ELSIE WALKER ENQUIRY

Hokitika Guardian, 27 February 1929, Page 6

ELSIE WALKER ENQUIRY

(By Telegraph—Per Press Association.)

AUCKLAND, Feb. 2(5

This morning when Inspector Hollis was in the box at the Police inquiry into the conduct of the Elsie Walker case, the Crown Prosecutor, Air Currie asked did the medical report distrust your mind from any line of inquiry you should pursue.—No. Air Currie: If it gave no help it did not harm.

A. H. Johnstone (for Inspector Hollis and Atcllvoney): AVhat is the meaning of that? Air Currie: .1 mean the report did not lead off on any wrong scent.

Inspector Hollis: AVe were not able to look. 4 Air Currie: I suggest that from the start you should have entertained tin* possibility of violence. Inspector Hollis: 4 here was nothing to suggest violence, though that did not stop us from looking for it. The Commissioner said there was a material difference between tbe two medical reports. It was liis opinion that Drs Alurray and Gilmour should he brought to the inquiry to give evidence. It would he only fair to them. Air Currie: Very well. sir. I shall see- to it.

After further questions, Air Currie said: There now comes the question of responsibility. Suppnfcing anyone is held to he remiss in the inquiries made in December and January, do von think you arc responsible?—The officer m charge of the case. He reports to the Chief Detective.

If there was any delay in making those inquiries, who is to blame?—The field officer making them. He would have to follow up inquiries.

The Commissioner: is it left to the discretion of the field officer as to when lie shall bring a case before his chief?—We have no rule. He uses his discretion. If lie found a matter had serious aspects, he should go to the Chief Detective for advice at once? —Yes. Air Currie: Is it fair to say there was a stage when the Chief Detective became responsible through these inqurics?—l could not say. Do you regard the decision of what inquiries should be made within the work of the Chief Detective?—Yes.

And although you were not responsible, do you wish to express any opinion as to whether the officers handling the investigation were remiss in their work?—l make no statement of my opinion.

Aly last question: Have you ever made any pencil notes when working this case out? —No. I have' not. Witness was then cross-examined by Mr a. H. .Johnstone, his counsel, and -went over the whole ground of investigation again.

Air -1 .Jinstone : I put it to you, the brief in this case docs not represent all the inquiries made and sifted by the detectives?—Oh, no—not by a long way. There were scores of inquiries to make the brief. . Only wlmt was considered worth while was put into tut* brief from tbe file.

Yet you did not cease the inquiry even after the matter was given to the Crown Solicitor for colonial inquiry?— No. We are still inquiring. Many anonymous messages are- received. They are all inquired into.

Do von see any reason for Constable Collins’ decision that there were no signs of violence on the body being characterised as an ungrounded decision?—No. In his position I think he was right. Can you see why Detective Sergeant j\elly should not order the body to be brought into the morgue in view ot what, lie was told.by Constable Collins? —No. None at all.

The Commission was adjourned until to-morrow. ..