Home Suggest a new issue General feedback














Click here to visit our sponsor

Forum

Port Arthur Massacre: Could Martin Bryant be innocent?


Page 526/529 of selected contributions from the readers of PublicDebate. (most recent first)

Return to the issue page Have Your Say View vote results

First forum page Back one page Next forum page Last forum page


Questions
Posted: December 08, 1999
By: Noel Mc Donald

Brian, The shooting you refer too was Kip Kinkel, he fired 51 rounds and killed 2 and wounded 21. The Port Arthur gunman fired less than that in the cafe to kill 20 and wound 12.

That is the difference between an amateur and a trained pro. Tell me how the Media reported a positive gun ID when Sgt Dutton stated it to be "impossible". Do you believe you know more about the event than Wendy Scurr? How do you explain the perfect timing of the police being decoyed? Why did the gunman fire from the right hip when Martin always shot a gun lefthanded? How do you explain the incredible accuracy of head shots from the hip at an average of 3-4 metres for most shots. Why were Bryants civil rights denied in Jail before he changed his plea? Why have the prosecution attempted to contradict the 4-5 minutes cafe shooting time of several witnesses in favour of his conjecture of 1 1/2-2 minutes. Why were no witnesses called to testify that observed the gunman, especially Mick Sargent who had a staring match with the gunman. How do you explain having the 16 person Mortuary Vehicle onhand for the task? How do you explain the selling of that same vehicle this year? How did Bryant get his back burnt and not his hands or front/face if he was not unconcious when the fire was started. Explain why ASIO attended. Tell us why Nightingale said "No, no, not here!"

See how you go with those straightforward questions, Brian.



String of coincidences
Posted: December 07, 1999
By: Brian Ross

Noel, I have no idea who Tomas de Torquemanda is beyond that he was, as you state, the Grand High Inquisitor of Spain (under Philip II, wasn't it?), so please don't confuse me with someone else.

Yes, conspiracies do exist, however, they tend to be small, cloistered things, kept well hidden and usually limited in their membership to prevent their exposure. The sort of conspiracy you're trying to create, in order to explain the very sad events at Port Arthur stretch back over a decade and would have had to have involved a fairly large number of people in order to be achieved. The main maxim of such conspiracies is that the more who are involved the more likely it will be exposed. So, perhaps instead of trying to claim that space aliens were behind the Port Arthur massacre, look towards the most likely explanation - that Bryant was the crazed gunman who managed to score 35 deaths in a single morning's work.

The conditions were right, he had access to the weapons and despite all the claims about his being unable to score the accuracy he did, you might like to consider that a very similar massacre occured a few years ago in the USA, where a young boy who was completely untrained in the use of firearms managed to kill a relatively large number of people with considerable accuracy using only a pistol. His secret was that he'd actually been highly trained, in the video game parlour. Bryant could well have honed his accuracy and hand-eye co-ordination in the same manner. A manner which is today acknowledged by most modern military forces as being quite useful (witness the announcement last year that the USMC was making use of the PC game "Doom" to train its elite urban response forces).

I've read most of Viall's "Expose" and found its logic to be rather wanting, to say the least. In particular his mistaken claims that being of below average intelligence necessarily automatically equates to poor coordination or accuracy. Rather smacks of a patronising tone if you ask me, while we have only his word on a great deal more of the supposed "evidence" that he claims to present.

Perhaps instead of looking for a conspiracy to explain the events at Port Arthur you should look at a string of coincidences and of course the normal human stuffups and stupidities which are the mainstay of most human lives.



AR15
Posted: December 07, 1999
By: Noel @ Liberty Exposure

While I await your reply Brian Ross/Tomas de Torquemanda... You mention simple people, well there is truism from you. People like yourself accept with simpleness the lies and propaganda that the media Spindoctors feed to you.

Your ridiculous claim about imagined conspiracies is quite contrary to many people that were involved with the massacre in 1996.

I suppose you think Lupo Prinz is a conspiracist too because he spoke of the gunman having planned it very well to have 6 areas of action!

And while you are drafting your reply Tomas, you might give me your opinion on Bill Drysdale's handed in AR15. The Herald Sun reported 23/06/96 about his suspicion that it WAS the Port Arthur weapon. Then the Herald Sun 11/08/96 reported that Victorian assistant commissioner Sinclair stated that "ballistic evidence establishes that the Drysdale weapon your article was inferring could be the murder weapon is not, in fact the murder weapon that was used".

Now Tomas/Brian, I know that the actual gunman was intelligent enough to disable both weapons to prevent ballistic testing, which is hardly what you would expect of simple Martin Bryant. So how do you explain the last statement when the experienced forensics man who was THE expert on the job, Sergeant Gerard Dutton, tells one and all in the police journal of Sep ,88 that "the rebuilding of the (damaged) AR15 made extensive ballistic comparison tests impossible".

But then Brian/Tomas, I guess you knew all that with your extensive library and knowledge on Port Arthur.

After all, being an opinionated person with his own website, you would make sure of all your facts first before you let fly with an opinion, wouldn't you!

Gee Brian Ross, I am sure the other readers can't wait to see what your answers to the three postings are like!!! This is your chance Brian/Tomas to rescue your credibility, or. I tell you what, if you apologise for shooting your mouth off, I will call it quits!

First forum page Back one page Next forum page Last forum page