by Mary W Maxwell
I dislike discussing the Port Arthur massacre as “Martin Bryant’s case.” The massacre in the Broad Arrow Café had nothing to do with Martin Bryant. He was not there at all, though he readily admits to being at Seascape cottage.
Claptrap versus the Real Thing
Don’t worry, I won’t present all the false details and debunk them. Others have done so, for which we all must be grateful, but now we need to say what Martin’s day really looked like on April 28, 1996 – the day that is rightly called “Australia’s 9-11.”
Let me show, below, how easy it is to discern Martin Bryant’s actual movements that Sunday, until sundown. As from 6pm it is undisputed that he was in Seascape cottage. So the mystery hours are only from the morning of April 28, 1996, to approximately 6pm.
The official story, which I will refer to below as “claptrap,” says that one man alone did 20 killings in the Broad Arrow Café of the Port Arthur Historic Site (the PAHS), then 3 more in the parking lot and 6 more at the tollbooth. Note: “tollbooth” means the entry to the PAHS, the box office as it were.
Following all that, per the official story, the lone gunman moved on to a petrol station where he ostentatiously killed a woman, kidnapped her boyfriend, and drove to Seascape cottage.
This gunman — allegedly — had already paid an earlier visit to the Seascape cottage, that morning, for the purpose of killing its owners, the elderly David and Sally Martin. (Why? Oh, over an old grudge of course.)
It seems to have been a busy day with a complicated itinerary. But here is the real itinerary:
The Real Itinerary of Martin – It’s Simple
Martin left his home in New Town, Tasmania, which is north of Hobart, around 9.47am. He intended to go to Seascape Cottage, a 90-minute drive. Why go there? It’s my guess that he was given a subliminal instruction, or whatever you call it, to go to Seascape. After all, it was vitally necessary for the government’s account, that a gunman be caught (or be burned to death) at Seascape.
Yes, the real Martin Bryant did travel to Seascape, in his yellow Volvo, making two properly-witnessed stops on the way. One was at a petrol station, and one was for a cup of coffee. He may also have done a bit of surfing. (Well you would, wouldn’t you? He was 28 and it was a Sunday.)
He truly did arrive at Seascape, maybe at 1pm, and and probably never left. Starting at 6pm, we have voice contact with him, as the police recorded some conversations between him and a guy named Rick.
I assume that Martin, during his day at Seascape, did not encounter any of the alleged dead bodies. I assume he did not engage in any violence in the cottage. The next morning (April 29th) he emerged from the cottage which was on fire (how? A grenade thrown in, to kill him?), and he was arrested.
Just so you won’t be confused, let me ask: AT WHAT HOUR DID BRYANT ARRIVE AT THE BROAD ARROW CAFÉ?
The answer, I hope you realize, is “No hour; he warn’t there.” The real Martin Bryant, live and in the flesh, was a total no-show at the Broad Arrow on Australia’s 9-11.
Martin has insisted that he did not go to the Port Arthur Historic Site that day. As you may recall, yesterday’s article about Van Dieman’s Land, by Dee McLachlan, quotes the exchange between police and Bryant as to the admission fee to the PAHS:
He told police that he hadn’t been there for the last six or seven years. Makes sense: think about how infrequently, if ever, you go to the famous historic places or museums that are right in your city.
The Claptrap Itinerary of Martin Bryant
Now get set for what may sound like repetition. This time I shall give the claptrap itinerary. Remember, I’m only telling the facts as put forth by authorities — the claptrap facts.
I’ll indent it like a quote but it’s only a paraphrase. And where they say “Bryant,” I will say “the criminal.” Try to picture someone non-identifiable. Wipe Martin from your mind.
The criminal arrived at Seascape around 11am, in order to kill the elderly couple that owned that cottage — David and Sally Martin. [Note: doing a small killing before a big one is a feature of many cases, e.g., Adam Lanza, Charles Whitman.]
The criminal then proceeded happily to PAHS. [He had just committed the first murders of his life, but that didn’t even make him nervous!] Along the way, he stopped to buy such things as a bottle of ketchup, and a cigarette lighter — although he doesn’t smoke.
At each place, one or more witnesses saw a man and described him. [In other words he left a trail. And the lighter was obviously to burn down the cottage.]
Once he arrived at PAHS, the criminal went inside the Broad Arrow café to purchase his lunch, but took it outside to eat at the tables on the balcony. The lunch having been consumed, the criminal went inside and killed many people.
The criminal then left and killed more persons near the tourist buses in the parking lot. (The Port Arthur Historic Site shows tourists the living conditions of the convicts who were transported here, from Britain, in the 19th century.)
The criminal then went up the road near the tollbooth, and killed a lady and her two young children, first telling the lady to kneel down.
Note: all of these killings really did take place. My skepticism is directed only at the identity of the perpetrator(s).
As so often happens (think Boston Marathon), the killer then felt the urge to do a carjacking, even though he had a car!
This required him to dispatch to God the three persons who were sitting in their BMW at the tollbooth. He drove off in that BMW, abandoning his yellow Volvo.
For no particular reason [not that there was any particular reason for doing the café massacre], the criminal went into a petrol station, shot dead the female companion of a male customer, Glenn Pears.
Creatively, he put Glenn in the boot of his carjacked BMW. It may have been tricky to lift the still-alive man while also wielding a gun, but so what.
The criminal, with the booted Glenn Pears, drove to Seascape cottage. He then entered the cottage. Once inside, he handcuffed and fatally shot Glenn Pears.
He stepped outside and set that car alight. Perhaps he didn’t really like BMW’s. The criminal then spent the night in conversation with police, via walkie-talkie. In the morning he set fire to the cottage and ran out.
End of claptrap itinerary.
How Easy It Is To Confuse the Public When There Is No Inquest or Trial!
I personally believe what Martin Bryant insisted on, that he was not at PAHS. Therefore someone else was the gunman there. See my interview with Kevin Woodman who proposes the idea that the shooter may have been David Everett, but there are other possibilities.
I think the complex itinerary required participation by a team of several men, appearing at the various locations — the café, the parking lot, the tollbooth, and the petrol station. Many people claim to have seen a male person do this or that at the named locations.
Naturally, it would take a court, and formal oaths by witnesses, to sort out who saw what. There are some known issues related to the witnesses that Sunday, but it’s not my job to go there.
Note: that matter is carefully analyzed by Keith Noble in the book he edited called Mass Murder, which is a free download. It is also given close attention at a website southeastasianews.org. (I took some of the points above from those sources.)
The point I would like the reader to take away is that we do have courts, and we do have the well-established mechanism of a coroner’s inquest. Thus, each of the many issues could be handled under oath. Witnesses could be cross-examined. Alibis could be analyzed. Exhibits could be inspected. As normal.
The fact that this has not been done, in such an advanced country as Australia, is PROOF that members of government are involved. Perhaps their only involvement is their frightened silence.
Well, OK, but that means they are at least aware that there is something to be afraid of. Yet they won’t tell us.
QUO USQUE TANDEM, CATALINA, ABUTERE PATIENTIA NOSTRA? (Look it up.)
— Mary W Maxwell is the author of “Fraud Upon the Court: Reclaiming the Law, Joyfully.” Fancy that.