The sketches, allegedly by Martin Bryant, explaining how he killed 35 people
By Dee McLachlan
Mike Willesee claims to have led an investigation into Martin Bryant. The product was a 46-minute TV show for Channel 7, aired on March 6, 2016. In it, needless to say, the man of the hour was not interviewed. We are never allowed to find out what the prisoner of almost 20 years is thinking.
But now we are told that there is a side door into martin’s brain, as it were. In the Sunday Tonight program John Avery, Martin’s lawyer, suddenly told Mike Willisee that he, Avery, had been “presented” with a set of drawings done by Bryant.
This appears at 22 minutes into the program. I provide the opening minute of the discussion below.
Martin Bryant had to be at least at least 28 years old at the time of creating these amazing pictures, since the subject matter thereof is the massacre itself. We see people shot in the café, we see the yellow Volvo (the caption of which is “Volvo” rather than “my car”) and we see the road to Seascape – of course.
Earlier in the interview, Mr Willisee had talked to a woman named Mary who must be 36 years old since she was 16 when she dated Bryant. Mary tells us about a boating trip. They ran out of petrol and Mary described how Bryant was scared and began crying. In the ‘old’ days, people might call a man who cried under pressure a cry-baby.
But moments later in the program we hear how this “cry-baby” killed 12 people (head shots) and wounded 10, all in 15 seconds. Mr Willisee doesn’t question it, or tell the untutored persons in the audience that such skill of marksmanship can only be matched by the best SAS soldiers.
This stuff, which is brand new to us who are weary from the weight of previous fake evidence, has got to be opposed straightaway before it takes hold. Here is my “note to Mike”:
Dear Mr Willesee,
As a citizen I demand that you come clean about these drawings. Who did them? When did you acquire them? Are there more of them that you are waiting to spring on us?
Mr Willesee, you claim that this was “fun and excitement for Bryant.” How did you possibly come to this conclusion?
In the program you show Mrs Jones interrogating Bryant. She asks Bryant what he thought of someone who killed 35 people. Bryant answers, “That’s a wicked, awful, horrendous thing…” That in no way accords with your narration!
The Bizarre Kids Drawings
You, along with Mr John Avery, indicate that these pictures are evidence of Martin’s guilt. You say Bryant took “strange pleasure in drawing the horror he had unleashed.” And Mr Avery says it is “not possible to escape the conclusion that he’s [Bryant] certainly admitting full responsibility for what happened.”
The detail in these drawings are meticulous. Details of twists in the road, and even the direction of the bullets and bodies are shown here.
I myself would not be able to draw such a map of streets I use regularly. And Martin says he had not been to Port Arthur for 6 years. Jim Laycock, who had known Martin since boyhood, saw the shooter and said it was not Martin.
You are trying by the most slim means to persuade us that the man has confessed his guilt through art work.
You claim to be investigating, yet you fail to ask the obvious:
When did he draw these?
If he has an IQ of 66, how could he remember such detail?
Did he copy these from police sketches?
Was he told to do them as “therapy”?
When you walked around the ruins, did it not occur to you that these drawings were possibly fraudulently manufactured to frame Bryant?
And do you believe that Bryant was savvy enough to sketch all these out EVEN IF he had done the killings? I don’t.
Maybe you should have done your due diligence and found who authored the “originals”, and how those drawings were produced.
I believe Bryant most likely copied police sketches. It is also possible that they told Bryant if would help get it “out of his system” and provide relief from any guilt he might be carrying. All done in the name of therapy.