POLICE INQUIRY

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXX, 17 June 1936, Page 11

POLICE INQUIRY

i SHOOTING OF SUPERINTENDENT DETECTIVE GIVES EVIDENCE (United I’i'ces Association- H.v Klr-.-r:; Telegr:u>!i -Co|>.\ right) MELBOURNE. 15 th June. At the inquiry into the circumstances surrounding the shooting of Police Superintendent Brophy and the accuracy of police statements concerning the occurrence, Detective-In-spector A. T. McKcrrai, chief of the ' Criminal Investigation Department, | gave evidence regarding the conflict- , mg stories of the wounding of Brc- ; phy and the measures adopted to clear the matter up, as “.newspapers on the Monday following the shooting published information in which there were discrepancies and departures from fact.’’ The witness said that the shooting was originally believed to have been accidental, but later Detective Carey told witness that he had seen Brophy at the hospital and ascertained that it was not accidental. Sir Thomas Blarney, Chief Commissioner, then instructed witness to correct the accident story and give •:>: newspapers the true facts. Mr L. Stretton, who is assisting the Royal Commission, asked the witness: “If an informer rang you in order to make an appointment to tell you about a prospective bank hold-up, would you meet him right on the steps of that bank?” McKerral: “Probably no.” Mr Stretton: “Would you, as Brophy purports to have done, have met the Informer right in the centre of the area where the motor bandits wore operating?” McKerral: “The circumstances ore different. You have usually to keep an appointment at the spot named by the informer, otherwise he will not come.” McKerral added that he saw nothing wrong in what Brophy did. It was quite good detective work. The doctor attending Brophy believed the whole thing .was accidental, despite the fact that the wounds were widely distributed. Detective-Sergeant H. Carey detailed the efforts he made to find out the facts of the shooting. He said that Brophy was doubtful whether he could identify his assailants, but he

Detective-Sergeant H. Carey detailed the efforts he made to find out the facts of the shooting. He said that Brophy was doubtful whether he could identify his assailants, but he hoped to pick up an informer who might help. Carey added that as a result of his investigations he now planned taking “certain action in a certain direction, but it was not desirable to divulge what was going cn.” Mr Stretton: “Do you agree with Brophy that the name of the informer in this case is sacred?” Carey: “I do. Detective O’Keefe is at this moment obtaining information that might be of value.-” 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, or Mrs Phillips. He was convinced from what Mrs Orr told him that a crime had been committed. The Royal Commissioner, Judge Macindoe, asked Mr Wilbur Ham, K.C., where his cross-examination was leading. Mr Ham, who is appearing for the, “Herald” and “Sun,” replied that it was very necessary to find out whether- police officers had some motive for falsifying reports handed to the Press. Judge Macindoe: Your suggestion to date is that Brophy may have been shot by an infuriated husband? Mr Ham: That is what we are here 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 of ordinary intelligence would suspect his account was false. His colleagues shared that suspicion and senior detectives lent themselves to the falsification of facts. Frederick Millard. West Coburgh, gave evidence that he was stopped on his way home in his car and was asked to drive Brophy to 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 that Brophy was his patient on the night of the shooting. Brophy told him he had been shot and witness gained the impression that it had occurred while he was on duty. Next day Brophy asked witness to keep Pressmen away. Dr O’Loughlin added that Sir Thomas Blamely 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 that 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 case, declared that it was certainly not the one placed before reporters by Detective Sloan. He and other reporters asked whether detectives were engaged on the affair, to which Sir Thomas Blarney, chief of police, replied: “What can we do? The men were masked and a torch was flashed into Brophy’s face.” Blarney also said that he did not know where the first Press statement about Brophy had originated. The inquiry was adjourned.