Author Keith Noble, of ‘Mass Murder; official killing in Tasmania’ has published the most complete record of the Port Arthur massacre scam available in the world today. Below Mr Noble gives an up-to-date analysis of the case.
In his witness statement given on 28APR1996, Peter David Crosswell (spelt Croswell in other places) states this in relation to the gunman who he saw up close in the Broad Arrow Café at the Port Arthur Historic Site: “I didn’t move but I could see his sandshoes across the floor.” Mr. Crosswell who was wounded in that café has the reputation of being a decent person – a truth teller, not a liar. He was one of several eyewitnesses who saw the gunman and who stated that person was not Martin Bryant. Note that the only eyewitness (James Clement Laycock) who personally knew Martin Bryant BEFORE the incident clearly states in his witness statement (10MAY1996) that the gunman he saw was not Martin Bryant.
The following is an extract from the book MASS MURDER: Official Killing in Tasmania, Australia (2nd edition; 2014; n.23, p.388): “At least two other witnesses have said the gunman was wearing a soft type of footwear commonly referred to as runners, trainers, or sandshoes. But it gets complicated when two facts are raised: i. The alleged gunman was said to have been wearing lace-up boots before the shooting on that Sunday (see Kessarios); and, ii. The alleged gunman was said to be wearing Blundstone-type* boots during the incident, at the tollbooth specifically. (see Rabe) So how could this be? If there was only one gunman, it means he must have put on three different types of footwear and one of those times must have been inside the yellow Volvo, between the parking lot and the tollbooth. Why? To create uncertainty perhaps. Or, were there two people the subject of these different footwear sightings? (* Quality boot made by Tasmanian company Blundstone which did not make runners/sandshoes/sneakers in and prior to 1996.)”
It is this type of evidence, given by many witnesses in their statements (see extracts in the book MASS MURDER), which confirms again and again that there is so much REASONABLE DOUBT associated with the case, that only unthinking sheeple, corrupt officials, and the complicit barristers (all of whom are officers of the court) in Tasmania say otherwise. And because there are so many truthful facts which disprove the allegations of the State, the innocent and retarded (IQ66) Martin Bryant was coerced and mentally tortured for over six months after which he repeated what the convicted criminal lawyer John Avery pressured him to say – then he was locked away FOREVER WITH NO TRIAL – repeat, FOREVER WITH NO TRIAL. Note that a hearing in a courthouse or anywhere else is not a trial. And also note that scum Avery was supposed to defend Martin Bryant. But all Avery did was pressure him relentlessly to repeat Avery’s plea of guilty. The truth is, Martin Bryant never had any ethical legal representation at any time and he was unable to engage another lawyer because the State had confiscated all his assets – his money and his home. That is what you are to accept as justice in Australia. The State accused innocent Martin Bryant of so much – yet, it was unwilling (and unable) to prove one single thing against him in a sound trial conducted by an ethical judge. Martin was the doomed PATSY.
There is no hard evidence proving Martin Bryant was the gunman or one of the gunmen. For example, not a single fingerprint was ever presented as proof of Martin Bryant’s involvement in the massacre. It is known with absolute certainty from the witness statements and from a police video that the gunman handled food-related things and a tray inside the café and that he left a video camera on a café table. All these things would have been covered with his fingerprints – obviously not Martin Bryant’s or we would have heard about them. The official narrative of the Port Arthur Massacre is grossly corrupt – in the Australian vernacular, it is complete bull! free pdf copies of the 694pp. book MASS MURDER: Official Killing in Tasmania, Australia (2nd edition 2014), of 20 YEARS CORRUPTION, DECEPTION, LIES, of CLASSIC KANGAROO COURT CASE, and of INTERNATIONAL MEDIA RELEASE (relates to that embalmer, ex-cop, and ex-senator Stephen Parry who has confirmed – in writing – prior knowledge of the massacre) are available from firstname.lastname@example.org & email@example.com) There is no copyright on any of these documents.
Note: Now based in Austria, Mr Noble has written other books about government-sponsored murder including the disappearance of Peter Falconio near Barrow Creek in the Northern Territory in 2001. Bradley Murdoch was eventually convicted of Falconio’s murder. Keith Noble says the NT police grabbed Murdoch after a hopelessly compromised and bungled investigation including a dodgy statement from girlfriend Joanna Lees then charged him for the murder without ever finding a body.
MARTIN BRYANT IS INNOCENT!
WRONGFULLY CONVICTED & INCARCERATED
20 YEARS; 1996-2016; HOBART, TASMANIA
Deception & Lies Presented to Australians
6 MAR 2016 CHANNEL 7 SUNDAY NIGHT
PORT ARTHUR, 20 YEARS
AUSTRALIANS will again be told lies about Port Arthur in Tasmania by
Channel 7 this Sunday 6th. Saying the shooting incident that took
place there in April 1996 is “Australia’s worst massacre” is absolute hype.
Many massacres in Australia have resulted in more people being killed.
The truth about the official killing at Port Arthur has been covered up
by complicit officials who have denied truth and justice to all the families,
relatives, and friends of the victims. It is the corrupt official narrative that
Channel 7 will broadcast again. Mainstream media deception continues.
WHAT CHANNEL 7 WILL NOT TELL AUSTRALIANS
_ In the supreme court on 22 APR 1994, two years before the Port Arthur
incident, Martin Bryant was placed under a guardianship order – he could
NOT manage his life. He was represented by Griffits & Jackson lawyers;
Martin Bryant is mentally handicapped. His IQ was/is(?) 66 (lowest 2%
of pop.) At best, he is an 11-year-old boy. He could NOT have premeditated,
planned, and perpetrated the incident over seven crime scenes;
_ Carleen Bryant relates the behaviour of her poor son Martin in her book
My Story. She describes how he could NOT operate simple things like door
latches or assembling Meccano toy parts. Martin was/is incompetent;
_ Martin’s mother Carleen Bryant and Martin’s female friend at the time
Petra Willmott, have both stated in writing that they had NOT seen firearms
or ammunition of any kind at Martin’s home (see MASS MURDER);
_ There is NO hard evidence Martin Bryant shot any person at or near
Port Arthur. Witnesses, including several who were shot, said in writing
the gunman was NOT Martin Bryant (see LEAKED DOCUMENTS);
_ There are NO fingerprints, NO gun shot residue, NO blood, NO fibres,
NO hair, NO DNA, etc. that prove Martin Bryant was at Port Arthur. That
officials say a person is guilty does NOT prove he/she is guilty;
_ Martin Bryant did NOT fix the vehicle Gaye Lind and companion Vicki
were driving to Port Arthur. He could NOT do auto-electric repairs. And it
was NOT Martin who bought marijuana from them. He did NOT use drugs;
_ The gunman carried a sports bag containing firearms, and a video camera,
into the Broad Arrow Café. He also handled a food tray, a plate, and a
drink container. NO fingerprints were ever taken off them by the police;
_ Martin Bryant did NOT have the ability to use any firearm in the military
manner used in the site cafe – this has been confirmed by military trained
people. There is NO hard evidence any firearm used was owned by Martin;
Witnesses have written Robert & Helene Salzmann (handlers?) did NOT
die innocently. They sat inside a yellow Volvo with the gunman at the tollbooth,
even though they knew he had been shooting at the historic site;
_ Witnesses at several crime scenes said the gunman had hair down below
his shoulders, some said flowing down to his chest. Evidence proves
that Martin Bryant did NOT have hair that long at the time of the incident;
_ The site video shows blurry distant images of an unidentifiable person.
The deceptive video appeared 90 days after the incident. On the day of the
incident, James Balsako did NOT tell police about any video he had made;
_ Martin Bryant said he carjacking a BMW at Fortescue Bay, NOT at the
site toolbooth. He could not have driven the BMW away from that tollbooth
as it had a manual-change gearbox which Martin could NOT operate;
_ Police stated in writing they saw a naked black-haired woman running
and screaming at Seascape at “about 6pm.” It was NOT the co-owner of the
house who had grey hair and who officials say was killed around midday;
_ Analysis of recordings confirm sounds at Seascape, shown on the police
transcript as coughs, are NOT coughs but the sounds of a firearm being
discharged while Martin Bryant is in another room using the phone;
_ There is NO credible time line for the incident. The time line presented by
officials is false. It omits interactions with Martin Bryant which several witnesses
experienced and described in writing (see LEAKED DOCUMENTS);
_ Martin Bryant did NOT order the 22-body refrigerated mortuary truck, or
embalming equipment “manufactured ready for the incident” (see SHOW
CAUSE NOTICE served on embalmer and Senate president Stephen Parry);
_ The Royal Australian College of Surgeons held a trauma seminar on the
morning of the incident. There was also an international media conference
that morning. Martin Bryant did NOT arrange for these gatherings;
_ Martin Bryant had NO proper legal representation. The 3rd lawyer (1st
D. Rigby; 2nd D. Gunson) was John Avery. Martin was kept in isolation for
over 6 months and Avery coerced him to change his NOT guilty plea;
_ There was NO trial, NO coronial inquest, NO public enquiry, NO royal
commission, etc. The State deliberately prevented witnesses giving their
testimony and thus the truth was NOT determined and made public; and,
_ Three criminally corrupt officials (John Avery, Damian Bugg, William
Cox) denied Martin Bryant his legal and human rights. Martin Bryant
was NOT treated properly and was wrongly convicted then imprisoned.
WHAT took place at Port Arthur in APR 1996, and thereafter, is NOT what
Channel 7 will tell its viewers. Channel 7 will NOT mention the media broadcast
doctored images of Martin Bryant making him look deranged which
biased the nation. What has taken place and is still taking place is the
worst injustice in modern-day Australia. Martin Bryant is INNOCENT! _
2 MARCH 2016
Dr. Keith Allan Noble; author
Unit 72 B, Am Heumarkt 7, 1030 Vienna, Austria t. 43-1-9712401
MASS MURDER: Official Killing in Tasmania, Australia; 2nd edit, 696 pp, 2014
free pdfs MASS MURDER, SHOW CAUSE NOTICE, LEAKED DOCUMENTS from
firstname.lastname@example.org, email@example.com, internet
29 DEC 2015
A letter to:
THE TASMANIAN BAR
Andrew James Abbott SC, William Ayliffe, Greg Barns, Kim Laura Baumeler, Raymond J. Broomhall, Aneita Browning, Bernard Cairns, Dan Coombes, Tom Cox, Kate Cuthbertson, Matthew Goldberg, Caroline Graves, Philip John Gray, Bill Griffiths, Chris Gunson, Craig Hobbs, Philip Jackson, Todd Kovacic, Joseph Lee, Bruce McTaggert, Aziz Gregory Melick, David Mitchell, Kate Mooney, Michael O’Farrell SC, Garth O’Rafferty, Keyan A.M. Pitt QC, David Porter QC, Ken Read SC, Mark Rinaldi, Mary Anne Ryan, Cameron Scott, Julian P. Siggins, Rodney J. Skiller, Ken Stanton, Garth Stevens, Charles Sweeney QC, Sandra Taglieri, Philip Theobald, Andrew Walker, Jennifer Mary White, Andrew Wood, Justin Zeeman, Phillip Zeeman.
On 21 DEC 2015 (copy below) and 22 NOV 2015 (available to all readers on request), emails were sent to you and your barristerial colleagues in Tasmania.
I have been asked why you were a focus in that 21 DEC 2015 email. Perhaps you have wondered, or perhaps you don’t care. You had my contact details, you could have asked me – if you wanted to know. But you never did. Regardless, I will now write a postscript here on why you are a focus in that email.
You are the only one whose listing on the Tasmanian Bar website (http://www.tasmanianbar.com.au/) is accompanied by a formal image – that is, an image of the listee wearing formal court dress of gown, jabot, and wig (see image below). This is the professional image you and your fellow barristers like to promote. Barristers – Officers of the Court – professional-looking, there in the courts ethically defending your clients. But really Cameron, can you tell me which barrister in Tasmania fought for Martin Bryant?
Aaaaah, you might say. He pleaded guilty so there was NO TRIAL. But your colleague John Avery rammed his guilty plea down poor Martin’s throat – after Martin had been kept in isolation for over six months during which he was tormented until he was broken. Martin always said he was NOT GUILTY, until they broke him. Now Cameron, do you really think a mentally incompetent boy-man with an IQ of 66 knew what was really going on, and what all the legal implications were for him? Do you believe that the criminal of a lawyer John Avery did the right thing for his client? Is what Avery did to Martin Bryant what you would have done? Avery said he had nothing to work with – he had no exculpatory evidence he said. This is pure bullshit. Have you ever studied all the witness statements? Exculpatory evidence screams out. Go and read LEAKED DOCUMENTS, which is an exposé of the statements which witnesses of the Port Arthur massacre thought would be used in a trial, but which were ignored by your Jewish legal colleague Damien Bugg the prosecutor. To hell with Gordon Hewart. Justice was seen not to be done.