POLICE CHIEF QUESTIONED

Southland Times, Issue 22914, 12 June 1936, Page 7

POLICE CHIEF QUESTIONED

Inquiry Into Shooting Of Detective (United Press Assn.—Telegraph Copyright.) (Rec. 9.5 p.m.) Melbourne, June 11. The Royal Commission to-day continued its inquiry into the shooting of Superintendent John O’Connell Brophy, chief of the Victorian Criminal Investigation Branch. Sir Thomas Blarney, Chief of the Victorian Police, said that he saw Mr Brophy at hospital after the shooting. Mi- Brophy told him that he had an accident with his own revolver in a car in Royal Park, and that two women were with him, and also the driver, Maher. As a result of later investigations, said Sir Thomas, he had a conference with Detective McKerral, when it was agreed to issue a statement to the Press that Mr Brophy went to Royal Park in response to a message and while there had been seriously wounded by two bandits. He had authorized no other statement. On the following day, Monday, he gave an interview to four representatives of the Press, telling them all he knew of the shooting up to that stage. The Age had then said that he would not continue the investigations into the shooting. That was wrong. “We had important clues, and I would not divulge them,” said Sir Thomas. “The chief secretary later called for a report of the whole circumstances, which I supplied.” Mr L. Stretton (acting for the Commission) : Do you think it proper that Mr Brophy should take two women and a man with him? Sir Thomas: I see no impropriety in it. It would have been risky to take a taxi, because of the driver, and also risky to take a policeman in plain clothes. Mr Brophy would in normal circumstances have taken steps to have his assailants arrested, but in this instance he had four bullet wounds. Shielding of Women. Asked why he did not supply the names of the women in his report to the chief secretary, Sir Thomas said: “Scandalmongering is not the business of the police; their names were omitted to shield them, Because these reports go through many hands.” Mr Stretton: When asked by the newspapermen about the accident did you say that you did not know where the report came from and that nobody seemed to know anything about it? Sir Thomas: I said something to that effect. Mr Stretton: If you said it, it would be an obvious untruth. Sir Thomas: Yes, if I said it. Mr Wilbur Ham, K.C., who is appearing for The Melbourne Herald, asked whether Sir Thomas attempted to stifle information about the shooting at the hospital. , “We were anxious that no wrong reports should be disseminated,” said Sir Thomas. “We wanted to ensure accuracy.” * Mr Ham: Or to ensure inaccuracy. Sir Thomas: I replied to the reporters’ questipns without intending to be candid. / Mr Ham: Then your intention was to mislead ? Sir Thomas: No; definitely to parry. Sir Thomas, replying to Mr Ham, said that when the shooting was originally reported to be accidental he did not ask Mr Brophy how he came to be wounded all over the body. Mr Ham: Didn’t you think it strange? Sir Thomas: Yes. The inquiry was adjourned.