Was Martin Bryant really responsible for the deaths of 35 people?
I've looked at the facts surrounding this case off-and-on for over 10 years now. I've reported on them in a rather comprehensive blog entry (just see my blog), but for anyone who's interested in discussing it, I think some of the facts are very interesting.
I also think it's telling the stigma that is associated with a low-intelligence person who has an interest in shooting; it almost seems as if that alone convinced people of Bryant's guilt. The police claimed that Bryant gave a confession; but you can read the entire transcript yourself and see that no confession is to be found. In fact, Bryant has no memory of the events, and this is a well established fact. So anything he said was of no value anyway. Now I don't know for certain whether he was guilty or innocent, but I am 100% convinced that the Port Arthur Massacre was not carried out by ONE man and that nobody else was involved. Here is a short list of "coincidences" which beg answers:
1. Bryant has no memory of ever taking place in the massacre.
2. Witnesses said that the shooter in the Cafe shot from the right hip. Bryant was right-handed but a left-handed shooter.
3. Two weapons were used at the Cafe: an FN-FAL rifle and a Colt AR-15.
4. Witnesses said the FN-FAL had a sniper-scope attached to it, but when found at Seascape the gun did not have a scope attached to it.
5. Eight people in the Cafe died from gunshot wounds from the FN-FAL rifle. Bryant owned three guns: a shotgun (found in the boot of his volvo), a Colt AR-10 (in the possession of gun dealer Terry Hills) and a Cold AR-15. In the recorded interviews with Bryant by police, Bryant even lists these three guns that he owned. The FN-FAL rifle did not belong to Bryant, and it has never been established where the gun came from.
6. At Seascape shots are heard from an SKK rifle, believed to be Bryant firing at police; even while he is talking to the police negotiator! Yet when the gun was recovered from seascape, it did not have a magazine, and no magazine for the SKK was found! Bryant could not have taken it anywhere since he was apprehended at the scene.
7. Both the murder weapons were damaged before they were recovered at seascape, and thus were never forensically linked to the murders.
8. Witnesses (survivors) described the gunman at the Cafe as being in his early-20's, but Bryant could not have been mistaken for being any younger than 25.
9. The late Joe Vialls purported himself to be a conspiricist and freelance internet journalist. In fact he had a history of reporting on some matters mere hours after initial reports and including details that would not become public for days or even weeks. This suggested that he was well-connected. Joe Vialls was a pseudonym. Joe met some of the survivours including Wendy Scurr to consider their versions. It has now been discovered that Joe Vialls is in the video (that he claimed was fake) that shows the gunman fleeing from the Cafe! Because of the scarcity of photos of Joe this never came out while he was still alive! What was Joe doing at the scene of the Massacre when the event itself actually took place???
10. In Australia a coronial inquest is usually held for any death not accompanied by a doctor's certificate. Ian Matterson determined that no inquest would be held into any of the 35 deaths following the guilty plea from Bryant. Yet there were still important issues that warranted investigation that were totally outside the issue of the gunman. The most prominent of which was the broken fire door the prevented seven people from escaping.
11. Because of point 10, no one has ever been held accountable for the inoperability of the firedoor, which was known to be broken for months!
12. Bryant carjacked the BMW at a service station and killed two of the occupants in his own car (Volvo). Yet Bryant had filled his car with petrol earlier that day and had no reason to stop at the service station!
13. Bryant did not hold a driver's license, and he usually drove before dawn or at night; since the town only had one full-time policeman.
14. The only cops in the area had been sent to investigate a drug drop-off which turned out to be false. Port Arthur is connected to mainland Tasmania by only one small strip of land, and had the police not been sent they would have been able to apprehend Bryant there, rather than let him escape to Seascape.
15. Why did Bryant's lawyer - John Avory - convince his client to plead guilty when he knew full-well Bryant had no memory of the crimes, and while Bryant had maintained his innocence for months?
16. Who is "Rick"? And why does Bryant mention him several times while talking to the police negotiator?
I've looked at the facts surrounding this case off-and-on for over 10 years now. I've reported on them in a rather comprehensive blog entry (just see my blog), but for anyone who's interested in discussing it, I think some of the facts are very interesting.
I also think it's telling the stigma that is associated with a low-intelligence person who has an interest in shooting; it almost seems as if that alone convinced people of Bryant's guilt. The police claimed that Bryant gave a confession; but you can read the entire transcript yourself and see that no confession is to be found. In fact, Bryant has no memory of the events, and this is a well established fact. So anything he said was of no value anyway. Now I don't know for certain whether he was guilty or innocent, but I am 100% convinced that the Port Arthur Massacre was not carried out by ONE man and that nobody else was involved. Here is a short list of "coincidences" which beg answers:
1. Bryant has no memory of ever taking place in the massacre.
2. Witnesses said that the shooter in the Cafe shot from the right hip. Bryant was right-handed but a left-handed shooter.
3. Two weapons were used at the Cafe: an FN-FAL rifle and a Colt AR-15.
4. Witnesses said the FN-FAL had a sniper-scope attached to it, but when found at Seascape the gun did not have a scope attached to it.
5. Eight people in the Cafe died from gunshot wounds from the FN-FAL rifle. Bryant owned three guns: a shotgun (found in the boot of his volvo), a Colt AR-10 (in the possession of gun dealer Terry Hills) and a Cold AR-15. In the recorded interviews with Bryant by police, Bryant even lists these three guns that he owned. The FN-FAL rifle did not belong to Bryant, and it has never been established where the gun came from.
6. At Seascape shots are heard from an SKK rifle, believed to be Bryant firing at police; even while he is talking to the police negotiator! Yet when the gun was recovered from seascape, it did not have a magazine, and no magazine for the SKK was found! Bryant could not have taken it anywhere since he was apprehended at the scene.
7. Both the murder weapons were damaged before they were recovered at seascape, and thus were never forensically linked to the murders.
8. Witnesses (survivors) described the gunman at the Cafe as being in his early-20's, but Bryant could not have been mistaken for being any younger than 25.
9. The late Joe Vialls purported himself to be a conspiricist and freelance internet journalist. In fact he had a history of reporting on some matters mere hours after initial reports and including details that would not become public for days or even weeks. This suggested that he was well-connected. Joe Vialls was a pseudonym. Joe met some of the survivours including Wendy Scurr to consider their versions. It has now been discovered that Joe Vialls is in the video (that he claimed was fake) that shows the gunman fleeing from the Cafe! Because of the scarcity of photos of Joe this never came out while he was still alive! What was Joe doing at the scene of the Massacre when the event itself actually took place???
10. In Australia a coronial inquest is usually held for any death not accompanied by a doctor's certificate. Ian Matterson determined that no inquest would be held into any of the 35 deaths following the guilty plea from Bryant. Yet there were still important issues that warranted investigation that were totally outside the issue of the gunman. The most prominent of which was the broken fire door the prevented seven people from escaping.
11. Because of point 10, no one has ever been held accountable for the inoperability of the firedoor, which was known to be broken for months!
12. Bryant carjacked the BMW at a service station and killed two of the occupants in his own car (Volvo). Yet Bryant had filled his car with petrol earlier that day and had no reason to stop at the service station!
13. Bryant did not hold a driver's license, and he usually drove before dawn or at night; since the town only had one full-time policeman.
14. The only cops in the area had been sent to investigate a drug drop-off which turned out to be false. Port Arthur is connected to mainland Tasmania by only one small strip of land, and had the police not been sent they would have been able to apprehend Bryant there, rather than let him escape to Seascape.
15. Why did Bryant's lawyer - John Avory - convince his client to plead guilty when he knew full-well Bryant had no memory of the crimes, and while Bryant had maintained his innocence for months?
16. Who is "Rick"? And why does Bryant mention him several times while talking to the police negotiator?
Last edited:
