The Deliberate Lie - 90 Seconds
---
Details That Point to a Coverup At Port Arthur
---------------------------------
Email:
editor@shootersnews.addr.com
In the days and months following the massacre the media peddled the official line the gunman had shot and killed 20 people and wounded 12 others in the Broad Arrow Cafe within a time of 90 SECONDS..
This claim was a deliberate lie. It could only have originated from the Tasmanian authorities.
Its purpose was directly aimed at justifying the planned ban on semi-automatic guns - that because those rapidfire semi-auto rifles had done all that in that short time frame - 90 seconds - it justified their removal from society.
The fact is the gunman was NOT in the Cafe for 90 seconds but somewhere around 5 to 6 MINUTES..
Witnesses there who were keeping a note of the time, particularly the staff at the site who were hiding outside the Cafe, said in sworn statements the gunman was in the Cafe for 5 to 6 minutes.
The media kept peddling the 90 seconds story for months especially during the gun debate and in particular Ray Martin on Channel Nine's A Current Affair Program. It was repeated over and over again.
Why this is significant is all witness statements who deviated from the 90 seconds story were ignored and not in the DPP's case brief. This is key evidence deliberately omitted. The question is who deleted them - the Tasmanian Police or the DPP ? This needs explaning.
It's also significant because for most of those 5 mintues the gunman casually walked round the Cafe shooting people in the same manner a manually operated rifle could have easily done. If the factual 5 or 6 minutes had been allowed to be reported to the public the case for banning semi-auto guns would have been greatly weakened.
What also needs explaining is given this 90 seconds claim was being constantly repeated in the media and police had taken statements off witnesses contradicting it WHY then did they not correct this factual error at the time ?
These facts clearly indicate an attempt to tamper with evidence by omission. The fact it occurred, given all the other things, indicates Tasmanian authorities were deliberately trying to support a case for banning semi-automatic guns and prevent any means of derailing that agenda if someone had said an non-semi auto gun could have done the same. It is in fact PROOF of involvement and complicity by the Tasmanian authorities in the massacre.
All of this of course detracts from the fact the Cafe gunman was not Martin Bryant.
Return to Port Arthur Links Page