Moran notes, for example, that all the allegations of a sexual assault upon Lumbia's wife could be sourced to claims made by Gribble and to the mission journals which were under Gribble's control as head of the Mission. Moran quotes a letter from the Crown Prosecutor in the case which referred to the claim of rape as "somewhat strange...that no statement of this nature was made by Lumbia or any of the native eyewitnesses either at the inquest or the trial". At the Royal Commission, Gribble claimed that Aborigines Department Inspector E.C. Mitchell, who had acted as Lumbia's advocate at his trial, conspired to suppress the alleged rape. Mitchell denied the allegation. Commissioner Wood agreed that the allegation was false and ordered all reference to it removed from the report before it was published. Through an oversight, however, the allegation remained in a letter attached to the report. Mitchell requested that a letter from Wood, which acknowledged that he believed Gribble's allegation was false and that he had ordered it removed, be attached to the report and this was done. Moran reports that, at a preliminary hearing presided over by Rev. Gribble as a Justice of the Peace and at a Coroner's inquest, Lumbia and his wives gave statements about the killing of Hay. The three accounts of the killing concur and were to the effect that Lumbia's wives were in the pool gathering edible bulbs when Hay rode up and attacked Lumbia with a whip for suspected cattle-killing. Acting in anger after the beating, Lumbia speared Hay in the back as he was riding away. The statements, which Moran reports are still on record, also agree on two other points: that Hay had not dismounted his horse until he fell off after being speared and that Lumbia then stripped the body. However, Forrest River Mission records documented several versions of the same event given by several mission translators claiming the rape of one or both of the Aboriginal women by Hay as the motive for his murder by Lumbia. Moran argues that, as Dr McGillivray had testified that none of the bone fragments were 'distinctive of the human skeleton' and those witnesses who thought that they may have been human had no qualifications or experience in examining burned and fragmented bone, it is probable that most or all the bone fragments found were the remnants of the meals of