-2-
403
The whole matter had worried me a great deal before the Inspector's death, which struck me there and then as being no less than a brutal confirmation of fairs and misgivings which I had tried in vain to put over to the Attorney-
General.
After the death of Inspector MacLennan, I expressed my concern to a Judge, saying that my hands were tied by the fact that a second Inspector
was in jeopardy if I were to make the matter public. The Judge reminded me of my responsibility to relate all I knew to the Attorney-General, no
matter who was involved. This I therefore did on 24th January, 9 days after
MacLennan's death. I knew that this set-up attempt had been related to the
Attorney-General by Mr. Howard Lindsay well before the death of MacLennan.
Mr. Lindsay subsequently was not offered a further contract by the Attorney- General after his contract expired early this year. Mr. Lindsay, you may
remember, had been brought to Court en homosexual charges but the Court
ruled that he had " no case to answer ".
At the Inquest it was stated that the Attorney-General advised the
arrest of John MacLennan. There is no indication whether he gave any instructions
to prevent the arrest being carried out by the same unit of police against
which he had been given information of intimidation to attempt MacLennan's
setting up.
Though I suspected all along that the public would never hear the truth from official quarters, I decided after much consideration to cooperate
and make a statement to the Coroner's officer, Assistant Divisional Superintendent.
Marcus Pelly. It proved a waste of a whole morning, because no part of my
statement saw the light of day at the inquest. It was among those rejected
by the Coroner as
irrelevant
As I had mentioned both to the Attor:ey-General ard to Ir. Pelly,
the incident in which John MacLennan was to be set up by the S.I.U., I
imagine that this Senior Inspector must also have been interviewed. I should
now like to ask the Attorney-General whether my allegation was followed up. Or did he dismiss this serious allegation as mere "gossip and tittle-tattle”,
as stated in his press conference ?
Since I have never handled a gun, I must concede an open verdict
on whether or not John MacLennan could have shot himself five times. An
open verdict in this case means either homicide or suicide. Whichever is
correct, the question of responsibility remains to be considered. But whatever evidence of responsibility existed, including my own statement, went unheard at the inquest. The exclusion of evidence has caused widespread disquiet and suspicion, and must be cleared up to public satisfaction. There
must be no repetition of the MacLennan case, and no further misue of the law.