Mr Ham replied it was very necessary to find put whether the police officers had some motive for falsifying the reports handed to the Press, ]

“Something to Hide.”

“Your suggestion to date is that Mr Brophy might have been shot by an infuriated husband?”—“That is what we are here for. Mr 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.”

“Anybody, of ordinary intelligence would have suspected Mr Brophy’s account to be false,” continued Mr Ham. “His colleagues shared that suspicion, and senior detectives lent themselves to the falsification of facts.”

Frederick Millard, of West Coburg, said he was stopped on his way home in his car on the night of May 22 and was asked to drive Mr Brophy to hospital. Mr Brophy told him he had been shot at Royal Park. Witness never had the impression that the shooting was accidental. “Keep Reporters Away.” Stanley O’Loughlan, of St. Vincent’s Hospital, said that Mr Brophy was his patient on the night of the shooting. The wounded man told him he had been shot, and witness gained the impression that it had occurred while Mr Brophy was on duty. Next day, Mr Brophy asked witness to keep reporters away. Witness added that the Chief of Police, Sir Thomas Blaney, also had asked him to keep reporters from Mr 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 Mr Brophy told him, within a quarter of an hour., of his admission, that he had received a telephone message to investigate a case at Royal Park, but he went there with a friend and that two masked men fired at him.

Douglas Gollison, a reporter on the “Argus,” when shown a slip of paper relating to Mr Brophy’s case, said it certainly was not the one placed before the reporters by Detective Sloan. Witnes said that he and other reporters had asked whether detectives were engaged on the affair, to which Sir Thomas Blaney had replied: “What can we do? The men were masked, and a torch was flashed into Mr Brophy’s face.”

Sir Thomas had also said ho did not know where the statement to the Press about Mr Brophy had originated. The hearing was adjourned.