INCREDIBLE ACCIDENT’

Press, Volume CIII, Issue 30469, 17 June 1964, Page 17

INCREDIBLE ACCIDENT’

(New Zealand Press Association) SYDNEY, June 16, Mr Norman Jenkyn, Q.C., told the Voyager Royal Commission today that some aspects of evidence which could be explained honestly and simply had been given a sinister appearance. These aspects included the missing pages from note-books and cross-examination about erasures. .

Mr Jenkyn, appearing for the Navy Board, said nothing of any real value had come out of these inquiries and they had put officers under a cloud which was not deserved or justified. The Royal Commissioner (Mr Justice Spicer) is inquiring into the sinking at sea on February 10 of the destroyer H.M.A.S. Voyager following a collision ”’ith the aircraft carrier H.M.A.S. Melbourne. Eighty-two lives were lost. Mr Jenkyn said all competent seamen regarded the loss of Voyager as an incredible accident which should not have happened. There was a need for careful examination of all the evidence of witnesses from Melbourne because the loss of life on the bridge of Voyager denied to the commission any version from those on the vessel best equipped to give evidence, he- said. Cause Sought It was the wish of the Navy Department, he said, that nothing material should be concealed which would throw any light on the cause of the disaster. He said he held no special brief for either Melbourne or Voyager, but had a very real interest in seeing that the

real facts leading up to the collision were ascertained, irrespective of whether they required criticism of those in command of either vessel. The Navy was interested in seeing that the responsibility for the collision was “correctly sited” and not placed on the shoulders of any officer or officers unless evidence had clearly established that they were responsible. Service Standards Mr Jenkyn said the Navy was concerned to see that service standards rather than theoretical and uninformed lay standards were applied when dealing with the evidence. He said the inquiry was into a specialised field. Any criticism of these standards should be advanced with much caution, Mr Jenkyn said. Many junior officers and ratings had been examined and cross-examined about matters about which they were not qualified to speak of with authority. He said he realised that his Honour would realise that this evidence was of doubtful value.