ELSIE WALKER CASE.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18201, 27 February 1929, Page 6

ELSIE WALKER CASE.

INQUIRY INTO POLICE METHODS. YESTERDAY’S EVIDENCE. By Telegraph—Press Association. AUCKLAND,, February 26. When Inspector Hollis was in the box at the police inquiry into the conduct of the Elsie Walker case, the Crown representative (Mr Currie) asked: “Did the medical report distract your mind from any line of inquiry you should pursue?’*—“No.” Mr Currie: “If it gave no help, it did no harm.” Mr A. H. Johnston© (for Inspectors Hollis and Mcllveiiy) : “What is the meaning of that, Mr Currie?” “I mean that the report did not lead off on any wrong scent.” Inspector Hollis: “We were not able to look.”

Mr Currie: “I suggest that from the start you should have entertained the possibility of violence.” Inspector Hollis: “There was nothing to sugest violence, though that did not stop us from looking for it.” Inspector Mcllveney, officer in charge of the metropolitan area, gave evidence concerning the methods of police control. Questioned regarding the Chhtf Detective’s work, he said it was undoubtedly heavy. He was Chief Detective himself once, and the volume of work had got larger since. He was closely associated with it. The increase in population would help that. Replying to the Commissioner, witness said that at the time he was inspector in charge of Detective work, he was the only inspector. The new arrangement with two inspectors came into operation about a year ago. The Commissioner: “A detective becomes on promotion a Chief Directive, and then Sub-Inspector. When he becomes sub-inspector in the uniformed branch, does the detective force substantially lose his experience?” Witness: “Yes, it would to that extent.” “Well, is that a desirable state of affairs?”—“l cannot see how it can be otherwise.” “is the Chief Detective overworked in Auckland?”—“l would not say that. I am satisfied that I could hold the position. I think it might be better if each detective in Auckland City prosecuted his own cases. Jt would give the Chief Detective longer in his office.” Inspector Hollis, officer in charge of the Central District, then gave evidence. He said detective work took up about 60 per cent, of his time. He had to read a total of about 200 files a day. Mr Currie : “Would it be correct to say the work of the Chief Detective is equal in responsibilities and importance to that of Sub-Inspector?”—“Oh, yes. Rut there are different duties. There is a big staff for a Sub-Inspector to handle. A Chief Detective has only 26 men, but there are Court prosecutions.” “Is not the Chief Detective invariably handling criminal cases?”—“Oh, yes.” “Do you find your work gives you time for serious consideration of big crime ?”—“Yes.”

Answering the Commissioner regarding the doctor’s report in the Elsie Walker case, witness said there was nothing in it to show any violence at all. The report did not assist them. Witness was questioned at length regarding inquiries into the time the missing car was seen at PapAtotoe. The Commissioner: “Why was there all the delay in getting Mrs Anderson’s statement?”—“l do not know, sir. The file would not come to me until it was complete.” “When was that?”—“ln December, but I saw parts of it.” Further questioned regarding Mrs Anderson’s statement, which was dated October 28, witness said it was the duty of the Detective-Sergeant in charge of the case to read it. Mr Leary pointed out that Constable Maloney had mentioned in his report, dated October 13, that Mrs Anderson bad seen the car. Mr Meredith (Crown Solicitor), commented on a letter sent to the Minister of Justice by Mr R. B. Lusk, which, lie said, was a' thinly veiled attack on himself in regard to the presentation of evidence ror the Crown at the original inquiry. It was typical of the counsel who handed it to the press, because it had been done by him in previous matters, in which he was engaged. He (Mr Meredith) was prepared to take full responsibility for any action lie had taken, but he wou’d ask the indulgence of the Commission later to reply. The Commissioner (Mr E. Page) said lie would consider the matter, and ; f it came within the scope of the inquiry he would give Mr Meredith that opportunity, Other counsel engaged before the Commission disassociated themselves from any attack on Mr Meredith. The inquiry was adjourned until tomorrow.